College of Education Strategic Plan

About the College of Education

The University of Florida College of Education, founded in 1906, consistently ranks among the top 25 among public education schools in the elite Association of American Universities.

The college’s distinguished professors and their graduate students aggressively pursue vital, interdisciplinary research that is making a dramatic impact on teaching and learning, education policy, and leadership in all education disciplines. By partnering with public schools and communities across the state, UF education faculty engage in novel scholarship and research activities that enhance “whole school” improvement, student achievement, early-childhood readiness, teacher preparation and retention, and classroom technology advances.

Teaching is just one of several career paths that UF education students can choose from: Nearly 1,900 students are enrolled in 21 bachelor’s and advanced degree programs, within eight academic specialties: Counselor Education, Educational Administration & Policy, Education Technology, K-12 Education, Literacy Studies, Research and Evaluation Methods, School Psychology, Special Education and Early Childhood Studies.

Source: http://education.ufl.edu/about-the-college/

Purpose of the Strategic Planning Effort

At the regular meeting of the Faculty Policy Council on October 11, 2010, the Long Range Planning Committee (LRPC) recommended the formation of a task force to lead the College of Education’s strategic planning efforts known as the Strategic Planning Steering Committee; the motion was unanimously approved.

The LRPC recommended that the Steering Committee be co-chaired by Dorene Ross (Professor, STL) and Paul Sindelar (Professor, SESPECS, and Secretary, FPC) and comprised of the following faculty: Buffy Bondy (Professor and Director, STL), Dale Campbell (Professor and Director, HDOSE), Jean Crockett (Professor and Director, SESPECS), Hazel Jones (Associate Professor, SESPECS and Chair, LRPC), Tracy Linderholm (Associate Professor, HDOSE and Member, Productivity Task Force), Ruth Lowery (Associate Professor, STL and Member, LRPC), Cirecie West-Olatungi (Associate Professor, HDOSE and Member, LRPC). Kathleen Long (Dean, College of Nursing and Associate Provost) and Tina Smith-Bonahue (Associate Professor, SESPECS and Chair, FPC) serve as ex officio members. (Note: Dr. Linderholm resigned from the committee in January because of a change in career plans.)

The purpose of this planning process was to engage College of Education faculty in the identification of a strategic direction for the college. Key outcomes were to develop a plan that articulated a long-term vision for the college as well as short- and long-term goals in support of that vision. This strategic plan is a result of that effort and is designed to indicate a faculty-centered strategic point of view about the college.

The strategic planning process builds on work undertaken last year by a “Productivity Task Force,” charged by the Faculty Policy Council to, among other things, “develop policy proposals designed to enhance the College’s standing as a national leader in education research” (Task Force Report, p. 4). To this end, the Task Force identified goals, objectives and benchmarks, and strategies, aligned in such a manner as to increase our capacity to engage in serious and meaningful scholarship. The Task Force Report ended with a call for the development of both a strategic plan and an action plan with which strategic goal may be achieved. The strategic planning process described in this report represents this next step in the process laid out by the Productivity Task Force.

Our Process

The Faculty Policy Council enlisted the guidance of the Human Resources Division of UF to assist us in the Strategic Planning process. Jody Genty and Bob Parks, from Human Resources, led the process and provided synthesis documents and an initial draft of this plan to the Steering Committee.

The strategic planning process followed four phases, beginning with a December 13, 2010, kick-off meeting (phase 1—engagement), as noted above. The next phases of the process included work group meetings (phase 2—data gathering), which began in January 2011; a check-in meeting of work group participants (mid-effort, also part of phase 2); and then two visioning and goals conferences (phase 3—visioning). The planning process concluded with a May working meeting to wrap up the effort with action planning to move toward finalizing the strategic plan (phase 4—action planning). Altogether, 73 COE faculty members participated in at least one meeting, and nearly 60% of them participated in two or more. Each school was well-represented: 18 HDOSE, 22 SESPECS, and 33 STL faculty members took part in the process.

Alongside these meetings, the Strategic Planning Steering Committee met regularly to guide the process and ensure the maximum use of faculty members’ time at each phase.

Planning Process Phases

Phase 1—Engagement (December 2010)

December 13 “Kick-Off Meeting” designed to introduce the strategic planning process, engage faculty in “big picture” thinking, and identify ways for faculty to be involved over the course of the strategic planning process.

Phase 2—Data Gathering (January – February 2011)

Work Group Meetings began, asking faculty to obtain needed information about a strategic theme (economic, social, technology, demographics, competition, quality, and political/legal/mandates) that was then used to shape the college’s strategic plan. Each work group was asked to benchmark, review best practices, speak with stakeholders, and otherwise obtain information to share in the form of a concept paper.

February 11 Mid-Process Check-in reviewed work done on concept papers, discussed emerging themes, and identified remaining work.

Phase 3—Visioning and Goals (March – April 2011)

March 18 Visioning and Goals Conference (1/2 day): Faculty identified essential ideas or recommendations from concept papers that they support and what the College of Education should be doing to achieve its purpose with excellence.

April 15 Visioning and Goals Conference (1/2 day): Goals and strategies identified to move the college forward (both short- and long-term). Began action planning.

Phase 4—Action Planning (May 2011)

May 3 Action Planning Meeting: Reviewed key strategic areas that will guide the college’s efforts over the next one to five years. Created action plans (key implementation steps, resources needed, who needs to be involved) around associated strategies. Also reviewed and responded to a vision for the college. Plan to be presented to UF and college leadership.

Mission, Strategic Purpose, and Vision

Mission of the University of Florida

The College’s mission fits within the broader mission of the University of Florida, which is a land grant AAU institution. The University mission is stated as follows:

The University of Florida is a public land-grant, sea-grant and space-grant research university, one of the most comprehensive in the United States. The university encompasses virtually all academic and professional disciplines. It is the largest and oldest of Florida’s eleven universities, a member of the Association of American Universities and has high national rankings by academic assessment institutions. Its faculty and staff are dedicated to the common pursuit of the university’s threefold mission: teaching, research and service.

The University of Florida belongs to a tradition of great universities. Together with its undergraduate and graduate students, UF faculty participate in an educational process that links the history of Western Europe with the traditions and cultures of all societies, explores the physical and biological universes and nurtures generations of young people from diverse backgrounds to address the needs of the world’s societies.

The university welcomes the full exploration of its intellectual boundaries and supports its faculty and students in the creation of new knowledge and the pursuit of new ideas.

• Teaching is a fundamental purpose of this university at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
• Research and scholarship are integral to the educational process and to the expansion of our understanding of the natural world, the intellect and the senses.
• Service reflects the university’s obligation to share the benefits of its research and knowledge for the public good. The university serves the nation’s and the state’s critical needs by contributing to a well-qualified and broadly diverse citizenry, leadership and workforce.

The University of Florida must create the broadly diverse environment necessary to foster multi-cultural skills and perspectives in its teaching and research for its students to contribute and succeed in the world of the 21st century.

These three interlocking elements — teaching, research and scholarship, and service — span all the university’s academic disciplines and represent the university’s commitment to lead and serve the state of Florida, the nation and the world by pursuing and disseminating new knowledge while building upon the experiences of the past. The university aspires to advance by strengthening the human condition and improving the quality of life.

Mission of the College of Education

Within the broader mission of the University of Florida, the College of Education has a distinct mission of its own:

The mission of the College of Education is to prepare exemplary practitioners and scholars; to generate, use and disseminate knowledge about teaching, learning and human development; and to collaborate with others to solve critical educational and human problems in a diverse global community.

Strategic Purpose of the College of Education

The college’s strategic purpose statement addresses a different question—why the faculty do the work they do. Where the mission statement establishes a connection to other colleges at UF, strategic purpose helps to distinguish the unique contribution the College of Education makes.

The College of Education’s strategic purpose is to improve the quality of educational and developmental outcomes across the human lifespan.

Vision Statement

When achieving its strategic purpose with excellence, we envision a time when the vision for the college’s future will be realized and the College will demonstrate the following:

The College of Education at the University of Florida is known for its innovative teaching and research that include highly collaborative work—across colleges as well as within—all designed to improve the quality of educational and developmental outcomes across the human lifespan.

Leveraging their partnerships with practicing professionals, the students they mentor, and faculty members from other disciplines, College of Education faculty work collaboratively with others to impact problems of practice as well as to help shape the political and educational landscape to influence public policy locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally. Proactive and, often, highly visible, our faculty members regularly investigate and advocate for issues of importance that support equity and excellence in education and learning.

The work of the college is supported by a culture of transparency, collaboration and mutual respect, with an infrastructure provided by college leadership that supports the faculty’s efforts—freeing them to focus on their research, teaching, and service at the highest levels. College faculty members value one another and the different roles they play.

In combination, the college is seen as a leader in elevating the academic discipline and also ensuring that the public good is served.

Environmental Analysis

As part of the strategic planning process—to define the context in which the college operates and cultivate a shared understanding of the college’s current state—the faculty participated in a SWOT analysis, focusing on the faculty’s perception of the internal workings of the college (its strengths and weaknesses) as well as external issues of concern (both opportunities and threats). They also explored key strategic areas (political/legal mandates, economics, quality, technology, competition, demographics, and social issues) by researching, writing, and sharing concept papers as a way to further support an informed strategic planning process.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths of the college included the quality of faculty and students, a shared interest and concern for “real world” problems and equity, a growing distance education program, the college’s network of district connections, and the faculty’s commitment to research. Perceived weaknesses were related to concerns about budget and college infrastructure as well as a lack of strategic direction and the need for improved relationships between college leadership and faculty. The need for a more collaborative culture was noted as well. Opportunities identified included the growing interest of other disciplines in education-related problems, the explosive demand for alternative forms of learning, the role of technology, and new prospects for federal or external funding—along with the education system’s need for help. Threats were related to perception of the discipline generally, budgets and the economy, loss of faculty lines, and policy changes.

Concept Papers

A number of faculty volunteered to participate in work groups to benchmark, review best practices, speak with stakeholders, and otherwise obtain information about strategic areas of concern—political/legal mandates, economics, quality, technology, competition, demographics, and social issues—to share in the form of concept papers with their colleagues. The purpose of the concept papers was to inform and educate the faculty about essential strategic information to consider as part of this process.

Broadly, the political/legal mandates concept paper not only helped the faculty focus on the challenges to the profession and discipline but also reiterated the need to address diversity in the workforce and make investments in innovation. Also seen as critical were cross-sector public and private partnerships as well as faculty member engagement in educational and relevant political conversations.

Increased transparency in budget and college decision-making and increased entrepreneurial activity were essential ideas that emerged from the economic concept paper. Innovation and collaboration with industry and others were other important concepts explored.

College infrastructure and culture were essential concerns that emerged from the quality concept paper. The college’s infrastructure was noted as a key factor in influencing quality and seen as critical to supporting high quality research, teaching, and service. This concept paper also highlighted the need for continued effort to create a climate that brings people together (regardless of role), increases collaboration (and decreases competition from within), and promotes mutual respect.

Infrastructure was the primary focus of the conversations surrounding the technology concept paper. The need to create a unified infrastructure to support faculty, staff, and students in research, teaching, and service to efficiently use resources is seen by most as a necessary next step in supporting the college’s short- and long-term strategies.

The competition concept paper dealt with a variety of issues, including increased competition among colleges and universities, increased need for strong representation for the college to remain competitive, the development of the infrastructure necessary to compete for external resources, and the impact of budget cuts on the college’s viability. Concern was expressed about competing for students with (community) colleges and for-profit providers, coping with public devaluation of colleges of education and faculty work, and sustaining capacity to compete for external funding.

The demographics concept paper highlighted the college faculty’s strong interest in equity, social justice, and the impact of changing demographics. Some important concepts were highlighted, including showcasing and communicating strong diversity initiatives in research, teaching, and service; reviewing and strengthening practices for recruiting and retaining underrepresented students and faculty; and developing a COE diversity mission statement.

Public perception and “leading rather than reacting” were two essential issues that emerged from the social issues concept paper. Striking a balance between the need to prepare skilled professionals and the need to contribute to an informed, civically engaged populace—within a rapidly changing political and social climate—also was discussed.

Common Themes

After reviewing and discussing the concept papers, the faculty members identified “essential ideas” that were important to consider when discussing and identifying a path forward for the college’s future. Common themes that emerged from that discussion, regardless of the concept paper at hand, were related to:

• The need to focus both internally as well as externally to move the college forward—that is, the college has some internal issues that must be addressed in addition to externally related goals that should be accomplished.
• The importance of and need for improved integration and coordination across the college—including the need for better infrastructure on a variety of fronts and the need for increased collaboration.
• The need to enhance the perception of the college (and even of the academic discipline) and the need to manage this perception in a positive, proactive way—or, as many described it, public relations.
• The role of the college and its faculty as leaders in policy discussions—using their research findings to help influence the political and education conversations that shape local, national, and international agendas.
• The need for innovation in teaching and research as a way to distinguish the college and its efforts.

These essential ideas were used to identify goals and strategies for the college moving forward.

Key Strategic Areas

The College of Education’s strategic planning process resulted in identifying four key strategic areas that will guide the faculty members’ efforts over the next one to five years: high quality research and scholarship; innovative and vital undergraduate and graduate-level teaching and programs; impact on critical problems of practice and policy; and improved public perception. These four strategic areas will be built on a foundation of improved transparency, infrastructure, interdisciplinary collaboration, and mutual respect.

The Strategic Purpose for the College of Education is to improve the quality of educational and developmental outcomes across the human lifespan.

The four key strategic areas are:

• High Quality Research and Scholarship
• High Quality Teaching and Programs
• Impact on Critical Problems of Practice and Policy
• Improved Public Perception

These areas are built upon a foundation of:

• Transparency
• Interdisciplinary Collaboration
• Mutual Respect
• Adequate Resources and Infrastructure

Building a Strong Foundation

As reflected in the figure, there are two components to the foundation that support the college’s key strategic actions. First, the college’s key strategic areas must be built upon a foundation of adequate resources and an infrastructure that provides coherent data to be used for decision-making and coordinated services to support the work of all faculty and staff. Second, forward progress requires building and/or enhancing a culture based on the values of transparency, interdisciplinary collaboration, and mutual respect. A key step in implementing the College’s strategic plan requires work to ensure this foundation is in place.

Building an adequate infrastructure requires that existing resources be used more effectively. Doing so necessitates revising the college’s data systems and organizational structures and services so that they support the college and its mission in a coordinated and aligned way, providing a building block for continued excellence. Additionally, the enhanced data systems will improve transparency by increasing faculty access to data and facilitating communication about how data are used in college and school-level decisions as well as in governance.

Interdisciplinary collaboration can be best cultivated by designating one or more people to oversee collaborative efforts (within as well as beyond the college) and to ensure collaboration remains a priority. Having formalized college-wide conversations about mutual respect and the ways in which different faculty roles contribute to the mission of a research university would further support a positive college culture.

Critical to this strong foundation is leadership that values transparency, communication, and interpersonal relationships among faculty and between faculty and administration.

Strategies

Resources and Infrastructure

Use existing resources more efficiently by revising the college’s organizational structure and services to align with the its mission and to allow faculty to focus on their work rather than logistical and technical issues. In a reorganization of resources and infrastructure, emphasis should be placed on technology, publications, assessment and accreditation, development, student services at the undergraduate and graduate levels, and research. As an initial step, clarify how each support unit serves the college mission and faculty. Ensure that no inadvertent barriers are created.

Other recommendations include:

• Conduct comprehensive self-study of college’s support services to assess the strengths and potential contributions of current faculty and staff.
• Streamline current and future efforts by reorganizing faculty and staff to maximize their effectiveness in meeting new needs and goals.
• Pursue new hires if essential but be mindful of the disadvantages of making the college top-heavy.
• Leverage existing college resources by staffing the research office and work groups with existing College of Education faculty based on their expertise and interests.
• Combine IT, DE, and technology support into one entity.
• Develop an organizational structure with a leader for technology who interacts with the FPC technology committee.

Transparency

Develop a comprehensible database, that is readily accessible, with enrollment, budgetary, and other key data that are used for college-level and school decisions as well as governance.

Other recommendations include:

• As an online database is developed, designate a key contact/development person, define “key data,” define “readily accessible,” and seek input from those who will use it.
• Make DAC minutes public and accessible to make college-level decision making more open.
• Make decision making more explicit (e.g. who makes what decisions and why, and when faculty and staff can provide appropriate input).
• Create an annual schedule of annual milestones to make governance and decision making in the college more predictable.
• Select a dean who values transparency, communicates clearly about data, and makes data available to all stakeholders.
• Involve FPC and school directors in using data to make decisions to implement the strategic plan.
• Do a comprehensive audit/efficiency study of college in terms of work and available resources to guide future decisions.
• Use the comprehensive audit to determine priorities. We can’t do everything if resources keep declining.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Ensure that interdisciplinary effort (across colleges as well as within the College of Education)—including faculty, students, and practicing professionals—becomes the standard for the college, regularly providing opportunities for collaboration around issues of critical concern.

Other recommendations include:

• We need a designated person or persons who will make collaboration a priority.
• Assess current faculty expertise and interests.
• Consider potential collaborative partnerships when making new hires.
• Identify ways to promote faculty work to external constituents and methods for rewarding collaborative efforts within.
• Create structures that foster cross-disciplinary gatherings of faculty and cross-faculty conversations.

Mutual Respect

Strive to value different work and roles equally; facilitate regular conversations (formal and informal) about ways that different faculty roles contribute to the mission of a research university.

Other recommendations include:

• Ensure that there are equitable rewards and recognitions for varying contributions.
• Choose college leaders who value diverse faculty roles.
• Value and support clinical and instructional faculty.
• Select a dean who values the importance of interpersonal relationships among faculty and between faculty and administration.
• Have a mediated college-wide discussion on mutual respect—what it means and how we develop and demonstrate it. Surface implicit assumptions that are or may be operating around the value of what we do or believe we do and examine them publicly and explicitly.

Goals and Strategies

Given these four key strategic areas, the College of Education’s broad goals are:

• To increase the amount of high quality research and scholarship as a way to improve educational and development outcomes across the human lifespan and address significant problems of practice and policy connected to education today.
• To cultivate and support innovative high quality teaching and programs—at the undergraduate and graduate level—to cultivate strong professionals in the field and further address issues of practice and policy, including concerns related to equity.
• To participate in policy conversations at the national and international levels and to share how faculty members’ work support the public good.
• To take a proactive stance in highlighting and communicating the college’s high quality research and programs in order to inform and improve public perception about the contribution of the College of Education and the discipline as a whole.

Strategies—Short-Term

The following strategies have been identified as those that would have the biggest impact on the college’s goals if they were focused on in the next 18 months (in priority order):

• 1. Create a full-service research office with the sole purpose of increasing faculty scholarship (research) and grant productivity. This office, as envisioned, would function proactively, identifying opportunities for collaborative work within and outside the college, as well as public and private partnerships, and would shepherd grants from “start to finish.”
• 2. Develop interdisciplinary groups (across colleges as well as within the College of Education)—including faculty, students, and practicing professionals—that collaborate around issues of teaching, learning, and development to support high impact, high profile research as well as innovative programs and teaching.
• 3. Identify and pursue entrepreneurial initiatives that impact critical problems of practice and policy and serve practicing professionals.
• 4. Combine existing offices of communication and development for more effective use of those resources, and charge this office to cultivate a strong alumni network as well as engage in a public relations campaign about the value of these graduates’ degrees. Hire or identify a writer to develop “rapid response” policy briefs that amplify the value and application of the college’s work.
• 5. Analyze current markets and trends as well as changing demographics to ensure our programs are responsive to and leading critical directions in education.

Strategies—Long-Term

The faculty identified the following strategies to be considered after the short-term strategies have been implemented:

• 1. Identify and implement formal mechanisms by which collaborative opportunities are identified, supported, measured, and rewarded.
• 2. Build broader public relations campaign to explain how the college improves lives and describe its impact in a coordinated, systematic way.
• 3. Identify faculty members, working alongside college leadership, to advocate at the state, national, and international level based on areas of expertise.
• 4. Increase the visibility of college leadership in the media (internal and external)—sharing excellent work of the college faculty.

Action Plan for Short-Term Strategies

1. Create a full-service research office

With the sole purpose of increasing faculty scholarship (research) and grant productivity. This office, as envisioned, would function proactively, identifying opportunities for collaborative work within and outside the college, as well as public and private partnerships, and would shepherd grants from “start to finish.”

Important Steps:

• Select a leader whose sole purpose is to lead and manage the research office (2011-2012; Dean and FPC)
• Prioritize the productivity task force plan and implement it (and former research initiative plan) (Spring and Fall 2012; Dean and FPC)
• Work collaboratively with school directors to engage faculty and maximize use of resources (2012 and ongoing; Associate dean for research, dean, directors, FPC)
• Secure a larger space for the full service center (2012; Dean, associate dean for research)

2. Develop interdisciplinary groups

(across colleges as well as within the College of Education)—including faculty, students, and practicing professionals—that collaborate around issues of teaching, learning, and development to support high impact, high profile research as well as innovative programs and teaching.

Important Steps:

• Familiarize themselves with work of faculty and their skills (December 2011; Associate dean for research, associate dean for academic affairs, FPC)
  • Resources Needed: Vitas; software; committee to assist—FPC, research advisory committee; personal meetings
  • Need a way to include non-tenured faculty and clinical/teaching faculty in the familiarizing step (when they do not have extensive publications, etc., on their vita)
• Develop information/database on faculty work, interests, research to generate new creative lines of research/programs within interdisciplinary groups. Based on gathered information, pull together interdisciplinary groups around new calls for proposals (December 2011; Associate dean for research, associate dean for academic affairs)
• Develop groups around teaching, pedagogy (Directors and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs)
• Personal and focused appointments to theme groups or calls. While personal and direct, this is not necessarily an invitation. It is an appointment to get a new group together at least one time to determine possibilities of collaboration (Varies—spring 2012; Group members, school directors, FPC, research advisory committee)
  • Resources Needed: Time, space, call information
• Collect feedback on success and challenges—why or why not people chose to work together (All participants)
  • Resources Needed: Need incentives to promote collaboration (noted as a long-term strategy)

3. Identify and pursue entrepreneurial initiatives

That impact critical problems of practice and policy and serve practicing professionals.

Important Steps:

• Identify and/or hire outreach and partnership “rain maker” (January 1, 2012; Dean, new person, Don Pemberton)
  • Resources Needed: Identify or hire this person
• Build collaborative partnerships with people who have expertise in relevant areas (business, community colleges) and also leverage existing partnerships (e.g., Lastinger) (Dean, new person, Don Pemberton, collaborative partners)
• Get faculty engaged in collaborative, entrepreneurial activities (Dean, new person, Don Pemberton, faculty, FPC)
  • Resources Needed: Need broad definition of entrepreneurial activities. Also need to work through issues surrounding intellectual property and non-profit status

4. Combine existing offices of communication and development

For more effective use of those resources, and charge this office to cultivate a strong alumni network as well as engage in a public relations campaign about the value of our graduates’ degrees. Hire or identify a writer to develop “rapid response” policy briefs that amplify the value and application of the college’s work.

Important Steps:

• Create high profile alumni educational events that are academic in nature and bring alums back to campus for engagement with faculty around topics related to pressing education issues. Faculty are the “celebrities” who engage and excite participants (alums and education stakeholders) (Combine development and communication offices now—as soon as new dean comes on board; Development and communication offices, each academic department, OER. Suggested champion or owner: Matt Hodge (will collaborate with OER and communication office and directors))
  • Resources Needed: Start-up funds are needed but will be revenue-generating eventually
• Revamp basic communication system for alumni network that highlights and promotes all the high quality research and programs that are ongoing in the college (publications, multi-prong approach) (As soon as new dean comes on board; Development and communication offices, each academic department, OER)
  • Resources Needed: Development/communication office
• Hire/identify a PR/policy brief writer to conduct an aggressive campaign to systematically, intentionally, and proactively highlight and connect the work of the college faculty (and programs) that impact pressing education issues. (Rapid response around topical issues—24 hour turnaround.) For example—linking state and national happenings (as in EducWeek or The Chronicle) to our college’s work and how we are addressing the issues (As soon as new dean comes on board; Development and communication offices, each academic department, OER)
  • Resources Needed: Funds to hire a writer or dedicate part of a person’s load to this activity

5. Analyze current markets and trends

As well as changing demographics to ensure our programs are responsive to and leading critical directions in education.

Important Steps:

• A role of the Long Range Planning committee should be to analyze current trends and markets and make recommendations about critical future directions (Fall, 2011; Task Force, FPC, Directors, Dean)
  • Resources Needed: Competition concept paper, Data about recent hires in the state

Conclusion

This Strategic Plan represents a first step in a long-term, developmental process for the College. Over the next year, several additional steps must be taken. First, because implementation requires joint action, the new Dean must work with the college leadership team, the FPC, and all college faculty and staff to review and modify the plan as necessary. Second, FPC and the Deans and Directors must identify who will be responsible for overseeing work in each area of the strategic plan. Third, school directors must discuss the plan with unit faculty to consider its potential impact on their school and to develop strategies for moving forward. It is the hope of the Strategic Planning Steering Committee that consensus is reached on a revised strategic plan in 2011-2012 and that individual schools develop action plans for implementing the plan locally.