The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

salvador-stanton
the need for carnegie designated very high research universities in nevada n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada

play fullscreen
1 / 33
Download Presentation
The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada
75 Views
Download Presentation

The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. The Need for Carnegie-designated “Very High” Research Universities in Nevada Kevin R. Carman, UNR John Valery White, UNLV Joint Presentation to WRED Committee June 5, 2014 *

  2. I. Why does a “Very High” Research University designation matter? • prestige with employers • value for students, graduates • credibility to funding agencies • akin to high grade from financial analysts • increased eligibility for major federal grants • essential to state economic development strategy

  3. Health / Medical Renewable Energy Sustainable Materials and Natural Resources Governor’s Economic Development Sectors: Research & Innovation Intensive • Gaming/ Entertainment • Aerospace • Information Technology

  4. “…Nevada lags behind other states and the nation on every indicator of innovation and Research & Development activity” Governor’s Economic Development Plan: Enhance R&D activity

  5. “underinvestment in higher education” “lack of a top-ranked Carnegie research university” Governor’s Economic Development Plan: Address “Threats”

  6. expand role of research universities: Research & Innovation Workforce Development through advanced degrees Governor’s Economic Development Plan: Recommendation for Action

  7. Significant, multi-year enhancement of universities’ operating budgets hire clusters of faculty in key research areas address research capital needs Public Investment in R&D Capacity • Utah “U-STARS” (2006) • Texas “Tier 1” Bill (2009) • Florida “Pre-eminence” Bill (2013)

  8. How is a university designated “Research University/ Very High”? UNM

  9. Research Expenditures S&E Non S&E Carnegie “Correlates” • PhDs • Humanities • Social Sciences • STEM • Other Professional • Non-Faculty Research Staff and Postdocs

  10. Where are we now ?How do we get there?> Different histories > Different capacities, needs > Different plans > Common goal

  11. UNR assessment of RU/VH

  12. UNR Capacity Study: 22,000 by 2021 • Analysis of faculty and staff needed to support 22,000 students • 18:1 Student: Faculty ratio • 272 Faculty (39/year) • 167 Staff (24/year) • 121 GTA (17/year) • Results are similar to the R-VH analysis…

  13. The Need for Additional Faculty in PhD Programs

  14. Comparison with New Mexico: PhD production

  15. Comparison with New Mexico: Grants

  16. Comparison with New Mexico: PhD production + grants

  17. Cost projections

  18. Cost Projections

  19. Funding Analysis • ~ $8M/year: additional required for personnel and operating expense • ~$5M/year: Enrollment growth + Fee increase • ~$3M/year: Gap • Potential sources of funds to bridge gap: • Increased $/WSCH • General fund • ~$67M: New/renovated facilities • Philanthropy • State

  20. UNLV analysis for Carnegie RU/ VH

  21. RU/VH sets the bar high for UNLV • Benchmarking through comparison • Oregon, Colorado, Utah, Arizona State • performance in each Carnegie correlate • Need to increase : • $80 million in research expenditures per year • 100 doctoral degrees awarded per year • 100 post-doctoral scholars, research faculty

  22. UG Education Remains a Priority • Retention/ Progression / Completion • more full-time UG students (15 to Finish) • R/P/C: improve 6-year grad rate, meet CCA • student completion drives formula funding • smaller sections taught by f/t instructors (block scheduling) drives student success • To meet these goals, F/T faculty instructional capacity must increase

  23. Starting Point: c. 2012 • Challenge: Limited faculty size (780) • Increased course loads, larger classes • More doctoral committees per faculty member • Challenge: Low point of research ($30 m) • Decline in grant proposals, grant funding • Almost no patent, tech transfer activity • Challenge: Insufficient space (Master Plan)

  24. Strategic Thinking Process • Vision/ Mission is clear: RU/ VH • Significant analysis to be done • Goals/ Objectives/ Metrics • Tactics & Strategies • Organization & Structure • People • Support Structures • Results/ Assessment of Performance

  25. Current estimate of what we need • Expand “bandwidth” for instruction, research • Target: > 1200 faculty, > 800 grad assistants • 900 tenure-eligible active-research faculty • 50 non-tenured research / clinical faculty • 250 lecturers (focused on UG education) • Faculty count not goal - means to ends • Research productivity/ economic development • Degree productivity/ workforce development

  26. Estimated need: 900 active researchers on faculty • 625 current tenure-eligible lines • many recruited from Tier 1 universities • heavy instructional load for RU/ VH • assigned 4 - 6 credit hours per semester • limited research leave opportunities • capable of higher productivity, need support • need increase of $50,000 research activity per line per year to attain RU/VH designation

  27. Estimated need:900 active researchers on faculty • proposed : 260 new (tenure-eligible) lines • ~ 50 senior hires, ~ 200 junior hires • recruited in key ED research areas • integrated with anticipated Medical faculty • to attain RU/VH designation, each must • average $200,000 research activity annually • supervise average 3 researchers annually • research faculty (25 - 50 per year total) • doctoral students / post-doctoral fellows

  28. Estimated need:275 lecturers on faculty • 200 current non-tenure-track lines • instruction-intensive (9-12 credit hours / term) • flexibility to meet enrollment needs • created 40 new lecturers since 2012 • conversion of part-time instructional budget • focused on high-demand / bottleneck areas • proposed 34 new positions • support retention, completion • funded by student fees

  29. Estimated Need:800 Graduate Assistantships • current: 550 state-funded grad assistants • proposed: 260 new grad assistantships • enhance stipends to be more competitive • focused on doctoral students • focused on research, innovation areas

  30. Estimated Operating Costs

  31. Estimated UNLV Capital Needs • current Master Plan (15 years) • state capital funds: $182 million • campus matching funds : $131 million • build 500, 000 GSF • repurpose 200,000 GSF • UNLV School of Medicine

  32. Proposed UNLV Match: $100 million • One-time expenses (over 10 years) • $61 million for start-up costs for new faculty • $40 million for other research infrastructure • libraries, laboratories, instrumentation • technical support staff • current, anticipated institutional funds • indirect cost recovery • other savings

  33. Regents/ NSHE: enhanced state operational support enhanced capital funds public support for research & innovation mission What do we need now? • Universities: • Higher productivity of advanced degrees • better supported, more research productive faculty • greater grant/ contract activity • enhanced community support