Report of the Strategic Planning Task Force on Outreach: December 1995

The rhetorical question "What has the University done for me lately?" forms the centerpiece for what Outreach can and should be at the University of Connecticut, the state's land grant university. In this time of changing university relations with the federal/state governments and increased awareness of the cost of higher education, it is imperative that the University publicly address this specific question, whether it is raised by the public or by the faculty. The recommendations in this report should help the University answer this question often enough and loud enough that the value of and the role of the University in the state and the nation does not come into question.

The Strategic Planning Task Force on Outreach, which met twice and then reviewed a draft of this report, used the September 1994 Report to the Provost, OUTREACH AND THE STRATEGIC PLAN, as a guide for discussion. That group of seven faculty had reviewed existing outreach efforts at the University and collected and reviewed material from a variety of peer institutions who have focused on outreach efforts in the past several years. Their report is on file in the Homer Babbidge Library Reserve Collection. In addition to that report, the Task Force members read WHAT THE PUBLIC WANTS FROM HIGHER EDUCATION, a report on a 1995 national survey conducted to "learn whether Americans are now continuing their education and training throughout their working lives . . ." One key finding from that survey indicated that "public support exists for universities, and the land grants in particular, to do more than educate 18-22 year old undergraduates". The respondents in that National Survey were asked how they would distribute $100 of taxpayer money toward typical functions: on average they would use $45 to teach students on-campus, $30 for off-campus education and technical help, and $25 for doing research on problems facing businesses, residents, and state and local government.

RECOMMENDATION I: A DEFINITION

The Task Force recommends that the University adopt the following definition of outreach:

Outreach is an active form of scholarship that cuts across teaching, research, and service. It involves generating, receiving, transmitting, applying, and preserving knowledge for the direct benefit of external audiences in ways that are consistent with university and unit missions.

Activities which fall under this definition should be differentiated from activities which serve the University community (for example, committees, University Senate), which are public service activities not linked to scholarship, or which publicize the University and its activities to the broader community (public relations). Linking outreach clearly to the scholarly mission of the University helps to clarify the value which we place on these activities for students, faculty and professional staff. We feel that this definition covers activities in all divisions of the University that reach out to external audiences (as compared to degree-seeking students).

The Task Force recognizes that a wide range of "external audiences" exist for the University's outreach efforts. The following list is meant to be illustrative rather than inclusive. We are conscious of the importance of doing outreach consistent with university and unit missions, and that affects the type of external audience on which we might focus.

--professionals (noncredit and credit)--teachers, health care workers, engineers, etc.

--firms which need research and training support

--federal/state/regional/municipal/community agencies which need targeted research, training

--government officials and policy makers

--potential students and their families, alumni and friends

--state citizens who desire "informal" educational opportunities--exhibits, performances, lectures, publications

RECOMMENDATION II: AN ASSOCIATE PROVOST FOR OUTREACH

The Task Force recommends that a centralized outreach management office be established and that it be directed by an Associate Provost for Outreach. Given the budgetary constraints of the University, the Task Force recommends that a new position not be created, but that an existing academic administrative position be redefined to focus more explicitly on outreach. While recommending centralized oversight, we also strongly advocate that outreach activities be generated from the bottom up, consonant with the mission of individual units and the expertise of faculty, staff and students. Specifically, the Associate Provost would be charged to respond to the action items in the Strategic Plan:

1.6a Identify outreach accomplishments, resources and opportunities and define outreach goals;

1.6b Communicate outreach activities to the public;

1.6c Provide resources to support outreach goals.

Outreach management would include:

1. database creation and management, preferably using existing reporting mechanisms (e.g. modified annual reports) to generate the data (1.6a);

2. consultation with deans, directors to set outreach goals and measure the effectiveness of outreach efforts; this could include regular needs assessment (1.6a);

3. dissemination of information about outreach activities and expertise, both within the University and to the state at large; coordination with Institutional Advancement and University Relations would be a key part of this function (1.6b);

4. support for outreach activities, including advocacy for the merit of outreach activities within personnel actions and curricular development, including service learning (1.6c);

5. encouragement of collaboration among University faculty to respond to outreach opportunities, within and across schools and disciplines (1.6c).

The Task Force further recommends that the Associate Provost for Outreach appoint an Advisory Council that represents the richness of outreach activities and possibilities across the University. This Council would provide a sounding board for the Associate Provost, and assist in outreach planning, information gathering and dissemination efforts. The following types of people should be included on the Council:

Dean or Associate Dean from school with active outreach efforts

Dean or Associate Dean from school with limited existing outreach efforts

Regional Campus Director

Several faculty, similarly distributed across units with and without intensive outreach focus

Several professionals, whose responsibilities require them to be involved with "external audiences"; all divisions of the University should be represented

Extended and Continuing Education and Cooperative Extension Service

State citizens, from both private and public sectors

Faculty must play an important role in outreach management. An outreach faculty council similar to the Graduate Council might be a valuable additional source of information and influence to the University and the Associate Provost.

RECOMMENDATION III: KEY ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED

The Task Force identified a number of key issues which must be addressed as the University enhances outreach activities. Although most of these issues have unit-level and personnel implications, the Task Force recommends that policies be set and clarified at the level of the Provost. The following issues related to how outreach fits into the University mission are matters of policy:

a. fees vs. gratis activities--does the University have an obligation to do these activities or should fees be charged?

b. conflict between values (academic freedom) of university and funding source

c. conflict with unit mission (e.g. student fees supporting outreach activities which do not return benefit to students)

d. public ownership, relevancy--how involve public as a part of determining our outreach efforts and programs

e. investment in outreach--centralized funding as seed money or as permanent allocation, unit-based investment or reallocation of resources (including the issue of indirect charges for outreach activities)

f. role of regional campuses in outreach--obvious locational advantages, but emphasis further complicates existing complex accountability relationships of faculty (director of campus, department and dean at Storrs); Regional Campus Task Force should address this issue

g. relationship with Extended and Continuing Education and the Cooperative Extension System. Further discussion of the relationship of ECE should be undertaken by the Task Force on Extended and Continuing Education, but we strongly suggest that they consider incorporating the Division directly into the Office of the Provost, reporting to the Associate Provost for Outreach. Interaction between the Division and the other schools and colleges of the University would be more direct with such a reporting relationship, compared to the present lateral ties which must be established and maintained. The Associate Provost would also need to clarify the relationship between the Cooperative Extension System and this new university-wide emphasis on outreach.

h. role of the University in creating an information highway in the state (both for use in University outreach activities and to benefit state citizens, firms and agencies)

Another important set of issues that must be handled at the level of the Office of the Provost relate to faculty/staff/student incentives:

i. forms of compensation for individuals--extra compensation, merit, awards are all alternatives for faculty and staff; credit courses might be important to students

j. faculty and professional staff roles and rewards-- explicit "valuing" of outreach in promotion, tenure and reappointment and in merit may require revision of forms such as PTR, merit and annual reports

k. consulting--is this a form of outreach or should it be (academic planning data report is ambiguous about how to handled consulting)

l. measuring productivity, outcomes--although this is clearly not just a personnel issue, clear guidelines concerning accountability enhance the credibility of outreach activities

RECOMMENDATION 1V: RESOURCES FOR OUTREACH

The Strategic Plan estimates an additional operational expense of $50,000 per annum to enhance outreach activities. Those funds would support the information management and reporting function of outreach management, but would do little to support actual outreach activities. Some of the funds might support a small grant program to provide support for pilot efforts in outreach. The Task Force anticipates that reallocation will provide the primary resources for enhancing outreach. Faculty, professionals and students will be encouraged to invest some of their time in outreach related to their scholarly and professional activities. In addition, many of these activities can be funded through fee-for-service arrangements or external funding; such support also provides an excellent indicator of accountability, since programs that do not meet community needs will not be supported. Again, the role of Extended and Continuing Education and the Cooperative Extension System in such fee-for-service and externally funded outreach must be considered.

RECOMMENDATION V: ACCOUNTABILITY

As the University increases its attention to outreach activities, it must be able to demonstrate accountability for the investment of resources, both dollars and personnel, in such efforts. Michigan State, whose definition of outreach we have chosen to modify for the University of Connecticut, has created a document, "Four Dimensions of Quality Outreach," which identifies significance, contextualization, scholarly characteristics and contributions, and external and internal impacts as dimensions for evaluating the quality of outreach activities. Michigan State proposes both qualitative and quantitative indicators to measure projects' contribution; many of the components and indicators could be used to evaluate individual performance in outreach as well as the projects themselves. This document, also on reserve in the Homer Babbidge Library, provides a useful guide to the Associate Provost and to units for establishing criteria for evaluating outreach activities and for reporting publicly on the impact of our expanded efforts in outreach. The document will be shared with the Task Force on Program Assessment.