Learning Resources

Abstract: Dr. Michael J. Sorrell is the longest-serving president in the 148-year history of Paul Quinn College. During his near 14 years of leadership, Paul Quinn has become a nationally regarded institution for its efforts to remake higher education in order to serve the needs of under-resourced students and their communities.

Abstract: Solo climbing mountainous terrain is like managing change in higher education—it requires meticulous planning, considerable effort, and the ability to adapt to a changing environment. This session will discuss how to take key climbing skills—assessing a changing environment and determining which tools, resources, and expertise are needed to manage change—and apply them to higher education. It will share a framework to plan for and manage change so you can achieve your personal and professional objectives.

Abstract: Entrepreneuring the Future of Higher Education: Radical Transformation in Times of Profound Change
by Mary Landon Darden
Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD: 2021
202 pages
ISBN: 978-1-4758-5494-7

Abstract: This article outlines the process by which a public university sought to develop and grow a culture of problem-solving and innovation at a time when the institution was undergoing a number of transitions. By developing a Barriers Team, the institution brought together a group of individuals representing all aspects of the university and charged the members with tackling barriers to success. The authors outline how they used the institution’s strategic plan as a starting point, and then describe the steps, provide examples, and reflect on the long-range viability of the approach.

Abstract: FLEXSpace—The Flexible Learning Environments eXchange—and the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) are tools that can help you plan, design, assess, and improve learning spaces on your campus. In this session, you will learn about the newly released FLEXspace 2.0 along with the LSRS. We'll cover the features and benefits of both tools and how they can be incorporated into the planning process. Come learn how to use these tools to inform designs and support end users from planning through post occupancy.

Abstract: This article applies the three stages of change (mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization) to the academic curricular process change that occurred during the 2014–2015 academic year at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Reflecting on the manner in which this major initiative was conceptualized and executed has revealed an inadvertent yet seamless application of Curry’s (1992) organizational change model. Throughout each stage of this organizational change, some inherent principles were maintained while balancing the required condensed timeline for completion. These principles included consistent and transparent consultation with many branches of the university community and revision of proposed processes based on feedback from community members. The goal of the authors in sharing the change process at IUP is to provide potential insights for others on recognizing a need for organizational process revision. The authors highlight the actions taken at IUP, offer recommendations, and identify potential hazards to institutions contemplating organizational change.

Abstract: Today we find our institutions barraged by the forces of change, and dutifully we respond. Over time, however, we end up molding our institutions to these forces to our own peril, and now U.S. higher education is on the ropes, so to speak. We believe education leaders should take hold of our destinies and shape our industry not by the forces of lackluster government policy, self-serving press and media, and for-profit mega corporations, but to serve true learning and personal growth. There are many tools we can use to lead change. This article introduces the concept of Positive Turbulence, an intentional, disruptive approach for positive change, to the education industry.

Abstract: Higher education institutions are under pressure to make transformative changes aimed at improving key areas of performance: access, affordability, price, and productivity to name a few. Institutions have responded with budget cuts and efficiency gains with incremental success. Yet paradoxically the very success they have achieved has also impeded the transformative change their stakeholders seek.

Many theories exist to support adaptive change in higher education. A single foundational theory of organizational change in industrial enterprises explains the paradox and illustrates how incremental success slows transformative change. Structural contingency theory, introduced by Alfred Chandler in 1962, encapsulates a number of higher education change theories, further grounding practitioners as they assist institutions in adapting to changing conditions and informing their planning efforts.

To achieve transformative change requires a model of integrated planning to synthesize unit improvements into institutional change greater than the sum of its parts. This article presents structural contingency theory to explicate the change process and introduces institutional portfolio management as an operational model of integrated planning. It speaks to an audience of practitioners seeking pragmatic solutions to very real and present problems.

Abstract: State institutions of higher education in Connecticut are experiencing a dramatic and unprecedented period of change: the consolidation of four universities and 13 community colleges into Connecticut State Colleges & Universities (CSCU) and the creation of a new administrative structure. This article charts the early stages of this process, presenting events as they unfolded during Governor Dannel Malloy’s first term beginning in January 2011, through his November 2014 reelection, until his state budget was passed in June 2015.

Advocates of systemness in higher education are challenged to balance the promise of centralized leadership and localized prerogative in designing and implementing policy. Systemness offers the promise of synergy and innovation within and across the system guided by common purpose and vision.

This article discusses five specific implementation processes and challenges: a systemwide credit transfer articulation program; Southern Connecticut State University’s early Transform CSCU 2020 initiatives; an ongoing effort throughout CSCU to develop a systemwide identity; the potential impact of budget constraints on systemness; and difficulties selecting and developing administrators and leaders.

Abstract: This article examines the strategic planning process at Cleveland State University, a large metropolitan state university in Ohio. A faculty-administrative team used a communicative planning approach to develop a collaborative, ongoing, bottom-up, transparent strategic planning process. This team then spearheaded the process through plan development and the early stages of implementation and evaluation. The article presents the framework for this process in detail and includes a three-year timetable. The authors discuss the unexpected landmines that threatened to undermine the process and the important lessons learned in the hopes that this will aid other universities in their strategic planning efforts.