Mission and Mission Fulfillment

Tom MillerUniversity of Alaska Anchorage

UAA’s ContextPublic universityPublic universityPart of a system of three independently Part of a system of three independently

accredited campusesaccredited campusesLargest of three major campusesLargest of three major campuses

20,000 students2,000 staff1,200 faculty

Extended reachExtended reachFive community campuses

UAA’s ContextComprehensive missionComprehensive mission

200 programs of studyCertificates to 2-year to graduate programs

Open accessOpen accessWide diversity of student bodyWide diversity of student bodyDouble identityDouble identity

Community collegeFour-year university

MissionUseful components for a Mission Statement

Identify purpose for activities: Identify purpose for activities: discover and disseminate knowledge through

teaching, research, engagement, and creative expression.

serve the higher education needs of the state, its communities, and its diverse peoples.

Mission Useful components for a Mission Statement

Identify important characteristics: Identify important characteristics: open access university academic programs leading to associate,

baccalaureate, and graduate degreesrich, diverse, and inclusive environmentsustainable practices

Mission Useful components for a Mission Statement

Identify impacts – the result will beIdentify impacts – the result will beGraduates prepared for: workforce, further

education in…, citizenship, life-long learningStudents will demonstrate (critical thinking,

leadership, etc.)Economic development in regionEngagement in arts and humanities

MissionNot so helpful statements

Bragging:Bragging:We will be (renowned for, recognized for,

famous for …) risk spending too much effort getting noticed

Comparisons or predictions:Comparisons or predictions:We will double our (enrollments, space,

foundation account, state appropriation, etc.) too many factors that institutions don’t control

We will be the top producer of aircraft mechanics in the state. Set benchmarks and thresholds in other documents

Mission Alignment with strategic and other operational plans

Common priorities and objectivesCommon data sets to measure

performanceCommon reporting and evaluation

Program level reviewsSystem level performance reviews

Evaluation tied to improvement

Institutional Planning and AccreditationInvolved partiesTimelineCollection of evidenceRole of values

Handling TransformationThinking deeply and in new ways…

The role and practice of institutional vision

When and how to include, delete or alter an institutional goal or core theme

When and how to measure effects

Mission FulfillmentDefinition of fulfillment: Broad range

between unacceptable and superior..

Acceptable Level of Performance – Internal or external guidance? Status or trends? Need for comparable data sets?

Evaluation of programs and services Role of institutional indicators. Rolling up

into Core Themes and Mission

The Use of IndicatorsAs markers of performance - not directly

pointing to process or goal adjustment. Prompts for further review

Distinguish between poor performance and inconclusive data

Careful analysis needed to connect cause and effect

Properties of good evidence: meaningful, repeatable, verifiable, multiple measures

Steps between data collection and action

Susan KalinaUniversity of Alaska Anchorage

PrinciplesEstablished by Steering Committee

from the outset

TransparencyInclusivenessCommunity InvolvementSensitivity in ApproachStudent CenteredRespect

Communication with University and Community

Initial briefings

Ongoing updates

Requests for feedback

Distributed results

New Standards and Process:Briefing All Major Organizational Units

•Aims at improvement based on evidence of achievement

•Engages entire institution•Encourages collaboration across units•Focuses on mission fulfillment•Provides an opportunity to adjust as

we go along

Ongoing Updates and Briefings Existing faculty, staff, student,

administrative and community governance groups

In writing and in personAdditional focused briefingsWidely distributed drafts, clear feedback

mechanismAccreditation 2010 Web site

Feedback Solicitedat Each Major Step

Core themesOutcomes and IndicatorsResources and CapacityPerformance and recommendations

Standards – reviewed simultaneously

Distributed Leadership Across Groups, Units, and Campuses

Steering CommitteeLeadership teamGovernance groupsCore Theme evaluation teamsChancellor’s Cabinet

Intra-institutional Benefits and Implications for Practice

Engages the entire institution and community in meaningful discussion

Encourages dialogue across traditional boundaries and up and down the traditional hierarchy

Helps individuals and units see how they contribute to the mission as a whole and to see their connections to other units

Intra-institutional Benefits and Implications for Practice

Encourages thinking about efficiency of effortAlignment with strategic plan and management

processes (evidence collection and analysis, decisions, measure effects, improve)

Renews discussion of mission and strategic plan

Incentives for responsible groups to take control

Intra-institutional Challenges and Implications for Practice

Cost and time implicationsTraining and expectations of institution and

the commissionTemptation to select only safe outcomes

(easy to measure or easy to accomplish)Unavailability of conclusive evidence – not

enough, not directly related to performanceInaccurate analysisActions not related to mission or

overwhelmed by events