June 20, 2017
To my fellow members of the University of Montana community,
I write to provide an update on the progress that the Academic Programs and Administrative Services Prioritization (APASP) Task Force has made over the past few weeks. As the prioritization process moves forward, you can expect more opportunities for dialogue and communication, and I implore you all to stay involved and engaged with our work. An excellent way to catch up on the process is to examine our newly updated set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). These will hopefully address many of the questions and concerns about the prioritization process at UM.
A new version of the Task Force’s Framework has been posted. Members of the Framework Subcommittee have substantially reviewed and amended this document over the past month, although it is not yet finalized as the Task Force awaits feedback on this new version. I would like to highlight a few of the changes in the following sections: Timeline, Approach, and Pilots.
Timeline
We have adjusted the timeline for prioritization based on the feedback the Task Force received in May. Some of the major dates in the revised timeline include:
-
June 30: Task Force will have finalized all components (criteria, metrics, weights, rubrics, etc.) of the prioritization process and will post these online for review throughout the month of July.
-
July 7-August 7: Pilots are conducted and feedback on the process gathered. (More on pilots below.)
-
August 28: Authorship officially begins. Programs/services will have just under five weeks to complete their reports before they are due on October 2.
-
October 2-November 21: APASP Task Force reviews all reports.
-
November 30: APASP Task Force will deliver its final report to the President, President’s Cabinet, and University community after a response period.
I want to acknowledge the short timeline that we will all have to complete the prioritization process. The Framework subcommittee and the full APASP Task Force have thoroughly examined the timeline for weeks, and I must stress that since the creation of the APASP Task Force in April, the expectation has always been for our campus to complete the prioritization process by the end of the 2017 fall semester. From my perspective, to extend the process beyond this deadline would mean only one thing for our campus: across the board cuts for fiscal year 2019, which would hemorrhage ALL of our programs and services. The members of the task force understand the challenges of the limited timeframe but we also recognize the critical importance of acting NOW. We have worked hard to construct the timeline that balances a need for action with quality of analysis, both for the programs/services under review and for the Task Force members conducting the review.
Approach
Next in the Framework document, I would like to draw your attention to the “Approach” section, where we have listed Task Force’s core tenets and values. These are currently guiding the APASP process as we finalize important pieces of the puzzle like the timeline, the criteria, the categories of ranking, and our rubrics. Many of these were drawn from feedback we have received from you, and I assure you that the Task Force will continue to uphold these tenets and values as the process develops.
Pilots
Finally, I would like to emphasize the pilot process that we have outlined under the “APASP Review Process” heading of the Framework document. We have deliberated to create a beta-test of program/service reporting in order to clarify any areas of confusion, and make any critical process-related changes before authorship begins for all campus units. We have worked as diligently as possible to ensure that participating programs and services are not given ANY advantage over those that do not participate. Our pilots will be process-focused rather than program-focused. To accomplish this separation, the Task Force will not provide any feedback or pilot scores to authors prior to its review until after all final reports are submitted on October 2. Participating programs will provide the Task Force with feedback about the authorship process alongside their pilot reports. From the pool of volunteers who turn in reports, the Task Force will randomly select three academic program and three administrative service reports to use to test the review process. These programs/services will not be notified that they have been selected for the pilot. We will make public any changes resulting from the pilot process, so that everyone starts authorship training on the same page at the end of the summer.
ANY program or service may participate in the pilot, and we invite you to do so. To sign up, please send your program/service name and contact information to Rebecca Power, Assistant to the President.
The Task Force has also posted draft ranking categories for academic programs and administrative services. These are associated with the revised criteria and metrics that we anticipate releasing at the end of June, as well as lists of programs/services, rubrics and weights, and more. A new update will notify you when all these are available for review and comment.
I want to thank all of you for your engagement in this process. Undergoing program prioritization is not an easy or pain-free task, but is absolutely essential to ensure a sustainable future for the University of Montana. If this process is to be successful, YOU need to send feedback to shape it, and you can do so via online feedback form, or in person at APASP open forums, to be held in the UC Theater this week:
-
from noon to 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, June 22 and
-
from 10-11:30 a.m. on Friday, June 23.
As a student, I cannot overstate how critically important it is for all members of the campus community –students, administrators, staff, faculty, and alumni– to unite during this transitionary period. This is OUR University, and together we have the opportunity to permanently shape its future– to create the University of Montana that we want to see. I hope to have each and every one of you beside me as we take this vital next step in our history together.
In solidarity,
Chase M. Greenfield
Senior– English Literature and Philosophy
APASP Framework Subcommittee Co-Chair