1. science
2. medicine
3. medical research

Strategic Plan
June 2002
WSU Spokane
Advanced Studies & Research
To:
V. Lane Rawlins, President
Washington State University
From:
William H. Gray, Campus Executive Officer and Dean
Washington State University Spokane
Date:
June 19, 2002
Re:
Transmittal of Campus Strategic Plan
Dear Dr. Rawlins,
On behalf of the Spokane community, I am forwarding to you the completed
campus strategic plan. This plan results from a process that stretched over nearly two
years, beginning with a campuswide workshop in August 2000. A highly participatory
process has engaged people from every department on campus and from across the
community in an examination of our assets and our future opportunities. It included
scores of internal sessions, seven communitywide focus groups, and external validation
of our health sciences strategy.
Documents reviewed as part of this process include plans developed by the Higher
Education Coordinating Board and by Washington State University, including the
Design Team reports of the Universitywide process that coincided with our planning
efforts. Also reviewed were numerous studies of the Spokane region and its economic
development needs, works on the modern urban land-grant university, and works on the
characteristics of successful learning communities.
The plan is also tied to our budgeting process, as the campus adopted the concept of
strategic budgeting in January 2001. Consequently, it is owned by the campus community. We look forward to broader discussion within the larger University to identify
mechanisms to link Spokane campus programs and initiatives more fully to the state of
Washington.
1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Spokane Context ................................................................................................................................. 5
Planning and Budgeting Process ...................................................................................................... 6
Values, Mission, and Vision ............................................................................................................... 8
Key Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Strategic Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 10
Academic Programs ................................................................................................................................. 11
Research .................................................................................................................................................... 13
Student and Learning Experience ...................................................................................................... 14
Community Engagement ..................................................................................................................... 15
Learning Environment ........................................................................................................................... 16
Identity ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
Academic and Information Services Infrastructure ....................................................................... 17
Recognition of Faculty, Staff, Students, and Stakeholders .......................................................... 19
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 19
Academic Programs ................................................................................................................................ 19
Riverpoint Campus ................................................................................................................................. 21
Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 22
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................ 23
Appendix I: Mission, Values, and Goals .............................................................................................. 24
Appendix II: Official Mission Statement ........................................................................................... 26
Appendix IV: Planning Process ............................................................................................................. 30
Appendix V: Planning Process Participants ....................................................................................... 32
Appendix VI: Benchmarks of Progress and Success ....................................................................... 36
Appendix VII: Historical Timeline ....................................................................................................... 38
Footnotes .................................................................................................................................................. 41
2
Executive Summary
Washington State University Spokane
has undertaken a participatory and
comprehensive strategic planning effort.
This document provides a summary of
that process and its outcomes. Our process
incorporated not only the formal activities related to strategic planning, but also
our campus master plan update and a new
strategic budgeting initiative.
Beginning with a review of the
context within which the campus plans
for its future, the document outlines the
campus’s core values and our shared
vision, the strategic goals and priorities
that cut across campus, programmatically
defined objectives that build on strengths
of the campus and the community, and
our goals for development of the
Riverpoint campus.
The future for WSU Spokane emphasizes research, especially in the health
sciences; an expanded set of program
offerings, ranging from undergraduate
through doctoral studies; increased
control over the curriculum; and an
increased identity and profile as a distinctive learning environment: the urban
research campus of Washington State
University. These priorities fit into the
mission and areas of emphasis of the
University as defined in its own strategic
plan, and will increase stature and recognition not only for the campus, but for
Washington State University.
The campus intends to lead the
development of a master plan for research
in Spokane as we move into the knowledge
economy. The plan will address the
campus’s role, both with its own research
agenda and priorities, and as a facilitator
of access to Spokane’s urban and clinical
research opportunities for all WSU faculty
in the statewide system. It will serve also to
identify roles and opportunities for other
higher education institutions, for the
health care system, and for the private
sector in establishing Spokane as a
research-friendly community.
Elements of such a plan are already
falling into place; one of the initial
priorities will be the development of a
Medical Research Institute with federal
funding. The Institute will serve to opti-
mize the health care system in Spokane
for medical research and to increase
competitiveness for investigator-initiated
research support from the national
institutes. Other centers and institutes,
especially in the health sciences, will
house academic programs and foster
research.
The campus’s slate of academic
offerings has grown slowly but
steadily since its establishment. We intend to
enhance the array of
degrees available to
Spokane’s
The future for WSU Spokane
placebound
emphasizes
research, especially in
population, and
the health sciences; an expanded set
to destination
of program offerings, ranging from
students, who
will want the
undergraduate through doctoral
unique learnstudies; increased control over the
ing experience
curriculum; and an increased identity
that Washingand profile as a distinctive learning
ton State
environment: the urban research
University
campus of Washington State
provides in
Spokane. As a first
University.
priority, the campus
will seek legislative and
HECB authorization for
doctoral degrees. We will also
develop additional baccalaureate
completion degrees in cooperation with
Community Colleges of Spokane as the
primary feeder, and continue to add
graduate degrees. Increased curricular
autonomy will be important to our
continued growth.
Continued development of the
Riverpoint campus will enrich the learning environment for students and enable
further program growth. Our first priority
is funding for the Academic Center,
currently in design, and we seek to
establish an ongoing construction schedule for full build-out.
Both campus and community members were quite clear in one priority that
wove through all other goals: an increased
profile in the community, more awareness
of what we do, and a singular identity for
all university programs in Spokane. First
and foremost, we desire clear and prominent signage on campus.
3
Introduction
Washington State
University Spokane lies at
the heart of the Inland
Northwest. Today that
statement refers to our
physical location. As we
move forward in accomplishing our strategic
initiatives, it will be true
also of our intellectual
leadership and our place in
Recommendations/Priorities
Within the context of the adoption and implementation of
this plan in its entirety, priority initiatives for the next five years
include:
♦ Development and leadership of a master plan for research in
Spokane. Initial priority is the development and implementation of a plan focusing especially on biomedical research.
♦ Development of a number of centers and institutes, especially
in the health sciences, to house academic programs and foster
research competitiveness. Initial priority is establishment of a
Medical Research Institute to provide the research infrastructure necessary to enhance the competitiveness of physician
scientists and university researchers for national institutes
funding.
♦ Build-out of program offerings to include doctoral degrees.
Initial priorities are the Doctor of Education and Doctor of
Design now awaiting HECB approval.
♦ Build-out of program offerings to include undergraduate
completion programs that enable Spokane residents to stay in
Spokane and earn a WSU degree. Initial priority for new
undergraduate degrees is a B.A. Human Development.
♦ Increased curricular authority with appropriate academic
and/or administrative structures.
♦ Continued development of the physical campus. Initial
priority is securing funding for the Academic Center, the next
building to be constructed on campus.
the community as a partner in Spokane’s
growth and success.
This document represents the hopes
and dreams of many at WSU Spokane
who have spent over two years thinking
about ways to help our students, our
graduates, our talented faculty and staff,
and the campus as a whole grow, succeed,
and contribute to the greater good and to
the community we serve.
In addition to the formal strategic
4
planning process, the campus undertook
an update of the campus master plan
through a participatory process that
engaged students, faculty, staff, surrounding neighborhoods, and other higher
education institutions.
We also launched a strategic budgeting initiative as a very early outcome of
the overall planning process. One of the
earliest workshops identified the need to
tie this plan directly to budget priorities in
what political scientist David Easton
called the “authoritative allocation of
values.” This will be the most concrete
demonstration possible of our commitment to the plan. The budget process was
developed over the course of 2001 and
initiated for the 02-03 budget year. Unit
directors prepared unit-level strategic
plans, working within the context of the
macro-level strategic plan of March 1,
2001 (Appendix I), and an early draft of
this document. They formulated their
budget requests within that context, and
tied plans for both increased and decreased allocations to their impact on
strategic priorities. This process will be
ongoing.
Our planning process has engaged
stakeholders from every department
throughout the campus, and from across
the community in a variety of organizations and industries. This document
represents a synthesis of their thoughts
and some of the best ideas from recent
research done on Spokane’s future. It also
benefits from consultant recommendations relative to biomedical research
development in Spokane. The resulting
document serves both as the plan we will
begin to implement, and a starting point
for further discussion about the long-term
role of the urban research campus of
Washington State University.
The plan articulates our vision,
mission, and core values; strategic goals
and key initiatives that cut across campus,
and ones that build on our centers of
excellence; and the context within which
we undertake to build a campus, and
thereby help to build a region.
Our planning effort is part of a larger
systemwide process involving all the
campuses, Learning Centers, and research
stations of Washington State University.
Information on the university’s planning
process is available at www.wsu.edu/
StrategicPlanning/.
A copy of this plan is available on our
Web site: www.spokane.wsu.edu/thefuture.
Implementation of the plan is already
under way in several areas, and it serves to
inform budget allocations and funding
requests for FY 02-03 and beyond. Individual unit plans developed prior to the
completion of this plan serve to provide
further detail, although they have not
been adopted by the campus as a whole.
Please send any comments to
[email protected], or utilize the
feedback form at the Web site.
Spokane Context
Spokane is a regional city that serves
as the hub of a catch-basin of over a
million people who come to the regional
center for health care, public services,
shopping, and higher education. Recently
designated by the Washington State Office
of Trade and Economic Development as
the state’s only biomedical cluster,1 the city
has in place many of the elements needed
to grow exponentially in the 21st-century
knowledge economy. The key element
needing further enhancement is a significant research university presence. 2
Washington State University Spokane,
established by the Legislature in 1989, was
originally intended to provide access to
WSU programs for placebound working
adults in the Spokane area. However, WSU
Spokane was not encouraged to offer any
programs similar to those offered by other
institutions.
The campus thus needed to grow in
niches not already served. The large
clinical population of Spokane offered
one obvious advantage to students; WSU
had programs such as graduate studies in
human nutrition and speech and hearing
sciences already offering courses and
conducting clinical placements in area
hospitals. WSU had also made courses in
engineering available. Other early programs included design and student
teaching.
Even in its earliest years, WSU Spokane began its differentiation from the
other campuses of WSU and University of
Washington also established in 1989. The
Legislature funded the Health Research and Education Center in 1987,
It is within a compliand established the eastern branch
cated context that WSU
of the Washington Institute for
Mental Illness Research and TrainSpokane has developed a
ing with fiscal agency through
campus with growing
WSU Spokane in 1989.
student enrollments,
In 1991, the Higher Education
growing research producCoordinating Board’s study of
tivity, growing numbers
graduate education in the state
of programs, and
assigned program responsibilities for
growing community
WSU Spokane: “Graduate programs
presence.
offered by WSU will serve an important
function in the educational needs of
Spokane and the region. Programs should
be developed to complement existing
programs offered in the area, enhance the
educational opportunities of professionals, and provide unique degree programs
which only a doctoral institution may
offer.”
In 1998, WSU was given total responsibility for the Riverpoint campus with the
directive to build a campus that would
house not only WSU Spokane programs,
but also selected programs of Eastern
Washington University.
These early phases of development
have held up to a large extent over the
course of the campus’s growth: academic
programs focused on the health sciences,
engineering, education, and the design
disciplines; distinctive research institutes
that do not exist elsewhere in the WSU
system; an emphasis on graduate programs and “degree programs which only a
doctoral institution may offer;” and
responsibility for a campus that involves
other institutions.
Washington State University Spokane
now stands ready to expand as a research
5
campus—already in place are a new
physical plant, a highly productive
faculty, a track record in NIH and NSF
funding, and the interdisciplinary culture
that fosters partnerships, new thinking,
research breakthroughs, and an enhanced
learning environment for students.3
WSU Spokane embodies contradictions, challenges, and opportunities in its
characteristics:
♦ A campus formed to meet the needs of
placebound adults in Spokane that
finds itself recruiting over a third of its
students from across the nation and
around the world to destination
programs.
♦ A campus restricted to offering those
high-cost, low-enrollment programs
not economically feasible for other
institutions, resulting in a high-cost
structure.
♦ A campus formed primarily for
delivery of academic programs that has
a significant base of pure research
faculty, a high level of research productivity in grants, contracts, and peerreviewed publications, and a number
of units dedicated strictly to research
and community service projects.
♦ A young campus seeking opportunities
for growth in an already-crowded
higher education market, with resultant pressures from its competitors to
rein in its ambitions, from the community to bring even more of WSU to
Spokane and to have a higher profile,
and from the main campus to remain
content as a satellite, lacking full
control over its destiny.
♦ The subject of more state-level discussion and scrutiny than any other of the
five newer campuses of the state’s two
research universities, the only one
recognized for doctoral studies and
research, the only one to have a mission
statement that has been reviewed and
adopted by the Higher Education
Coordinating Board.
♦ Positioned to grow significantly as the
leader in development of a biomedical
and health sciences core for Spokane’s
economic and educational systems, yet
held back by lengthy, elaborate, and
conservative program approval processes that unacceptably lengthen timeto-market for new programs needed to
build that base.
♦ Expected to develop graduate programs that deliver on WSU’s worldclass quality, yet constrained by state
6
and university policy from offering the
doctoral programs that would aid in
the recruitment of top faculty who
require doctoral students as research
assistants.
♦ Charged with the build-out of a
physical campus that must house
selected programs from another
institution—an institution whose
faculty seek collaboration with our
faculty in a variety of disciplines and
which teaches joint programs with us,
yet one that has objected to new
program proposals from WSU Spokane.
♦ Expected to lead the development of
WSU’s presence and identity in Spokane, while an individual college of
WSU headquartered in Spokane (also
constituted as a multi-institutional
consortium) maintains a separate
physical location and identity, thus
diluting the WSU brand and its presence in the community.
It is within this complicated context
that WSU Spokane has developed a
campus with growing student enrollments, growing research productivity,
growing numbers of programs, and
growing community presence.
It is within this context that WSU
Spokane plans for its future.
Planning and Budgeting
Process
WSU Spokane undertook a comprehensive and highly participatory approach to development of this strategic
plan (see Appendix IV for full timeline).
Students, staff, and faculty participated
throughout the process, as well as all the
departments on campus, from administration to every academic program to the
maintenance crew and the campus
receptionist.
Immediately preceeding this planning
process, the campus went through an
update to the campus master plan. That
planning process engaged dozens of
students, faculty, staff, community
leaders, and neighbors of the campus, and
informed the campus’s thinking about its
growth and development beyond the
physical elements.
At community workshops held for the
master plan, people were as apt to discuss
the nature of new program development,
and its implications for the campus’s
growth, as they were the proximity of
buildings to the street, parking, and other
elements traditionally addressed in a
master plan. Their comments informed the
strategic planning mindset on campus as
well.
In the initial phase of strategic planning, nearly a hundred members of the
faculty and staff met to talk through
various elements of the campus’s environment, programs, and mission. The discussion was wide-ranging, from the
advantages of the urban setting and its
implications for teaching, research, and
service, to the need for a strategic budgeting process to link the plan to resource
allocation and thus make it real. Out of
this process grew key themes that were
developed into a one-page statement of
mission, 4 values, and goals (Appendix I).
The campus submitted this macro-level
strategic plan to the university March 1,
2001.
The campus community then addressed the goal areas identified in the
macro-level plan, holding a campuswide
workshop followed by focused discussions
over the course of fall 2001 to define what
actions are necessary to meet the goals,
and how progress and success can be
measured.
One of the priorities identified in that
document was the implementation of a
strategic budgeting process.
The concept of strategic budgeting
is to promote a rational and open
planning process in which goals,
expectations, and outcomes are
openly discussed and established.
It uses the budget to create
incentives to maintain alignment
between individual, departmental,
unit, and institutional activities,
responsibilities, and priorities. It
also serves as the basis of a
‘collective mentality’ needed to
promote institutional thinking
and shared responsibility. 5
As the first tactical outcome of the
planning process, the strategic budgeting
process was developed during the summer
of 2001, and communicated campuswide
at the beginning of the fall 2001 semester.
The process included an agreement that in
strategic budgeting, funds would not be
allocated solely on the basis of FTE
generated or other measures of activity,
but rather would support or invest in
the planning priorities of the
campus. It required participaThe concept of
tion, collaboration and
strategic
budgeting is to
problem solving from a
promote a rational and open
significant segment of the
planning process in which goals,
campus. Designed to tie
the budgeting process
expectations, and outcomes are
closely to the strategic
openly discussed and established.
planning efforts, it
It uses the budget to create incenserved as a vehicle to
tives to maintain alignment befurther define campus
tween individual, departmental,
priorities and provide
unit, and institutional activities,
an incentive for those
responsibilities, and priorities. It
activities that advanced the campus
also serves as the basis of a ‘collecplan.
tive mentality’ needed to proUnit directors develmote institutional thinking
oped individual plans
and shared responsibility.
within the context of what
was known at the time about
the campuswide plan, addressing
campus goal areas such as the learning
environment, research, and the student
experience. These unit-level plans as well
as the campuswide draft plan provided
context for budget requests made in a
formal hearing process during February
2002. This process will be repeated
annually and will serve to tie priorities to
resource allocations.
In the larger strategic planning
process, following the refinement of crosscutting, “horizontal” goal areas (e.g.,
student and learning experience) over the
course of fall 2001, disciplinary clusters
met to address “vertical” goals and plans.
A variety of groups met to discuss health
sciences, engineering and technology,
design disciplines, education, new and
emerging programs, outreach and service
programs, and research. Cluster plans were
presented first to the campus community
(January 2002), then to
external focus groups of
selected community
leaders who responded to
the proposals with
critique and with ideas
for enhancement and
refinement, and finally to
the campus again for
final comments.
7
The result of the process is a comprehensive plan with the buy-in of the
campus community, and the validation
and support of informed community
leaders.
Values, Mission, and Vision
One of the most exciting things about
the planning process was that it did
precisely what it is intended to do: It
fostered the explicit articulation of beliefs
and values shared across the campus
community, so that these values could be
expressed through our actions and our
choices of priorities.
People read, reflected, talked, and
shared resources. We discussed what makes
WSU Spokane special to those of us who
work, teach, and learn here. The depth of
passion and engagement demonstrated in
the process is a testament to the campus’s
first decade of development as a new kind
of university campus, and to our ability
to develop even further in ways uniquely
suited to Spokane and to Washington
State University’s land-grant mission of
research, teaching, and community
The urban campus of Washington State University, WSU
Spokane serves the metropolitan Spokane area, the Inland
Northwest, the state, the region, and the world. It offers the
educational, scientific, economic, and cultural benefits that
accrue from access to the services and programs of a major
public land-grant research institution. WSU Spokane works
collaboratively with communities to enhance quality of life
through an intentional and sustained effort to create, interpret,
apply, and disseminate knowledge, thereby serving as a model
for a world-class urban campus in a regional city.
As a destination campus, WSU Spokane offers all students,
from those articulating from other campuses to international
students, opportunities for advanced studies and research in a
variety of targeted programs, enriching the fabric of the WSU
system. The campus community values diversity and places a
high priority on providing all the elements needed for student
success. WSU Spokane will continue to take the lead in utilizing
flexible and creative approaches to meet needs for lifelong
learning with research-based teaching.
The campus’s mission is to build the intellectual, creative,
and practical abilities of individuals, communities, and
institutions. It does so by actively fostering learning, inquiry,
and public service, and by engaging with constituents in
enhancement of quality of life and economic vitality.
8
service.
Out of our discussions grew the
adoption of the principles of a learning
community as defined by Ernest Boyer as
the values that frame our work, and that
best describe what it is like to work here.
In the spirit of Boyer’s writings, we strive
to be celebrative, open, purposeful,
caring, inclusive, just, creative, and
disciplined. 6
We did not merely adopt these values
and move on, we talked about what it
would mean to be a celebrative or a
creative learning community. We talked
about the ways in which we currently
reflect these values in our work, and the
ways in which we will be more explicit in
doing so in the future. We chose to expand
our definition of the learning community
of which we speak, to include our alumni
and other stakeholders in the success of
the campus.
While the campus has a formally
adopted mission statement created by the
HECB (see Appendix II and opposite), it is
not the kind of mission statement one
frames and hangs on the wall for inspiration. The campus community crafted a
more visionary statement of its mission
through an intensely collaborative
writing process. It reads as shown in the
box at left.
Building upon this sense of shared
values and a common mission, the
campus identified the elements of its
vision for the future, which are as follows:
Washington State University Spokane
will be:
♦ The urban land-grant campus serving
metropolitan Spokane, the Inland
Northwest, the state, the region, and
the world;
♦ The leader of Spokane’s research
agenda and the defining element of
success in Spokane’s growth as a
research-friendly community developing successfully in the knowledge
economy;
♦ The cornerstone of community
collaboration, working to enhance
quality of life through an intentional
and sustained effort to create, interpret,
apply, and disseminate knowledge,
thereby serving as a model for a worldclass urban campus in a regional city;
In fall 1999, the Washington
State Higher Education Coordinating Board approved a new mission
statement for Washington State
University Spokane to represent the
breadth of the goals and activities
envisioned for the campus. The
mission statement reads:
Washington State University is
charged to lead in the development
of a Spokane higher education
magnet center. Its mission reflects
the magnet center’s statewide and
regional service area and its responsibilities as the fiscal agent, site
manager, strategic planner, and
coordinator for the Riverpoint
campus, at which the physical core
of the higher education magnet
center is situated.
The Spokane campus also
represents Washington State
University’s commitment to bring
distinctive upper-division and
graduate education services to
Spokane and to the core of the
higher education magnet center’s
program inventory. The academic
emphasis is on programs in the
Health Science, Engineering and
Technology, and Design fields.
Washington State University is
charged with the responsibility of
providing doctoral programs in
Spokane, as approved on a case by
case basis by the HECB. It also
encourages and participates in
interdisciplinary and intercollegiate
master’s programs and consortial
alliances and is responsive to the
social and economic development
needs of the Spokane region.
Through teaching, research, and
outreach, Washington State University at Spokane provides a distinctive and distinctively responsive
form of higher education experience
for residents of the region and from
throughout the state.
♦ A caring, supportive learning community where the principles of equality
are modeled and promoted and where
all the elements needed for student and
employee success are provided;
♦ An institution dedicated to scholarship
and personal growth that takes the
lead in utilizing flexible and creative
approaches to meet needs for lifelong
learning with research-based teaching;
♦ The doorway to the educational,
scientific, economic, and cultural
stimulation that accrues from a major
public land-grant research institution.
Within our small campus community,
these shared values and this shared vision
are deeply held. They are a commitment
we make to each other, to the community,
to the University, and to our future
students and colleagues.
Key Findings
We heard key themes repeated
throughout the process, from faculty and
staff in campuswide workshops at the
beginning and from community leaders
in external focus groups over 18 months
after we started. Everyone told us the same
things about our assets, challenges, and
keys to our success. These themes are
listed here as key findings that define the
campus and that are essential to our
continued growth and success.
♦ The urban context defines and
shapes the campus’s culture, priorities,
and programming. WSU Spokane
should continue and accelerate its
development as an urban land-grant
campus.
♦ Campus identity must be enhanced
and more broadly communicated via
every available medium, from advertising and media relations to signage and
events. Especially important to both
external and internal audiences is the
installation of WSU Spokane signage
on the Riverpoint campus.
♦ Community engagement lies at the
heart of much of the campus’s research
and teaching. WSU Spokane’s mission
is in and of the Spokane community; it
provides both context and content for
what we do.
♦ WSU Spokane should lead the way in
shaping a research vision for Spokane
and for the university in Spokane. A
“master plan for research” should
be developed by WSU Spokane,
9
focusing on translational, outcome-oriented, and clinical
research, and identifying
how to leverage the
assets of the University
and Spokane without
unnecessarily duplicating Pullman-based
research.
♦ Community expectations for collaboration
with other institutions
of higher education
focus on seamless transfer, ease of
articulation, complementarity of
program offerings, and scholar-toscholar research and service collaborations—not necessarily at the program
or course delivery level. WSU Spokane
can and should meet expectations for
collaboration while developing and
delivering stand-alone programs that
can be provided only by a world-class
research university.
♦ Doctoral degrees are a priority for
the campus and for the community.
As the research university campus
in Spokane, WSU Spokane is the
appropriate institution to
deliver doctoral degrees—
practice-oriented in the near
term, PhD in the long term.
Key goal areas
identified by the
campus community:
Academic programs
Research
Student and learning
experience
Community engagement
Learning environment
Identity
Academic and information
services infrastructure
Recognition of faculty,
staff, students, and
other stakeholders
♦ Program development
and delivery must accelerate. The campus needs
greater control over curriculum to accomplish this, and
must be able in certain
instances to decouple the
curriculum to enable innovative delivery approaches,
including certificates and
online methods.
♦ The campus needs to develop
baccalaureate completion
degrees in selected fields, especially ones that complement offerings available from other institutions,
and ones that complement the mix in
Spokane’s economy.
♦ Spokane serves as a professional
services and public sector hub for
the region. Program offerings should
underpin these sectors, in addition to
the existing bases in health sciences,
education, design disciplines, engineering, and cross-disciplinary management.
♦ The campus needs organizational
forms appropriate for interdisciplinary approaches to scholarship and
10
program development. Examples
supported by the community include
such elements as a Center for Engineering and Technology Management,
serving the high-tech and engineering
sectors; colleges or other organizing
structures in the design disciplines and
in health sciences; and a Center for
Health Services Research.
♦ The campus must develop a more
student-centered learning environment, with elements such as a
student union building. It must also
develop as an integral part of the
downtown core, with design utilized to
link to downtown across Division
Street and to make the student population a key user of the growing downtown housing base.
Strategic Goals and Objectives
Strategic issues are the fundamental
issues the organization has to address to
achieve its mission and move towards its
desired future. We began our identification of these issues from the first discussions in the planning process, and it was
crystal clear that for WSU Spokane, these
issues lie almost completely in one arena:
Systemic and structural constraints on
campus growth, development, and
responsiveness to the community.
Some of these constraints are internal
to the larger University, some are external
and/or political. All relate in some way to
a lack of ability to direct our own future.
From mandates for collaboration to
objections to program development and
restrictions on doctoral degree-granting
authority, these structural issues are
problems that must be addressed for the
success of the campus and its students.
In the current economic climate,
funding will be a major constraint for all
higher education. While not an issue
specific to WSU Spokane, it is worth
noting that this campus took the highest
budget cut, in percentage terms, of any
WSU campus. This can be attributed to
the heavy graduate enrollments of the
campus—a defining element of our
identity, and one that works to our
disadvantage in funding. Elimination of
structural constraints now will enable
preparation for accelerated growth and
success once funding becomes available.
Within the context of these con-
straints; Spokane as our urban laboratory
and most immediate market; the landgrant mission; and our agreed-upon
values, mission, and vision, the campus
identified interrelated goals in eight key
areas:
♦ Academic programs
♦ Research
♦ Student and learning experience
♦ Community engagement
♦ Learning environment
♦ Identity
♦ Academic and information services
infrastructure
♦ Recognition of faculty, staff, students,
and stakeholders
Throughout the participatory process
that identified these as priorities, faculty,
staff, and students all agreed: WSU Spokane has already laid the foundation for
continued growth and success. The campus has successfully cultivated an entrepreneurial and engaged faculty and staff.
It has fostered a personalized, caring
approach to student services that consistently wins high marks. It has become an
integral community partner in clinical,
translational, and outcome-based research, and has made Spokane competitive
for funding at the national level.
It remains only to put in place the
necessary elements to build upon this
foundation. Below, these eight areas are
outlined with our specific goal statement,
a narrative that touches upon the high
points of the objectives identified for each
goal, and some of the interrelationships
between goal areas.7 An outline can be
found in the Appendix, and more detail is
already being developed on a variety of
initiatives and in the implementation
planning phase we are about to launch.
Key points are highlighted in boldface.
It is important to stress that these
goals are mutually reinforcing.
Indeed, it was difficult at times to decide
where any one objective might fit, as most
would fit comfortably in two or three
goals. Increased academic offerings and
more research will serve to build our
identity; we plan to recognize and reward
faculty and staff for community engagement; service learning will enrich the
learning experience; and so forth. This
section should be viewed as a tapestry, not
as individual threads.
Academic Programs Goal:
Expand and enhance academic
programs within a thoughtful,
systematic approach to program
development and
delivery.
Academic programs currently available at the campus fall into several core
clusters that take advantage of the urban
context, access to a large clinical base, and
the community’s need for advanced
degrees to support industry growth and
career advancement for individuals.
The largest clusters are the health
sciences, design disciplines, and education.
Engineering and technology is a “crossover” cluster, involving programs in both
engineering and business. Business is
emerging as a new cluster for the campus,
while the existing criminal justice program
is expected to transition to a focus on
community and urban studies that will fit
well with existing degrees, such as health
policy and administration and design.
The campus plans to leverage these
existing clusters through a variety of
tactics, focusing especially on the development of new degrees from baccalaureate
completion through doctoral degrees.
To accomplish this within the existing
climate of limited resources and difficult
program development
processes and timelines,
the campus will develop
a planning framework to
identify, assess, prioritize,
and implement new
programs. In this process,
the campus will remain
alert to emergent strategies, which have proven
to be a successful vehicle
for program develop11
ment over the course of the
campus’s first decade-plus of
existence.8
The campus will work with the
community to identify highpriority degrees, which are expected to fall mostly in the health
sciences cluster, and also to include
doctoral degrees as a top priority.
The development process will
also involve working with the other
campuses to identify programs that will
benefit faculty and students by increasing
access to Spokane’s urban laboratory. One
model for this is the approach taken by
pharmacy and the design disciplines,
offering a combination of Pullman’s
residential undergraduate experience with
a transition to the professional world in
Spokane’s urban environment.
The campus will work especially
closely with the Community Colleges of
Spokane to identify 2+2 baccalaureate
completion opportunities, and to develop
Since
and deliver a seamless enrollment experiWSU Spokane
ence for articulating students. This
is boxed in by
process is already under way with the
HECB constraints
development of the B.A. in Human
that prevent compeDevelopment, with faculty from
tition with existing
Spokane Falls Community College
involved in planning the feeder
programs, “first to
curriculum to ensure transferabilmarket” is the key
ity of credits. The president of
advantage. If the UniverSFCC has been involved in the
sity loses the opportunity
strategic planning process, and is
to be the first to provide a
supportive of efforts in joint
program in Spokane, it
marketing and advising to
enhance the growth of articulated
loses that program
programs and opportunities for
permanently. Losing
their
students.
that opportunity
through its own
actions (or lack
thereof) is
unacceptable.
A key to accomplishment of
academic program goals is increased local control over campus
destiny. As long as it takes multiple
academic years to develop and deliver new
programs, with Pullman-based processes
that serve as barriers to change, the
university will be perceived as nonresponsive to community needs, and as being out
of touch with the educational needs of the
knowledge economy and the region.
In one of the external focus groups,
the comment of a prominent community
leader was, “If it’s going to take you four
years to get a program developed, then
12
forget about it. You’ll be too late to do us
any good.” The implication was that the
community would look elsewhere, to
institutions that promise to be more
responsive.
Since WSU Spokane is boxed in by
HECB constraints that prevent competition with existing programs, “first to
market” is the key advantage. If the
University loses the opportunity to be the
first to provide a program in Spokane, it
loses that program permanently. Losing
that opportunity through its own actions
(or lack thereof) is unacceptable.
Several tactics are suggested to address
this problem, which is the primary issue that
must be addressed for campus growth and success.
These tactics include the development of
administrative/academic structures
headquartered at WSU Spokane. Another
tactic should be the development by the
University of a systemwide approach that
enables increased campus-level autonomy
in program development, with the
necessary safeguards for program quality.
Such a systemwide and top-level recognition of the need to respond to community
needs would benefit all four campuses of
Washington State University, both
through increased enrollments and
through increased community, donor, and
legislative support.
Another key element of the program
planning process will be the involvement
of Information Services, the Cooperative
Academic Library System, Student Services, and other support units to ensure
the availability of needed infrastructure.
As with start-ups in a variety of industries,
the campus sometimes outruns its own
support systems. As this can operate to the
detriment of students and faculty, the
process will be more deliberate in identifying needed infrastructure in advance of
program launch.
WSU Spokane programs are of high
quality, as evidenced by accreditation,
national ranking for some, faculty
publications and grant productivity, and
student satisfaction as reported on a
nationally normed survey conducted
annually. The planning process will be
designed to maintain and to enhance this
quality.
Research Goal:
Lead the development of Spokane’s
research community.
WSU Spokane is Spokane’s
research university. It is the only
Carnegie doctoral/extensive university
offering programs in Spokane. It serves as
the connection between Spokane’s rich
research environment, and the significant
intellectual and scientific resources of
WSU across the state. This role must be
enhanced and expanded, with WSU
Spokane positioned as the leader in
establishing Spokane as a researchfriendly community poised for growth in
the 21 st-century knowledge economy.
WSU Spokane provides some infrastructure currently that has been key both
to faculty and to clinical researchers and
community organizations seeking to
obtain grants and conduct research. This
infrastructure includes the Institutional
Review Board-Spokane, which provides
human subjects review for all hospitalbased research, a biostatistician, faculty
and staff who develop the research agenda
and write grant proposals, and a director
of biomedical development who works to
mine faculty research and community
resources with potential for development.
The evidence of this infrastructure’s
importance lies in such accomplishments
as Spokane’s selection as one of only nine
communities nationwide funded by the
Department of Justice for a study on
reducing children’s exposure to violence
(approximately $3 million), with WSU
Spokane faculty in the lead and providing
the research orientation that was key to
landing the grant. It lies in the NIH and
NSF funding granted to WSU Spokane
faculty researchers, and the increased
competitiveness for Washington Technology Center grants thanks to
biodevelopment activities. It lies in recent
approaches by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention to partner in
taking advantage of the large physical
database developed as part of the Spokane
Heart Study at WSU Spokane.
To take research in Spokane to
the next level, the campus must
further build out the research
infrastructure. Community leaders,
especially in the health care sector, look to
WSU Spokane to provide a variety of
WSU
resources, and to expand core support for
Spokane is
research activities, in order to accomplish
Spokane’s
this. Priorities for the campus and the
research
community include expanded computer
university.
programming, biostatistical, and epidemiological support, assistance with grant
identification and proposal writing,
faculty appointments for clinicians to
enhance their competitiveness,
matchmaking to identify common
interests in the clinical and faculty
Top priorities
communities that might provide opporfor the Research
tunities for research, education for
goal include develpractitioners on how to do research,
and increased support for faculty
opment of a master
entrepreneurial activities to expand
plan for research in
opportunities for commercialization
Spokane, establishof research to benefit the local
ment of a Medical
economy.
Perhaps the most interesting idea
to emerge from the planning process is
the notion that WSU Spokane should
develop the master plan for
Spokane’s research community. Not
only is the campus the only research
university here, but it also has a proven
track record of collaboration with other
community players, from other universities to nonprofits and the public sector.
This creates both access and credibility
needed to attain buy-in for a plan, once
completed.
Research Institute,
and buildout of the
campus research
infrastructure.
An initial phase of work to support
this has already been completed, with the
Tripp-Umbaugh & Associates study of
Spokane’s potential for biomedical
development. 9 That study identified a
number of sectors with significant
potential for growth in the clinical,
research, and commercial arenas, from
medical devices to informatics to selected
disease clusters such as diabetes and
cardiovascular disease.
WSU Spokane provides a significant
percentage of the strength in several of the
priority sectors identified, both in the
form of faculty research and in the form
of clinical education and advanced
studies. By leading the development of a
13
master plan for research, the campus can
build upon this report to address not only
the next steps needed to underpin work in
all the areas of opportunity identified, but
also to address research in other sectors
not included in the report. The master
plan, in order to serve the region’s needs,
must also address research administration
and commercial development, to enable
maximum leveraging of research findings.
include increased dissemination of
research to stakeholders and to those who
apply the research, through mechanisms
to include conferences, seminars, publications, and the Web. The systematic
translation of research to those who will
benefit fulfills the land-grant mission of
Washington State University, and will be
enhanced through the implementation of
the strategic plan.
Several existing or embryonic centers
of excellence in the health sciences will
grow through the implementation of the
strategic plan. Priorities include establishment of a Medical Research Institute with
federal funding support, and designation
as an NIH Exploratory Center, potentially
in mental health or in diabetes. A Child
and Family Studies research unit with a
proven track record of funding has
already formed, and the objective is to
receive official university recognition for
it. A new Center for Health Services
Research will take advantage of the
enormous and unique resources available
through the data collected by Inland
Northwest Health Services and other area
health care providers, and will serve as a
foundation for the growth of research and
academic programs in medical
informatics and related degrees.
Funding for research support will be
vital to success. The campus has already
initiated a faculty seed grant program, to
support the development of initial
research that can serve to position further
studies competitively for NIH and other
national funding sources. The campus will
continue to increase fundraising efforts
and partnership opportunities to identify
and obtain additional funding sources.
The Interdisciplinary Design Institute
already operates a Design Assistance
Program that utilizes student and faculty
talent to provide design ideas to community organizations, and a GIS lab that
supports work not only in design, but in
other program areas such as health
sciences and criminal justice. The Institute
plans the development of a formal
Community Design & Construction
Center and a Center for Geographical
Information Systems and Simulation
Studies.
A key theme that emerged repeatedly
throughout the planning
process stresses the need for
greater visibility and
greater recognition of
the campus’s presence
and accomplishments.
Research content is an
important element of the
campus identity to be
communicated. Tactics here
14
Student and Learning
Experience Goal:
Offer the best possible learning
experience for all campus
constituencies: students, faculty,
staff, alumni, donors,
and others.
The campus consistently receives high
marks on the Student Satisfaction Survey
conducted annually, and strives to improve even further. The existing culture on
campus that emphasizes responsiveness
and positive one-on-one treatment of all
students will be sustained and supported,
and this culture will continue to be
transmitted to new hires as they join the
campus community.
Students have direct access to campus
leaders through the Dean’s Student
Advisory Council, and were involved in
the development of this strategic plan. The
campus will continue to involve students
in communications and decision making,
and to build their sense of connection to
the campus and its future, both as students and in their transition to alumni
status.
The interdisciplinary approach of
We will
several
respond to the
academic
unique needs that
and
arise out of our
research
distinctive student
programs,
body and their comand the
plex patterns of attenadvandance, while
tages of a
maintaining high
smaller
marks on the
campus
Student Satisfacand the
resulting
tion Survey.
culture that
fosters
interdisciplinarity, are
important components of the
campus culture, as is an emphasis on
teaching approaches that utilize the urban
context. The campus will seek to reward
these efforts through the tactics addressed
under the Recognition goal.
Student service demands arising out of
the nature of the student body are not
those of a traditional residential campus.
WSU Spokane serves a higher percentage of
part-time students and working students,
while at the same time serving traditional
undergraduate and graduate students and
a growing international student group.
Because the campus offers some
programs in collaboration with institutions that have different academic calendars and different tuition rates (e.g., School
Psychology Certification with EWU),
Student Services staff must advise and
register students who face sometimes
bewildering complexities in planning their
course of study.
Part-time graduate students may begin
a course of study, then encounter professional or family challenges that require
them to discontinue their studies for some
period of time before resuming.
These and other challenges for our
students affect their learning experience,
and their need for services.
The campus seeks to identify and
address unique needs such as these that
arise out of our distinctive student body
and their complex patterns of attendance.
These issues are ones to be addressed in the
academic program planning process
outlined above as an objective, so that
additional demands on students, and thus
on Student Services, will be addressed
before problems develop.
Individual unit strategic plans will be
reviewed and revised as necessary to
ensure incorporation of tactics to help
meet campuswide objectives in continued
enhancement of the student and learning
experience, as with other goal areas.
Community Engagement Goal:
Focus, coordinate, integrate, and
capitalize upon community linkages
to serve the region and enrich
the campus.
Faculty and staff at WSU Spokane
carry out the land-grant mission of
research, teaching, and service through
their extensive community-based activities. In the next five years, the campus will
expand its community engagement through a variety of tactics.
A Center for Service Learning
and Community Engagement, or
the establishment of such a
coordinating function within an
existing entity, will support both
service projects and service
learning, thus enhancing the
learning environment for students and
for faculty. The campus will work to
identify and then to communicate and
leverage existing linkages with the
community. This will serve both to
enhance the outcomes of such linkages,
and to further increase community
recognition of the campus’s presence and
contributions. The community itself will
be further engaged with the campus
through a variety of mechanisms, similar
to the efforts planned to increase communication of research activities.
Much of the work to be accomplished
in the community engagement goal is
interwoven with all the other goals
identified. It will be addressed explicitly
throughout implementation of the plan.
15
Learning Environment Goal:
Sustain and enhance a stimulating
physical and intellectual learning
environment that meets the needs of
our campus community and
enhances our urban
context.
When the campus was established, it
was expected to serve primarily
placebound working adults. With
“Learning environthis expectation in mind, physical
ment is not just brick
plant development focused on
academic buildings, to the
and mortar; it is a learnexclusion of student gathering
ing community.”
spaces and elements such as
“We work together as a
food service. The reality that
has emerged indicates that
learning community
“commuter students” need at
where learning and teachleast
some of the traditional
ing are valued and reamenities—they don’t have a
warded.”
handy dorm room to run to
— Comments from the
between classes. And the learning
brown-bag discussion on
that takes place before and after
Learning Environment,
classes—the essential opportunity to
Sept. 27, 2001
talk with other students, to run into
faculty in a common space and bring
up a nagging question, the intellectual
culture of a university campus—must be
The campus
facilitated by the campus’s physical
intends to maxidesign of buildings, landscape, and
services.
mize the develop-
ment of the
The campus intends to maximize
the development of the Riverpoint
Riverpoint campus
campus through construction and
through construction
purchase. In the design and developand purchase. Campus
ment of buildings and spaces, the
design will serve to
campus will embody our values as a
connect the campus
learning community, and will foster
seamlessly to the
the interaction that is the heart and
downtown core, and
soul of true learning. This will
include creation of a dedicated space
to enhance the
or building for a Commons or Student
urban experience
Union function, and the incorporation
for students.
of informal gathering spaces in the design
of new buildings.
Campus design will serve to connect
the campus seamlessly to the downtown
core, and to enhance the urban experience
for students. Signage on campus will
improve wayfinding. Installation of
16
prominent WSU Spokane signage at
campus entrances is essential.
The intellectual learning environment
will be further enhanced through activities identified as objectives under other
goal areas, such as communication of
research activities and enhanced community engagement on campus.
Identity Goal:
Communicate a consistent,
distinctive campus identity based
on mission and
strengths.
One of the strongest messages, articulated the most often throughout the
internal and external planning phases, was
the need to communicate what the
campus is and does.
From research activities to design
charrettes, from community service
projects to the accomplishments of
faculty and students, to the very existence
of the campus itself adjacent to downtown—all these need to be communicated
clearly and consistently.
The campus faces challenges in this
arena (see further discussion under
Recommendations, Riverpoint Campus,
below). Nonetheless, it is vital for the
University’s presence in Spokane that we
get the identity message out.
First and
foremost,
campus
signage for
WSU Spokane must be
installed. It is
unacceptable
to students,
staff, faculty,
and the community that a
visible statement of the
WSU presence
is nowhere to
be found on
the physical
campus.
The
planning
process itself
has served to
enhance
knowledge and
understanding,
both on and
off campus, of
WSU Spokane
programs and
accomplishments. The strategic plan,
when complete, will serve as one vehicle
for public discussions that will raise the
campus profile. Presentations at community groups and other tactics will build
community awareness and support.
Regular, formal communications with
community leaders will be re-established,
following the elimination of a quarterly
newsletter in 01-02 due to budget constraints. Efforts in media relations, promotion of programs to prospective students,
and community events will continue.
Word of mouth is the most powerful
mechanism for building awareness. A
reconstituted Campus Advisory Council
will be enlisted as respected messengers to
the community. Campus faculty and staff
will be trained as Campus Ambassadors,
rewarded with release time for outreach
activities that communicate campus
presence, and recognized for their contributions.
Physical presentation of campus
identity involves publications and the
Web, as well as signage on campus.
Campus publications and the Web site
are currently being redesigned in
From research
the University graphic identity,
activities to design
with expected completion of
charrettes,
from commuthe overhaul by fall 2002.
The campus will
establish at least one major
signature event to be held
annually that strengthens
its identification as a
research campus with a
special focus in the
health sciences. Existing
and newly developed
lectures, seminars, and
other events will be
promoted within a
collective approach to
publicity highlighting
the campus as the
institution that brings
the best of research and
practice not only to its
students, but to the
broader community.
nity service projects to the
accomplishments of faculty
and students, to the very
existence of the campus itself
adjacent to downtown—all
these need to be communicated
clearly and consistently.
Academic and Information
Services Infrastructure Goal:
Ensure effective educational and
institutional information
infrastructure to support students,
staff, and faculty in the delivery of
expanded academic offerings,
research, and service and
administrative
support
functions.
The nature of program delivery has
changed. The first campus planners could
not have foreseen that today, email and
Internet access are ubiquitous and essential. Nor did they foresee that this campus
would develop distinctive programs that
have the potential not only to draw
destination students, but to provide
content to a worldwide audience through
the Web and other distance delivery
modes.
17
The campus must develop a technology infrastructure that meets identified
and prioritized needs both in academic
Characteristics of our IT
program delivery and in administrative
system in five years:
support units. The academic planning
process described above will
High-speed data delivery
address IT needs as an essential
Distance learning to appropriate
element of program developlocations
ment.
In what will be perhaps
Appropriately staffed
the most difficult element of
Secure infrastructure (by secure we mean
this plan in its day-to-day
reality, support for
both security against attacks such as viruses,
faculty and staff in
and redundancy/reliability)
The nature of
development and
Connectivity to partner organizations &
implementation
program delivery has
of
new
technolinstitutions—“one big campus”
changed. The first camogy
will
be
pus planners could not
Simple yet effective
based on
have foreseen that today,
program
Equal quality of learning experience in
email and Internet access are
priorities, not
classroom, online, distance, virtual enviubi-quitous and essential. Nor
solely on
ronments
did they foresee that this camindividual
requests,
and
pus would develop distinctive
Managed within rational, prioritized
will be conprograms that have the potenplanning process
strained by availtial not only to draw destina—Comments from the brown-bag
able funds, staff, and
tion students, but to provide
discussion on Information
infrastructure. The
Technology Infrastructure,
content to a worldwide
creation of increasing
Sept. 17, 2001
audience through the Web
demands on a limited infraand other distance
structure cannot continue
indefinitely. The purpose of a
delivery modes.
strategic plan is to mobilize rethe context of the
University’s
sources to accomplish common goals.
larger strategic plan for technology, and
This of necessity means that some indithe availability of matching technolvidual plans are not adopted as campus
ogy at the other campuses. However, it
goals, and hence are not priorities for
must be recognized that a Pullmanresource allocation.
centered control function will limit the
campus’s degrees of freedom in the
To ensure that whatever technology is
utilization of technology, and may
available is utilized effectively, a plan will
operate to the detriment of the student
be implemented to enhance user compeexperience.
tence through
training and
support, and to
evaluate the
student and
user experience
of technology
to identify and
to address
needed improvements.
Planning
for IT will take
place within
18
A survey instrument addressing the
quality of technology-mediated learning,
and the student experience across delivery
strategies, will be utilized to identify
strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities
for enhancement of program delivery
quality.
Recognition of Faculty, Staff,
Students, and Stakeholders
Goal:
Strengthen the campus as a
celebrative, open, purposeful,
caring, inclusive, just, creative, and
disciplined learning community
that invests in all members of the
community and recognizes the
value of contributions from
both internal and
external
stakeholders.
The campus will establish, to the
fullest extent possible, a recognition and
reward system that fully reflects the landgrant mission.
Currently, faculty who go the extra
mile in teaching, in community service, in
supporting recruitment efforts, in developing new curriculum to address community concerns, do not gain the same
recognition in the tenure and promotion
process for these efforts that they do for
research. The campus seeks to link and to
reward the rich intersection of all facets of
the land-grant mission, as embodied in
the work of faculty and staff.
The campus has already established a
successful culture of recruitment that
brings in people who share an entrepreneurial spirit, a belief in a rich learning
experience, and a commitment to the
community. It will build on that effort
through expanded activities in retention,
support, recognition, and skill development.
The campus will create distinctive
forms of recognition to demonstrate the
value of campus contributions, including
a Dean’s Public Service Award or Scholarship for students and a Community
Engagement Award for employees, supported by donor contributions.
Recognition efforts will embrace
campus alumni and community supporters, in addition to faculty, staff, and
current students. These efforts will be
communicated as part of the overall
campaign to enhance campus visibility
and identity, and will link with communication activities in research and
community engagement.
Recommendations
As indicated in the process
summary (see above; detail and
timeline in Appendix IV), the
Campus Strategic Plan began
with meetings of the faculty
and staff in academic year
2000–01. Core values were
identified and agreed to.
These values became the
underpinnings of the multiyear process.
Academic Programs
The campus
has already
established a successful culture of
recruitment that brings
in people who share an
entrepreneurial spirit, a
belief in a rich learning
experience, and a commitment to the community. It
will build on that effort
through expanded activities in retention, support, recognition, and
skill development.
While programmatic initiatives were viewed from both
academic and political feasibility,
their principle test was adherence to core
campus values. The Spokane campus
will be an urban, research university campus that is student centered and engaged with the
community it serves.
Towards that end, the campus
intends to proceed along the following
development path:
♦ Secure statutory and HECB authority for offering doctoral degrees.
♦ Become Spokane’s research university through national institutes
funding.
♦ Gain authorization to offer several
baccalaureate completion programs
enabling interested students to
transfer directly to WSU Spokane
from an area community college.
♦ Focus on health sciences research
and education.
♦ Develop, extend, and adapt urbanbased programs appropriate for a
regional city.
♦ Gain increased curricular autonomy.
In the planning process, faculty
and staff proposed scores of new initiatives. While most were deserving, not all
were advanced for final campus review.
Initially, six program groupings were
19
established: the health sciences,
design, education, business,
engineering, and urban studies.
Ultimately, four foci were
established and advanced to
the community for review.
These areas received further
scrutiny in seven communitybased focus groups. Community priorities follow:
The health sciences.
The leading community priority is to
develop a health science campus. There is
strong support for developing a
medical research infrastructure
The campus
(Institute) to enhance the
intends to:
region’s competitiveness for
Secure statutory and
national institutes support;
applying for an NIH
HECB authority for offering
“exploratory center;”
doctoral degrees.
giving physician
Become Spokane’s research uniscientists university
versity through national institutes
appointments;
developing new
funding.
academic proGain authorization to offer several
grams; and
baccalaureate completion programs
engaging the
University of
enabling interested students to
Washington
transfer directly to WSU Spokane
School of Medifrom an area community college.
cine.
Focus on health sciences research
and education.
The medical
community has
proposed the
Develop, extend, and adapt urbanconsolidation of
based programs appropriate for
nursing, pharmacy
a regional city.
and allied health
programs into a School or
Gain increased curricular
College of Health Sciences.
autonomy.
This is advanced in order to
provide funding visibility for
both university and community
health programs. It also is intended as a
vehicle to overcome current obstacles
relative to the Pullman campus. The
consultant study commissioned as part of
the strategic planning process concluded:
♦ Geographic and psychological distance
between key basic science concentrations (in Pullman, Moscow and at
PNNL) and the clinical expertise in
Spokane limits clinician-to-scientist
interactions and reduces scientists’
access to human subjects.
♦ Current regulatory environment
governing WSU Spokane operations
20
limits the institution’s ability to recruit
research-oriented faculty and basic
scientists.
♦ The majority of the academic research
infrastructure is entrenched in Pullman.
Active resistance exists to moving key
research elements to Spokane, even if
the move would be logical to better
engage clinical research resources. 10
Education. The University has the
opportunity to reestablish its leadership
in education in the Spokane area and the
state. Primacy in the field was lost during
the 1980s and has been regained only in
the WSU Spokane superintendent and
principal certification programs. Renewed
emphasis should be placed on the MEd
and MIT programs through the professional certification process. Significant
enrollments are available, as well as the
development of strategic partnerships
with area school districts.
The highest priority is for the Doctor
of Education. Currently, Spokane students
are required to enroll in Pullman classes
for residency purposes, even if the class is
taught from Spokane. The focus group on
education provided the harshest feedback
received in this process. Members admonished the University to get rid of the
antiquated residency requirement and to
remake the Graduate School into a
customer-friendly service unit.
Technology and engineering.
Engineering enrollments have historically
been a problem in Spokane for WSU (and
other engineering schools). The University
has offered graduate degrees in the
engineering disciplines—materials science,
mechanical, and electrical—since the late
1980s. But in spite of industry’s assurance
of support, these programs have not
matured.
More recently, we joined with the
University of Idaho and Gonzaga University to form an engineering consortium to
offer baccalaureate completion programs
for working adults and students articulating from the community colleges. While
this is a relatively new initiative, it is not
clear that these programs will be heavily
subscribed either. Nonetheless, the BS in
Computer Engineering and the MSEE can
be sustained.
The programs that show considerable
promise are the two interdisciplinary
programs: the Master of Engineering
Management and the Master of Technology Management. Historically, these
programs have not worked well together,
as they are from two separate colleges. We
believe new opportunities will be available
owing to different collegiate leadership
and financial adversity. The community
focus group supported the faculty’s
proposal to establish a Center for Engineering and Technology Management.
This proposed new center would
provide focus and identity for these
programs. It is made possible by the
presence of the majority of faculty in
Spokane in these programs: WSU Spokane
has the only full-time engineering management faculty, the only full-time
technology management faculty, and two
of the three construction management
faculty.
Design. The Interdisciplinary Design
Institute has been the organizing vehicle
for design discipline leadership at WSU.
Since the formation of the Institute in the
early 1990s, four upper-division completion programs (architecture, construction
management, interior design, and landscape architecture), three master’s level
programs, 16 faculty lines established
including nearly all the PhD-trained
design faculty at the University, and a
large number of graduate students have
been located at WSU Spokane. 11 Additionally, the new Doctor of Design has been
approved by the University, and awaits
HECB approval.
The design focus group was impatient
about the two-year delay in approval and
urged University advocacy. The group also
urged the University to take the final step
of moving the Institute to a School or
College of Design. They
see few advances without
Spokane leadership of
the design disciplines.
Riverpoint Campus
WSU Spokane has
different campus management responsibilities
than any of the other
campuses. We not only
have the responsibility of
providing space for WSU
faculty, staff, and
students, but also
those of
Goals for campus developanother
ment include:
university.
Accelerate the pace of campus buildout to
one building per biennium.
Reconcile campus life issues with Trent Avenue
and the proposed light rail stop.
Continue to manage the campus for the multiple
constituencies.
Join with Gonzaga University and the City of Spokane
to form and promote the “University District.”
Secure adequate M & U funding from the State to
adequately maintain campus facilities.
In cooperation with SIRTI, secure EDA funding for
incubation and contract research facilities.
Install “Washington State University Spokane”
signage on campus.
Link the campus to the new convention center
expansion via a university conference center.
While
Partner with private sector interests to
the
develop university housing proximate
commuto campus.
nity of
Spokane values
this interinstitutional role, it has no
appreciation for the added
complexity. Goals for campus development include:
♦ Accelerate the pace of campus buildout
to one building per biennium.
♦ Reconcile campus life issues with Trent
Avenue and the proposed light rail
stop.
21
♦ Continue to manage the campus for
the multiple constituencies.
♦ Join with Gonzaga University and the
City of Spokane to form and promote
the “University District.”
♦ Secure adequate M & U funding from
the State to adequately maintain
campus facilities.
♦ In cooperation with SIRTI, secure EDA
funding for incubation and contract
research facilities.
♦ Install “Washington State University
Spokane” signage on campus.
♦ Link the campus to the new convention center expansion via a university
conference center.
♦ Partner with private sector interests to
develop university housing proximate
to campus.
The physical campus has been
undermanaged from both a citywide and
WSU perspective. While this was probably
unavoidable owing to the confused Joint
Center for Higher Education beginnings
and the urban nature of the real estate
holding, it is time to build a more solidly
WSU image for what is now Riverpoint.
Summary
We are confident that this plan
represents significant and realistic priorities, grounded in our existing assets and
those of Spokane. Extensive involvement
by campus participants and community
opinion leaders gives us both buy-in and
validation.
The plan confirms and builds upon
the core values identified early in the
process. Our people truly deliver on the
land-grant mission, and they dream of
doing more. They asked campus leadership to build a planning process, and then
a plan, that would engage them and
enable them to focus and to prioritize
their efforts on the elements that will
yield the greatest successes.
These elements include, first and
foremost, a commitment to the urban
context and to the land-grant mission.
These are the twin guideposts of the
campus’s academic programs, research,
and outreach, undertaken in service to the
community itself. Our identity as the
urban campus of a research university will
be communicated to enhance the understanding of that reality.
22
The campus’s desire for targeted
efforts shows in this plan, which lays out
objectives designed to build out core
centers of excellence, rather than to
attempt to be all things to all people.
Degree programs anticipated for development, from baccalaureate through
doctoral degrees, were identified as those
that take advantage of existing clusters,
and those that increase our responsiveness
to our community context.
Our next step is the development of
plans for implementation, with further
clarification of our objectives and tactics,
and identification of benchmarks of
progress and success. Some elements of the
plan are already under way, and we will
utilize the formal plan, once adopted, as a
guidepost for prioritizing both resources
and efforts in the future. As a result of
these efforts, WSU Spokane will be truly
world class.
Appendices
I.
Mission, Vision, and Goals
II. Official Mission Statement
III. Summary of Goals and Objectives
IV. Planning Process
V. Planning Participants
VI. Benchmarks of Progress and
Success
23
Appendix I: Mission, Values, and Goals
Macro-Level Strategic Plan (March 1, 2001)
Mission and Values
The urban campus of Washington
State University, WSU Spokane serves the
metropolitan Spokane area, the Inland
Northwest, the state, the region, and the
world. It offers the educational, scientific,
economic, and cultural benefits that
accrue from access to the services and
programs of a major public land-grant
research institution. WSU Spokane works
collaboratively with communities to
enhance quality of life through an intentional and sustained effort to create,
interpret, apply, and disseminate knowledge, thereby serving as a model for a
world-class urban campus in a regional
city.
As a destination campus, WSU Spokane offers all students, from those
articulating from other campuses to
international students, opportunities for
advanced studies and research in a variety
of targeted programs, enriching the fabric
of the WSU system. The campus community values diversity and places a high
priority on providing all the elements
needed for student success. WSU Spokane
will continue to take the lead in utilizing
flexible and creative approaches to meet
needs for lifelong learning with researchbased teaching.
The campus’s mission is to build the
intellectual, creative, and practical abilities
of individuals, communities, and institutions. It does so by actively fostering
learning, inquiry, and public service, and
by engaging with constituents in enhancement of quality of life and economic
vitality.
Goals and Directions
♦ Enhance the student experience
through community engagement,
research-based teaching, internships,
and a committed, diverse, world-class
faculty and staff.
♦ Sustain and enhance an academic and
information technology infrastructure
that enables us to strengthen and
expand academic offerings, including
24
targeted doctoral-level, master’s,
professional, and undergraduate
degrees, to meet identified market need
consonant with our mission.
♦ Expand creative and flexible program
delivery to address the complex
patterns of attendance of an urban
and more diverse student body with
specialized certificates, professional
and continuing education, alternative
scheduling, online and distance
delivery, together with traditional
degree programs.
♦ Strategically expand research in areas
of core strength, including health
sciences, design, engineering and
technology, and other targeted programs, by capitalizing upon the urban
context for program development,
expansion, and collaboration.
♦ Encourage and recognize faculty and
staff for community-based scholarship, collaboration, interdisciplinary
scholarship, research-based teaching,
contributions to campus growth and
development, and an entrepreneurial
spirit, through appropriate reward
mechanisms and support structures.
♦ Establish and communicate a strong
sense of shared campus identity
through creative and sustained internal education and strategic external
efforts, recognizing the mosaic of
higher education in the city and
positioning WSU Spokane as the
partner of choice.
♦ Sustain and enhance a stimulating
physical and intellectual learning
environment that meets the needs of
our campus community in the context
of a shared, nonresidential, multiinstitutional urban campus, through
use of space, technology, and other
elements that foster interaction,
stimulation, and engagement.
Strategies
♦ Develop and deliver a limited number
of broad-based baccalaureate completion programs, with resulting increased
enrollments.
♦ Develop a limited number of professional/practice-oriented doctorates,
with resulting increased enrollments.
♦ Establish new academic and college
structure in core areas, including health
sciences and design disciplines, with
resulting efficiencies in administration
and program development.
♦ Achieve recognition at the regional,
national, and international level of
core areas of excellence as destination
programs, with resulting increased
understanding of WSU as a world-class
research university.
♦ Achieve increased recognition within
the University as a center of academic
innovation for interdisciplinary and
urban-based programs.
♦ Expand areas of selective excellence in
research with increases in funding,
resulting in increased stature for WSU
as a research university.
♦ Achieve widespread recognition within
the community for our position as
“Spokane’s Research University” and
the leader in research-related economic
development in biotechnology, the
health sciences, and computer technology, with resulting increased recognition for WSU overall.
♦ Establish a clear vision for the development of the Riverpoint campus as a
multi-institutional setting managed by
WSU Spokane, resulting in creation of
an environment within which all
partners prosper under our leadership
and management of the campus.
“This just gets better
and better. What a great
job everyone has done. I am
especially impressed with the
thoughtful responses to requests
for feedback and additional
questions. What a great group
we have here. I don’t have anything constructive to add — just
words of recognition and accomplishment for those who have
worked on it.”
—Feedback received on the onepage macro-level strategic plan
during its development
♦ Further develop a support system for
students in the context of an urban
commuter campus with complex
patterns of attendance, jointly delivered programs, and other factors that
impact student service needs.
♦ Develop a participatory planning and
budgeting system that links strategic
goals with measurable outcomes to the
budget allocation process, provides
accountability, and enables a flexible
growth strategy.
♦ Explore alternative tuition and registration models that enable Spokane
students to enroll in multiple institutions simultaneously, and/or to
articulate more easily from one
institution to another.
25
Appendix II: Official Mission Statement
In fall 1999, the Washington State
Higher Education Coordinating Board
approved a new mission statement for
Washington State University Spokane to
represent the breadth of the goals and
activities envisioned for the campus. The
mission statement reads:
Washington State University is
charged to lead in the development of a
Spokane higher education magnet center.
Its mission reflects the magnet center’s
statewide and regional service area and its
responsibilities as the fiscal agent, site
manager, strategic planner, and coordinator for the Riverpoint campus, at which
the physical core of the higher education
magnet center is situated.
The Spokane campus also represents
Washington State University’s commitment to bring distinctive upper-division
and graduate education services to
Spokane and to the core of the higher
education magnet center’s program
inventory. The academic emphasis is on
programs in the Health Science, Engineering and Technology, and Design fields.
Washington State University is
charged with the responsibility of providing doctoral programs in Spokane, as
approved on a case by case basis by the
HECB. It also encourages and participates
in interdisciplinary and intercollegiate
master’s programs and consortial alliances
and is responsive to the social and economic development needs of the Spokane
region.
Through teaching, research, and
outreach, Washington State University at
Spokane provides a distinctive and
distinctively responsive form of higher
education experience for residents of the
region and from throughout the state.
26
Appendix III: Summary of Goals and Objectives
Academic Programs
Strategic goal: Expand and enhance
academic programs within a thoughtful,
systematic approach to program
development and delivery.
♦ Develop framework to identify, assess,
prioritize, and plan for new, costeffective programs, and growth of
established programs
♦ Continue to increase the quality of
program offerings and delivery
♦ Establish administrative and/or
academic structures with appropriate
academic authority based on this
campus to build upon core areas:
College of Health Sciences, College of
Design, Center for Engineering and
Technology Management
♦ Increase the number and range of
programs available to students, consistent with mission, identity, core
strengths, and identified market
demand, from baccalaureate completion through doctoral degrees
Research
Strategic goal: Lead the development of
Spokane’s research community.
♦ Develop the master plan for Spokane’s
development as a research-friendly
community, identifying core competencies, gaps, and areas for enhancement across the public and private
sectors
♦ Develop the infrastructure necessary to
support, enhance, and expand research
programs and initiatives throughout
the community, linking practitioners
with researchers
♦ Increase core support for research
functions
♦ Systematically translate and disseminate research to key stakeholders to
increase internal and external knowledge of research function
♦ Achieve recognition as a destination
campus in selected programs through
creation of and recognition for centers
of excellence:
o Medical Research Institute
o Biomedical and biotechnology
research and development
o NIH Exploratory Center status
o Child & Family Studies Research
Institute
o Center for Health Services Research
o Community Design & Construction Center
o Center for Geographical Information Systems and Simulation
Studies
♦ Develop partnerships with industry
and funding agencies to increase
extramural funding in core areas and
to explore additional opportunities for
growth consistent with campus
mission and identity
♦ Enhance our reputation and identity as
a research university campus
“Our
research
Student and Learning Experience
agenda comes
Strategic goal: Offer the best possible
from two places: it
learning experience for all campus
may address the
constituencies: students, faculty,
needs of the commustaff, alumni, donors, and others.
nity, or it may arise in
♦ Sustain a campus culture that
response to the access
values and rewards one-on-one
that the community
interactions across all levels of
the organization
provides to a specific
♦ Explicitly link and reward
type of population
instruction, research, and service
needed by the reas the foundations of our urban
searcher.”
land-grant mission and the
campus’s learning culture
♦ Involve students in campuswide
communications and decision making
♦ Foster and reward interdisciplinary
teaching, scholarship, and application
—Comments from the
brown-bag discussion on Research,
Sept. 20, 2001
♦ Identify and address unique student
needs that arise out of our student
body make-up and complex patterns
of attendance
Community Engagement
Strategic goal: Focus, coordinate,
integrate, and capitalize upon
community linkages to serve the region
and enrich the campus.
♦ Establish a Center for Service Learning
and Community Engagement to
support student, faculty and community participation and service learning
27
♦ Create an “engagement inventory”
capacity to understand, leverage, and
enhance faculty and program linkages
with the community
♦ Communicate linkages internally and
externally for increased recognition of
the outreach mission of our urban
land-grant campus
♦ Increase community recognition of
campus contributions
♦ Increase community involvement on
campus through partnerships, events,
and other mechanisms for public
engagement
Learning Environment
Strategic goal: Sustain and enhance a
stimulating physical and intellectual
learning environment that meets the
needs of our campus community and
enhances our urban context.
♦ Maximize the development of the
Riverpoint campus by obtaining
funding for continued construction
and purchase of buildings/property
♦ Foster and optimize interaction among
students, staff, and faculty through a
dedicated space or building for a
Commons or Union Building
♦ Connect with the city context for the
campus through design, construction,
and development projects
♦ Improve wayfinding on campus
through signage
♦ Provide supportive indoor and outdoor
spaces, physical infrastructure, and
design that will enrich the student/
learning experience and embody
campus values
♦ Construct and manage facilities with
balanced approach to access, sense of
welcome, and security
Identity
Strategic goal: Communicate a consistent,
distinctive campus identity based on
mission and strengths.
♦ Increase and enhance communication
of campus identity through all mechanisms
Academic and Information
Services Infrastructure
Strategic goal: Ensure effective
educational and institutional
information infrastructure to support
students, staff, and faculty in the delivery
of expanded academic offerings, research,
and service and administrative support
functions.
♦ Establish an appropriate and adequate
technology infrastructure for academic program delivery and administrative support functions
♦ Develop a clear and consistent process
for evaluating existing technology and
implementing new and efficient
technologies
♦ Establish an explicit planning process
that links academic, research, and
service program planning with information technology to ensure that an
adequate infrastructure is in place in
advance of program initiation or
expansion
♦ Develop and implement a plan to
enhance user competence and user
experience
♦ Strengthen and enhance student
learning experience across delivery
strategies, including fact-to-face setting
and technology-mediated learning
Recognition of Faculty, Staff,
Students, and Stakeholders
Strategic goal: Strengthen the campus as a
caring, inclusive, open, just, creative, and
celebrative learning community that
invests in all members of the community
and recognizes the value of contributions
from both internal and external
stakeholders.
♦ Develop mechanisms to foster and
celebrate campus identity
♦ Foster, reward, and recognize actions
that embody our values in all facets of
the organization and at all levels:
scholarship, research, entrepreneurship,
outreach activities, teaching, staff
functions, administrative functions,
community engagement, service work,
and student involvement
♦ Enable and support open communications systems throughout the organiza-
♦ Reinforce our learning community
culture through targeted recruitment,
♦ Develop and consistently communicate
a clearly articulated statement of
identity for Washington State University Spokane and for the Riverpoint
campus
28
tion
retention, and skill development
strategies in human resources
♦ Create distinctive forms of recognition
to demonstrate the value of campus
contributions, including a Dean’s
Public Service Award or Scholarship for
students and a community engagement award for employees
29
Appendix IV: Planning Process
Goals
♦ Engage a broad cross-section of the
campus community in discussion of
the campus’s future direction.
♦ Engage a broad cross-section of
community leaders to inform them
and to enlist them in an external
review and refinement of the campus’s
plans.
♦ Throughout this process, discuss a
range of alternatives and decisions to
identify the best fit between the
institution, its resources, and the
environment, in the context of the
larger University planning process.
Underlying Assumptions
♦ The land-grant mission: teaching,
research, and service
♦ The University’s strategic goals, to be
shaped and adapted for the WSU
Spokane context:
o Offer the best undergraduate
experience in a research university
o Nurture a world class environment for research, scholarship,
graduate education, the arts, and
engagement
o Create an environment of trust
and respect in all we do
o Develop a culture of shared
commitment to quality in all of
our activities
Timeline
Fall 1999: Northwest Architectural
Company is engaged to update the
campus master plan.
January 2000: First community open
house for campus master plan.
February 2000: Community workshop
for campus master plan.
April 2000: Presentation of preliminary
master plan to community.
June 2000: Master plan report presented.
Extensive stakeholder review and input
followed, then final multi-phased master
plan drawings were completed. Presentations to the community and refinements
30
to the master plan have continued from
this date to the present, as new information on public and private projects and
their integration with the campus becomes available.
December 2000: Distribution of information on process to campus community.
Provided information on upcoming
campuswide workshop (Jan. 11, 2001).
Distributed background materials:
Original strategic plan (1997); brief update
to plan (2000); Pres. Rawlins statements
about University strategic planning
process, budgetary process tied to strategic priorities; referral to web links for
Universitywide Design Team Scope
Statements.
January 11, 2001: Campuswide workshop with approximately 100 participants. Facilitated round-table discussions
on topic areas: Academic programs;
Riverpoint campus development; communications; environmental analysis:
constraints, opportunities, relationships;
developing the learning community;
resource and budget issues; urban context
and experience; core strengths in teaching,
research, and service; instructional
technology; the strategic planning process
January 2001: Workshop followup.
Circulated summaries of workshop,
collected additional comments, first draft
of one-page statement of mission and
goals circulated campuswide for comment and feedback.
February 2001: Campus discussions and
development of draft document. Discussion of draft one-pager at meetings of
campus committees, e.g., Admin Council,
Faculty Meeting, Classified Staff Meeting,
Instructional Leadership Council, meetings of research and service units. Circulation of revised drafts and solicitation of
additional comments via email and at
publicized brown-bag discussions. Final
document refined through collaborative
editing/writing process with a crosssection of volunteer campus representatives.
March 1, 2001: Final version of one-page
document circulated campuswide. Began
development of plans for adoption of
strategic budgeting process to accomplish
one of the priorities identified in that
document.
August 23, 2001: Campuswide workshop
with approximately 100 participants.
Introduction of strategic budgeting
process and timeline. Recap of strategic
planning process to date, facilitated
roundtable discussions on goal areas
identified in one-page document: student
experience; IT infrastructure; program
delivery; research; recognition for faculty/
staff; identity; learning environment;
service and outreach. All comments
compiled and circulated campuswide
following the workshop for additional
comments.
September-October 2001: Campuswide
discussions. Held facilitated discussions at
brown-bag lunches focusing on each goal
area individually. Output of each discussion circulated campuswide for additional
comments. Guidelines circulated to unit
heads for preparation of unit-level strategic plans; these plans will serve as context
for their budget requests.
to external focus groups for discussion,
review, and refinement: health sciences
and research, engineering and technology,
education, design disciplines. Presentation
of all four cluster area plans for discussion, review, and refinement to external
focus group on economic development.
(For list of participants see Appendix V)
May 21, 2002: Draft plan and action
item list circulated campuswide for
feedback. Comments addressed and
incorporated in final draft. Spokane
County voters approve the expansion of
the downtown Convention Center, which
will present new opportunities to be
addressed in the ongoing update of the
campus master plan.
May 22-23, 2002: Presentation of draft
strategic plan to selected community
leaders in two additional focus groups.
Comments addressed and incorporated in
final draft.
May 31, 2002: Dean’s Cabinet retreat to
discuss final plan, launch implementation
phase.
June 3, 2002: Final report submitted to
Provost & Budget Office.
October 23, 2001: Draft of five-year plan
with action items in each goal area
circulated campuswide for comments.
November-December 2001: Disciplinary
cluster meetings. Meetings of faculty and
staff held in core areas—health sciences
and research, engineering and technology,
education, design disciplines, new/emerging programs, and service/outreach—to
develop broad shared goals in these areas
for presentation to the campus community.
January 11, 2002: Campuswide workshop with over 100 participants. Clusters
presented their strategic goals for comment and feedback. All comments compiled and circulated campuswide
following the workshop for additional
comments.
February 4-8, 2002: Budget presentations by individual departments to
campus budget committee. Budget requests tied to strategic priorities as identified to date through planning process.
March-April 2002: External participation. Presentation of specific cluster plans
31
Appendix V: Planning Process Participants
This list represents our best effort to track participation. We may have inadvertently
missed some individuals who took part, especially those who attended the larger workshops. Please accept our apologies for the oversight, and our deep appreciation for your
involvement. Contact [email protected] to add your name to this list.
Campus Participants by Department
Administration
Gray, William H.
Kruse, Sandie
MacKenzie, Lanni
Myhre, Debra
Thompson, JoAnn Asher
Area Health Education Center
Bolen, Helen
Hardt, Charlotte
Lamoreux, Cathi
Meltzer, Steven
Rundlett, Bettie
Associated Students of WSU Spokane
Bollinger, Ryan
Dunlap, Courtney
Griffin, Andrew
Lange, Marc
Spratt, Jolene
Runne, George
Campus Communications
Appel, Kaarin
Harris, Stacie
Chamberlain, Barbara
Cancer Prevention and Research Center
Campbell, Dan
Meadows, Gary
Rivers, Yvonne
Capital Planning and Development
Hall, Steve
Cooperative Extension
Adams, Ed
Gray, Kelsey
Criminal
Justice/WSICOP/WRICOPS
Brody, David
Goldman, John
Deve l o p m e n t
Haberman, Debbie
Harbison, Joyce
Education
Hoerner, Debbie
Howard, James
Marchant, Jack
Peterson, Fred
Ray, Dennis
Schmidt, Lenore
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
Mortz, Margaret
Schimpf, Paul
Engineering Management
Rumsey, Hal
32
Campus Executive Officer & Dean
Assistant to the Campus Dean
Academic Coordinator
Office Assistant II
Associate Dean
Secretary Supervisor
Assistant Director
Conference Manager, Professional Dev.
Director
Program Coordinator
ASWSU Spokane Secretary (02-03)
ASWSU Spokane Vice-President (02-03);
interior design graduate student
ASWSU Spokane President (02-03);
landscape architecture 5th-year student
ASWSU Spokane President (01-02)
Communications & Events Coordinator
Communications & Events Coordinator
Director of Communications & Public Affairs
Director
Grant Editor
Construction Engineer
Agriculture & Natural Resources Programs
Director
Organizational Development Specialist
Assistant Professor
WRICOPS Director
Director
Secretary Senior
Secretary Senior
Associate Professor
Student Teacher Supervisor
Professor
Associate Professor
Clinical Associate Professor
Associate Professor
Associate Professor
Associate Professor
Exercise Science
Blank, Sally
Associate Professor
Facilities Operations
Schad, Jon
Facilities Manager
Finance and Operations
Arend, Gretchen
Fiscal Specialist
Edwardson, Linda
Fiscal Tech
Hoegl, Ines
Grant Coordinator
Hornbeck, Phyllis
Director of Finance & Operations
Strickler, Henry
Fiscal Specialist
Food Science & Human Nutrition
Beary, Janet
Dietetic Internship. Director, Assistant Professor
Massey, Linda
Professor & Program Coordinator
Health Policy and Administration
Ahern, Melissa
Associate Professor
Coyne, Joseph
Associate Professor
Hicks, Barry
Associate Professor
Roberts, Dori
Office Assistant
Schenk, Kiley
Academic Coordinator
Schmidt, Winsor
Director and Professor
Health Research & Education Center
Hull, Glynis
Program Development Coordinator
Mielke, Harold
Director
Human Development
Behan, Kate
Research Associate
Blodgett, Chris
Director
Human Resources
Breshears, Julie
Human Resources Assistant
Wick, Diane
HR Manager
Information Services
Bisagno, Kenny
Telecommunications
Hoffman, Larry
Director of Information Services
Rood, Sicco
WEB Master
Institutional Review Board
Eldredge, Janet
IRB Administrator
Grosvenor, Erlene
Secretary
Interdisciplinary Design Institute
Abell, John
Associate Professor
Bicknell, Catherine
Assoc Prof/Grad Coord
Brooks, Kerry
GIS Director
Brown, Nancy Clark
Assistant Professor
Hokanson, Dale
Instructor
Latham, Ruby
Principal Assistant
Menzies, Doug
Associate Professor
Ndubisi, Forster
Professor and Director
Rice, Jaime
Academic Coordinator
Scarfo, Bob
Associate Professor/Graduate Coordinator
Wang, David
Associate Professor and Graduate Coordinator
Wardrop, Kristie
Program Assistant
Library (CALS)
Buxton, Dave
Campus Librarian
Rodgers, Dee
Interlibrary Loans
Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement
Moznette, Joanna
Secretary
Pharmacy
Baker, Danial
Director, Drug Info Center, Professor
Clifton, Dennis
Dept Chair, Professor
Levien, Terri
Drug Information Specialist
Terriff, Colleen
Assistant Professor
Weeks, Debbie
Research Associate
Real Estate
Epley, Don
Lyon Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Small Business Development Center
Clark, Carolyn
Statewide Director
33
Speech and Hearing Sciences
Hasbrouck, Jon
Clinical Assistant Professor
Madison, Charles
Professor & Graduate Program Coordinator
Nye, Jeff
Clinical Assistant Professor
Power, Leslie
Clinical Associate Professor
Stephens, Doug
Office Assistant III
Vogel, Linda
Clinical Associate Professor
Student Services
Martin, Lisa
Enrollment Services Coordinator
Menzies, Joan
Student Affairs Officer III
Horton, Marian McDonnell
Enrollment Services Coordinator
Ragaza-Bourassa, Anna
Admissions Counselor
West, Liz
Financial Aid Coordinator
Severinghaus, Jack
Student Counselor
Technology Management
Hoegl, Martin
Professor
Washington Institute for Mental Illness Research & Training
Bays, Lorri
Secretary Senior
Dyck, Dennis
Director & Professor
Hendryx, Michael
Assistant Director
Community Participants
Education (2/26/02)
Becker, Sharon
Bleeker, Wendy
Christiansen, Garn
Colliton, Clayton
Dean, Patti
Kingrey, Joan
Munther, Terry
Selle, Mark
Snowden, Phil
Design Disciplines (3/14/02)
Dellwo, Susan
Edwards, Michael
Guilfoil, Michael
Mercer, John
O’Gram, Stephanie
Sherry, Tom
Warner, Jeffrey
Whitesitt, Scott
Spokane School District 81
Spokane School District 81
Superintendent, Chewelah School District
Teacher, Ferris High School
Administration Coordinator,
Cheney School District
Associate Superintendent, Mead School District
Superintendent, ESD 101
Superintendent, Valley School District
Superintendent, Cheney School District
Vice President, Design Source
President, Downtown Spokane Partnership
Features Writer/Editor, Spokesman-Review
Planning Director,
City of Spokane Planning Services
Interiors Manager, Integrus Architecture
Architect/Principal, TC Sherry & Associates
Principal, ALSC Architects
Principal, ALSC Architects
Health Sciences (3/15/02)
Clifton, Dennis
Director of Research, Sacred Heart Medical
Center; Associate Professor, WSU Spokane/College of Pharmacy
Fisher, Marian
Deaconess Medical Center
Fritz, Tom
Executive Director, Inland Northwest Health
Services
Haberman, Mel
Associate Dean for Research,
Intercollegiate College of Nursing/
WSU College of Nursing
Isgrigg, William
Associate Director,
The Heart Institute of Spokane
Jones, Patrick
Executive Director, Biotechnology Association
of the Spokane Region
Klohe, Ellen
Inland Northwest Blood Center
Mielke, C. Harold
Director, Health Research and Education Center,
WSU Spokane
Rumpler, Lewis
Director, INTEC
Stier, Robert, M.D.
Retired
White, Tom
President & CEO, Empire Health Services
Young, Judith
CEO, Inland Northwest Blood Center
34
Engineering & Technology (4/12/02)
Adair, Don
Bever, Greg
Cox, Rick
Hergoz, Michael
Jones, Jason
Kopzcynski, Don
Panattoni, Larry
Stokoe, Jim
Economic Development
Brooke, Roberta
Edwards, Michael
Hadley, Rich
Commerce
Long, Randy
McQueen, Doug
Palek, Mark
Pearman-Gillman, Kim
Straalsund, Jerry
Turner, Mark
Development Council
Community at Large
Brokaw, Wayne
General Contractors
Hunt, Terry
Palek, Mark
Quigley, Tom
Satre, Wendell
Thorburn, Kim
Owner/Partner, Herriman/Adair Interactive
Publisher, Journal of Business
Research & Development Manager,
Agilent Technologies
Manager, Mobile Systems, Itron
Human Resources, Itron
Director, Engineering & Technical Services,
Avista Utilities
President, Servatron
Senior Corporate Training Program Developer,
Itron
5/1/02
Executive Director, International Trade Alliance
President, Downtown Spokane Partnership
President, Spokane Regional Chamber of
Director, INTEC
Director, University of Idaho Research Park
President, Spokane Falls Community College
Economic Development Office, City of Spokane,
Office of the Mayor (Avista Corp.
loaned executive)
Executive Director, SIRTI
President/CEO, Spokane Area Economic
5/22/02 and 5/23/02
Executive Director, Inland NW Associated
Allied Security
President, Spokane Falls Community College
President, Kiemle and Hagood
Retired
Director, Spokane County Health District
Campus Master Plan Participants
Listed by sectors; list of participants available upon request from Northwest Architectural Company, Spokane.
Neighborhoods
Logan
East Central
Riverside
Near Neighbors
Schade Towers
Riverpoint Village Condominiums
Riverpoint Office 1
Motels
Restaurants
Transportation
Highway
City
Spokane Transit Authority
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
C o m m e rc i a l / C i v i c
Spokane Regional Chamber of Commerce
Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce
Spokane Area Convention and Visitors Bureau
Spokane Area Economic Development Council
Vision Spokane
Spokane Symposium (John Stone)
Health Services Industry
Educational
Washington State University
Eastern Washington University
Gonzaga University
Whitworth College
Community Colleges of Spokane
Students
Faculty
Interdisciplinary Design Institute, WSU Spokane
School District 81 – Spokane
Gove r n m e n t
City Council
County Commissioners
City Planning
Park Board/Parks Department
Downtown Spokane Partnership
Spokane Arts Commission
History/Preservation Groups
Horizons – Growth Management Area – Zoning
Other
Centennial Trail
Displaced Persons (House of Charity, Union
Gospel Mission)
American Institute of Architects
35
Appendix VI: Benchmarks of Progress and Success
Campus progress toward accomplishment of strategic goals will be measured
utilizing a number of measurements, some
already established, some to be developed.
This serves only as a preliminary list of
benchmarks; others will be identified in
the implementation planning phase.
Existing measures already in use (not an
exhaustive list):
♦ Student Satisfaction Survey
♦ Internal communications survey (inhouse instrument)
♦ Community awareness (professional
survey repeated every 2 years)
♦ Research productivity measures:
number of peer-reviewed publications,
grant funding
Measures to be considered for adoption:
♦ National Survey of Student
Engagement (nationally normed; information online at http://www.indiana.edu/
~nsse/)
Measures to be considered for development or adoption as available:
♦ Information technology: user satisfaction, user skill base, inventory management with life cycle/replacement
schedule
♦ Community engagement: Engagement
inventory to quantify involvement
with community by faculty, staff, and
students
Measures listed below are the product
of brainstorming at brown-bag discussions held fall 2001. These need further
evaluation to determine appropriateness,
availability of existing instruments and
other ways to measure, and priority for
development of new instruments or
techniques.
Measures for program delivery:
♦ Quality of program consistent no
matter what delivery mode
♦ Systematic evaluation and adjustment
♦ Accreditation
♦ Student experience (measure by
Student Satisfaction Survey)
♦ Faculty/staff evaluation
36
♦ Cost-effectiveness
♦ Market demand measured and tracked
♦ Efficiency (faculty/student ratio, other
measures)
Measures for IT infrastructure:
♦ Efficiency: cost efficiency, productivity
♦ Planning system in use & working
♦ Need to determine: Are there existing
standards, and do they measure inputs
or outcomes?
♦ Measure user experience and usability,
not just numbers of FTE, $$, equipment
♦ How current everyone’s technology is—
set a goal and meet it—e.g., nothing
older than 3 years
♦ Identified campus priorities drive
resource allocations
Measures for learning environment:
Accreditation
♦ Does design of new buildings and
outdoor spaces reflect our values:
o community (internal, places to
gather)
o community (external, interaction
with Spokane)
o interdisciplinary opportunities
o f lexible
o safe
♦ Student Satisfaction Survey results
♦ Assessment of faculty/staff satisfaction
with learning environment
♦ Calibre of faculty
Measures for recognition of faculty, staff,
and students:
♦ Improved morale
♦ Exit interviews (add trend analysis)
♦ Need an assessment tool, internal
survey
♦ Climate survey (Did the Pullman one
break out Spokane results we could get
to serve as a baseline? Could we follow
up on that one with a survey tailored
to our needs?)
♦ T&P process recognizing service/
outreach
♦ Retention and turnover rates
♦ Increased campus voice in T&P (mea-
sured by successful faculty candidates,
other measures)
♦ Continued recognition as an employer
of choice (measured by number of
applicants for open positions, highquality pools)
Measures for research:
♦ Productivity
♦ Peer-reviewed publications
♦ # of grant submissions: total, successful, with partners
♦ # of requests from community for our
expertise, grant assistance, partnering
♦ Outcomes measures—what did our
research result in? (note that these can
be difficult to measure, sometimes
difficult to attribute changes directly
to our research)
♦ Discipline-specific measures
♦ Number of programs (variety available
to students)
♦ Number of returning students where
they have an option (e.g. 5th-year
design choosing to stay in Spokane
rather than go back to Pullman)
♦ Retention rates (should reflect satisfaction with program if you continue)
♦ Program quality measures—link to
these, since they affect the student
experience
♦ Alumni giving is a measure of satisfaction with the experience they had here
♦ Use both short-term and long-term
measures
♦ Creative scholarship
♦ Students winning awards
♦ Research assistantships funded by NIH
♦ Placement of our students in (prestigious) graduate and doctoral programs
♦ Known/recognized as a research
university
♦ Increased knowledge (internal and
external) of the impact of our research
Measures for service and outreach:
♦ List of entities served
♦ # of hours
♦ # of people served
♦ Impact on community of service:
quantity, quality, significance
♦ Measurement depends on goals set by
campus
♦ Community awareness of our service
and the campus
♦ # of students involved
♦ # of courses that involve service
learning
♦ Impact of student activity on community
♦ Partners involved with us
Measures for student experience:
♦ Student Satisfaction Survey
♦ Number of courses with interdisciplinary elements
♦ Course evaluations tailored to our
campus and courses
37
Appendix VII: Historical Timeline
1920s-1980s
•
WSU offers a variety of programs in
Spokane, from night courses during World
War II to Cooperative Extension,
pharmacy clerkships to student teaching.
In the 1980s, increased academic activity
lays the groundwork for the
establishment of the branch campus.
1980-82
•
First continuing education courses
offered by Food Science and Human
Nutrition in Spokane.
1982
•
Food Science and Human Nutrition
begins Registered Dietitian (RD) program.
1985
•
•
1986
•
1987
•
•
1988
•
1989
•
38
First graduate class in Human Nutrition
offered in Spokane.
The AHEC is initially established as part
of a federally funded, four-state regional
program through the University of
Washington School of Medicine, linked to
WSU.
•
•
1990
•
•
1 991
•
Spring: Graduate degree in Human
Nutrition begins in Spokane.
The state legislature recognizes the
opportunities for new health sciences
programs by providing a $427,000
biennial appropriation to initiate the
WSU Health Research and Education
Center (HREC).
WSU Spokane moves into 23,000 square
feet on 4 floors of the Farm Credit
Building at 601 West First Avenue (now
the Metropolitan Financial Center). The
space houses classrooms, reference library,
computer lab, the AHEC/Office for Rural
Health, HREC, Food Science and Human
Nutrition, College of Pharmacy and its
Drug Information Center, and the new
Communication Disorders teaching,
research, and clinical facility, a joint
program of WSU’s Department of Speech
and Hearing Sciences with EWU.
Higher Education Coordinating Board
approves WSU proposal for a branch
campus system
State legislature creates and funds WSU
Spokane. 59 students attend in the fall
semester. Master’s degrees available:
Electrical Engineering, Engineering
Management, and Food Science and
Human Nutrition. Coursework available
in other programs in engineering
•
1992
•
•
•
•
1993
•
•
disciplines, Speech and Hearing Sciences,
and Education.
Washington Institute for Mental Illness
Research and Training (WIMIRT) created
by the state legislature as part of SSB 5400,
the Mental Health Reform Act. The
Eastern Branch, located at Eastern State
Hospital in Medical Lake, is under the
fiscal direction of Washington State
University at Spokane.
Spokane MESA (Mathematics,
Engineering, Science Achievement)
Program established at WSU Spokane.
Resident faculty in Human Nutrition
arrive in Spokane.
August: Fifth year of the Pharmacy
program relocates from Pullman to
Spokane, after nearly 20 years of
sponsorship of fifth-year clinical
clerkships in Spokane.
The 1991 Higher Education Coordinating
Board (HECB) study of graduate education
in the State assigns the following program
responsibilities for WSU Spokane:
“Graduate programs offered by WSU will
serve an important function in the
educational needs of Spokane and the
region. Programs should be developed to
complement existing programs offered in
the area, enhance the educational
opportunities of professionals, and
provide unique degree programs which
only a doctoral institution may offer.”
The Area Health Education Center
becomes a public service unit of WSU
Spokane.
The Spokane County Medical Society’s
Library (SCMSL) collection relocates to
WSU Spokane in March.
Inauguration of design studio location in
Spokane and fifth-year architecture
students
$3.76 million grant to study effects of
radiation on humans awarded to WSU
Spokane researchers
New research lab at Sacred Heart Medical
Center opened
February: Cooperative Academic Library
Services (CALS), jointly operated by WSU
Spokane and Eastern Washington
University, is dedicated.
Fall: Doctor of Pharmacy program begins
with six students, the first and still the
only such program in Eastern
Washington and the only doctoral
•
•
1994
•
•
•
•
•
1995
•
•
•
1996
•
•
•
1997
•
1998
•
•
1999
•
•
•
program at any branch campus in the
state.
Construction Management program
begins operation in Spokane
Additional lab opened at Sacred Heart
Cancer and Research Center
Computers, printers and software for
design students donated from Lindsey
(gift totals $1.3 million)
SIRTI building completion; WHETS
classes begin in building
Health Policy & Administration holds first
classes
HREC teams with area physicians to
study the ability of electron beam
computed tomography to provide early
detection of coronary artery disease in the
Spokane Heart Study
Construction begins on Phase I Classroom
Building
Grants received for cancer research
Joanna Ellington secures $500,000 for
infertility studies
WIMIRT receives $1.1 million for
programs
Western Regional Institute for
Community Oriented Public Safety
(WRICOPS) is formed.
College of Pharmacy begins offering the
External Pharm.D. program in
collaboration with University of
Washington, enabling practicing
pharmacists to upgrade their credentials
as the doctoral degree becomes the
standard in the profession.
First Thomas Foley Institute Lecture in
Media and Scoiety held
Robert Stier pledges $100,000 in support
of Robert F.E. Stier Memorial Lectures in
Medicine
Fall: Four new master’s degrees begin
classes at WSU Spokane: Master of
Technology Management, M.S.
Architecture, M.A. Interior Design, and
M.S. Landscape Architecture.
Spring: 435 students are enrolled. 264
graduates go through commencement—
the highest number ever.
Spring: Enrollment of 349 FTE (http://
www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases2/bc102.htm)
May: 264 graduates go through
Commencement (http://www.wsu.edu/
NIS/releases2/bc112.htm)
June: Ten-year anniversary celebration
and open house (http://www.wsu.edu/
NIS/releases2/bc118.htm)
•
•
•
2000
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2001
•
•
•
•
2002
•
•
September 2: Groundbreaking for Health
Sciences Building (http://www.wsu.edu/
NIS/releases2/bc121.htm)
Fall: Enrollment reaches 499 FTE (http://
www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases2/bc123.htm)(
First Boeing Distinguished Professor in
Health Policy named: David Sclar,
BPharm, PhD (http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/
releases2/bc122.htm)
Spring: Enrollment of 383 FTE (http://
www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases3/bc103.htm)
May: Health Policy & Administration
program achieves ACEHSA accreditation
(http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases3/
bc124.htm)
Graduate Certificate in Aging launched
spring semester 2000—first-ever graduate
certificate offered by Washington State
University (http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/
releases3/bc100.htm)
July: Health Policy & Administration
program admitted to WICHE Western
Regional Graduate Program, allowing the
program to charge Washington-resident
tuition rates to students from 14 Western
states (http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/
releases3/bc128.htm)
August: The first invention disclosure for
research done at WSU Spokane is filed;
the product is to be an antioxidant test
(http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases3/
bc129.htm)
Fall: Enrollment reaches 555 FTE (http://
www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases3/bc131.htm)
Second Distinguished Professor joins
campus: Donald Epley, PhD, Victor C.
Lyons CCIM Distinguished Professor of
Real Estate
School Psychology Certification (postmaster’s program offered jointly with
EWU) receives approval from the State
Board of Education. With the approval,
students who successfully complete the
program and meet requirements of the
Office of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction are recognized as eligible to
practice in the state (http://
www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases4/bc110.htm)
Spring: Enrollment hits 496 FTE, an
increase of 114 FTE over spring 2000
(http://www.wsu.edu/NIS/releases4/
sh113.htm)
Fall: Enrollment reaches 622 FTE.
Programs begin moving into the Health
Sciences Building.
January 7: First-ever EWU classes held in
the Health Sciences Building
January 14: First-ever WSU Spokane
classes held in the Health Sciences
Building
39
•
•
•
40
February 22: Formal dedication ceremony
for the Health Sciences Building http://
wsunews.wsu.edu/
detail.asp?StoryID=2732
May 10: Largest-ever Commencement
(423 graduates); first graduates in 4+1 M.A.
Interior Design; first graduate in M.S.
Kinesiology (degree name subsequently
changed to M.S. Exercise Science) http://
wsunews.wsu.edu/
detail.asp?StoryID=3017
Spring: HECB approves name change and
move of M.S. Kinesiology (WSU Pullman)
to M.S. Exercise Science (WSU Spokane);
Faculty Senate had previously approved
creation of a Graduate Certificate in
Exercise Science
Footnotes
Sommers, Paul, PhD. “Cluster Strategies for
Washington.” Report for the Office of Trade and
Economic Development, December 2001.
2
In an article on factors contributing to regional
economic development and growth, Shane
Mahoney, professor of government at Eastern
Washington University, wrote “The implications for
Spokane seem clear. . . . It is the substantial presence
of a committed, engaged and accomplished research
faculty that is absent” (The Pacific Northwest
Inlander, Feb. 21, 2002) .
3
“Regional economic development in the Silicon
Valley . . . is primarily sparked by the formal and
informal interaction of bright, university research
faculty with one another and with industrial
product designers, engineers and managers in the
region” (Ibid.) The report of the Boyer Commission
on educating undergraduates in the research
university, Reinventing Undergraduate Education:
A Blueprint for America’s Research Universities
(1998), sponsored by The Carnegie Foundation,
makes interdisciplinarity a major theme (available
online at http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/
boyer.nsf/).
4
“Mission” in the sense of what the campus
community views as its guiding mission—not
“mission” in the sense of the campus’s HECBapproved formal mission statement.
5
“Report of the Strategic Budget Design Team,”
Portland State University, May 1997.
6
Ernest Boyer, 1990. Carnegie Commission for the
Advancement of Teaching.
7
These strategic goals were adopted by the campus
community in February, 2001, and remain
unchanged in their intent. Some wording has been
revised.
8
Emergent strategy implies that an organization is
learning what works in practice. It is “a pattern, a
consistency of behavior over time,” “a realized
pattern [that] was not expressly intended” in the
original deliberate strategy plan. It results from a
series of actions converging into a consistent
pattern (Mintzberg, H., The Rise and Fall of
Strategic Planning. New York, NY: The Free Press,
1994, pp. 23–25).
9
“Spokane and the Inland Northwest: An
Assessment of Opportunities for Biomedical
Economic Development” (Tripp-Umbach &
Associates, May 2002).
10
“Spokane and the Inland Northwest: An
Assessment of Opportunities for Biomedical
Economic Development” (Tripp-Umbach &
Associates, May 2002).
11
From the founding of these graduate programs in
1998, FTE enrollment at WSU Spokane Fall 98-Fall
01 totaled 160.6 FTE; Pullman enrollment totaled 46
FTE.
1
41