On April 17, the first grass-roots planning session for a new Strategic Plan was held. Only 23 people were able to make it, but we had students, staff, administrators and faculty, and there were representatives from highly divergent viewpoints. And we generated some ideas.

None of our suggestions are decisions; they are just the beginnings of a discussion. What is important is that we have begun that discussion. For that is how we shall mold our future: by generating from the bottom up, the ideas that will drive us onward.

We had many topics we thought to talk about, but we grouped them under four headings:  process (as in governance), mission (broadly understood), people and finance.

For process, we had these thoughts: The current governance structures have enabled an overlordship by the President, which has long caused dissension and now threatens the very stability of the University; we need stronger structures, such as representative bodies for faculty, students, staff and alumni. Yes, we already have the Faculty Senate, the Student Government Association, the Graduate Student Association and the Staff Advisory Committee (SAC); but the SAC is sadly unrepresentative, and the alumni have nothing. Then from these we could form a University Parliament, which would meet several times a year. There, the different constituencies could speak to one another. The President could be obliged to appear before the Parliament, to answer questions and explain policy. Trustees could be chosen from these bodies – this is done in some universities. All of this would require a new University charter, but we must think in bold strokes if we are to change our mode of proceeding.

For mission, we highlighted the Jesuit mission and academics: teaching and research. There is great interplay among these. The core curriculum feeds into the Jesuit mission and is informed by it, and teaching and research aid one another. To highlight the importance of academics, we should revive the office of Provost, a post above other vice presidents. We need to examine carefully our use of part-time adjunct faculty. A University Research Council, staffed by faculty, could serve as a focus for advocating the research needs of the faculty, in terms of the libraries, laboratory space, administrative support for grants and the like.

For people, we saw a crying need to see to the staff, who frequently are unable to voice their issues for fear of endangering their jobs. Human resources benefits sometimes badly serve the staff, and there is concern over the outsourcing of benefits to The Vitality Group, which is often arbitrary and demeaning. Part-time adjunct faculty have poor connections with the rest of the faculty and are denied faculty development opportunities. Communication needs to be improved, including between trustees and the rest of the University community; having trustees elected from among students, faculty, staff and alumni could aid in that.

For finance, we saw great needs for transparency, accountability and the spread ofainformation.  The American Association of University Professors’ “Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities” calls for a voice from the faculty in shaping the University budget, including the balance between operating and capital budgets. Without a sharing of information on what the capital budget is, there can be no such voice. The President’s Opportunity Fund looms particularly large in this picture—of unknown tens of millions of dollars, unspecified provenance and unchecked expenditure, it is the great mystery sitting over all University budget discussions that take place outside of the President’s office. Finally, perhaps most important of all, is the desperate need for a bicentennial campaign to inaugurate our third century. We should campaign for funds for capital purposes, academic scholarship, research and strengthening the endowment.  The campus is ready to lend a hand to such an auspicious undertaking—if we have new leadership to point the way.

A few more details in our deliberations can be seen at the SLU AAUP website: https://sites.google.com/a/slu.edu/aaup-slu-interim/not-so-secret-strategic-planning-session-april-17.

This is just the product of a couple hours of deliberation by a couple dozen people. Nothing here is decided—but the game has now begun, and we must carry it forward. Where shall the next planning session be—the medical campus?  And when—maybe the last week of April?  Now is the time to start planning for the University we want to be!