The Educational Effectiveness Planning Committee
membership included 28 faculty, staff, and administrators representing
the range of academic and support areas that are central to
the University’s academic mission. The committee chose
an academic participatory planning model to guide the process.
This “inductive” model provided for development
of the plan from a broad base of grass-roots participation.
The majority of work to date has focused on the planning phase.
Late this fall, the implementation phase will begin when the
committee presents its report to the president. The report
will propose plans for achieving each of 10 strategic priorities
that were defined from a longer list of 25 goals established
earlier in the planning process.
How has HPU’s participatory planning been conducted? The
following highlights of each of the past three years show the
participatory activities used in this planning process:
2000-01- The committee defined the participatory methods and
conducted analyses of HPU’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities,
and threats (SWOT). Focus groups were conducted to collect data
from staff, faculty, and students. Detailed reports from the
focus groups were analyzed in a committee retreat and used to
draft elements of the new HPU mission statement and five goal
areas for the University’s future. External environmental
factors were also analyzed to provide a foundation for planning.
In the summer of 2001, a campus-wide workshop was conducted with
faculty and staff to review HPU’s mission and generate
ideas for specific goals under the five goal areas. The five
goal areas defined as the basic structure for planning are: Student
Learning, University Community, Global Citizenship, Institutional
Effectiveness, and Academic Infrastructure.
- Based on the campus-wide workshop results, the Committee
defined 25 specific goals that were organized within the five
major goal areas.
Drafts of the new HPU mission were also generated from the
workshop results. The committee completed the reaccreditation
for WASC (Western Association for Schools and Colleges), in anticipation
of the campus visits in 2004 and 2005. In the spring, staff and
faculty completed first-year plans for the five goal areas. And
the Committee started work on budget analyses and identification
of comparison schools.
2002-03 - The committee completed the new HPU mission statement
and defined nine Strategic Priorities from the 25 goals, to guide
planning. Deans and managers integrated plans from the Colleges,
schools, and departments, to align the plans with the Strategic
Priorities. Faculty and staff completed a second year of plans.
In the summer of 2003, a second campus-wide workshop was held;
students, faculty, and staff served as panelists to focus participant
discussion groups on challenges and opportunities associated
A major change at HPU during the two years of planning has
been the increased availability of data to support the planning
Academic Program Review, and preparation for our WASC reaccreditation
visits (2004 and 2005). These activities increased the need for
evidence on educational quality and resulted in development of
data reports on “key performance indicators” (KPI’s),
which are indicators of university progress. These reports contribute
to the University’s culture of evidence by providing faculty
and staff with information about such outcomes as graduation
and retention rates, average time to graduation, class sizes
and enrollment, student-faculty ratios, and student opinions
reported on the graduation survey.
2003-04 - In the fall of 2003, the Vice President for Academic
Administration will convene the new Academic Support Council,
which will address alignment of resources with strategic planning
through shared governance. At the same time, the Educational
Effectiveness Planning Committee will present the first formal “2010
Educational Effectiveness Planning Report” to the president.
This plan will summarize plans from faculty and staff and outline
the Committee’s plans for addressing the Strategic Priorities.
It will set the stage for formal collaboration between the Educational
Effectiveness Planning Committee and the Trustees’ Long
Range Planning Committee. (It should be noted that the work of
the two Committees has already overlapped or intersected to create
improvements.) HPU’s Strategic Priorities are listed with
examples of progress;a 10th priority has been added, which makes
provision for the committee’s recommendations for facilities
development for HPU.