Study Group process
The following document is a compendium derived from the discussions at regular study group meetings. The Study Group has been meeting weekly since April 2002. Upon completion of its deliberations, the Study Group will submit a draft report to the Commonwealth North Board of Directors. After acceptance or modification by the Board and possible further input from the Study Group, a final draft document will be circulated throughout Alaska and statewide commentary will be actively sought. The Study Group plans presentations in Fairbanks, Anchorage, Juneau and with key University constituencies. The CWN web site and other modern means of communication will be used to gather maximum thoughtful feedback from around the state and from different constituencies of the University, both internal and external. The Study Group will then review the draft in light of feedback and submit a final draft for Board approval or modification. At that point the final report will be distributed statewide and the implementation phase will begin.

This report is produced by an organization with a long-term track record of analysis of serious Alaska issues. It is an informed opinion report of dedicated volunteers who have spent many hours interviewing resource people, researching and deliberating. However, it is not, nor is intended to be, a detailed management review of the University of Alaska. It is not a McKinsey & Company management report. It attempts to identify, analyze and make recommendations on statewide policy level issues. Recommendations are intended to be in the form of general principles that will serve as a practical guide for the statewide university community -- not specific campus or departmental management directives.

Please note this is very much still a DRAFT. It will be used to focus discussions to meet our deadline of producing the report by the end of October. Please submit any specific suggestions to Duane at exec@commonwealthnorth.org

I. Background on the University of Alaska

1. Definition of “University” by Random House Webster’s College Dictionary (1998) “An institution of learning of the highest level, comprising a college of liberal arts, a program of graduate studies, and several professional schools, and authorized to confer both undergraduate and graduate degrees.”
2. A university preserves, creates and transmits knowledge
3. The University of Alaska system has evolved into a uniquely extreme example of a modern university. Clark Kerr describes the modern university as a “multiversity.” In The Uses of the University Kerr states: “The multiversity is an inconsistent institution. It is not one community but several -- the community of the undergraduate and the community of the graduate; the community of the humanist, the community of the social scientist, and the community of the scientist; the communities of the professional schools; the community of all the nonacademic personnel; the community of the administrators. Its edges are fuzzy -- it reaches out to alumni, legislators, farmers, businessmen, who are all related to one or more of these internal communities. As an institution, it looks far into the past and far into the future, and is often at odds with the present. It serves society almost slavishly—a society it also criticizes, sometimes unmercifully. Devoted to equality of opportunity, it is itself a class society. A community, like the medieval communities of masters and students, should have common interests; in the multiversity, they are quite varied, even conflicting. A community should have a soul, a single animating principle; the multiversity has several -- some of the quite good, although there is much debate on which souls really deserve salvation.”
4. To this mix, U of A adds a community college mission, vocational and technical missions and remedial education. All of this with a background of a near-monopoly on higher education serving the needs of six hundred thousand inhabitants spread over a vast area one-fifth the land mass of the “Lower 48,” a coastline longer than the rest of the country and which would stretch from Florida to California if it were shifted southeast about 2000 miles.
5. The University of Alaska is a cutting edge multiversity. Its extreme combination of disparate campuses and missions creates an institution unique in the United States.
6. Three main campuses separately accredited are coordinated by the University of Alaska System
7. Brief history FILL IN
8. Basic attendance statistics, including context of APU, Sheldon Jackson, Charter College and other post-secondary alternatives FILL IN
   1. UAA total FTE enrollment, 2001: 15,374
   2. Alaska Pacific University (Anchorage) total enrollment in 2000: 689 students
   3. Charter College (Anchorage) enrollment: 426 full and part time students
   4. Sheldon Jackson (Sitka) enrollment: 250 full and part time students
   5. Ilisagvik College (Barrow) enrollment: 531 students
9. Basic academic statistics
10. Basic financial statistics FILL IN
    1. Share of operations funded by the State: 46%. The State contributes $12,800 per student for a total of $211 million in FY 2003.This contribution is made as a single line item administered by the University of Alaska System. In addition, the State has provided $157 million of capital funding during 1999-2000.
    2. Net tuition and fees of $2,900 per student provide 10% of operating revenue. After one year of residency, out-of-state students qualify as residents and receive in-state tuition.
    3. Research grants and contracts totaling $118 million are 17% of total operating revenue of $XXX million.
    4. U of A has recently focused efforts on building private philanthropic support. The U of A Foundation receives about $4 million, or 30% of state-mandated oil company charitable donations.
    5. Total financial resources exceed $289 million including $102 million in the U of A Foundation. This equals $18,826 per FTE student.
    6. Total pro-forma debt: $119 million, with an additional $61 million earmarked from a $230 statewide bond issue to be voted on November 2002.
       vii. U of A received a Moody’s bond rating of A1 in July 2002.
       
       

II. How other American universities are changing direction to respond to current conditions (Clark Kerr)

Based on the observations below of a leading analyst of higher education, the changes U of A is undergoing are not unique. What is unique is the Alaskan context in which U of A operates.

1. More privatization: greater reliance on tuition (the Carnegie Commission suggested that students pay one-third of costs), service and patent income, alumni and industry funds.
2. More federalization
3. More cultivation of general public support
4. More attention to effective use of resources
5. More pluralistic leadership
6. More attention to longer-term directions of movement
7. Consideration of protection for “non-market functions” such as citizenship, culture and scholarship that has no early, if ever, monetary returns
   
   

III. What are the goals of higher education?

According to Investment in Learning by Howard R. Bowen, higher education in general seeks to accomplish the following goals:

1. For the individual
   1. Cognitive learning: verbal skills, quantitative skills, substantive knowledge, rationality, intellectual tolerance, a sound family life, consumer efficiency, fruitful leisure and health.
   2. These satisfactions and enjoyments accrue both during college years and in later life.
   3. Conversely, the skills listed above avoid negative outcomes for individual students
2. For society
   1. Advancement of knowledge: discovery and dissemination of new knowledge and advancement of philosophical and religious thought, literature, and the fine arts.
   2. Direct satisfactions and enjoyments received by the population from living in a world of advancing knowledge, technology, ideas, and arts.
   3. Discovery and encouragement of talent
   4. Advancement of social welfare: economic efficiency and growth, enhancement of national prestige and power, progress towards the identification and solution of social problems, “improvement” in the motives, values, aspirations, attitudes, and behavior of members of the general population and over long periods of time, exerting a significant and favorable influence on the course of history as reflected in the evolution of the basic culture and of the fundamental social institutions.
   5. Avoidance of negative outcomes for society.
3. The community college and technical education role of U of A touches various aspects of the above, depending on the particular program.
   
   

IV. Long term trends that the University needs to consider in its future outlook

1. International, national and Alaska demographic trends
2. Direction and rate of technological change
3. Nationwide development of educational distance delivery options and how they impact and create opportunities in Alaska
4. The genetic revolution in biological sciences
5. The impact on university governance of increased public, legislative and student involvement with the university
6. The Alaska state fiscal situation
7. Globalization
   
   

V. Checklist of issues for the Study Group to consider

1. Academic control and governance -- how the university decides what it does and does not do
2. The role of U of A in understanding and enhancing an “owner state”
3. Program development policy and articulation
4. The balance between research, teaching and service
5. What types of research will be emphasized
6. The need for “centers of excellence”
7. How to determine which campuses get which programs
8. Specific Alaska Native needs and means to satisfy those needs
9. Rural needs and means to satisfy those needs
10. Specific Alaska distance delivery issues
11. University relationship with the K-12 system
12. The “Brain drain”
13. Financial control and governance
14. How to determine adequacy of university funding and possible and appropriate sources of funding
15. Comparison with external university models and benchmarks
16. Identification of and relationship to the public(s) the university serves
    

VI. Findings

1. The underlying role of the U of A is to improve the quality of life of Alaskans by offering opportunities for self improvement
2. U of A fills a broad mission. It incorporates all facets of post secondary education in Alaska, including university and community college functions.
3. Its mission is fulfilled in three ways
   1. Teaching
   2. Research
   3. Service
4. The primary university-level orientation must include a quality core liberal arts curriculum at each major campus to prepare people to think, reason and understand their role in the larger world.
5. Basic and applied research are essential elements
   1. U of A is uniquely positioned to do northern latitudes research
   2. Existing areas of expertise
   3. Flywheel effect
   4. Economic contribution to overhead
   5. Potential to derive income from patents
   6. Potential to export expertise
6. U of A offers 2/3rd the course offerings of its peers
7. U of A is a major contributor to workforce development
   1. Adult education
   2. Associate degrees
   3. Certificate programs
   4. Examples
      1. Nursing
      2. Logistics
      3. Teaching
8. U of A sets the standard of preparation by the K-12 systems for higher education in Alaska. Is the standard clearly understood? Is the standard high enough?
9. U of A has increasingly diverted resources to complete inadequate K-12 education of incoming students.
   1. 40% of incoming freshmen need remedial programs
   2. This mirrors national trends
10. State student loan programs subsidize the export of Alaska’s youth.
    1. 50% of post-secondary students attend Outside
    2. After five years, only 20% of students who study Outside return to Alaska.
11. Tuition levels are low compared to peer institutions and to national norms
12. Administrative costs seem in line or favorable compared to peer institutions
13. The Alaska scholars program is a success
    1. Higher retention rate
    2. An increasing percentage come from Alaska
    3. Incentive effect is small schools
    4. However, University natural resource income is being consumed to support this program
14. U of A contributes to the quality of life in Alaska through athletic, cultural and intellectual events
15. Different campuses have different levels of connection to their communities
16. Effective communication, outreach and accountability are keys to success in generating public support for the University
17. The University does a substantial amount of self-analysis and comparison to peers. It has tools to understand itself well.
18. The different campuses have recently done a better job of cooperating and coordinating
19. U of A currently enjoys more effective leadership
    1. It has “turned the corner”
    2. Well positioned to move forward
20. The Board of Regents and the University of Alaska system has begun a strategic planning process
21. The three major academic units are quite different from each other and have individual missions
22. U of A is a major employer and a major economic engine in Alaska
23. Adequacy of resources, including total state funding
    1. Basic facts
    2. Tuition levels
    3. Adjusted peer comparisons
       
       

VII. Conclusions

1. Adequate/inadequate funding?
2. Natural opportunities for excellence and distinction
   1. By virtue of being in Alaska
      1. Arctic science and engineering
      2. Distance delivery of education, health care
   2. By campus
      1. Each of three major campuses should have one or more centers of excellence
3. The Board of Regents must be responsible for strategic planning and asset allocation between the major academic units
4. Benefits of developing and maintaining a comprehensive strategic planning process (Currently focusing on 2009 -- the 50th anniversary of statehood)
   1. Distills a coordinated vision for the overall university and its component units
   2. Allocates resources in a planned vs. political fashion
   3. Provides year-to-year continuity
   4. Provides an understandable direction that helps students, teachers, legislators and citizens relate to the university.
5. Statewide needs that U of A could meet
   1. Keep more post secondary students in Alaska.
   2. Thoughtful analysis of public policy issues
   3. Post secondary remedial education
   4. Training for existing industries
   5. Identification of future economic opportunities and training for them
   6. Fill in needed cultural opportunities
   7. Be a catalyst for intellectual, scientific, technical and business innovation
   8. Need to create an “Alaskanized” workforce with useful training and a realistic understanding of the Alaska operating environment.
      
      

VIII. Recommendations

1. (Student loans) Create incentives to keep students in Alaska, or have them return to Alaska if they have studied Outside.
2. (State funding levels) Principles legislators and the public can use to judge appropriateness of state funding levels
3. Recommendations for consideration by the administration and Regents on possible initiatives and directions to explore.
   
   

IX. Implementation Strategies

Part A -- report completion

1. Keep CWN Board informed of progress
2. CWN Board approves a DRAFT for circulation around the state
3. Circulate draft for feedback and commentary
   1. Web site
   2. Printed version
   3. Public presentations
      1. Juneau
      2. Fairbanks
      3. Anchorage
      4. Key University constituencies
4. Study group assimilates feedback and modifies report as necessary
5. Modified report submitted to CWN Board
6. Distribution of final report and follow-up on action items

Part B -- Follow-up actions

1. Identify one or more recommendations for CWN to pursue after report completion that are achievable within 12 months.
2. Form a follow-up group to pursue these items.
   
   

Appendices:

1. Who and what is Commonwealth North?
2. The Charge to the Study Group

   ---

1. Questions to be addressed:

• What are the appropriate roles and responsibilities of the University of Alaska?
• How can U of A best fulfill these obligations to Alaska?
• How do issues such as costs, resources, competing choices and constraints (both internal and external) affect the ability of U of A to fulfill its roles and responsibilities?

2. Scope of study:

• The scope of the study is statewide.
• Identify Alaska’s higher education needs.
• Analyze how well the U of A is meeting those needs.
• Analyze University operations as they relate to current Alaska economic activity.
• Identify specific areas where higher education initiatives can support economic development..
• Review the U of A financial situation, both current and projected.
• Explore successful financial, academic and economic models external to Alaska.
• Develop specific goals and make recommendations to achieve them.

3. Nature of report to be issued (Technical, Analytical, or Opinion):

This report will analyze the issues, identify a process for addressing issues, and find guiding principles for the benefit of the State. While the report will largely express an opinion, it will address technical and analytical issues that may be necessary aspects of the larger picture.

4. Conflict of interest standards:

The intent of the study is to represent a balance between the geographic, demographic, ethnic and economic interests in Alaska.

It is expected that persons with interests in the outcome of the study will be members of the study group and will participate in its deliberations. Study group leaders should request that study group members identify their interests relative to specific points they advocate.

5. Measure of success:

This study group can be successful in two ways:

1. Recommendations are made, approved and implemented that achieve all or part of the goals that the study develops.
   
   
2. CWN study group participants generate understanding of and insight into the potential for higher education in Alaska, and generate media coverage appropriate to share this understanding and insight with a much wider audience of Alaskans.

   ---

3. Matrix of U of A System and campus missions and visions

4. Resource people interviewed by the Study Group

University President Mark Hamilton, University of Alaska Fairbanks Chancellor Marshall Lind, University of Alaska Southeast Chancellor John Pugh, University of Alaska Anchorage Chancellor Lee Gorsuch, U of A Regents Chancy Croft and Michael Burns, U of A System Chief of Staff James Johnsen, Pat Pitney, Joseph Beedle, Wendy Redman, UAA Director of Native Student Services Willy Templeton, UAA Professor of English Dr. Jeane Breinig, First Alaskans Institute Sarah Scanlon.

5. Additional sources of information

The Uses of the University, Fifth Edition, Clark Kerr, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2001; Investment In Learning, Howard R. Bowen, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick and London, 1996; “Reengaging the University: A Case Study of the University of Alaska, 1998-2002,” James R. Johnsen, Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California Berkeley, 2002.

6. Members of the Study Group

7. Members of the Commonwealth North Board of Directors

8. Underwriters