Background
During the 2018-2019 academic year, the School of Science community engaged in a consultative and iterative process to update the School’s 2015-2018 Strategic Map. The update effort was coordinated and led by a Task Force that represented all of the School’s key stakeholders: students, staff members, and faculty members (full-time and adjunct). Members of the Task Force are listed below.
The Task Force’s work was anchored by the School’s and College’s missions and informed by several resources on organizational effectiveness and strategic effectiveness.
Strategic Map Task Force
Faculty members
Biology – Nina Peel
Chemistry – Joe Baker
Computer Science – Dimitris Papamichail
Mathematics & Statistics – Cindy Curtis
Physics – AJ Richards
At large – Janet Morrison
Adjunct – Marc Brescia
Staff members
Administrative – Ann Zsilavetz
Technical – Marc Brescia
Student members
Jonathan DellaGatta ‘22 (Computer Science)
Christian Tucker ’19 (Mathematics)
Office of the Dean
Dean – Jeff Osborn
Assistant Dean – Laurel Leonard (ex officio)
Development of the Updated Strategic Map
The Task Force solicited feedback from the School of Science community through a series of facilitated group conversations for each stakeholder group in March 2019; the series of sessions also included breakout discussions at the regularly scheduled March 6, 2019 School of Science faculty and staff meeting. Students, staff members, and faculty members who were not able to attend one the sessions had the opportunity to contribute via an electronic survey.
The group conversations and electronic survey asked the following questions:
Questions
The longer-term. Where do we want to be in 10-15 years?
- What does it mean for the School of Science to move to the next level? Where do we want to be in 10-15 years?
a) For your academic department?
b) For the School of Science as a whole?
The current situation. Where do we stand now in moving to the next level?
- What do you see as the key strengths of the School of Science?
- What do you see as the School of Science’s weaknesses or areas of needed improvement?
The short-term. What do we need to do over the next three to five years?
- What do you see as the critical issues, or threats (external and internal), that the School of Science will face over the next three to five years?
- What do you see as the key opportunities available to the School of Science to leverage over the next three to five years?
- What do you see as the top three to four priorities the School of Science should establish in its updated strategic map?
The current Strategic Map.
- Are there priorities and/or objectives on our current Strategic Map (for 2015-2018) that no longer need to be included? (i.e., Which boxes should come off)?
What else?
- Do you have additional comments that would be helpful in updating our strategic map?
The group dialogues and electronic survey results yielded a robust and rich amount of feedback from the School community. Based on this feedback, the Task Force drafted an updated Map. The draft Map identified the School of Science’s central challenge for the next three-to-six years and a limited number of strategic priorities and strategic objectives to address that challenge.
The draft Strategic Map for 2019-2022 was then shared with the School of Science community for review and comments. Feedback on this draft Map was provided by students, staff members, and faculty members via an electronic survey. In addition, an interactive discussion on the draft Map was held at the School’s regularly scheduled meeting on May 1, 2019.
The Task Force carefully reviewed all of the feedback from the School community and revised the Map to reflect this feedback. That Map was forwarded to the School of Science Council of Chairs for its consideration and was adopted without any changes on May 15, 2019.
The Strategic Map for 2019-2022
The School of Science’s Strategic Map is available here, and it summarizes the School’s strategy for 2019 through 2022.
The oval at the top of the map articulates the central challenge for the School of Science over the next three years: “Continue Developing Inclusive and Academically Excellent Programs that Garner National Recognition.” The central challenge is the focal point of the strategic map in realizing the School of Science’s aspirations and is supported by four, top-level strategic priorities (blue boxes). Each strategic priority is in turn supported by three strategic objectives (white boxes). Additionally, a cross-cutting objective supports all priorities, and several core implementation principles underpin the Map.
Implementation of the School of Science’s Strategic Map involves ongoing, operational work and resources, as well as targeted strategic investments. Utilizing feedback from the School community, annual projects/initiatives will be identified, implemented, and the assessed.