Minutes from September 26, 2018
Planning Council Minutes
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
415 Reid Hall
|Members Present||Members Present||Others Present|
|Deb Barkley||Rob Maher||Michael Babcock|
|Tracy Dougher||Kasia Maison||Becca Belou|
|Chris Fastnow||Sara Mannheimer||Tami Eitle|
|Stephanie Gray||Bob Mokwa||Ian Godwin|
|Wade Hill||Adam Edelman||John How|
|Bridget Kevane||Christine Stanton||Abbie Richards|
|Myleen Leary||Brett Walker|
|Ilse-Mari Lee||Taylor Blossom|
I. Welcome and announcements
A. Members introduced themselves
B. Strategic plan information sessions will be held
II. Approval of 4/18 minutes – approved
III. Council Expectations - Fastnow
A. University-wide perspective and conversations
B. Communication role for members is critical – two-way channel
C. Contribute to the agenda so we address topics and projects with impact
IV. 2018-19 Council work plan
A. Possible work
1. Solicit input on the draft strategic plan
2. Metric definitions
3. Template for process or outcomes for campus units with expectation that units will undergo planning
4. Template for resource (including space) planning
5. Design better alignment between planning and budgeting
B. Fastnow asked Council members to consider projects or tasks for the Council to take on this year, with discussion and calendaring at the October meeting.
V. Review draft plan language
A. Draft strategic plan to be presented to University Council 10/3, approval slated for November or December
B. Mission statement needs to be approved by the BOR
C. The current and all previous drafts are available online: http://www.montana.edu/strategicplan/process/index.html
D. Discussion ensued
1. Where did the “Grand Challenges” emerge? Fastnow explained that the VPRED crafted them from her planning process.
2. Recommendation to add sustainability goals
3. Suggestion that goal 2.2 could be expanded to staff
4. Reading of the “Grand Challenges” as exclusive of large parts of campus.
5. 1.3 needs to define “global citizens” and figure out how to measure what that means.
6. Missing international education.
7. 2.3 and 2.4 may be redundant and could be combined.
8. Missing sustainability.
9. Recommendation for language explicitly on civic discourse.
10. “Grand Challenges” seen as the meatiest part of the document, possibly excluding social sciences and humanities, though one can see roles.
11. Possible to frame more inclusively through inclusion of civic discourse
E. Comments will be relayed to Strategic Planning Committee
VI. Other Business - None
Next Meeting: October 24, 1-3 pm