Skip to content
  • Print

September 21 2000

University of the Pacific
Institutional Priorities Committee
Minutes for September 21, 2000
Taylor Conference Room

IPC Members Present: Benedetti, Chambers, Fox, Gilbertson, King, Kirkland, KruegerDevine, Lundergan, Meer, Stark

Minutes: Minutes approved with minor changes.


Barbara Kirkland was introduced to IPC as our staff representative. She is also an alumna of UOP. Welcome Barbara – it is great to have you on board!

There will be no meeting on October 12th due to the Regent’s meeting.


Heather Mayne has taken our comments on diversity to the university wide Irvine grant committee. She may need to postpone the application of the grant from October to December to better address data collection.

The Provost has expressed concerns to the appropriate people regarding delays in program review reports. He has also requested a formal report from Registrar’s office and will share it with us when received.

Continuing Issues:

I. IPC Budget/planning guidelines

  1. Bill Lundergan met with the Dental School Administrative Council to review IPC budget and planning guidelines. The Council approved the draft. The Law School has not yet given feedback on the guidelines.
  2. The Deans expressed concern for withdrawing "allocation of a specific matching dollar amount for the Stockton faculty salary pool,….." under the Compensation section.
  3. A concern was raised regarding the increasing daily maintenance needs as we renovate and build. Will we have a comparable investment in daily maintenance needs? This should be addressed in program review. Additionally, it has been mentioned that a task force/committee was formed to address specific academic facility needs.

II. Vision Statement – Benedetti and Stark presented their preliminary revisions of the vision statement.

The vision statement should be both descriptive and prescriptive.

  1. Add term "graduate" to first sentence, change term "strengthen" to "increase", omit "and take full…" "Internships and leadership", "these"
  2. Add faculty, staff and alumni.
  3. Key issues discussed: add graduate reference (implications for budget and focus), delete reference to Northern California (viewed as constricting and confusing), delete internships and leadership and development, add service to alumni.
  4. Strengthen its visibility of the three campuses, omit entire sentence from vision sentence and spotlight in a priority? Need to keep as "Good Neighbor Phrase"
  5. Leadership Development: It was discussed that this term is not exciting for faculty but alumni are very excited about it. There needs to be more time and attention on how to fuse leadership with curricular and co-curricular.
  6. Add: Alumni: implications for providing a service to alumni.

III. Planning Assumptions

  1. #1 Is it appropriate for each program to define its own optimal enrollment. 6000-6500 is too broad a goal big difference between 6000 and 6500 students. Addressing growth within units is necessary.
  2. #2 still needs revision. Unclear what is trying to be said.
  3. 3 Where does technology fit? Is the term integrity appropriate? Do we mean integration?

Discussion to continue next week.