Learning Resources

Abstract: From demographics and social change to politics and technology, many trends impact planning in higher education. SCUP’s Trends for Higher Education is designed to help you and your institution make sense of the most significant evolutionary forces.

Abstract: Academic strategic planning can be difficult given the bevy of stakeholders and often multiple sets of accreditation criteria. Recognizing the limits of the traditional SWOT model, our program chose to use the Strategic Planning Engine model. The model itself is quite laborious, and to increase its usability, we simplified the environmental assessments. Our results proved to be useful and relevant, and we developed a series of feasible objectives. In this article, we describe and evaluate our experience. In comparison to SWOT, we found this process to be more objective and replicable, scalable and responsive to multiple criteria, flexible to accommodate changing strategic plans or criteria, and transparent. With that being said, we caution about the level of labor required and organization and communication needed. Finally, we recommend implementing a leadership team, a communication plan, and a plan on how to respond to uncontrollable circumstances and developing a level of comfort with limited resource allocation.

Abstract: From demographics and social change to politics and technology, many trends impact planning in higher education. SCUP’s Trends for Higher Education is designed to help you and your institution make sense of the most significant evolutionary forces.

This edition focuses broadly on change in higher education. We look through an array of different lenses to gain some perspective on issues and opportunities that appear to be on the horizon—or at our doors.

Abstract: While universities recognize the need for change, establishing an environment conducive to change requires time and movement through stages. In this article, I examine different tools and processes that can pave the way for innovation or change. These processes became evident in my research on the emergence of an interdisciplinary policy school jointly established on two campuses where previous models did not exist. The change came about because there was a confluence of forces that promoted it; these factors were strong enough to negate the barriers. There were key actions undertaken by the universities that promoted the change, including systematic program review, university-wide integrated planning, the appointment of an executive sponsor who had social and political capital, and the establishment of a “grassroots” working committee comprising faculty who were passionate about the initiative. However, there were equally important practices and policies that hindered the movement forward; these included institutional procedures that required multiple levels of approval in a lock-step process and the many facets of resistance to change. For universities contemplating a change agenda, the implementation of some of these processes and tools could potentially be beneficial in moving forward.