PROVOST FORUM 2012-13 Priorities September 17, 2012. msubillings.edu/ futureu. Indus Foundation Conference Hyderabad, India September 7-10, 2012. Institute of Management Technology, Hyderabad, India. Sriram Institute of Management and Technology, Dehli , India.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
*15th day official headcount
** September 12, 2012 (not 15th day official headcount)
***Lower enrollment is due to increased English competency requirements.
NWCCU Year 3 Report ° Update on previous reported concerns° Review Progress on Standard One : Mission, Core Themes, and Expectations° Address Standard Two: Resources and Capacity° Describe how the resources and capacity in Two can help your institution achieve One.
(Previous 2008 Report) Recommendation 2: Although the actions of the Board of Regents and President Cruzado to more clearly define intra-campus governance may be steps in the right direction, at this point there is nothing concretely proposed and nothing adopted (Standards 1.A.1, 6.A.4, 7.A.1).
(2011 Report) Concern 1: Although some of the indicators measure the quantity of service provided, consideration should be given as to how often the services are used and their impact in order to gain more meaningful achievement indicators. (Standard 1.B.2)
(2011 Report) Recommendation 1: Although the University has a clear mission statement that is published on their website and approved by the Board of Regents, there is no evidence to demonstrate that its mission statement is widely published and generally understood by its community. The evaluators recommend that the University document and provide evidence for how the University community is aware of the mission statement and understands it. (Standard 1.A.1)
(2011 Report) Recommendation 2: The institution has listed numerous (over 50) indicators to assess core theme, however, they appear as lists of everything that could possibility be included as opposed to key, strategic indicators. In addition, there is no mention of establishing targets by which to gauge progress. The evaluators recommend that the University examine each indicator to determine its value for measuring progress toward goals and core themes, that it establish baseline data, and that it determine appropriate targets to measure progress. (Standard 1.B.2)
Academic Affairs Searches° COB Dean° Vice Provost (Academic Affairs?)° Director Grants and Sponsored Programs° Director of Graduate Studies° Director of MSUB Extended Campus° Director of eLearning (with IT)° Executive Director of International Studies