*** Comments from Forum Committee -- Sorted by Paragraph Reference *** ENRICHING AND INTEGRATING THE UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE EXPERIENCE ************************************************************ [1.x] Again, include some material about improving the graduate student educati= on with the undergraduate. [1.x] > THE UNDERGRADUATE EXPERIENCE I think we need a section on the assumptions we have about the nature of=20 students we serve. Their values, their choice of life styles, etc. [1.x] -add access to graduate level classes (can't remember if I saw it) [1.2] "Undergraduate research": I hope that undergraduate research includes crea= tive research as well. Often, creative activities are excluded from what is tra= ditionally considered research. [1.2] Undergraduate Research I am obviously a proponent of this action, so it should come as no sur= prise that I think we are giving it much too little emphasis considering the ramificat= ions it has for our campus. I will be happy to contribute additional prose, if nece= ssary, to flesh out the ideas for this action item that have been discussed within bo= th the Undergraduate Education and the Research and Graduate Education Subcommittees. [1.2] We should be mindful of including "creative activity" with "research activ= ity" in this section. [1.2] **** I think the concept of creative activity must be a crucial element=20 in any definiton of what Universities do. It should be part of every=20 definition and a reward system to encourage it. [1.3] **** some solution appear to be workin at cross purposes. For example any= =20 increase in rigor will increase failure and drop out rates! [1.4] Information Skills I think this is a wonderful action item overall and would even be in f= avor of promoting this to one of our primary goals for the plan. In the last senten= ce, however, the inclusion of "information retrieval" seems out of place. This = is not a highly technical skill. [1.5] (program review), regular and systematic seems redundant. How about one o= r the other? [1.5] Program Review I would shorten the second sentence to read: "We will continue to crit= ically assess the quality of existing graduate programs." Tying their viability to employment opportunities in the 21st century is short-sighted and wrong. [1.6] ****An specific objective for the Measurement Section**** > * We will pursue the goal, which is now within reach, of awarding > at le= ast fifty Ph.D. degrees each year. [1.6] - remove 50 Ph.D. [1.6] 50 Ph.D.s each year I know there is a desire to quantify everything that we do, but this o= ne should be left out. If we have to say something, then we should say that we will s= trive to both improve the quality of our Ph.D. programs and the quantity of Ph.D. graduates emerging from those programs. [1.7] Interdisciplinary Programs As written, this is boilerplate. John Warwick's input on interdiscipli= nary program items is essential. [1.8] Teaching Assistant Enhancement Another boilerplate item-- if the current GSID TA training program is inadequate, then we should have an action item that proposes a different ap= proach.=20 [1.9] Graduation Time This is a well-intentioned, but naive action item. The factors that co= ntribute to the graduation time of M.A., M.S., and Ph.D. students are complex and we ca= n hardly control the time to degree by wishing it to be shorter. My guess is = that our graduation times are on a par with those of other institutions. [1.10] *****IMHO because the process of digitial communications is at the heart of modern media (video, sound, graphics, animation, etc.)I also think too many people think of computers as calculators, or word processors, or game machi= nes when in fact they are at the root of modern [1.10-1.12] -too much detail under technology, in the *instruction technology just=20 add a little detail talk about technology in and out of the classroom [1.10,1.11,1.12] technology: I believe we must not always interpret technology as synonymou= s with computers; e.g. video technologies are increasingly relevant. [1.11] (begins: "Computers are also used...") This paragraph communicates some interesting ideals for the use of elec= tronic media in an educational institution, but the paragraph hardly describes any institution I am familiar with, much less UNR. It should be made clearer th= at these are present-day capabilities and that the university must evolve into= a leader in utilizing this technology. [1.12] Action Item: Instructional Technology I would significantly shorten this item to read as follows: "We will pr= ovide the equipment and training necessary for the effective use of modern technology= in instruction."Note that this statement covers both the use of technology as = a pedagogical tool AND as the object of the instruction. [1.13] Will these assumptions be voted on... Some I don't agree with. Surviving The Early Years >=20 ***Assumptions****> Many students who leave the university without=20 graduating=20 [1.16,1.18]] ... career services might need more emphasis, as well as advisement about postgraduate education opportunities. [1.16-1.18] Should include not only undergraduate transition, but also graduate transit= ion [1.16-1.19] General comment: I like the section on "Transition from Undergraduate Studi= es" very much. Unless we feel that the plan is becoming too long, I would recommend embellishing these ideas a bit. [1.20-1.28] General comment: Two-thirds of this page is devoted to "Diversity" issues. = In addition, the word "diversity" appears in a significant percentage of the a= ction items elsewhere in the document. It is so pervasive that an outsider might = be led to believe that we are obsessed with our homogeneity and provincialism. I d= o not believe that this accurately reflects the atmosphere or attitude of our cam= pus (please correct me if I am being misrepresentative). Philosophically, I believe that diversity should be one of the fundamental assumptions about the nature of the university. That is, it should be so in= trinsic to everything that we do that we don't have to continually remind ourselves to= be diverse. Yes, we should encourage students from diverse backgrounds (and th= is can mean many different things!) to attend UNR and we should provide them w= ith support (both moral and financial). Yes, we should encourage departments to= hire diverse faculty (most do already because this fundamentally strengthens departments and has been a university goal for many years). Yes, the univer= sity should sponsor activities that promote diverse perspectives. But this shoul= d be part of the definition of "university" and not the cornerstone of all our g= oals for the next few years. [1.21-1.28] I am a strong proponent of helping students develop a more internationa= l perspective. I think all students should spend a year in a foreign country = (whose native language is not English) and learn how others live. The reality of o= ur student body, however, is that a significant fraction of them are paying th= eir own tuition and cannot afford to go to San Francisco, much less another country= . I am skeptical that our study abroad program, no matter how attractive it might = be, would be able to attract more than a small handful (much less a "significan= t number") of UNR students for reasons that are completely beyond our control (however, see below). Finally, I would be cautious about using phrases like= "At no other time in American history..."-- an historian might be tempted to ch= ange the word "no" to "every"! [1.20] second sentence "diversity by its nature is difference" seems redundant, unneccesary. [1.22] The phrase "'in class' diversity experiences" sounds real groovy, man!= I would omit the second sentence of this item because faculty and departments shoul= d have control over what goes into their courses (irrespective of master plan= s) and the suggestion is irrelevant for a wide range of disciplines, including mat= hematics, natural sciences, American history, mining, anthropology, geology, and engineering, to name a few. [1.22] *Diversity in the Curriculum -the study abroad, exchanges, campus culture could be sub items under=20 diversity (comment abroad - not sure it is a high priority given the cost) [1.22] > * Diversity in the Curriculum: We will increase =D2in-class=D3=20 > diversity experiences by continuing to support the efforts of the=20 *** need glossary "Rin-classS" more snips [1.23,1.24] Study Abroad Both of these items are fairly straightforward and I strongly support = the first as a means for helping more of our students partake in international experienc= es. The second should be discussed more in our committee-- my impression is that UN= R belongs to a consortium of universities who collectively operate several st= udy abroad sites. While we are certainly able to establish new sites as needed,= our student participation in the consortium programs is among the lowest of all= the member schools. We should learn more about the realities of study abroad be= fore making blanket recommendations like this one. [1.25,1.26] Action Items: Exchanges We are already in the process of creating reciprocity relationships wi= th foreign universities, but I do not recall discussing this point in the forum or of = anyone advocating it as a major goal for the university in the next few years. Is = this on our primary agenda? The second of these items is a little vague: faculty ex= changes with whom? Shouldn't we be concerned about the maintenance of instructional quality which might be compromised by faculty exchange programs? [1.27] Campus Culture This recommendation remains a little vague and, therefore sounds a bit boilerplate. We need to state what the problem is and ways that we might ef= fect its solution. [1.28] International Students We already provide this support via the International Students Office.= In the Research and Graduate Education subcommittee it was felt that there wasn't = much more we could do for students that wasn't already being done. Unless there = are some specific ideas about improvements that need to be made, this item shou= ld be omitted. [1.29] (beginning: "As a center for ...") The second sentence of this paragraph sounds a little funny to me. Doe= s anyone else have the same=20 reaction? [1.29] - Center for leaning and scholarship - use a action sub action format. [1.30] Visiting Scholars The second sentence states that "we will ensure that some of these visi= ting scholars bring diverse perspectives." That should be easy. I would leave th= is sentence out. [1.32] **** Do we have to tell them every detail of what we are currently doing? > both in the Reno area and throughout the state, to participate in=20 > the intellectual life of the university through attendance at=20 > events, enrollment in formal and informal instruction, and=20 > technology-based communications with our faculty and students. [1.34,1.35] (recruitment and diversity) could be combined=20 [1.36] Honors Program, is the reason we have it to raise the academic standards of= the university? [1.38] Fellowships This is another boilerplate item. We do this already and it is only wh= at any competent university should be doing. [1.39] Diversity This also seems to be pretty "boilerplate" to me. It really doesn't sa= y any more than has already been stated in prose elsewhere. BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS ******************************** [2.1] K-12 Standards I would word as follows: "We will advance a centralized University eff= ort and will encourage individual departments and programs to communicate with the middle and high schools regarding the skills and knowledge necessary for st= udent success in college."The "requirements for admission" are the responsibility= of the Admissions Office and I am reluctant to place that burden on individual departments. [2.2] Action Items: K-12 Outreach (shouldn't use "outreach as a noun!) UCCSN Standards Admission Standards Recruitment Diversity These action items are all fairly boilerplate and are not major new di= rections relative to the past and present Master Plans. They are actions that any re= asonable university would take in the course of its normal day-to-day affairs and I = think including them explicitly gives them a greater weight than they should have= . We have to make some assumptions about our own competence to run a university = in the 1990's.=20 [2.4] It sounds like we will seek new partnerships with everyone but DRI and we w= ant to "hold the line" and only maintain the ones that already exist there. I a= m pretty sure that this wasn't the intention. [2.4] the relationship with DRI reads very passive. Instead of "maintain" how ab= out enrich or foster? =20 [2.7] Partnerships (the 3rd) In the second sentence, we say that we will promote experiences that "= expose students to a diversity of individuals." I agree that this is much better t= han exposing them to the same individual all the time! [2.7] - Partnership section - call the student experiences internships, a=20 action - sub action format would work well here also. [2.7] *******Interships and credits for work experience IMHO have NOT been the=20 norm at university. Is ths stuff below a new thrust? Needing new=20 resources, new standards, etc. > * Partnerships: Academic experiences outside the=20 classroom ... [2.8-2.14] General comment: As I indicated earlier, there is much too much use of "outreach" as a noun on this page. We should be selling the idea of "outrea= ch" as an adjective. [2.8-2.14] ] > should be selling the idea of "outreach" as an=20 > adjective. **** Its probably too late. People use it as a noun.**** [2.10] Outreach Goals I am almost tempted to suggest that we change this item heading to "Ou= treach Attitudes" because I am not sure that we should promote specific goals rela= ted to outreach activities. In any case, I believe that the role of outreach activ= ities pursued by various faculty should be departmentally driven. If we want the = plan to say that departments are encouraged to pursue outreach activities, fine. Bu= t they should have the ultimate say as to whether or not a given outreach activity= is meritorious. I should also point out that the inclusion of outreach activit= y in one's role statement should imply all of the business concerning rewards and promotion. If the chairman and the dean sign off on the role statement, doe= sn't that mean that it is the basis of merit evaluation? [2.11] Industry Relations I am not sure that this should be an action item-- as I recall in the = 0th order draft, it was part of the vision statement and I don't know that represents= an action so much as a philosophy. [2.11] the word "finally" seems misplaced when there is more on the same topic. [2.13] Sponsorship I would truncate this item to read: "We will encourage private sector sponsorship of University students studying abroad and foreign students stu= dying at the University." By the way, where did this come from? [It came from the International Commi= ttee report.] [2.14] I would add phrases so that they read: "They contribute to the success= of men and women, young and old, [students and faculty,] who come to the Universit= y or use its services from afar, to learn and to discover knowledge. We are prou= d of our [community of scholars] and we are committed to providing them with the resources they require to learn, the skills they need to inquire systematic= ally, and the culture that inspires their creativity." IMPROVING FACULTY AND STAFF EFFECTIVENESS ****************************************************** [3.x] ***** If detail is needed then we need something about publishing on the=20 web as a teaching and scholarly activity. *** [3.1] (right below the heading "Faculty Effectiveness") This is a reprise (almost verbatim) from the Preamble. Perhaps we shoul= d use different prose here. [3.1] **** How Well The Job of Serving Students, Scholarship, and Community=20 gets done**** > The university's mission weaves the faculty's primary=20 activities=20 > of teaching, scholarship, creative activity, and service, into a=20 > seamless fabric. Our instruction includes not only teaching what=20 *** need measurement of effectiveness **** > as among those outside our campus, that scholarship and=20 > instruction are inseparable within our mission.=20 [3.2] > As the state grows, so will the university. ****Assunmption**** It is clear that we=20 > will be hiring more faculty members in the coming years. One of=20 > the most important challenges we face is that of hiring well. [3.3] > * Quality/Diversity: We will continue to recruit the=20 > highest-quality and most diverse faculty possible, in order to=20 > create a critical mass of top-notch colleagues for the enhancement=20 > of teaching and research. ***** Puffery???>=20 [3.4] I would change the last phrase to read "allocation of resources will be bas= ed on factors more directly related to academic objectives rather than to faculty= -student ratios."We might also consider reinstating some of the prose indicating tha= t some disciplines are more appropriately taught in small classes, others in large= lecture groups. Also, upper-level classes often should be smaller. [3.4] how about a more general statement like "allocate faculty positions to addr= ess the goals and objectives outlined in this plan". [3.5,3.6] (faculty development) could be combined into one sentence. [3.5-3.7] The Educational Experience (An introductory paragraph introducing the reader to the notion that al= l members of the university community are engaged in learning activities of = one kind or another (including, gasp, faculty) would make a nice prologue to= this general section.) [3.5] - on faculty development, state that some of the services may be free or= =20 available at a minimum charge while others most be at cost. [3.6] Faculty Development (the 2nd) ("We will enhance faculty development ...") This is purely boi= lerplate near as I can tell. I am not even sure exactly what this action item is try= ing to imply. I am also not sure that we need another diversity item thrown in rig= ht here. [3.6] - remove second faculty development issue dealing with diversity [3.7] Travel Support I also think that this one is important and would expand it to mention specifically instructional enhancement. [3.7] -travel support - emphasize that this should be part of the direct=20 support from the state for state support positions. [3.9] > * Start-up Support: We will continue to provide start-up packages=20 > competitive with those in a scholar's discipline. Start-up moneys=20 > will include funds for instructional tools=20 **** AND COMMUNICATIONS TOOLS (TELEPHONE BUDGETS, COMPUTER SOFTWARE=20 BUDGETS, COPYING BUDGETS***** and equipment as well=20 > as research materials.=20 [3.10] Research Funding The first sentence is a moot point. The Junior Faculty Research Grant = Program has never in the last four years disbursed all the money available to it. K= en Hunter has been approached and has agreed (in principle)=20 to raise the maximum allowed award under this program. [3.12] Grants and Contract Support I would not mention a specific figure like $100 million. [3.13] "Staff Support": I believe we need to determine where increased administra= tive and technical staff support is most needed [3.14] Research Personnel This item is a little presumptuous in that we have only identified an = area which will require some planning and discussion, but we are not yet in a position= to make recommendations as specific as the "creation of a new category of tech= nical staff". That remains for others to do. I would remove the last two sentence= s from this item. [3.14] *Research Personnel - In the last sentence - must add the word possible It will also include the creation .... [3.15] Mentoring I like this item a lot; however, the last phrase seems to imply that y= oung faculty are not given a chance to participate in the life of the university= . On the contrary, I think young faculty have much more in the way of opportunities = at UNR than at any other university with which I am familiar. I would omit the= last phrase. [3.15] **** I need an operational flavor for this goal *****>=20 > * Mentoring: We will encourage the establishment of mentoring=20 > relationships between new faculty and senior faculty, providing=20 > new faculty with needed information about the operation of the=20 > university and with opportunities for increased participation in=20 > the life of the university. [3.16] Funding (the 1st) ("We will develop a strategy ...") This item is vague. What does it mean? [3.18] Interdisciplinary Research This is boilerplate-- input should be sought from John Warwick on this= item. [3.19-3.21] Role statements: According to this document, role statements are only mentioned for faculty. As the faculty senate has recently said, perhaps administrators should also be required to maintain role statements and be evaluated on this basis. [3.19] *** I think outreach activities will become the central element of our academic mission... Outreach Activities are the source of funds that UNR needs to grow. [3.19] One of the main points that I remember coming out of the Outreach Subcommittee is that we should only treat the word "outreach" as an adjective. Yet here and on p. 11, "outreach" is used repeatedly as a noun. This document should proclaim this idea and then set the example by using "outreach" only as an adjective. I also disagree with the phrase at the end of this page (p. 5) and the beginning of the next: that outreach should become "an essential element of our central academic mission." I think that outreach activities can be an important component of the ways in which the university serves its local community, state, and nation as a center for learning, but I draw the line at describing them as an essential element. I think this is way overstated. [3.19] *** Unfortunately it may not be overstated.... Clear need for assumption section.> [3.19-3.21] - reduce reward system section and remove role statement [3.20] Role Statements This item is completely unnecessary. Role statements are effectively in place already. [3.20] ***** Is the following not current policy?***> > * Role Statements: Every faculty member will have a role > statement. [3.20] ***** I have cases in point where the chairman will not sign off a role statement as a basis for merit. The role statement as a contract between faculty and administration must be discussed.***** [3.21] ***** Is the following not current policy?***> > * Reward System: We will revise applicable bylaws and codes to > reflect a broadened definition of scholarship and to reinforce the > values we have articulated. [3.22-3.23] ***** The following does not reflect reality and the future indicates that more faculty will be recruited who are not trained to teach at the graduate level**** > * Graduate Faculty Status: We will operate on the principle that > all faculty at this university are qualified to teach at both > undergraduate and graduate levels and to serve on the advisory > committees of graduate students. Therefore we will eliminate > "graduate faculty status" which now divides our faculty.**** IMHO we must plan to achieve "what might be" on the basis of "what is" and not on the basis of "what might have been." [3.22-3.23] Graduate Faculty Status I do not believe that the principle under which the plan claims to operate is true, that is, I do not believe that ALL faculty at the university are qualified to teach at the graduate level or to serve on graduate advisory committees. However, I DO believe that departments are qualified to assign appropriate faculty to teach graduate courses and to compose graduate committees appropriately. This is fundamentally different from the action item as it is presently stated. I also advocate the elimination of "graduate faculty status", however. IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE *********************************** [4.x] ***Computers are communication tools! The details should be in the measurement section. [4.x] Campus Infrastructure, the opening statement doesn't quite convey what is coming. Perhaps elaborating on the idea that for faculty, staff, and students to do what they do best, they need the technology and physical plant to keep pace. [4.1] The first two paragraphs under this heading prominently feature the phrase "learning and scholarship" in the first line. While I am a devotee of this phrase and its implications, I worry that its overuse will cause it to become hackneyed. Can we rephrase these paragraphs a little? [4.1-4.8] *** A comment on technology, is it too detailed, need assumption section & glossary of terms **** ************* A university is a community of scholars who traditionally communicate across time (books) and space (classroom) and communications technology is in the greatest change since the invention of the printing press.Each more of faculty will be expected to communicate across greater distances into virtual classrooms and faculty need the equipment and training to do this job properly. ****** [4.1-4.8] To much emphasis on computers and related topics. Need to have balance with conventional equipment (testing, laboratory) needs. [4.2] The phrase "regardless of format" seems funny and distracting to me. [4.3] Student Computers These are excellent action items! In the first of these, I would change "would" to "should" in the last line. [4.3] ***** A good specific objective for the objective measurement section**** > * Student Computers: Students will either own or have access to > computer s[etc] [4.3] I believe 60-75 computers refers to those available to all students, as opposed to only those enrolled in classes in a particular department. [4.4] Faculty and Staff Computers In the second item, I would indicate that telephone modem access is inadequate. [4.5] Technical Support Staff ... I would add the adjective "small" to describe the measure of support that we get from System Computing Services. [4.5] *Technical support staff - needs to be expanded to include laboratory technicians for lab support [4.5] Technical Support Staff: Who should these employees answer to? The present system has some problems, might it not be better if tech support staff were answerable to someone with educational responsibilities (deans, chairs) if education is the primary goal if the institution? [4.5] I question the number 600 faculty. According to my records, there are over 1,000. Also, where does the seven current come from? Is that IMS only? There are several departments that have their own computer staff. [4.6] The analogy of the computer network to a nervous system doesn't work for me. Does anyone else feel the same way? Also, I would comment that having 60% of our buildings on the network is completely inadequate. [4.6] ***** Yes! Every faculty member and student should have access to the Internet anywhere on campus.**** [4.7] Campus Network This is in the last master plan. Will it be done by 1997? [4.8] Network Support Boilerplate. [4.9] This is an important statement and well-written. [4.9-4.12] - Combine library items. [4.11] Access to Materials I strongly disagree with the stated philosophy of acquiring library materials only at the time of need rather than in anticipation of need. Where did this item come from-- I don't recall any discussion of this nature. [4.11] *** I don't think we can afford to acquire all materials that we might anticipate needing. **** I think we need discussion on this. [4.11] (access to materials), change "shall" to "will". [4.12] Library Collection I would rework the end of this item as follows: "In developing the collection and providing access to other resources, we will be especially cognizant of the needs created by our strengthened emphases on undergraduate, graduate, and faculty scholarship and creative activities." [4.13] Research Equipment I would rework this as follows: "We will assess the condition of research equipment, and develop plans for maintenance, upgrades, new acquisitions, and reallocation within the university when possible." [4.13] * Research Equipment - need to add that the staff to support and maintain this equipment is needed. [4.16] Instructional Technology: I would like to see some words to the effect that the process of classroom renovations etc should be instructor-driven. No money should be released for renovations until the instructors using the classrooms have signed off on the project. [4.16] > * Classrooms: We will bring all classrooms up to at least a > minimum standard conducive to teaching. **** standards for learning should also be considered! (types of chairs that are considered appropriate for a 3 hour lecture. ******* [4.18] Campus Housing We should add something about providing better assistance to students who seek off-campus housing also. Our housing services are terrible. [4.19] Study Centers This item needs to expanded and clarified. Otherwise it is best left out. [4.19] **** yes it should be left out. This is becoming more of a wish list than a plan. MISCELLANEOUS ******************************* [5.0] We seem to treat Carnegie I Research Status as if it were a special accreditation when it is simply a category used to evaluate different institutions. It is fine for administrators to wish that we will be grouped with the movers and shakers of the universities in this country, but the goals for growth in our research activities should be driven by loftier ambitions, namely the expansion of scholarly activities in the state. The idea that we should set as a goal in our Master Plan the election of one or two faculty members to the National Academy of Sciences/Engineering is ludicrous-- we have no control over this highly political process. This is the sort of result that happens naturally as an institution matures in its scholarly activities and our time will come (but it will come regardless of anything we put into this plan). I advocate leaving this paragraph out. [5.0] ******* very good point. We need goals and objectives that are within our means to achieve. ***** [5.0] > The university has these overall goals for research: obtain > Carnegie Research I University status by 1997; grow research and > other sponsored projects to $100 million by the year 2000; see one > or two faculty members elected to the National Academy of **** A good idea! A How statement is needed ***** OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN ************************************************* [following are the broad headings Forum members decided to use at the last lunch meeting] 1) Building Partnerships This goals would focus on the university reaching out to facilitate learning. This would include K-12, community colleges and sister institutions, and the concept of life long learning. Also included would be the concepts of research, creative activities and service. The integration of the university into the local, state, national, world, and universe communities. 2) Enriching and Integrating the Undergraduate and Graduate Experiences Mentoring, Undergrade research, increased admission standards, rigor of the core, focus on upper division, undergrads taking grad courses, internships, senior thesis, diversity, fellowships and scholarships, and the concept that research enhances both undergraduate and graduate education. 3) Improving Faculty and Staff Effectiveness (Don't like the title but ... with this title there is a lot of over lap with 4 and some with 2) quality, diversity, critical mass of faculty, distribution of faculty, distribution and number of support staff, start-up, junior faculty programs, mentoring, travel support, grants and contracts, research personnel issues, etc. 4) Improving Infrastructure Laboratories, teaching and research tools, computers, equipment, resource centers (Study), housing, ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My main objection with the present outline is the continued segregation of undergraduate education and graduate education/research. Most of the dialogue we have had the past few months has been aimed at reducing these distinctions and emphasizing the synergy between these two aspects of scholarship and learning. A lot of the organization also seems to get away from the idea that the faculty are also students (albeit self-guided) and are engaged in life-long learning. ***** I agree with the thought but the plan is written for the BoRand we must think about the audience needs for the organization. General comment: I agree with the idea voiced yesterday that we need a succinct summary of the primary goals of this plan to help accentuate the organization of our action items. We've talked alot about "integrating concepts" - integrating teaching and research; undergraduate and graduate studies; "in class" and "out of class" experiences; outreach into teaching and research; diversity and technology into teaching and research; even the partnerships with K-12, community colleges, etc. could be viewed in those same terms. Maybe there's a way we can set that out at the beginning. My engineering training requires symmetry and uniformity. Therefore, there needs to be more uniformity in the detail given on each issues. Details could be provided in another section. Some items could be combined and other items could be a sub list under a * item. PREAMBLE Preamble-- 5th paragraph, 1st sentence Why not write "women and men" rather than "men and women"? Just a thought. In the Preamble, paragraph 5, I thought we should have a section in the plan addressing assessment.