Report to the Board of
Regents
May 22, 1997
Contents
Goal 1: Comprehensive Strength in Undergraduate Programs
Goal 2: Premier Graduate and Professional Programs in Significant Number of Areas
Goal 3: A Faculty of National and International Distinction
Goal 4: Distinguished Research and Scholarship
Goal 5: A Culturally Diverse and Inclusive University Community
Goal 6: Strong Ties Between the University and External Constituencies
Goal 7: A High-Quality Academic and Working Environment
The Use of Targets in Implementing Achieving Distinction 2000 at The University of Iowa
May 22, 1997
Mary Sue Coleman
President
On December 17, 1996, the Iowa State Board of Regents approved Achieving Distinction 2000, The University of Iowa’s strategic plan for 1995-2000, as enhanced by the 1996 addition of sections on Core Values, Indicators of Progress, and Strategic Focus Areas. In approving the plan with its 1996 enhancements, the Board asked that the University sharpen the section in Indicators by attaching "Targets" where appropriate. After campus-wide consultation and further informal discussions with the Board President and Board Office in January-April 1997, the University has refined its Indicators and divided them into two types: (1) "targeted" indicators, those quality-related measures which can be associated with time-specific numerical objectives, and (2) "progress" indicators, additional points of reference which cannot be set at pre-determined levels but are useful in tracking the institution’s direction and rate of improvement. The proportion of undergraduate credit hours taught by tenured or tenure-track faculty in undergraduate colleges, for examples, has a clear bearing on the quality of undergraduate education; thus in setting a target percentage, the University should be able to assess qualitative improvement by a quantitative gauge. By contrast, it would be inappropriate for the University to set numerical targets for usage of special support and student disability services, or for attendance at Haunter events, but these data are followed so that we can monitor year-to-year variations, anticipate future trends, and assess our progress in serving a diverse community and creating a high-quality working and learning environment.
The two types of indicators, in that they attach numerical data to non-numerical goals, share a common limitation: rather than measuring quality directly, they register indirect and collateral evidence of certain narrowly defined aspects of quality. The progress of an institution as complex as The University of Iowa cannot be charted in spreadsheets alone, nor can any single set of measurements be made to apply equally to all parts of the organization. Moreover, it is beyond the scope of even the most sensitive numerical indicator to capture non-quantifiable, yet profoundly significant, signs of improvement in an academic institution that aspires to excellence. A great university is marked by a continuous increase in the vigor and dynamism of its intellectual community, as evidenced in an unrelenting and never-ending pursuit of knowledge and a constant growth in the courage to face truths, including those truths that may be difficult to accept. For The University of Iowa, the most meaningful indicators of quality are written in the enriched lives and expanded horizons of our students and in the value of the scholarship and services that we extend to others.
Both "targeted" and "progress" indicators are to be monitored and reported annually, with 1995-96 as the baseline year and 2000-1 as the target year. Although it is unlikely that progress will occur in evenly spaced annual increments, trend lines established by annual measurements should facilitate analysis of the direction and rate of change. Together, the two types of indicators will provide a revealing, if incomplete, series of snapshots of The University of Iowa that should help us see where we stand in relation to our goals. Most important, this annual exercise will serve as a keen spur to our individual and institutional self-improvement.
Targeted and Progress
Indicators for Institutional Goals
Base Year, 1995-96; Target Year,
2000-01
Goal 1: Comprehensive Strength in Undergraduate Programs
1:1 Percentage of students graduating in four, five, and six years.
Target 1A: Increase 4-year graduation rate from 32.6% to 40%. (Chart)
- For the base year 1995-96, the 4-year rate is calculated as a percentage of the 1992 UI freshman cohort who graduated by the end of 1996. This figure does not include the percentage of our 1992 freshman cohort who transferred to, and graduated from, other institutions, nor does it include 1996 UI graduates who did not enter as freshmen. One-third of all UI students are transfer students.
- For many decades the UI’s 4-year graduation rate, thus calculated, has hovered around 30%, while the 5-year rate has hovered around 57%.
- The graduation rate for UI students who have attended Summer Session has improved steadily, rising from 37.2% of the 1988 cohort to 44.3% of the 1992 cohort.
- These data suggest that many students fall short of the 4-year mark by only one or two courses.
- We anticipate that the Four-Year Graduation Plan, instituted in 1995, will help more students plan their studies so that they can be completed within 8 semesters. Students who choose to change majors or carry course-loads of less than 15-16 hours per semester, however, will need longer than 4 years to graduate. It should also be recognized that some undergraduate curricula are not covered by the Four-Year Graduation Plan.
- For students who pay out-of-state tuition fees the four-year graduation rate is 38%, compared to 28% for in-state students of nearly identical admission qualifications. This difference suggests that motivation (cost-savings) may be a significant factor in improving graduation rates.
- The 1992-96 4-year median graduation rate for public Big Ten institutions (excluding Purdue, for which data are unavailable) is 32.7%. In that group the UI ranks 5th (the median).
- Graduation rates are closely correlated with the high school class standing of admitted freshmen. By statute, the UI admits all Iowa students who graduate in the top 50% of their high school class. At the UI and at Ohio State University, 22% of incoming freshmen are in the top 10% of their high school class; all other public Big Ten universities have larger percentages of incoming freshmen in the top 10%. Leading this group is the University of Michigan, which has 65% of freshmen in the top 10%, and a 4-year graduation rate of 61.3%.
- Four-year graduation is not for everyone. The advantage of cost-effectiveness must be weighed against opportunities for expanded educational development, extensive participation in extracurricular activities, or part-time employment.
1:2 Number of National Merit Scholars and high school valedictorians in the freshman class.
Target 1B: Increase the number of National Merit Scholars from 24 to 50, and the number of high school valedictorians from 123 to 160. (Charts)
- Increasing the number of highly-motivated, exceptionally well-prepared students will enhance the quality of undergraduate education for all students, without compromising the UI’s historical commitment to broad access.
- The number of National Merit Scholars at the UI fell from 103 in 1990 to 73 in 1995, while the number of high school class valedictorians rose from 105 in 1990 to 126 in 1995.
- The UI has historically offered fewer merit-based scholarships, in proportion to the size of its undergraduate student body, than its peer institutions. A restructuring and expansion of the UI’s merit-based scholarship program, coupled with more intensive recruitment of high-ability students, should help attract more high-achieving students to the UI.
- Increasing the proportion of high-ability students will also help to raise the UI’s 4-year graduation rate.
- Recognizing that scores on the Educational Testing Service’s National Merit and National Achievement (for Black and Hispanic students) examinations are only one indication of academic potential, the UI also seeks students who meet non-traditional merit-based criteria of "unusual intellectual or creative talents, leadership gifts, or significant service to school and community."
1:3 Participation by undergraduates in scholarship/creative activity and individual development programs.
Target 1C: Increase undergraduate participation in the Honors program from 3130 to 3500; in the Study Abroad program from 323 to 500; in Cooperative Education from 959 to 1200. (Chart)
1:4 Percentage, by discipline, of undergraduate credit hours taught by tenured and tenure-track faculty; percentage of senior tenured faculty in undergraduate colleges who teach at least one undergraduate course per year.
- In addition to these three targeted educational-enhancement opportunities for which data are available, the UI offers a variety of departmental and collegiate individual development programs and experience-based educational opportunities such as internships, practicum placements, independent research projects, laboratory and studio participation, supervised volunteer activities, and other experiences that can significantly enrich the total educational experience of undergraduates.
- The Honors target is modest because this program has already doubled over the past five years, expanding beyond the College of Liberal Arts to all colleges enrolling undergraduates.
Target 1D: Increase percentage of undergraduate credit hours taught by tenured/tenure-track faculty from 56.3% to 60%; increase percentage of senior faculty teaching undergraduates, in undergraduate colleges, from 75% to 80%. (Charts)
1:5 General assignment classrooms with access to computers and multimedia presentation equipment.
- These targets reflect a commitment to improve what are already high standards for undergraduate teaching in a research university; these percentages are consistent with the faculty’s graduate teaching and research responsibilities and the UI’s role in educating the professors of the future.
Target 1E: Increase number of technologically-equipped classrooms from 22 to 100. (Chart)
1:6 Reputational rankings; national surveys.
Progress: Track "best value" ratings in national magazine annual college guides.
- 31st in U.S. in "Best Value" rankings in Money’s "College Guide ‘97" (1996); up from 35th place in 1995
- 6th best value for "sticker price" among national universities in US News & World Report, 1996; up from 23rd in U.S. among "Best Buys" in 1995.
Progress: Track reputational rankings of selected undergraduate programs in national college guides.
1:7 Student rankings of perceived quality of instruction (surveys, evaluation forms).
- College of Engineering: Top 25%, US News & World Report, 1995.
- College of Nursing: Among top 15, US News & World Report, 1995.
- College of Business Administration: 31st , US News & World Report, 1995.)
Progress: Institution-wide samplings; rating systems within departments.
- ACT Student Opinion Survey: 1995 spring-fall sample (1864 responses); one out of 42 questions dealt with "Instruction in your major field"; UI rated 3.82 on a 5-point scale, with 4 representing "satisfied."
- Departmental surveys: Students in each section of each undergraduate course are asked to rate the quality of the course and of the instruction; instructors see ratings (after grades have been submitted) and use them to improve courses and instruction; departmental chairs and executive committees take these rankings into consideration in making decisions on promotion, tenure, and salaries. The data are held in confidence and are not gathered centrally.
1:8 Placement rates.
Progress: Encourage more colleges and programs to gather data on placement of graduates. (Chart)
- Placement rate is set one year after graduation; for this indicator, baseline year is 1994-95.
Goal 2: Premier Graduate and Professional Programs in a Significant Number of Areas
2:1 Quality of entering students; program competitiveness; ratio of applications to admissions to acceptances.
Target 2A: Raise quality of entering students from mean Graduate Record Examination composite (V+Q+A) score of 100 points above national mean to 130 points above national mean; increase mean GPA of entering students from 3.28 to 3.35. (Charts)
2:2 Time to completion of graduate degree programs.
Target 2B: Decrease overall median time to completion of Ph.D. degree from 7.8 to 7.0 years. (Chart)
2:3 National Research Council Ratings by discipline; rankings in national magazine guides to graduate and professional programs.
Progress: Consistently high rankings; placement in top tier of public universities.
2:4 Performance on professional qualifying/licensing/certification exams.
- National Research Council rankings, the "gold standard" of graduate program ratings, cannot be reported annually; they appear at intervals of approximately ten years and do not cover all fields in which graduate degrees are awarded.
- In the most recent rankings (1993 surveys, rankings made public in 1995), the UI had 5 programs in the top quartile (including one, Physiology, in the top 10%), 15 in the 2nd quartile; 12 in the 3rd quartile; none in the bottom quartile. 15 of the UI programs rated by NRC in both 1982 and 1993 rose in rank; 2 remained the same; 3 declined.
- Graduate and professional program rankings in national newsmagazines, although they do not rate all programs annually and employ questionable methodologies, are widely influential and provide a rough guide to quality.
- In the 1995 US News & World Report, for example, the UI ranked 5th in Counseling Psychology, 20th in Education, 42nd in Engineering, 2nd in Physical Therapy; 3rd in Dentistry, 5th in primary care specialties in Medicine, and the UIHC was highly rated in several specialties in graduate medical education. The College of Law ranked in the top 15% over all, and the top 5% among public universities.
- Other graduate program rankings. Various disciplines also issue rankings that are helpful in tracking progress. In 1995, the UI program in Communication Studies ranked 11th out of 66 programs nationally, according to a survey conducted by the Research Board of the Speech Communication Association.
Progress: Scores above national average in all appropriate disciplines. (Chart)
- The 98% pass rate for Engineering applies to the 25% of bachelor’s degree recipients who took the Fundamentals of Engineering exam.
- In the case of Law, exams are state-based and the UI’s June 1995 pass rate is compared with the statewide average.
- In some disciplines, scores are reported not in relation to the national pass rate but as national rankings. For example, the College of Dentistry placed 7th among 53 dental schools in its graduates’ pass rate for Part I and 3rd in Part II of the national exam.
Goal 3: A Faculty of National and International Distinction.
3:1 Number of faculty (annual and lifetime) elected to national scholarly academies or receiving any of a specified set of high prestige career awards.
Target 3A: 20 members of national academies (base: 12). (Chart)
- The national academies considered in this target are the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 1995-96, the UI faculty had 1 (emeritus) in the National Academy of Sciences, 0 in the National Academy of Engineering, 8 in the Institute of Medicine, and 3 (including emeritus) in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, for a total of 12.
Target 3B: 50 high-prestige national awards (base: 43). (Chart)
- In the previous five years (1990-95), UI faculty members received 43 high-prestige awards: 3 Guggenheim Fellowships, 7 National Science Foundation Young Investigator Awards, 1 NSF Presidential Faculty Fellow, 1 Burroughs Wellcome Young Investigator Award, 2 Sloan Fellowships, 10 National Institutes of Health MERIT Awards, 10 National Endowment for the Humanities Fellows, 2 Pulitzer Prizes, 3 MacArthur Awards, 3 Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators.
- A complete list of awards considered to be of "high prestige" is in preparation.
- The target of 50 new awards over the next 5 years will take into consideration all awards on the "high-prestige" list.
Target 3C: 170 faculty members on national peer review boards (base: 150). (Chart)
3:2 Number of faculty receiving external recognition for excellence in teaching.
Progress: Improve tracking of external teaching awards.
- Although few external awards for teaching exist and the UI has no mechanism for collecting these data centrally, we have recorded 4 such awards from national professional associations to UI faculty members in 1996: American Association of Endodontics Educator Award, Society of Automotive Engineers Ralph R. Teetor Educational Award, Association for the Education of teachers in Science Outstanding Mentor Award, and American Psychiatry Association Kempf Award for collaborative achievement in a mentoring relationship.
3:3 Annual/lifetime number of faculty receiving Fulbright, senior Fogarty, and other international awards.
Progress: Improve tracking of Fulbright and other international awards.
- This category of awards meets the definition of "high prestige awards," Target 3B under indicator 3:1, but because we lack a firm baseline for Fulbright awards (not reported centrally in 1990-95) we have classified Fulbright and other international awards under the heading of Progress Indicators.
Goal 4: Distinguished Research and Scholarship.
4:1 Amount of external funding for research received by the University; number of proposals submitted and percent awarded; percent faculty with external research support.
Target 4A: Increase external funding for research from $198 million to $250 million. (Chart)
Target 4B: Increase proposals for external funding from 2427 to 3000 annually. (Chart)
Target 4C: Increase percentage of faculty receiving external support from 27.6% to 33%. (Chart)
4:2 Number of faculty publications and citations of publications in comparison with national disciplinary averages.
Target 4D: Increase annual publication index in all relevant disciplines by 15% (1.0 additional publication per faculty member); increase citation index by 10% (3.5 additional citations per faculty member). (Base: 6.5 publications; 33.8 citations).
4:3 Number of intellectual property disclosures by members of the faculty (in appropriate disciplines).
Target 4E: Increase annual intellectual property disclosures from 74 to 90. (Chart)
4:4 Library rankings.
Progress: Maintain overall library ranking in top 20 among public universities.
Goal 5: A Culturally Diverse and Inclusive University Community
5:1 Retention statistics for underrepresented students, faculty, and staff.
Target 5A: Increase minority representation among students from 9.2% to 12%, among tenured and tenure-track faculty from 11.3% to 13%, among merit staff from 4.6% to 5.3%, and among professional and scientific staff from 4.6% to 5.5%. (Chart)
- 1995 overall enrollments, with retention rates from 1st to 2nd year: African American, 754, 74.3% retention; American Indian/Native Alaskan, 112, numbers too small to generate meaningful percentage; Asian-Pacific Islander, 1085, 83.1% retention; Hispanic, 586, 79.2% retention.
- The UI recognizes that the most significant measure of diversity is the percentage of minorities in graduating classes earning baccalaureate, graduate, and professional degrees.
- Attainment of these targets, or aspirations, will depend on our success in retaining current members of the faculty and staff, the number of hiring opportunities in future years, and continuing good-faith efforts to attract a competitive, diverse pool of applicants for positions at the University of Iowa.
- Targets for increasing the percentage of underrepresented faculty and staff are based upon an annual analysis of availability of minority candidates in each category of the labor force.
- In recent years, the UI has enjoyed some success in recruiting a more diverse faculty and staff, but gains in hiring have often been offset by resignations and retirements. Additional emphasis upon retention should be an effective strategy for increasing diversity.
- The faculty and some P&S staff are selected from a national pool of candidates; merit staff and many P&S staff are recruited locally
- In staff hiring, opportunities for increasing diversity arise only when searches are not internal and when, in the case of merit staff, open positions are not filled by contract transfers or "bumping rights" transfers.
Target 5B: Increase female representation on the tenured and tenure-track faculty from 22.2% to 25%, and increase female representation in executive, administrative, and managerial positions from 29.6% to 32%. (Chart)
5:2 Reports on satisfaction surveys from selected constituencies.
Progress: Conduct biannual surveys and track results.
- Student satisfaction surveys, emphasizing the campus as a learning community, will reflect the UI’s progress in creating a more healthful, more student-centered learning environment.
5:3 Number of students served by special support and student disability services.
Progress: Monitor usage of these services.
- Many students with exceptional learning potential must overcome educational, economic, physical, or psychological obstacles to achieve academic success. Special Support Services and Student Disability Services enhance the students’ opportunities to achieve academic excellence.
- Data on trends in the use of these special holistic development services, offered in addition to our other advising and counseling services, will help the UI anticipate future needs and prepare to address them. These data will also help us to gauge our success in motivating students voluntarily to take advantage of services that can help them succeed in their academic programs.
Goal 6: Strong Ties Between the University and External Constituencies
6:1 Annual private support reported by UI Foundation.
Target 6A: Increase number of annual contributors from 44,000 to 50,000. (Chart)
- In the calendar year 1995, the UI received $34.4 million in outright gifts and $19.6 million in future commitments, for an annual total of $57 million.
- The UI and UI Foundation are studying the feasibility of conducting a major capital campaign in the near future.
6:2 Non-degree-seeking enrollments in on- and off-campus educational activities.
Target 6B: Increase number of non-degree-seeking enrollments from 2448 to 2800. (Chart)
6:3 Off-campus cultural programming via the Iowa Communication Network.
Target 6C: Increase sites served by Hancher programming via the ICN from 0 to 30. (Chart)
6:4 Annual patient visits to UI health sciences centers.
Target 6D: Increase annual patient visits to UI health sciences centers from 701,900 to 750,000. (Chart)
6:5 Mean monthly news citations of UI activities.
Target 6E: Increase mean monthly news citations of UI activities from 74 to 85 in national print media and from 51 to 60 in national broadcast media. (Chart)
6:6 Reports on satisfaction surveys among Iowans, both alumni and non-alumni.
Progress: Conduct biannual satisfaction surveys among Iowans, boh alumni and non-alumni.
- In 1993, 71% of Iowans surveyed ranked UI undergraduate education "good" or "excellent"; 76% said it "meets or exceeds expectations."
6:7 Annual attendance at a specified set of cultural, scholarly, and athletic events.
Progress: Track attendance at Hancher and other events and cultural attractions
- In 1995-96, 92,685 attended Hancher events.
- In 1995, Old Capitol was ranked as Iowa’s "top tourist attraction."
6:8 Number of faculty/staff appointments to state/national/international service panels.
Progress: Encourage departments to report faculty appointments to service panels to Deans; establish University-level baseline.
Goal 7: A High-Quality Academic and Working Environment
7:1 Annual campus safety statistics, compared to national averages.
Target 7A: Rank in best four among 17 comparable universities for each of 10 campus community safety statistics. (Base: best four in 5 of 10.)
7:2 Annual building renewal statistics.
Target 7B: Eliminate all substantial deferred maintenance and obsolescence of general-fund-maintained facilities by meeting national building renewal funding norm of 1.0% of building’s value. (Base: 0.623%.) (Chart)
- The UI will monitor annual changes in each of 10 safety categories.
- The UI will review safety measures and progress with the Campus Safety Committee and assess the effectiveness of important efforts through Committee-sponsored surveys of faculty, staff, and students.
- The UI’s annual report to the Board of Regents on deferred maintenance tracks changes in backlog and projects funded the prior year.
7:3 Annual faculty/staff development opportunities.
Target 7C: Increase number of staff members participating in professional development programs from 2907 to 3900. (Chart)
- In addition to these programs, the UI proposes to increase internship opportunities from 15 to 24; increase its new Professional Development Seminar Program from 0 to 20; increase the newly initiated Mary Jo Small Fellowships from 0 to 11; increase tuition assistance grants from 626 to 666.
Target 7D: Increase faculty development opportunities from 124 to 150, and increase faculty participating in Technology-based Teaching Initiative from 0 to 300. (Chart)
7:4 Satisfaction surveys among faculty, staff, students, patients and visitors.
Progress: Conduct biennial surveys of seniors and sophomores; annual surveys of UIHC patients; biennial or triennial surveys of faculty and staff.
7:5 Annual reports of Ombudsperson and Office of Affirmative Action.
Progress: Monitor number of complaints/problems, number satisfactorily resolved, and time to resolution. Where appropriate, include data from the Office of the General Counsel.
Return to The University of Iowa home
page
Last updated on September 19, 1997
