ATTACHMENT 4

Work Session

May 23-24, 2002

 

Some perceived challenges and questions I have gathered from MUS constituents during my various campus visits:

 

  1. Are the smaller campuses of the MUS given fair budgetary allocations and fund control as the larger ones?
  2. Are all of the campus-CEOs of the MUS able to effectively and efficiently respond to their communities� unique needs (via degree program creations, outreach, etc.)?
  3. Are our diligent and devoted MUS Presidents (as both unit controllers and specific campus administrators) realistically able to treat all campuses & communities equally given their very broad job assignments?

 

Potential course of action for the Board of Regent�s consideration:

 

  1. Solicit further input, and solutions if needed, from each MUS campus-community to determine the public�s true perception.�
  2. Using existing resources, like the Political Science Departments, create a neutral survey that solicits responses for these questions and others, from our student-customers, faculty, staff, and other constituents; in a manner that serves our MUS outreach plan.� The survey would include any other questions relevant to improving the university system.
  3. Encourage our excellent Presidents to continue their work towards ending any misconception that inequity exists amongst the campuses of the MUS.
  4. Incorporate both the answer and response to these above questions into a MUS communications/outreach plan.
  5. Have the board of regents review (and potentially create if needed) safeguards that ensure an equal representation and ability for campus-CEOs to respond to the community needs of all MUS campuses.
  6. Charge the commissioner to review (and potentially create if needed) safeguards that ensure an equal representation and ability for campus-CEOs to respond to the community needs of all MUS campuses.

 

Other possible courses of action:

 

Submitted By Christian Hur