Report Format: The Academic Affairs Committee proposes to issue a final report as an annotated organizational chart.  Taking the view that we are planning how academic affairs is to be structured under a university as opposed to college umbrella, we do not propose to offer detailed solutions to existing administrative problems in this area.  That is, we see our mission as proposing rather than implementing a structure for delivering academic services under a new organization.

Parameters of Change: As a planning group we have been particularly concerned with what the future holds for our organization.  We have been fortunate to have projections for new programs at both the MWC and JMC campuses provided to us.  Input from JMC members of the committee and visits to the JMC campus have been particularly helpful in putting such projections into perspective.

Given the immediate reorganization of programs which returns BLS services to the MWC campus and the current limitations on space in the building on the JMC campus, we are quite conservative in our views.  We are not convinced of the likelihood that JMC student numbers will expand to justify the faculty numbers proposed.  Certainly ghe JMC campus can not accommodate increased numbers of students in evening classroom settings, especially in the short (5 year) term.  At this date additional space is at least four years in the future.  Further, load ratings of the current JMC building severely limit possibilities for additional classroom load, even if space conversion were planned.   Programs based on distance learning would consume space in a very different way and use academic services differently as well.

Sources of Additional Information: The committee is currently leaning toward a structure which continues to localize almost all shared services on the MWC campus, relying heavily on technology for coordination with the JMC campus.  On the other hand, services peculiar to programs offered only on the JMC campus would be physically located there.  Certainly MWC has more flexibility for administrative and service expansion in the short run than does the JMC campus.  We feel confident that this will be borne out by the MWC Campus Master Plan currently in preparation.

Given this outline, the committee feels that current administrators on both campuses would be an important source of information on the strengths and weaknesses of our current organization.  Our interpretation of our charge makes us sensitive to differences between problems arising from organizational structure and problems arising from how that structure is or is not being followed in practice.  Additionally we feel that institutions currently configures much like our own with a main and a satellite campus would be the best source of information for us.  We see less utility in studying institutions where a non-traditional campus has come to dwarf a traditional liberal arts campus.  We simply will not be such an institution in the next ten years.

Specific Questions: The committee agreed to leave wording to the group constructing an instrument to be administered in the fall.  We would like offices which provide academic services or support academic services to provide information from their unique perspectives.  Under our current structure those include at least: registration and academic records, advising and student services, disabilities services, student accounts, purchasing and disbursing.  Certainly both MWC and JMC offices must be queried. Of course academic services are strongly influenced by course accessibility and staffing, financial resources, as well as physical resources and accessibility.  We are particularly concerned with issues arising from competition for resources at all levels, from ìhybridî students competing for classes to campuses competing for staffing resources.

Here are examples of questions we believe should be addressed to one or more of these offices:

1. How could your office (program) be best organized and administered to maximize efficiency and minimize conflict between multiple campuses?

2. What physical, personnel and support resources are necessary and/or desirable to allow your office/program to effectively serve two or more campuses?

Since we will be dealing with a small number of offices, and because both general and specific ideas may be very useful, we might best be served by open-ended responses.

Academic Affairs Committee

Members: 

Emily Azukas
Porter Blakemore
Gil Coleman
Robert Columbus
Leah Cox-Hanley
Karen Hartman
Debra Hydorn
Pat Norwood
Roy Smith
Susan Stevenson