The bold vision outlined in USM’s second draft of the strategic plan aims to focus the university’s effort and organization in a time of tightening economic conditions.
Released on Feb 12th, “Preparing USM for the future: 2009-2014,” identifies some of the key structural and organizational problems at USM, and suggests plans of action for addressing them.
“This is the time where we can have major input” said economics Professor Joe Medley, who sees the strategic plan in it’s current form as a collection of discussion points still open to revision.
The plan is an attempt to guide USM’s policy during a period characterized by a “crushing shortage of resources,” said Medley.
The second draft of the strategic plan, created by four groups of USM faculty, students, staff, and administration, is now open to review and suggestion from members of the USM community.
While the plan has drawn some criticism for it’s proposed restructuring of USM’s three campuses, many of the suggestions included in the draft have been well received.
“The plan recognizes a lot of things we do, and do really well,” said Lydia Savage, professor of Geography and Anthropology.
Among these strengths, Savage mentions USM’s commitment to “engaged teaching and learning” an idea also discussed in the plan, as USM’s new “signature approach to teaching and learning.”
“We already do a lot of engaged learning – labs, field work, conferences,” said Savage. “In my own department I see undergrads working alongside faculty in nationally recognized research projects.”
While the plan lacks a formal definition of “engaged teaching and learning,” many USM faculty members are eager to offer their own interpretations of the idea.
“It’s making sure students have ownership over their education, that they are active participants in it, not objects” said History professor David Carey.
By offering more opportunities for service learning, and bringing in guest lecturers, Carey feels that USM could create a sense of “community, and academic solidarity.”
Medley was glad to see engaged teaching and learning addressed, but thinks that it is as much the student’s responsibility as it is the university’s. “We need to encourage students to make a mental, emotional, commitment to learning,” Medley said.
“They need to have their heads in class, not their cell phones,” he added.
The one item in the Strategic Plan that has stirred up the most controversy is the proposal to restructure USM’s three campuses, creating a unique “identity” and “location specific missions” for Gorham, Portland, and Lewiston-Auburn.
This restructuring would help to consolidate resources, cut down on commuting, and create a stronger central mission for each campus.
Under the plan, the College of Arts and Sciences, applied sciences, and many Core classes would be centered on the Gorham campus, while Portland would become the home of professional and graduate education.
Some USM faculty see this reorganizing as a costly and unnecessary process that also runs the risk of alienating students.
“I am concerned that by trying to identify each location’s identities, we are going to end up fracturing the university community in a myriad of ways,” said Savage.
“Frankly, I think we can do a much better job selling who we are to the community,” she added.
CAS Dean Pam Edwards doubts the logistics and cost effectiveness of moving an entire college. On a cash-strapped campus, each dollar has to be stretched, and the cost of moving entire academic departments would be a significant financial burden that some can’t imagine. “We can’t get the money to hire someone to move a desk”, said Edwards.
Ben Taylor, USM’s student body president, was a member of Strategic Planning group that focused on the three campus issue.
“Core is a good idea to have in Gorham,” Taylor said. “[But] you should be able to take second, third, or fourth year classes at either campus,[for] at least some of the majors that are more popular.”
Medley notes that past surveys have showed that USM students prefer taking class in Portland (over Gorham) by a ratio of four to one.
“If that is where students want to be taught, that is where we will offer [courses],” said Medley.
“The university would be foolish to go against this.”
Medley encourages students to get involved in the process.
“Student input ito the Strategic Plan is central” he says, adding that by getting the opinion of the average student, “the whole process gets a hell of a lot smarter.”