New University Model Advisory Panel Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The New University Model Advisory Panel (NUMAP) finds that Rain & Company's best practices consist of: 1. Identifying educational problems. 2. Proposing several well-conceived and innovative solutions for meeting the needs of underprepared students. 3. Finding certain viable ways for UNT Dallas to cut costs without significantly compromising quality. This panel has identified several significant omissions from Rain's data. The consultants presume educational quality and have engaged in narrow university benchmarking that fails to consider the following: 1. The parts of the traditional university model that are worth saving. 2. ESL students and students returning to school as part of the UNT Dallas student body. 3. A major in International/Global Studies, which fits the UNT Dallas mission. 4. Alternative semester models. 5. Cheating and plagiarism, especially in on-line courses. 6. The role of the faculty with regard to curriculum control. 7. Numerous successful upgrades of universities in urban settings. This panel has found numerous other problems with Bain's data, including: 1. Analysis based on incomplete data. 2. Selectively biased benchmarking. 3. A failure to advocate for several well-researched ideas such as a five-week summer boot camp and study skills session. 4. The presumption that jobs in primary and secondary education depend solely on a major in education rather than on education courses and discipline-specific preparation. 5. A failure to consider that high graduation rates are dependent on the maintenance of a lowstudent faculty ratio, which means adding tenure-track faculty as the student population grows. 6. Equating hybrid learning and a year-round academic cycle to "winning." 7. Privileging an urban university's location and price over program availability and quality, despite their own clear-cut data supporting the contrary. 8. A reference to equal faculty compensation as practiced at BYU-Idaho, to which the consultants never return. 9. Compromising educational quality by advising "minimal self-funded research," for faculty. President Price asked the NUMAP to provide responses to twelve questions regarding the new university model, based on analysis of existing research, which was prepared primarily by Bain & Company, for the 21 st Century Commission.

A summary of the panel's responses are as follows: I. UNT Dallas has already differentiated itself in the marketplace by reaching out to a broad spectrum of students and providing them access to higher education at an affordable cost. The university should continue on this path and emphasize its unique characteristics: transformation, belonging, value, diversity, and legacy. 2A. UNT Dallas should continue to recruit transfer students as part of its student profile because of its past success in this area. If a transition is made to recruit first-time-in-college students, it should be gradual and in combination with graduate student recruitment so that we do not lose the numbers game. UNT Dallas should simultaneously work to develop more robust retention methods, academic support, and social and personal support to students. 2B. The panel believes strongly that there is not a single "target student profile" for a driven student because of widely varying socioeconomic factors among potential student recruits and UNT Dallas's own status as a commuter university. We identify three target student profiles: freshman, whom we should recruit without distinction, transfer students age 25-55 who will likely require remediation, and graduate students age 25-55 who are career changers or career advancers. 3A. Our criteria in determining UNT Dallas's appropriate student mix are that students be encouraged to graduate in four years or less, switch to needs-based rather than incentive-based financial aid practices, expand course offerings in daytime hours, incorporate hybrid learning models, and increase state funding to the university. This will allow UNT Dallas to meet university and state goals of increasing graduates and decreasing the time it takes to graduate, while remaining financially solvent. 3B. The panel recommends developing a long-term plan over the next 10-12 years to move from a majority of transfer students to a majority of traditional freshman students. To help encourage transfer students to attend full-time, we recommend that UNT Dallas provide credit for career service to compress the time necessary for degree completion. 4A. UNT Dallas should not base its teaching delivery model solely on enrollment growth and increased graduation rates. Instead factors such as student readiness and preparedness, finances, access to internet and computer, workload and availability, and desired skill set for career paths must be considered. Faculty preparedness, workload, course learning objectives, university budget, and classroom space are equally important criteria. 4B. Therefore, a single teaching delivery model is a mistake. The best one will vary by discipline based on the above criteria. 5A. Financial, academic and career advising should all be conducted by trained professionals. Given the current workload of full-time faculty and staff members, they should not be expected to also serve as financial or career advisors on a part-time basis, and administrative burdens should be minimized for faculty serving as academic advisors. Academic advisors can playa

limited, supporting role in career advising within their own discipline; however, workplace connections should not be regarded as a common expectation for faculty and staff. 58. Financial advising should be handled by full-time staff professionals. General education advising should be conducted by professional staff advisors and administrative assistants, and upper-level advising should be done by faculty members within their own discipline. Career advising and the arranging of internships should be handled by staff professionals with assistance from faculty and staff members who have workplace connections. 6. The panel believes that the process for college graduation can be streamlined by identifying clearly defined first-year pathways that merge into program pathways such as health, business, liberal arts, or STEM. This strategy would include limiting the common general education core, providing greater academic support for introductory program courses, maintaining UNT Dallas's existing first-year experience course, and implementing block scheduling for students. We also believe in enhanced student advising and academic support to help students select their majors earlier. As part ofthis strategy UNT Dallas should offer high-touch advising, continue early alert, place students in math courses appropriate for their majors and careers, offer high-quality student remediation, increase course availability and financial aid incentives, develop more partnerships with area high schools and community colleges, and consider offering more oncampus jobs and childcare to students. 7A. Faculty workload should be based on the maintenance of high-quality and productive teaching, research, and service, including community engagement. Faculty teaching loads and enrollment caps should be limited to ensure that UNT Dallas's graduates meet the goals of its mission. 78. The allocation among teaching, research, and service responsibilities should be flexible and tailored to each individual faculty member based on their own strengths, weaknesses, and interests. The current 10-percent service allocation does not reflect the percentage of time most faculty members devote to service, and administrators should consider upping the theoretical standard to 20% to reflect this. 7C. The university should adopt a more flexible stance on faculty workload that would recognize that some of the most talented teaching faculty prefer to devote a majority of their time to teaching (80% teaching, 10% research, 10% service), while the most talented researchers would prefer to devote an equal amount of time to teaching and research (40% teaching, 40% research, 20% service). 8A. UNT Dallas's programs should be based on its current mission and vision. This means it should continue to emphasize educational quality rather than efficiency and profit and be engaged with the community socially, culturally, and economically. It should recognize that new and existing academic programs should not be implemented or retained based solely on projected job growth. Instead, this criterion should be balanced with a program's costs, enrollment potential, and redundancy. Remedial help should be offered to help students in need, but the university should also maintain sufficiently rigorous academic standards to weed out chronically failing students.

88. Based on these criteria, it does not make sense to have narrowly focused programs based exclusively on local and regional market demand. Instead a well-rounded balanced academic curriculum that includes the full scope of the liberal arts and applied sciences is needed. Current programs in Sociology, Education, Biological Sciences, and Mathematics should be retained, and UNT Dallas should conduct rigorous analysis to determine the most viable new majors to offer. 9. The panel recommends that UNT Dallas participate in K-12 student engagement by creating a scholarship fund to reward certain students for high academic achievement, more closely integrating high school and college curricula, and enhancing the Tex-Prep high school feeder program. We also advise establishing student-specific educational savings accounts, a university scholars program, an Honors College, and a two-week "college camp" for students to attend between the 11th and 12th grade. 10. The panel recommends that UNT Dallas make financial decisions that are student-centered and prioritize and align expenses with its mission and target students in order to maintain educational quality and financial stability. The university should explore reducing facility costs by examining hybrid/on-line delivery programs for some programs, reducing the costs of highcost programs by building community/corporate partnerships, shifting faculty time from research to teaching, and fully utilizing existing facilities. The panel also believes that UNT Dallas make certain areas of student support financial priorities. 11. To optimize existing classroom capacity, UNT Dallas should consider a variety of options based on course and program demand and its mission and university plan. These include implementing hybrid/online instruction to accommodate more students; full utilization of existing facilities during weekdays, weekends, and in the summer; and renovating and consolidating underutilized rooms. The university should also consider using off-campus space, including more large multi-purpose rooms or modular spaces in future buildings, and allowing external groups to utilize our current space to promote a more positive community atmosphere. 12. The most important criterion is that this person possess the highest integrity. The person also should not be afraid to make mistakes, demonstrate humility by giving credit when credit is due, be open to alternative viewpoints, work will with others, possess technological acumen, have experience overseeing academic organizational structures in higher education, and preferably possess experience interacting with students as a former university faculty or staff member. The individual's authority and decision making should be checked by a university advisory board with representation from each academic division.

INTRODUCTION: WHAT DOES BAIN DO WELL? WHAT ISSUES ARE MISSING OR PROBLEMATIC?
The Best of Bain 1. Bain & Company's consultants do an excellent job of identifYing educational problems through statistical analysis in the Dallas-Fort Worth region and contextualizing them with state and national problems in higher education as reported in the Spring 2012 issue of New Horizons. 2. Several ofBain's solutions for meeting the needs ofunderprepared, struggling students are well-conceived and innovative. Examples include a computer-based early alert intervention system, which the University of North Texas at Dallas has already begun to implement, and a five-week summer boot camp for underachieving incoming students. The committee recommends that UNT Dallas consider implementing a similar boot camp as soon as possible. 3. Bain consultants should be commended for finding certain viable ways for UNT Dallas to cut costs without compromising quality at a time when many American college-bound students and their families are struggling and contending with rising university tuition and student fees because of declining state funding and overambitious facility expansion. Missing Issues in Bain's Data 1. Bain consultants do not ask what parts of the traditional university model are worth saving. Instead they advocate across-the-board changes for change's sake. In simpler terms, they advocate throwing the baby out with the bathwater. This is reminiscent ofthe pre- I970s approach to engineering, where the goal was to solve the problem at hand (enrollment), while neglecting its broader context. This leads to unintended consequences. 2. Educational quality is presumed and not adequately explained or produced by the model. The underlying concept that we can accomplish by disruptive innovation what we cannot do with traditional models has several implications. As proposed by Christensen, disruptive innovation is an entrepreneurial model designed to win a competition for market share. Winning means increased enrollment. It does not guarantee the quality of the product, which in this case is the graduates. Marketing and advertising often promote inferior products to eminence in market share, but this will not work for our university in the current employment market. UNT Dallas should be striving to produce high quality graduates into the local and regional workforce. One such graduate successfully employed in Dallas or Texas will do far more for marketing this university than billboards, mascots, and brands. Producing quality graduates will show to the business community that we can accomplish our academic mission and our social mission of serving the community. 3. Neither ESL students nor employees going back to school are addressed as part ofUNT Dallas's student population. 4. A major in International/Global Studies, which would fit well with UNT Dallas's current mission and vision, is not considered.

5. Alternative semester models are not considered. Alternatives to consider should include a 3-3 course load system for faculty, nested within a lO-month trimester with optional summer teaching for faculty; or a two-semester 3-3 model with a one-month January term for community engagement/experiential learning. 6. Cheating and plagiarism, especially in on-line courses, are not addressed. 7. The faculty is largely ignored with regard to curriculum control. At traditional universities, the faculty has final say over the curriculum, subject to requirements set by the Legislature and higher education authorities. In this model, the UNT Dallas curriculum is set by external entities such as sponsoring industries or individual businesses acting in conjunction with UNT Dallas administrators. To date at UNT Dallas the faculty has played a secondary, reactive role in curriculum planning and formulation, apparently because the administration has made the determination that non-tenured faculty are not entitled to participate in curriculum construction. The consultants, who have been excluded from curriculum recommendations in their work for Cornell University, the University of California at Berkeley, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, apparently see no problem with this interpretation and the exclusion of a broad range of faculty on curriculum matters. 8. Bain's university benchmarking is narrow. It omits other successful upgrades of universities in urban settings such as the University of Maryland-Baltimore, George Mason University, the University of Massachusetts-Boston, and the University of New England. All of these universities are highly innovative and have demonstrated sustained growth over the last forty years. George Mason began as a community college, while U Mass-Boston was originally a teacher's college. Problems with Bain's Data 1. Bain's data itself is incomplete. Since the consultants are still in the process of completing their proposed research, drawing conclusions and making recommendations based on incomplete data seems presumptive and reductive. 2. Benchmarking is selectively biased to satisfy preferred perspectives, often without considering the context of the benchmarked universities and similarities to UNT Dallas. For example, in Steering Committee II some ofthe university benchmarking choices deserve more explanation, especially BYU-Idaho, which has a student population that is only 10% minority. Bain alleges that BYU-Idaho and Georgia Gwinnett College were chosen for their "innovative four year models" (Slide 40), but it seems that these two schools were chosen at least in part because their faculty are untenured. If this is the case, it should be specifically stated in the slides, and our committee opposes this idea because it will destroy the quality of undergraduate education. They also fail to note that Georgia Gwinnett College has achieved its great success without offering anyon-line courses. Woodbury College in Los Angeles was allegedly chosen for its high minority graduation rate. Yet it also happens to be a business college whose mission is quite distinct from our own. Strangely, the University of Dallas is omitted entirely from Bain's analysis.

3. Bain consultants came up with a very good idea based on practices at SUNY-Stony Brook, which was to have five-week boot camps and study skills sessions in the summer, but then decided to radically reorganize the academic year into an II-month trimester system. Why not keep the traditional semester system and simply add the boot camp for those students who need it? 4. Slide 34 from Steering Committee I indicates that primary and secondary education, along with accounting and nursing, are occupations adding the most new jobs. This means that teacher training programs in the liberal arts and applied sciences are relevant and those disciplines should be retained at UNT Dallas. The Bain consultants seem to presume a one-to-one correspondence between jobs in primary and secondary education and education courses, which simply isn't the case. Teachers need education courses and discipline-specific preparation. 5. Slide 35 from Steering Committee 1 shows that the key to a high graduation rate is a LOW student-faculty ratio. Based on this, it would seem that adding well-qualified tenure-track faculty is necessary to maintain educational quality as the university's student population grows. 6. According to Steering Committee II, Slide 29 Bain argues that hybrid learning and a yearround academic cycle equate to "winning." Why must that be the case? Aren't there other ways to win? Hybrid courses are expensive to produce. Yet in Steering Committee IV, Bain consultants argue that they will lower the cost per graduate and even improve learning outcomes. We seriously question these claims. 7. In Steering Committee II, Slide 36 Bain consultants argue that location and price are more important to urban students selecting colleges than program availability and quality. We seriously question whether this is the case, and we question the level of college readiness of those students for whom this is true. According to Bain's own data in Steering Committee VI, 84% of students said that offering a major that they were interested in is a critical factor to choosing a university. This has nothing to do with location or price. 8. According to Steering Committee III, Slide 12, one intriguing practice at BYU-Idaho that Bain identifies and never comes back to is that faculty members are compensated equally across disciplines. Is this something that Bain consultants and/or UNT Dallas administrators are considering? If so, this committee wants to make sure that such compensation would be adequate and not indicate a "rush to the bottom." 9. In Steering Committee III, Slide 19, Bain proposes "minimal self-funded research" for faculty, which will compromise the quality and reputation of faculty at this university and the quality of education students receive.

1. HOW SHOULD THE UNIVERSITY DIFFERENTIATE ITSELF IN THE MARKETPLACE?

The New University Model Advisory Panel has chosen to address this question last because it made little sense to address differentiation in the marketplace without answering the other

questions relating to target students, academic programs, teaching loads and semester structure, and so forth. In reviewing the material provided by Bain & Company, it is clear that the university will have to market to a type of student to which it has not marketed before. Driven students, even those who need heavy support, are a unique demographic. This will present challenges to UNT Dallas, forcing the university to walk a fine line between promises made and the reality of what we can actually afford to offer. The New University Model Advisory Panel believes that our lack of programs, social-campus life, and facilities preclude us from associating traditional college characteristics and features with our brand. Secondly, the panel believes we are already differentiated by what we are doing - reaching out to a broad spectrum of students who need to complete degrees and providing access where there has been none. Therefore, we recommend that we differentiate ourselves in the marketplace in a way that acknowledges this preclusion and our legacy of providing access to success at an affordable cost. We believe this can be accomplished by emphasizing the following: 1. Transformation: This idea extends from personal, to communal, to global. We should stress with potential students that their four years in college are about personal transformation and goal setting. But once they are alumni, we should stress that their 40-year work life should be about efforts at transformation for future students (through giving), communities (through service) and nationally and globally (through engaged citizenship). 2. Belonging: We should stress UNT Dallas' "sense of place" and "belonging," a type of openness and acceptance with the goal of transforming students' lives. We should stress the "personal" nature of education at UNT Dallas and the "leamer-centered" focus ofthe school. Students are not numbers at UNT Dallas. 3. Value: UNT Dallas remains among the most affordable options in higher education; but we should stress that what makes UNT Dallas a value is the quality. We should avoid words like "affordable" and "cheaper" which are associated with inferior quality. The word "value" is key. 4. Diversity: We should be seen as a home for "Traditional," "Transfer," "Seekers," "Switchers," and "Advancers." We would not use these words, but they communicate that we do not believe we should adopt a one-size-fits-all method of marketplace differentiation. 5. Legacy: We should lastly emphasize the idea of an "educational legacy." Studies show that, in communities with high unemployment and low educational attainment rates, it normally takes one generation of college attendance to break a cycle. UNT Dallas can be differentiated as a place where educational legacies begin. These points are dependent upon the outcomes established and recommendations made by the 21st Century Commission. Ifwe choose to focus on "driven students" it will be difficult substantially to differentiate UNT Dallas from regional competitors. If a more moderate 8

approach is chosen, with the view of attracting a diverse population of students, we can utilize the above markers to set UNT Dallas apart from other schools.

2A. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING THE UNIVERSITY'S TARGET STUDENT PROFILE?
The first part of this question, part A, is not asking what the student looks like, as much as it is the factors we will use to determine what the student will look like. First and foremost, we must consider the "how" and "where" questions for UNT Dallas. How has UNT Dallas achieved growth in the past? From where did most of the students come? Similarly, we should ask how and where growth among targeted students will come in the future. Answers to these questions, provided by historical evidence and the projections of Bain & Company, lead us to believe we should consider the following: 1) past successes, 2) realistic expectations of outcomes, and 3) the numbers game (financial impact). Past Successes With respect to past successes, the answer is clear. Our greatest triumph - the bread and butter of UNT Dallas - has been transfer students. We do not believe we should abandon this in favor of recruiting traditional freshmen (even "driven" ones) unless we have in place a lengthy transition plan to shift the focus toward traditional first-time-in college (FTIC) students. The cone of older, non-traditional students is growing, precisely because of the poor educational outcomes of the 1990s and the first decade ofthe 21 st century. We should capitalize on this, understanding that this is where we have been successful in the past - in the area of degree completion. Conversely, the cone of "driven" FTJC students is much smaller than past decades. If the goal is to shift to recruiting driven FTIC students, our admissions and selection criteria must change. If this happens, however, processes must be put in place to attract new targets without alienating potential students belonging to the traditional profile (transfer and degree completion). Again, no less effort should be placed on addressing the needs of our current student population while seeking out driven students. Realistic Expectations of Outcomes Another reason we believe a lengthy transition plan must be in place to shift from our current student demographic to FTICs is that we have so little to offer traditional freshmen. Our current level of resource commitment is insufficient to attract "driven" students in large numbers at this time. We have few academic programs, no sports, no student center, no health facilities, no dormitories, one dining option, and no development around the campus to attract students. The area's best and brightest students also are already being hand-picked by multiple prominent universities in the state and across the nation. It is unlikely we will attract these students in the near future because traditional FTIC students want a college experience. We recognize, however, that driven students with strong family ties may wish to stay in the area.

The things that will attract FTIC students en masse will take time to develop. With this in mind, we suggest developing a timetable with a date set in the future shifting the majority of resources toward recruiting driven students. In the meantime, the focus should remain on proven recruitment methods and marketing patterns. We should also develop more robust retention methods for students and provide more academic, social and personal support to students. This less ambitious growth rate among FTICs for a period of years will allow the university to develop a solid base of transfer students who will assist in funding traditional, driven students. These realistic expectations of outcomes for recruiting a target student should be considered. Financial Factors Can we win the numbers game? Can we attract enough ofthe selected, driven students to make that our sole target student and make the ends meet financially? Given the data, the answer is "no." We will have to continue with large numbers of transfer and degree completion students to fund the driven students we admit until an agreed upon date to shift marketing and recruitment functions solely to FTIC driven students at the undergraduate level. We should, however, place a large emphasis on recruiting graduate students, for whom less effort is expended in recruiting and retention. They also generate more revenue per credit hour. These thoughts, based on the historical evidence, indicate that we will not have a single "target student profile." Rather, there will be "target student profiles" comprised of factors that help the university increase its student population while broadening its base of financial support to the point where the university offers the services and student life functions necessary to attract the "driven" FTIC student. 2B. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA WHAT SHOULD BE THE UNIVERSITY'S TARGET STUDENT PROFILE OR PROFILES? A major concern shared by all on the New University Model Advisory Panel is that while we have a definition of a "driven" student, we do not have an adequate picture of "driven students in context. " A driven student in Highland Park is far different than a driven student in southern Oak Cliff. In all likelihood, there is a vast difference in income, quality of life, family structure, school quality, parental involvement, peer success rate, and even nutrition. A driven student in Oak Cliff may be so out of a desire to leave his or her surroundings, rather than merely to land a well-paying job, for instance. But "success" in high school in Oak Cliffmay also be defined differently than "success" in Highland Park, where a student may be driven by a desire to attend the college a parent attended. Context must be considered for each type of driven student. We believe, therefore, that there isn't a single "target student profile" for a driven student, no matter how much we want there to be one. We have history to consider, student demographics,

10

location, lack of funding, lack of programs, lack of alumni, and lack of residential facilities impacting our decision. We are now, and will be for a significant time, a commuter university. With this in mind, we believe there are three target student profiles: Freshman, Transfer, and Graduate. Undergraduate Ifwe shift to the type of driven student Bain & Company describes, the freshman target will be the 18-year-old, recent high school graduate with stable familial arrangements and high level test scores (ACT and SAT). Based on our recruiting pattern, few ofthese will come from Dallas ISO schools. A driven student in a DISD school, who has good grades and good test scores, may choose to go anywhere. Why would he or she choose UNT Dallas when the universities of Texas, or Kentucky, or Arkansas, or Harvard University await? We should do a study to measure the desires of students to "get out" of the area before we assume we'll pull large numbers from DISD. But we can and should conduct a robust marketing program targeted toward freshmen who meet our admissions requirements, driven or not. It should not be a "one size fits all" approach. Ifwe plan to be a 21 st century institution, we must recognize that it may be our responsibility to drive students through college once admitted with sufficient academic support, financial aid, and degree planning. The committee believes we should not focus on recruiting one type of undergraduate student. We should recruit freshmen without distinction (provided they meet admission requirements) to broaden the financial base of the university. The student population will also need to include sufficient numbers of transfer students age 2555 years old, with career experience and family, in need of financial aid to complete school, and likely in need of remediation. In this case, this will prove problematic for us since we have pledged not to focus on remediation. Graduate Graduate students will likely remain the same as our current demographic. They will likely consist of working professionals age 25-55 who are currently seeking to go to school on a parttime basis and are categorized as either career changers or career advancers.

3A. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHING THE UNIVERSITY'S DESIRED STUDENT MIX?
This question presents us with a Catch 22 situation. Our successes in the past (and likely into the future) have been as the result of transfer students. They are, however, no matter their numbers, normally part-time students who take longer to complete degrees. They normally attend at night.

11

To meet university and state goals of increasing college graduates and decreasing the time it takes to graduate, not to mention funding the university, our criteria in determining the appropriate student mix should be: 1. Time to completion of degree (four years or under) 2. Availability of financial aid (switch to needs-based, rather than incentive-based approach; in other words, make the process more competitive and more funds available to full-time students) 3. Programmatic offerings (expanded offerings in daytime hours) 4. Online/hybrid learning models 5. Financial benefit to the university (through state funding)

3B. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, WHAT SHOULD BE THE UNIVERSITY'S DESIRED STUDENT MIX?
We must develop a transition plan to move from a majority oftransfer students to a majority of traditional freshman students. But this needs to be a long transition plan (perhaps as long as 1012 years). In the meantime, we should continue to focus on transfer students but encourage more rapid completion ofthe remaining two years of study. In years 1-6, we should focus on attaining 70-75% full time students; in years 7-12 we should move to 80-85% full-time. This should be the desired goal, as it is for most universities. The m~ority of students (80-85%) would be undergraduate students. The remainder, graduate students, would be able to complete a large majority of their work online. The problematic part that remains is how to get transfer students to attend full-time. Perhaps we should look at providing credit for career service to compress the time necessary for degree completion.

4A. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE TEACIDNG DELIVERY MODEL TO FACILITATE ENROLLMENT GROWTH AND INCREASE GRADUATION RATES?
The question implies that two of the criteria should be to facilitate enrollment growth and increase graduation rates. Should these two criteria even be the primary goals of a university's teaching delivery model? Shouldn't the goal be to facilitate student learning so that they meet the learning objectives for each particular course? And if that's the goal then we need to consider the level of student learning skills/readiness/preparedness in each particular course and discipline. Major criteria other than enrollment growth and increased graduation rates include: 1. student readiness and preparedness: data is needed on this.

12

2. student finances and access to internet and computer 3. student workload and availability 4. faculty preparedness 5. faculty workload 6. course learning objectives and desired skill sets for career paths: ex. If a course learning objective is for students to become orally proficient, how is that achieved in an on-line course? What learning objectives are blended and on-line courses better at meeting than face-to-face classes? 7. university budget 8. classroom space

4B. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, WHAT SHOULD BE THE UNIVERSITY'S APPROPRIATE TEACHING DELIVERY MODEL?
Based on these criteria, it is a mistake to have a single teaching delivery model. The best teaching delivery model will vary by discipline and depends on such factors as student and faculty preparedness and workload and classroom space.

SA. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHING THE STUDENT ADVISING MODEL OR MODELS FOR FINANCIAL/ACADEMIC/CAREER ADVISING?
Financial Advising: 1. Advisor expertise: The first criterion is that financial advisors should be trained professional full-time staff members. These advisors must possess specialized knowledge of scholarship and loan sources inside and outside the university. 2. Faculty and staff workload: This is a complex subject that would compromise the quality of education and need-based aid provided to students if faculty and staff members were asked to perform these duties on a part-time basis on top of their other full-time obligations. Academic Advising: 1. Advisor expertise: The first criterion is that academic advisors should be experts in their field. They must be able to discuss course offerings and programs leading to degrees in their academic discipline, and they should have up-to-date knowledge of and training in the academic requirements for majors in their field. 2. Faculty workload: The second criterion is faculty workload. Tenure-track faculty members are already expected to assume responsibilities in administrative and recruitment areas that are not customary at other universities, which reduces the amount of time they can spend on teaching 13

and research. Advising will take time, so it is imperative that administrative burdens be minimized. Career Advising 1. Advisor expertise: The first criterion is that career advisors should be trained professionals with connections in the local and regional business community and government to help students prepare for specific jobs and careers and to establish internships. Academic advisors can playa supporting role by telling students in general terms whether their degree plan seems to provide a foundation for specific careers. 2. Faculty and staff workload: This, too, is a complex subject that would compromise the quality of education and employment options offered to students if the university relied solely on faculty and staff members performing these duties on a part-time basis on top of their other full-time obligations. 3. Workplace connections: The third criterion is workplace connections. Most faculty are new to the area and do not necessarily have employer contacts in the community. Workplace connections should not be regarded as a common expectation for faculty. Those faculty members that do have connections should be regarded as exceptional cases.

5B. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, WHAT SHOULD BE THE UNIVERSITY'S STUDENT ADVISING MODEL(S)?
Financial Advising This should be handled by full-time staff professionals. Academic Advising I. General Education Advising: Professional staff advisors and administrative assistants should handle general education advising because faculty members bring no specialized knowledge of general education requirements to the table. 2. Upper-level Advising: Faculty should be prepared to offer academic advising to upper-level students enrolled in degree plans within the faculty member's discipline. UNTO administrators should seek to limit the administrative burdens placed on faculty advisors by ensuring staff support for advising and undergraduate record keeping, especially as enrollment grows. Students should also be required to show up for advising with their courses already noted on standardized degree forms for each major. 3. Career Advising and the arranging of internships: These should both be handled by staff professionals with assistance from faculty and staff members who have connections with employers, firms, and government agencies in their field.

6. WHAT CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE IN THE UNIVERSITY MODEL TO ENABLE STUDENTS TO GRADUATE IN FOUR YEARS OR LESS?
14

The panel is mindful that no one model will work best for all students. Some students, particularly many of our current student population (who represent up to 75% of current college enrollment in the U. S.) must balance college courses with work schedules and family needs. Full-time course loads, which clearly lower costs by reducing the overall time in school and which lead to better graduation rates, are not always realistic for students who also work parttime. However, because of the significantly lower graduation rates among part-time students, it is recommended that a major facet of our model enables and encourages students to reduce the overall time attaining a college degree, if not graduate within 4 years. Based on the needs of our current undergraduate student population and the needs of many of the high school students from the DISD and other area school districts who will likely continue to comprise our student population, we support the following measures to help students graduate in less time: Course & Program design Streamline the process for college graduation using some of the following strategies: 1. Clearly defined first-year pathways that merge into program pathways. These pathways can include health, business, liberal arts, or STEM. Although a student may not know exactly what program they are interested in pursuing, they acquire core college-level credits that will count toward certificates and degrees. This will help students avoid taking needless courses and thus shorten their time to graduate. This strategy would include: a. Common general education core. Course offerings that fulfill general education requirements should be limited. b. Academic support for introductory program courses. Provide greater support for introductory courses that may be serving as a gatekeeper into various programs. These courses often become roadblocks. Provide additional tutoring and support for these courses. c. First Year Experience /College skills development courses.[l] A first year experience course will begin at UNT Dallas this fall. This class should be continued with the new model. d. Block schedules. Students are automatically signed up for a block of classes that are grouped together either in the morning, afternoon, or evening. Often, they would take these courses with the same students which could serve as a learning community. Block schedules simplify the registration process and provide students with predictable meeting times so they can schedule their work and life around school.[2] Students are enrolled once in a single, coherent program rather than being signed up every term for individual, unconnected courses.

15

Student advising / academic support with early selection of a major. Get students to commit to programs of study ASAP. Students are twice as likely to graduate if they complete at least three courses in their chosen programs of study in their first year on campus. Invest in strong initial counseling and support in the areas of program / degree assessments and career / skills / interests assessments. Give the students a clear path toward graduation and successful careers that match their skills and interests.[3] As part of this strategy, our University should: 1. Offer high-touch advising. Students meet with their advisors frequently (e.g., twice a semester) to ensure students are on track to graduate and to assess any financial or emotional needs a. Require formal, on-time completion plans for every student, updated annually. b. Students should meeting with faculty advisors as soon as they select a program. 2. Continue Early Alert. Faculty can inform advisors/academic support early in the semester if a student is in trouble so intervention can occur before it is too late in the semester to make course corrections. 3. Place students in the right math. Most students are placed in algebra when statistics or quantitative math would be the most appropriate to prepare them for their chosen programs of study and careers. 4. Student remediation. Remedial education is a major impediment to students graduating on time. UNT Dallas needs to provide high quality remedial education that will avoid many of the pitfalls of traditional remedial education. Best practices[4]include: a. Co-requisite remedial courses. Use co-requisite instead of prerequisite models. Instead of wasting valuable time and money in remedial classes for no credit, students have been proven to succeed in redesigned first-year classes with built-in, just-in-time tutoring and support. Those with serious remedial needs can still be placed in full-credit courses with built-in support but should take the courses over two semesters instead of one.[5] b. Summer Boot Camp. Also known as a summer bridge program, this program helps students make the transition between high school and college. The program may not resolve all of the remedial needs of a student, but it does help with study skills, academic self-efficacy, academic skills, social acclimation, etc. It has been shown to be associated with higher levels of performance and retention.[6] 5. Course availability. Offer courses at various times ofthe day and year to accommodate different schedules and avoid bottlenecks in students' progression. Also consider: 16

a. more summer offerings b. courses offered during two or more semesters each year. 6. Financial incentives. Money is always a great motivator. Financial aid incentives could be used to facilitate graduation in 4 years or less. Though further research would be helpful in creating the most effective financial incentives, there are a variety of ways this can be structured, such as: a. Increasing discounts after each successful completion of a semester. After 4 years, the discounts go away. b. Discounting summer tuition to encourage summer attendance and/or offering a flat rate (tuition for 6 or more credits is the same price.) c. Providing free tuition for the last two semesters for students on track course to graduate in 4 years or less. d. Providing discounts for books for on-track students; many students who are struggling financially choose not to buy books. 6. Pathways for transfer students. Develop more partnerships with area community colleges to better define transfer requirements and to facilitate the transfer of more credits from previous college work; many transfer students lose out on credits from community colleges, therefore duplicating efforts and spending more time and money on their education. 7. High School engagement/partnerships. Increase the preparedness of students by engaging them while they are in high school. a. Offer dual credit courses. b. Provide UNT Dallas Education students the opportunity to help tutor middle school/high school students. c. Develop a pilot program with an area ISO for college-track sophomores that would include college-readiness and remediation, skills and interests assessments, and guidance for college programs and careers (similar to assistance offered to college students mentioned in Section 2). 8. Additional recommendations to be considered: a. More availability of on-campus jobs. b. Availability of childcare.

17

Notes [1] In a review of the literature, Upcraft, et al. (2005) found that students who participate in firstyear seminars are more likely to persist than those who don't even when controlling for other precollege and during-college factors. First-year seminars also have a positive impact on GPA, number of credit hours attempted and completed, graduation rates, student involvement in campus activities, and student attitudes and perceptions of higher education. [2] Example: The City University of New York offers Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) to help students complete associate degrees more quickly. By using block scheduling, student cohorts by major, and other supports, students can effectively balance jobs and school. The results speak for themselves: ASAP students have three times the graduation rate of their peers who do not participate in the program. [3]Upcraft, M. L., Gardner, J. N., Barefoot, B. O. (2005). Challenging and supporting the firstyear student: A handbookfor improving the first year ofcollege (p 35). San Francisco: JosseyBass. [4] Many best practices can be found in the Complete College America report entitled Remediation: Higher Education's Bridge to Nowhere. [5]Example: Texas State University-San Marcos enrolls students who need extra math help in concurrent remedial and college-level algebra and statistics courses, and it requires additional weekly tutoring, for which students earn credit. Seventy-four percent of participants in the program earn a grade of C or better in algebra during their first semester. This is more than twice the percentage rate of all remedial students at Texas State-San Marcos who earn similar grades in their first two years. [6] Strayhorn, T. L. (2010). Bridging the pipeline: Increasing underrepresented students' preparation for college through a summer bridge program. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(2), 142-159.

7A. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHING FACULTY WORKLOADS? (TEACHINGIRESEARCWSERVICE)

Faculty workload should be based on the maintenance of high-quality and productive teaching, research, and service. It should be tied to the university's mission statement, which means that faculty teaching loads and enrollment caps need to ensure that UNT Dallas graduates possess the skills and values needed to "become exemplary citizens" and leaders in a "global environment." Faculty members should strive to achieve high-quality interdisciplinary teaching, innovative research, productive university and divisional service, and a commitment to civic engagement.

7B. HOW SHOULD FACULTY WORKLOAD BE ALLOCATED AMONG TEACHING, RESEARCH, AND SERVICE RESPONSIBILITIES?
Currently, the faculty workload allocation is 60 percent teaching, 30 percent research, and 10 percent service. A viable question is whether it accurately reflects the allocation of time faculty actually put in to each of the three criteria. Virtually all UNT Dallas faculty members are feeling 1.8

pressure to teach more and perform more service than the current allocation allows for while simultaneously remaining productive researchers. In addition, the existing low enrollment policy does not adequately recognize preparation time regardless of class size and results in compounding inequitable workloads. Although administrators seem concerned with whether the current allocation will make the university financially sustainable, tenure-track faculty members wonder how they can possibly develop national reputations in their disciplines if the university continues to privilege teaching quantity over teaching quality and service over research. Grant opportunities often follow initial scholarship. Therefore, supporting faculty research benefits faculty, students, and the institution. In addition, does anyone actually think faculty members only devote 10 percent of their time to service? A second question is whether academic advising should constitute part of teaching or service allocation? The allocation among teaching, research, and service responsibilities need not be as rigid as it currently stands. Although a theoretical standard is helpful, the reality is that individual faculty members have varying strengths. Thus, it could be possible to have several tracks to tenure, which reward faculty for excellence in teaching, research, or service. An unnamed Research One Institution, for example, has a 40 percent teaching, 40 percent research, and 20 percent service allocation. Faculty members are supposed to teach a 3-3 load each semester, but the reality is that they teach a 2-2 load or even a 1-2 because ofthe university's emphasis on high-quality research and the administration's recognition that time-demanding administrative assignments such as graduate coordinator or department chair necessitate a reduction in teaching load. Although this allocation does not necessarily fit with UNT Dallas's current mission and vision, it is arguably closer to it than the model proposed by Bain consultants. At the very least, the 20 percent service allocation seems closer to the amount of time UNT Dallas faculty actually devote to divisional, university, and community activities.

7C. BASED ON THESE CONSIDERATIONS, WHAT SHOULD BE THE UNIVERSITY'S FACULTY WORKLOAD GUIDELINES?
At one extreme could be the teaching workhorses who teach a 4-4 load each semester and perhaps also teach one or two summer courses. Their allocation might be as high as 80 percent teaching, 10 percent research, and 10 percent service at the other extreme might be the most talented researchers, whose allocation might look more like the 40 percent teaching, 40 percent research, 20 percent service with a 2-2 teaching load each semester (with the option of teaching 4 courses in a single semester) with no summer teaching or service requirements to allow for more sustained innovative research.

8A. BASED ON WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD THE PROGRAMS OFFERED AT UNTD BE DETERMINED?
The programs should be based on UNT Dallas's mission and vision. A critical part of our current mission is to "enhance access to high quality education and to prepare students to become exemplary citizens who can assume leadership positions in a global environment."

19

The University's "commitment to improve the quality of life through civic engagement" also means that the university has a responsibility to network with the surrounding community in its fullest context, not just the business community of Dallas. I. High-Quality Education: Based on its mission UNT Dallas is seeking to provide an educational foundation to facilitate life-long learning for its graduates. This is different from being a business-oriented degree mill that seeks to maximize enrollment and graduates. It is also distinct from serving as a publiclyfunded vocational and technical school that trains employees for its private-sector partners. The emphasis should stay on educational quality rather than efficiency and profit. For UNT Dallas, that means that certification in the three R's is an inadequate graduation standard. An appropriate standard should include not only competence in reading, writing, and mathematics, but also the ability to think analytically and critically. We may require substantive job-based knowledge and experience. But this is an element of technical job training that should be assumed by employers. Moreover, substantive job knowledge is often outmoded or superseded within a few years. At their best, universities provide students with the intellectual tools to continue to learn after the graduate departs. 2. Civic Engagement: The university should be engaged with the community socially and culturally as well as economically. The concept of a "niche university" is incompatible with UNT Dallas's current mission and vision. Universities are conceived to provide broad educational opportunities for their graduates to experience the scope and nature of life and its many possibilities, duties, and responsibilities. Not all of those opportunities are likely to be profitable. Until recently, institutions of higher education also intended to provide graduates with something else -a sense of community, of ethics and of public service, and citizenship. This is a critical part ofthe UNT Dallas mission that should be retained. 3. Program costs: Tight budgets and appropriations mean that expensive programs like engineering, which has both massive start-up costs and operational costs, should be given lower priorities than less expensive ones. 4. Potential for enrollment: Course popularity should and will establish initial offerings of the university. But existing enrollment in programs such as Sociology should not go unrecognized - and this is what the commission has done. President Price and Provost Beehler have correctly recognized that cutting programs that are largest in enrollment would wreak havoc on the ability of the university to sustain its finances. It would also cut off those students who have committed to those majors. 5. Admissions standards: IfUNT Dallas continues to admit students who need remedial help in the basic skills of writing, math and critical thinking, the university must provide such help and it must maintain standards that weed out students. Program offerings must recognize the limitations of our student body, while diverting resources to help students in need. For example, creating an engineering program

20

when most current students are in need of remedial math assistance means the university would have to radically alter its current student base. 6. Redundancy: If other schools in the DFW area offer specialized programs with high quality, UNT Dallas should give a lower priority to such programs for the time being. Several regional universities offer high quality engineering programs, and UT Dallas offers has world-class instruction in geographic information systems (GIS), yet these are programs being proposed or established at UNT Dallas. 7. Market Demand: Just because job growth is projected in a discipline does not mean that program should automatically have priority to be retained. Instead, costs of the program and the feasibility of underprepared students achieving the academic skills needed to graduate and receive ajob in that field should also be considered.

8B. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, WHAT MAJORS SHOULD BE OFFERED?

Based on these criteria, it does not make sense to have narrowly focused programs based exclusively on local and regional market demand. Instead a well-rounded, balanced academic curriculum that includes the full scope of the liberal arts and applied sciences is needed. According to Bain's own research, 84 percent of students said interest in a major offered at a college is a critical factor for choosing a college or university. Given the limited number of majors UNT Dallas currently offers, it is not surprising that many students are shopping elsewhere to find their desired programs. 1. Well-Rounded Balanced Academic Curriculum: The program plan for the university should be expansive. This means setting priorities to attract enrollment initially, but ensuring that the university eventually reflects a broad educational base. For UNT Dallas to provide quality graduates and to gain respect within the academic community, it must offer a solid base of degree-granting disciplines in the liberal arts and social sciences as well as the physical sciences, mathematics and biological and health sciences. No one is suggesting a classics or philosophy department, but degree paths in History, Sociology, Psychology, Economics, Political Science, English, and Spanish would provide some basis to the argument that UNT Dallas is a high-quality comprehensive university rather than a narrow conglomeration of random programs. At the very least, these disciplines can be initially combined in omnibus departments and offer minors and second major degree paths before evolving into full degree-granting departments. 2. Sociology: This is a successful major that should be retained. It is currently the largest major, and it is both analytic and explanatory, including an introduction to quantitative and qualitative analysis and research skills. 3. Education: While teachers at all levels are under attack, it is imperative that UNT Dallas maintain its teacher training programs. This is the essence of its public service to the community. 21

4. Biological Sciences: Health programs and careers are supported by a degree path in biological sciences. The current problem is finding adequately prepared students for this sequence. 5. Mathematics: This discipline should be retained. UNT Dallas needs to provide a foundation for all its programs, and many jobs require substantial skills in algebra, which is the basis for problem solving mathematics. Math education is also a viable career path. 6. Emerging Career Fields: At the same time, it also makes sense for UNT Dallas to offer degrees that enable students to find employment in emerging career fields, provided they are cost-effective to implement, there is sufficient projected enrollment, and these degrees are not already being offered by major competitors. Salient examples based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics include Oil and Gas Production, Digital Media, Forensic Science, and Foreign Service Officer Preparation. However, before UNT Dallas adds any potential major, rigorous analysis should be conducted.

9. WHEN AND HOW SHOULD THE UNIVERSITY PARTICIPATE IN K-12 STUDENT ENGAGEMENT TO OPTIMIZE RECRUITMENT WITHIN THE NEW UNIVERSITY MODEL?
There are several things we can do to involve ourselves in the K-12 process, from academic to practical: 1. Reward student grades each term with a small contribution to a UNT Dallas scholarship fund in their name for every A grade they receive. For each A, for example, provide $25 for that specific student. You'd have to limit it though to a certain number of students each year. 2. Establish educational savings accounts at the university where college is paid for a little at a time (this again would be student specific). 3. Work to better align the curriculum and create "connections classes" where the high school and college curriculum begin to intersect in the 11 th grade. 4. Create a university scholars program where students are dismissed from high school one or two afternoons a week to attend college lectures (attendance would be required). 5. Create a "college camp" for students to attend between the 11th and 12th grade years where they experience college life for a two-week period. If they decide to attend UNT Dallas, provide them 3 hours credit for it. 6. Quickly establish the Honors College and design a specific curriculum for it that allows the students to enroll and attend classes during their senior year.

22

These are just a few ideas. Additional thoughts from a committee member: 1. Enhance the high school feeder program now in place (Tex-Prep Program) in the following ways: a. Consider granting students who complete the program their first semester at UNTD without cost. b. Incorporate the new information literacy course into this program. c. Grant feeder school students borrowing privileges, access to library electronic database resources, and library instruction in scholarly research both on campus and off site. 2. The Tex-Prep Program is important because local lSD's (Lancaster, Cedar Hill, Desoto, Duncanville) have severely reduced library staff and some have closed middle and high school libraries. a. "Librarians were eliminated in the 90's. It became clear which students came from those districts. Students who had access to libraries in high school had a GPA 1 point higher than nonfeeder schools." (John McGinnis, School Board Long Beach Unified School Dist., American Library Conf. 2012) b. "All students don't know what an online course means. Students believe 'everything is on my device'. Faculty share with HS teachers what they want taught."communities (Lynn Lampert, Chair Reference and Instructional Srvcs., California State Univ., Long Beach, CA.) 10. ON WHAT BASIS SHOULD THE UNIVERSITY BALANCE FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF THE UNIVERSITY WITH AFFORDABILITY FOR THE STUDENTS? Obviously, financial stability is imperative to any successful organization and should be a high priority for the University. However, our success as a University is also based on student success. Reducing costs in areas that affect student learning outcomes will have a long-term negative impact on the reputation of this University, and will not lead to financial sustainability. Therefore, this panel recommends that financial decisions should be student-centered and expenses be prioritized and aligned with our mission and our target students. The panel believes areas exist in which costs can be reduced or maintained, and many of these options could be explored. Some ofthese options are: 1. examining online / hybrid delivery platforms for some programs to reduce facility costs 2. avoiding high cost programs unless paid for in part through community / corporate partnerships 23

3. shifting faculty time from research to teaching 4. full utilization of facilities to include expanded daytime use, weekend classes, and yearround attendance The panel recognizes that many of these measures, while saving expenses in one area, can lead to higher costs or diminished services in other areas. Additionally, the panel also believes that some areas of student support should receive financial priorities for our University to offer robust programs which effectively serve our students' needs. These areas include: 1. developmental/remedial education 2. academic support and advising 3. tutoring and career counseling 4. high school partnerships and engagement 5. civic engagement 6. student life

11. CONSIDERING THE CHALLENGES IN OBTAINING CAPITAL INVESTMENT FOR NEW BUILDINGS, HOW CAN THE UNIVERSITY OPTIMIZE THE EXISTING CLASSROOM CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE RAPID ENROLLMENT GROWTH AND ON WHAT BASIS SHOULD EXISTING FACILITIES BE PRIORITIZED TO ACCOMMODATE POTENTIAL FUTURE GROWTH?
To optimize existing classroom capacity, the University could consider several options. One option is implementing hybrid / online instruction to accommodate more students. As mentioned previously (in Question # 10), full utilization of facilities to include expanded daytime use, weekend classes, and year-round attendance would also allow for increased capacity. Other options include the renovation and consolidation of underutilized rooms and the use of offcampus space. When consideration for future buildings is made, the University should examine the type of spaces that are needed and currently lacking from existing space, such as larger, multi-purpose rooms or modular spaces to accommodate flexible room requirements. The panel also recommends examining the possibilities for external groups to utilize our current space, when available, in order to promote a more positive community atmosphere which we are seeking.

24

Priorities for the use of existing facilities could be detennined by demand of courses and programs, but should also align with our mission and our master plan.

12. WHAT KIND OF PERSON SHOULD BE APPOINTED AS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICER TO WORK WITH THE PRESIDENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW UNIVERSITY MODEL?
The most important criterion is that the person should possess the highest integrity. This means the individual's resume should be open to full public scrutiny, and he/she should be able to provide evidence of the highest ethical standards and practices as a member in good standing in professional organizations appropriate for their discipline (e.g. accounting-CPA; engineering-Po Eng.; law-SBT (State Bar of Texas); social work-NASW). Other required qualifications should be that the person cannot be afraid to make mistakes, that he/she demonstrate humility by giving credit where credit is due; be open to alternative viewpoints, work well with others, possess technological acumen, and have experience overseeing academic organizational structures in higher education. The best person for this position would not only be an experienced academic administrator in higher education but also possess experience interacting with students as a fonner university faculty or staff member. Finally, this individual should be accountable to a university advisory board with representation from each academic division for the purposes of checking and balancing power and managing risk. Thank you for your time and consideration in reading this report.

The New University Advisory Panel Matt Babcock, Assistant Professor of History, Co-Chair. Abigail Ure, Research Analyst, Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Co-Chair. Brenda Robertson, Head Librarian, Recording Secretary David Forde, Associate Dean, Division of Liberal Arts and Life Sciences, Scheduling. Terri Bell, Accountant IV, Office of Finance and Administration Walt Borges, Assistant Professor of Political Science Gretchen Choe, Lecturer, Criminal Justice Alicia Clark, Student Services Specialist Ron Fory, Lecturer, Accounting Ron Horick, Development Associate Alounda Joseph, Director of Graduate Admissions and Enrollment Joy Patton, Assistant Professor of Human Services Greg Tomlin, Executive Director of Marketing and Communications Rhonda Vincent, Lecturer, Teachers Education

25

Appendix
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS

The New University Model Advisory Panel (NUMAP) has solicited feedback on this report from faculty and staff. After reviewing a sample of responses, the panel offers the following summary of responses to questions 1 throughl2: 1. While some who commented offered tepid support for some of the tangential elements of Sain's recommendations, the majority upheld the idea of differentiating UNT Dallas in the marketplace as a regional university focused on serving the underserved and broadening access to higher education, rather than narrowing it exclusively to driven students. 2. Respondents supported our panel's recommendation that UNT Dallas should consider a variety of target student profiles consisting of transfer students, adult learners, working nontraditional students, and graduate students. They also agreed with us that it is important to maintain the current student population before scouting the group of students classified as "driven" and "highly motivated." Other recommendations included targeting the growing population of ESL students in order to create revenue, adding certificate programs such as a Certificate in Counseling, offering professional licensing and revalidation of foreign degrees, and collaborating with the large community college districts to create a program for transitioning community college graduates to the university. Our panel submits that UNT Dallas currently has little to offer traditional freshmen due to insufficient resources to attract a large number of socalled "driven" students. 3. The majority of responses support our panel's recommendation that all students, including transfer students, should be targeted for recruitment to UNT Dallas. Like our panel, respondents were against exclusively serving full-time "driven" first-year students, and one response advised that profitability should be one of the criteria considered. 4. A majority of respondents agreed with the panel's conclusion that there is no single teaching delivery model appropriate for all disciplines. Some expressed strong support for face-to-face learning, others would like to experiment with hybrid delivery, and another group voiced concern that hybrid and online delivery will compromise educational quality and that a single person is inadequate staffing to make this transition smoothly in the near future. 5. Nearly all respondents agreed with the panel's assertion that advisors should be trained professionals, specialized in academic or career advisement. Suggestions for improvement in advising included adding more career advisors and increasing sensitivity to students' needs and schedules for advising appointments on the part of academic advising. 6. Several respondents suggested that the goal to graduate students within four years is overemphasized and even impractical or unrealistic for many students, particularly those who need to go to school on a part-time basis. The panel recognizes this need for options to maintain

on-track graduation, and believes it is important to adopt measures which enable efficiency in the enrollment-to-graduation process for all students to help limit a student's out-of-pocket expenses. 7. A sampling of responses favored an elective approach that identifies tenure-track and nontenure track, designed to emphasize diverse strengths within the faculty. Responses also underscore the role that continued research plays in sustaining the quality of faculty expertise in their respective fields. 8. Although some respondents expressed support for the criteria our panel listed in Part 8A, there is substantial disagreement over how to balance the importance of high market demand for a new program vs. startup costs and community support. The panel believes UNT Dallas needs to conduct rigorous analysis and carefully weigh all of these issues when implementing any new academic program. 9. Several respondents specifically supported the panel's recommendations. Others offered additional ideas for improving K-12 student engagement, which included better utilizing UNT Dallas Student organizations and recruiters, offering duel-enrollment courses, and implementing an Upward Bound program. 10. From the survey responses, two ideas emerged from multiple sources: I) providing more student services (which could attract more students); and 2) seeking more outside funding sources. The panel sees merit in both of these ideas. 11. Responses for this question vary but generally agree with the panel recommendations. It is important to note that although the panel did address consideration for future facilities, our focus for this question was on "existing" facilities. Strategic and long-range planning for future facilities was not within the scope of our work. 12. A majority of respondents agreed with the panel's response. Several highlighted the importance ofthe person having academic experience in higher education. Diversity and gender consideration were also raised, and several responses questioned the need for such an office in the first place, given the number of administrative posts already in place and the fact that the University is trying to cut costs.