Eighth Study Group Meeting Minutes
7 a.m., Wednesday, June 12, 2002
Northrim Bank Building, 3111 C St., 5th Floor Conference Room
Jon Kumin and Steve Rieger, co-chairs

Format: The agenda for this meeting is in regular text. The minutes are added as notations in italics. They are intended to represent the general nature of the discussion, rather than be complete, detailed minutes. Clarifications are welcomed -- please email any to Duane Heyman at: duane@commonwealthnorth.org

Introductions -- Those present include: Patrick Burden, Milton Byrd, Brian Davies, Betty Emerick, Charles Fahl, Jan Gehler, Joe Griffith, Duane Heyman, Ky Holland, Grant Hunter, Dave Kester, Nancy King, Kim Knapp, Rachel Morse, David Rees, Susan Ruddy, Niel Thomas, Tim Wiepking

Goals for this Meeting -- Reflect on the information the Study Group has obtained so far and discuss our own vision for the University of Alaska.

Discussion Points -- Encourage all participants to express their visions for U of A. Explore formulating a tentative consensus.

Comments and questions on this study --

• To what level of depth can the study go?
• Need to prioritize
• Start with top down hypothesis?
• Why a “vision?”
• Explore the gap between quality programs and perceptions
• Relationship of a university to society
• Legislature reflects the people
• Can a university be all things to all people? Inherent conflicts.
• What is the effectiveness of the organizational structure—“Costco with 100 doors” metaphor?
• Need to match life cycles of programs to needs
• Focus more on why do kids leave? Vs. structure of the university.
• Emphasize “should” vs. “does.”
• Two ways to look at the university: lay view vs. internal view. Political response to demands.
• What should the university NOT do?
• Teaching/research/service balance.
• Ask if the university is doing the right things, vs. are they doing it right?
• Our study group has credentials by virtue of showing up weekly at 7 a.m.
• What are the disconnects?
• Gulf between perception and reality.
• Create a list of what universities do.
• What can CWN do to help the university reach a vision?
• Analyze conflicts.
• Biggest disconnect may be public lack of understanding

What to do next?

• Ask regents about their process.
• Do we need an all day retreat?
• What do universities provide? Then, where do they fail?
• From which users should we get input?
• Need for non-university educators, especially from the Bush.
• How does the university allocate resources?

Ky Holland report on special meeting with Drs. Johnson and Dunham

• Emphasized contextual teaching and learning, which is sensitive to time, place and the individual. Very good in multicultural context.
• Emphasized integration of K-12 to fit into the university system. “Seamless pathway;” “2+2+2”
• Need for the university to drive standards at all levels
• Good teacher training and strong teacher training institutions essential.
• Focus on authentic assessment—meet real world needs.
• In Alaska the integration of community colleges into the university is a big plus.
• Beware impact of high stakes teaching paths, e.g. teaching towards tests.
• Are we going “back to the future” with programs similar to 3-50 years ago?
• Comment: many educational recommendations come in the form of moral imperatives vs. how-to-do.

Confirm next meeting and adjourn by 8 am -- On Wednesday June 26, 7 a.m., same location. Regent Mike Burns and possibly one other regent will speak.