Library Committee Handbook

Library Faculty Meeting Agenda Committee

Library Faculty Meeting

Meetings 2013-2014

Meetings 2012-2013

Meetings 2011-2012

Meetings 2010-2011

Meetings 2009-2010

Meetings 2008-2009

Meetings 2007-2008

Meetings 2006-2007

Meetings 2005-2006

Meetings 2004-2005

Meetings 2003-2004

Meetings 2002-2003

Meetings 2001-2002

DRAFT 10/18/05

I. Competitive Analysis*

 

Overall

Competitors ↓

Research/Scholarship

Education**

Engagement/Service***

Economic Development

1. UC-Berkeley

UC-Berkeley

UC-Berkeley

 

University of Wisconsin

 

 

UC-San Diego

2. University of Michigan

University of Michigan

University of North Carolina

Texas A&M

UC-Berkeley

3. University of Wisconsin

 University of Wisconsin

University of Virginia

 

Purdue University

University of Texas-Austin

4. UCLA

 UCLA

University of Michigan

University of Florida

Georgia Tech University

5. University of Texas-Austin

University of Texas-Austin

UCLA

Michigan State University

University of Wisconsin

 

 

*Competitors identified from public research institutions.

**Education competitors focus on undergraduate education (for graduate education, the overall competitors provide a more accurate list).

***Engagement/Service competitors reflect the land-grant focus of the institution.

 


 

II. SWOT Analysis (three for each mission)

 

SWOT ↓

Research/Scholarship

Education

Engagement/Service

Economic Development

Strengths

1. Internationally recognized, highly talented, youthful (high potential) faculty

 

2.Comprehensive institution with strength in most disciplines; particular excellence in computing, science technology, engineering and agriculture fields

 

3.Solid external funding portfolio; grants and contracts per faculty FTE have increased steadily

 

4.Strong addition of exceptional facilities over last 15 years

 

5.Solid basic research orientation in an opportunistic, entrepreneurial culture

1. High ability student population, with student diversity equal to the best public research universities

 

2. Comprehensive educational opportunities (majors, programs, co-curricular offerings)

 

3. Strong demand/interest in Illinois degrees

 

4. Leading national position in graduate education, with the majority of graduate programs highly ranked.

 

 

1.Deep tradition of wide array of engagement activities, involving many campus units and local, state, national and international partners

 

2. Cooperative extension structure provides highly effective model of engagement

 

3. UIUC scholarship, research and education are relevant to many of society’s most pressing concerns

 

4.Significant student volunteer activity is taking place

 

 

1. UIUC scholarly achievements have had significant positive influences on business, industry and the economy, in the state and beyond

 

2. Significant rising trend in invention disclosure and patents filed and issued

 

3. UIUC is one of the largest doctoral degree producing institutions in the nation

 

4. Educate large segments of Illinois workforce

 

5. UIUC has a tradition of creating businesses and jobs that drive Illinois economy

Weaknesses

1.External funding portfolio is not ideally balanced; too little representation in areas of highest opportunity (e.g., limited corporate support, NIH portfolio could be expanded, etc.)

 

2.Faculty compensation is not competitive with best research institutions

 

3.Overextended resource base creates vulnerability in core academic areas

 

4. Institutional mechanisms and traditions can create barriers to innovation and collaboration (e.g., ICR policy, cumbersome governance structures, P&T review biased toward discipline-centered models)

 

5.Underrepresented in national academies and lack of leadership in setting national science and tech investment priorities

1.Size of student population has become too large to ensure quality of education and campus environment

 

2.Comprehensive nature challenges achieving quality in all offerings, including core academic disciplines

 

3.Lack of distinctive identity (what are the defining features of a UIUC education?)

 

4. UIUC has limited training grant culture, limited resources dedicated to graduate fellowships, and heavy reliance on TAs

 

5.Absence of top 20 ranked professional programs except Graduate School of Library and Information Science

 

 

1.Engagement efforts often are not coordinated, centralized or well-publicized (broad campus engagement plan is not clearly formulated or articulated)

 

2.Faculty reward structures of the institution do not effectively incorporate engagement

 

 

 

 

3.Princip al engagement units (e.g., alumni relations, development, outreach) have fragmented structures/dual reporting mechanisms

 

 

1. Economic development is not universally viewed as a mission, responsibility or opportunity

 

2. Institutional incentives do not always foster entrepreneurial culture

 

3. Many faculty/units have few or no corporate partnerships

 

 

 

4. Challenges with effectively using the expertise of a wide range of disciplines in pursuing economic development activities

Opportunities

1. Disciplinary strength provides opportunities for interdisciplinary innovations (science, technology, materials, arts, humanities, translational/behavioral health promotion)

 

2. Potential for substantial growth in research support in many areas (e.g., social and behavioral sciences)

 

3. Research activities exist that are well-positioned for corporate and private sector support

 

4. Reinvigorated core humanities disciplines and international area studies centers are poised for higher achievement

 

5. Nascent institutional repository (IDEALS) poised to curate, archive, make digital output of University accessible perpetually

1.Demographics support recruitment of talented students (growth in number and diversity of Illinois high school graduates)

 

2.Opportunity to create distinct identity and contributions in undergrad education

 

3.Developed models for interdisciplinary collaboration provide platform for innovative interdisciplinary degree programs

 

4.UIUC graduate programs are engaged in national initiative to reform grad education

 

5.Opportunity to create innovative educational delivery models and partnerships is significant (Library/CITES Learning Commons effort – in library, on campus, virtual is excellent opportunity)

 

6. UIUC could sharply increase role in addressing education of aging population through e-learning and academic outreach

1.UIUC has strong disciplinary expertise on which to scaffold effective engagement with community partners

 

2.Demand/opportunity for high quality, relevant academic outreach is strong (e.g., e-learning and other forms of continuing education, lifelong learning)

 

3.Huge alumni population can be leveraged for lifelong engagement

 

 

1.Numerous innovations in progress that have potential to promote economic development

 

2. Many opportunities for application and commercialization of current work

 

3. Opportunities for effective corporate partnership exist with majority of campus units; focused effort underway to identify most immediate and promising opportunities

 

 

Threats

1. Financial footprint is not viable to sustain excellence ; chronic underfunding leaves Library unable to support potential Nobel Prize winners or their equivalents in other disciplines

 

2.Vulnerability in recruiting and retaining (preventing raids) most talented faculty to university and geographic area

 

3. Institutional inflexibility and difficulty with changing rapidly enough to accommodate new needs

 

4. Institutional financial practices reduce resources for academic core (e.g., lack of energy conservation)

 

5.Aging core physical facilities, difficulty in adequately supporting networking and infrastructure needs (including library facilities, which threaten the preservation of materials in which the University has invested since 1868)

1.Competition for high achieving students, students of color, and non-residents is particularly keen

 

2.Increasing international competition for high achieving graduate students

 

3.Tuition increases create increased pressure to deliver high quality distinctive, programs and challenge access to low-middle income students and non-residents

 

4. Behind competitors in effective, on-line/e-learning and other academic outreach activities

1.Lack of incentives for engagement  mission; engagement devalued relative to research and scholarly activities

 

2.Investment in engagement is highly uneven across campus units; engagement is often not well-integrated with unit research and teaching missions

 

3.Competition from other institutions in effective and innovative engagement to meet societal needs (i.e., competition in e-learning, lifelong learning/engaging seniors, etc.)

1.Lack of incentive structure to attract and retain the most talented scholars and students

 

2. Conflicts of interest and commitment can arise (must be managed)

 

 

 


 

III.       Assessment of Distinctive Competencies:  For each of the four missions, please describe no more than three characteristics that distinguish Urbana (1) as a campus and (2) from the top five institutions with which it competes.

 

Overarching Distinctive Features : The concentration of intense intellectual, educational and engagement resources in a highly livable environment; the great Midwestern university at its very best; a long tradition of public commitment to local, state, national and global communities.

 

 

Research/Scholarship

Education

Engagement/Service

Economic Development

Campus Distinctiveness

 

and

 

Differentiation

From Competition

Positive:

 

1. Distinguished public university library

 

2. Impressive number of Nobel prize recipients among faculty and alumni

 

3. Significant number of Title VI centers supporting strong international presence and activity

 

4. Long record of ranking either first or second in nation in amount of NSF funding

 

5. Preeminence in areas of physical science, computing and information systems, and engineering disciplines among public research universities

 

6.Strong standing in arts disciplines among public research universities

 

7. Pioneering interdisciplinary research centers and institutes

 

 

Negative:

 

8. Relative to program and institutional quality, surprisingly low numbers of of National Academy of Science and Engineering members

 

9. Like UC-Berkeley, minimal traditional medical school presence

 

10.Fewer programs in top 10 standing, relative to competitors

 

11. Library unable to support quality research/education relative to competitors

 

Positive:

 

1.Very large, high quality student population (i.e., largest freshmen class in nation in Fall 05)

 

2.Broad array of distinct, high ranking graduate programs

 

3.National leader in producing doctoral degree recipients each year

 

4.High number of international students

 

Negative:

 

5. High proportion of undergraduates are Illinois residents (relative to competitors)

 

6. Limited programs and resources dedicated to recruitment of highest caliber students

Positive:

 

1.Excellence in cooperative extension – a program that reaches throughout the state and provides a model of effective outreach

 

Negative:

 

2.Underdeveloped continuing education/academic outreach programming (i.e., limited reach of e-learning, etc.)

Positive:

 

1.High number of Illinois graduates remain in state and contribute to economic development

 

2.For brief period of operation, Research Park effort has achieved noteworthy success

 

3.NCSA private sector program is unique and successful economic development model

 

Negative:

 

4.Slow, relative to competitors, in terms of agility and progress in economic development initiatives

 


 

IV. Suggestions of Most Promising Interdisciplinary Areas (no more than three)

 

 

Research/Scholarship

Education

Engagement/Service

Economic Development

Translational Biomedical and Health Initiatives, including the following potential areas:

·         Developing new therapies based on animal models

·         Cutting edge bio-imaging technologies

·         Health promotion and quality of life initiatives (nutrition, disability prevention)

·         Neuroscience and cognitive science initiatives

·         Bioengineering initiatives

 Allied Health

 

Development of new approaches to community engagement that involve multidisciplinary partnerships between academic units and established outreach entities, for example:

  • Homeland security initiatives
  • Initiatives serving newly arriving populations

 

Research Park

Arts and Humanities Initiatives, including the following potential areas:

  • Leveraging intersections of arts with new technologies and information applications
  • Creating new forms of art and entertainment across media

 

Informatics/IT Minor

Arts and Technology Initiative to Engage Community

Collaborative economic ventures between university and CU community (e.g., hotel and conference center, golf course, ice arena)

Strengthening Democratic Participation and Social and Community Life, including the following potential areas:

  • Exploring democratic governance
  • Forging collaborations in social and behavioral science to conduct research relevant to school and community
  • Human relationships (families, caregiving, employment, etc.)

 

Race, society , poverty and culture: Ethnic studies shared curriculum

 

 

Externally oriented health and wellness promotion efforts

Technology Management

Leverage collaborations between disciplines and professional programs