THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA PLANNING FOR THE 1990'S May 7, 1990 Amendments to Plan Pages 15-16 .. Page 124 Role of the Two-Year College Provide Developmental Studies for students who are not admitted to the universities and senior colleges which choose to raise their entry standards. Page 18 . Page 127 Role of Universities To limit duplication between universities with statewide and regional roles, primacy should be given to regional universities for meeting the needs of their region through programs and services within their defined missions. Regional universities, in turn. have a special obligation to coordinate whenever feasible special programs through sharing resources with other public institutions to limit duplication of labor. Page 16 .... Page 124 Role of the Two-Year College "In an effort to build closer relationships and increase System efficiency, the Chancellor and Board of Regents should consider the conversion of smalle~ twoyear colleges into two-year branch campuses of a nearby two-year college, senior college, or regional university.1I ". Page 125 Role of the Two-Year College If, as determined by the Board, special circumstances warrant, nothing in thb document will preclude the Board's consideration of institutional changes ~ status. Role of the Senior College Amendment to Pages 127-128, Full Plan Pag~ 19, Executive Summary In addition, the University System has reached a poifit at ....hich some of its s\'mio~ colleges shO\:lld ~aise thei~ admisgiofi gtafida~ds. Hany of the sefiio~ colleges histo~ically have beefi expected to p~ovide relatively open access to st~dents ifi thei~ a~ea of the state. ORe mission of the System' s th~ee histo~ically black colleges shotlld: cOfitifi~e to be the p~ovisiofi of access to mafiY studefits with the intellectual capacity to achieve but with deficieficies in academic p~epa~ation. 'lith the g~owth of the two yea~ colleges aetoss the state, it may fiOW be possible, howeve~, fo~ certain sefiior colleges to revise stafida~ds fo~ admissiofi, shiftifig some of the ~espon9ibility fo~ se~ving the less well p~epated students to othe~ colleges whose mission clea~ly elflb~aces s~ch a role. Substitute: As part of their mission, all System institutions should be encouraged to attract and admit the best prepared students possible. From both the faculty and student points of view, one mark of a high quality university system is the extent to which its institutions challenge the best-prepared students. To this end, University Systemuniversities and certain of its senior colleges should be encouraged to raise their admission standards to provide a more challenging academic environment. At the same time, the learning needs of many students from a wide range of educational preparation and background must be addressed effectively. It is equally important that students who are not as well prepared to begin college are served by the University System. To insure that these students have access across the state to the additional preparation needed for college-level study, a substantial number of System colleges should continue to provide developmental studies as one of their roles. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. The University System of Georgia II. The Needs for the University System of Georgia in the 1990s Georgia's Changing Population General Economic Trends Georgia's Economic Needs Update of 1982 Program Needs Assessment Regional Needs for Higher Education III. Responding Effectively to StateNeeds: Greater Involvement. HigherEfficiency and Improved Quality in the University System Increasing the Participation in Higher Education Strengthening the Role of the University System in Economic and Community Development Coordinating Institutional Roles in Responding Effectively to State Needs University System Policies on Extending Access to UpperLevel Baccalaureate Programs University System Role in Providing Postsecondary TechnicalVocational Education Institutional Roles Within the University System of Georgia Regional Universities Roles of Two-Year Colleges Roles of Universities Roles of Senior Colleges Assuring and Improving Quality in the University System Faculty Students Academic Programs Coordination of Advanced Graduate Programs and Research Institutional Effectiveness Institutional Planning and Assessment Special Institutional Assistance THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA The University System of Georgia is composed of 34 institutions--four universities, 15 senior colleges and 15 two-year colleges. In addition, three two-year colleges and one senior college maintain a postsecondary vocational-technical unit in cooperation with the State Board of Technical and Adult Education. In Fall, 1989 the System enrolled 172,190 students, representing an increase of over 45,000 students since 1980 (Table 1). Nearly 90 percent of these students were Georgia residents. Blacks were 15.7% of the enrollment and women were 55 percent. Of the students 64 percent attend full-time and 36 percent on a parttime basis (Table 2). The most popular major field for undergraduates is Business and for graduate students, Education followed by Business (Table 3). In 1989, University System institutions conferred over 26,000 degrees and certificates (Table 4) and employed over 8,000 faculty, nearly two-thirds of whom hold the doctorate (Table 5). In addition to the degree-related credit instruction and study, the 34 colleges and universities together enrolled over 513,000 students in non-credit Continuing Education courses. In 1988, the four universities operated 131 institutions and centers that conduct research and provide services. In that period, the four universities received $246 million in external grants and contracts to support research and service. The senior colleges received $17.7 million to support these activities and the two-year colleges, $4.3 million. The University System of Georgia has succeeded in making available throughout the state a wide range of higher education services. Most levels and kinds of programs and services are geographically available in the various state regions and locales through the System's 34 colleges and universities and numerous offcampus centers and programs. Moreover, the small enrollments of several of these institutions bespeaks this commitment to spread higher education widely as well. While the demands for more access can never be satisfied fully, the number of public institutions and the small size of several of them reflect a commitment to providing access to higher education at the most local levels. Currently, as was identified in the needs assessment phase of the planning process, there are emerging strong demands for additional services from growing areas of Georgia, such as Gwinnett and North Fulton counties, Southeast Georgia and the Macon area. The evaluation and consideration of responses to such needs was a major part of this planning process. The University System of Georgia is also known as a leade~ in strengthening the quality of higher education. Beginning in the 1970s with the development of the Regents Testing Program for undergraduates and the implementation of the Core Curriculum, anarcontinuing into the 1980s with the establishment of the College Preparatory Curriculum and the college placement examinations for entering students, the University System has moved first into improvements that other state systems later came to replicate. It is notable that the efforts of the University System to provide full access have not daunted its efforts to improve quality at the same time. Such a balance is both needed and difficult to achieve in Georgia, which, like so many other southern states, has a history of lower educational attainment at the school and college levels. These conditions make the progress of Georgia and its University System over the past two decades even more extraordinary. 1 Now the University System and the state it serves are positioned to reach for even further excellence marked by national and not just regional preeminence. For the first time, it is not unrealistic to establish the goal of making the University System of Georgia one of the top public higher education systems in the United States. This vision for the 1990s should include the following goals whose realization would coincide with achieving such preeminence: The quality of the teaching, research and service offered by the University System of Georgia will lead all efforts in the Southeast and be in the top rank nationally. The quality of, and access to, the colleges and universities of Georgia will be at a level where Georgia sons and daughters will not need to look to other institutions outside the State to meet their educational aspirations. The colleges and universities of Georgia will be a leading force and an active and contributing partner in the economic development of Georgia at the State, regional, national and international levels through teaching, research and service efforts. The quality of excellent graduate programs and research in the University System will enable Georgians to find excellence in graduate study and research in most disciplines. With these lofty but now reachable goals in mind, the University System requires a plan composed of policy directions or specific actions to guide its progress through the next decade. Such a plan begins with a practical statement of mission as follows: Mission of the University System of Georgia The mission of the University System of Georgia is to promote higher learning and to advance and create knowledge. The System performs its mission through the participation_of faculty and students in teaching, scholarship and research. The System carries out these functions within its 34 colleges and universities and also by the promotion of learning and application of knowledge to the state as a whole~ In so doing, the System will be a leader in strengthening the quality of life in Georgia through economic, social and cultural development. The System's performance is measured by three characteristics: participation in its services, impact and quality of its activities and efficiency of operation. University System planning considered what directions and actions the system should take to meet this mission with the greatest possible effectiveness, which, if accomplished, would establish its national preeminence. Carrying out this mission effectively will be increasingly challenging in the 1990s. In contrast to the earlier years when the newness of the University System caused a focus on access and institutional growth and extension, the key to the further maturation of the system will lie in how well access, quality and efficiency can move ahead together. With limited state resources there are limits as to how much higher education can be provided throughout the state while maintaining the quality of all of its services and building toward national excellence. 2 As higher education is reminded of periodically, state resources are limited. It is also true that all levels and kinds of institutions aspire, and understandably so, to more and higher levels and quality of programs and services. However, spreading a state's limited resources across too many institutions and programs creates only mediocrity and a dilute quality. The 1990s bring a convergence of these forces: a state needing more and higher quality services from its higher education system; 34 colleges and universities, each with its own set aspirations; a growing commitment to move the quality of the University system to national preeminence; and a realization that constant growth of state resources is not inevitable, requiring the efficient use of available funding. It is this imperative to offer the most services and highest quality out of limited resources that provides the largest challenge to the University System in the 1990s. Meeting this need to use resources effectively will challenge sternly the capacity of the Board of Regents and Chancellor to coordinate the University System on a statewide basis. A good deal of the success of the University System may be attributed to its rather unique structure for carrying out the functions of system governance and statewide coordination of public higher education, all lodged in a single constitutionally-based governing board. Such a board, of which there are very few in the nation, has tremendous natural advantages in directing, evaluating and holding accountable the various institutions. It is also a challenging structure to operate owing to the combination of governance, which requires institutional advocacy as well as accountability, and statewide coordination, which requires the Board and Chancellor to regulate, which in many cases requires constraints on institutional aspirations. This mixture of the Board roles of advocacy and regulation is at once its greatest strength and challenge. And the challenge grows as more and more institutions seek, with their greater maturity, expanded roles. As the University System enters the decade of the 1990s, the "Statement of Plann adopted by the Board of Regents at its_January, 1932 meeting is as appropriate now as it was then. This timeless description of the need for and value of statewide coordination of public higher education reads as follows: It is the conviction of the Board of Regents that the people of Georgia intended to ordain by the Act creating the Board that the twenty-six institutions comprising the University System should no longer function as separate, independent, and unrelated entities competing with each other for patronage and financial support. The manifest purpose of the Act creating the Board of Regents is to unify and coordinate the work of these institutions so that the educational program of each shall be integrated with that of every other institution and with the system as a whole. The result aimed at is a correlated, harmonious, and symmetrical structure free from wasteful duplications, but providing the maximum of educational opportunity to the students of the State. In short, the emphasis has been shifted from the interests of particular institutions to the interests of the State. 3 While the traditions, the welfare and the prestige of the several branches of the system will be an object of care on the part of the Board, all of their problems are to be finally resolved by the answer to the question: What will best serve the educational interests of the State as a whole? With this as the paramount consideration, the constant aim of this body ~ill be to establish and maintain a system of higher education that will command the sympathy and support of our educational leaders, and at the same time successfully meet our needs by offering the yOlUlg men and women of Georgia the maximum of education. To accomplish this result, the Regents will, after careful study, take such steps that to them seem best to coordinate and unify these institutions so that they will be related in purpose and regulated in scope. The only competition in which these schools will hereafter engage will be for preeminence in service and scholarship. Like most state systems of higher education, the University System of Georgia approaches the 1990s having a history of addressing difficult coordination decisions. While limiting possible duplication at the university level, the University System has seen the development of a large number of senior colleges in relation to the number of two-year colleges. This growth has largely been through the addition of the junior, senior and graduate level programs to twoyear colleges, an occurrence that has been repeated seven times with its associated costs. The University System of Georgia now has entered a period in which there are increasing pressures to expand the current roles of institutions to the next level: two-year to senior college and senior college to university status. While these aspirations are understandable and predictable in any maturing public system of higher education, they will challenge severely the coordination of higher education systemwide. In addition to this press for changes of status are constant demands by colleges and universities to tlfill outtl their current roles by adding more programs at all levels. This is very costly at the graduate level but can be expensive at the associate and baccalaureate levels as the University System is asked to respond to Georgia's needs for more highly-prepared graduates, especially in high cost technical, scientific and health care fields. The manner in which the University System responds to these pressures and challenges for institutional growth will determine whether the quality of the University System will be strengthened over the 1990s even as the same system attempts to meet a wider range of state needs in the face of limited resources. The need is for effective coordination statewide which is required to address the following key issues: How to meet the growing state needs for a better educated citizenry, for trained manpower and for research and development services to the economy and communities. How to define institutional roles and scopes. How to guide program growth to meet state needs within available resources. 4 How to coordinate University System actions with those of other levels and sectors of education. All of the above issues are about the coordination of the various parts of a public system of higher education. They concern directly not so much how each individual institution is managed and carries out its responsibilities which is the stuff of governance, as these issues concern how the various parts relate to the others, interact and in the process form a system of relatively unduplicated and cooperating colleges and universities, all meeting important state needs within available resources. This report, as did the planning process itself, begins with a careful assessment of the needs of Georgia and its various regions for the different kinds and levels of University System services. This needs assessment is supplemented with the latest projections of the numbers and nature of Georgians to be served over the next decade. Also included is a description of the future economic environments and their implications for how Georgia and its University System will need to respond to prepare Georgians to thrive in the changing situation. With these needs and conditions as a basis, the report then addresses the directions and actions that will be needed to meet the needs of the 1990s with the greatest possible quality and efficiency. Some of these directions concern increasing the availability of or access to University System services so that more Georgians benefit from Georgia's economy and its society continues to progress. Because so many needs exist and resources are limited, it is critical that the University System possess sound policies and directions to coordinate future institutional growth and roles. Accordingly, this report addresses several of these issues. Finally, the planning process addressed the improvement and assurance of quality because meeting the goals for access and efficiency will be empty if not done in a high quality manner. Accordingly, the final section deals with what actions and initiatives the University System should take to move individual institutions toward higher quality as well as to assure certain levels of performance. 5 .&.~~.L HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENT FALL 1980 - 1989 HEADCOUNT enrollment represents an unduplicated count of all students who are enrolled in credit courses at a University System institution, regardless of course load. Therefore, it includes both full-time and part-time students. Institution 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Georgia Institute ofTedmology Georgia State University Medical College of Georgia University of Georgia 11,261 11,158 11,396 10,912 10,958 11,078 11,494 11,m 20,333 21,009 21,335 21,512 21,366 21,612 21,879 22,116 2,310 2,357 2,362 2,387 2,320 2,320 2,312 2,262 23,470 25,679 25,m 25,042 25,230 2S,4D8 25,698 26,547 11,887 12,090 22,245 23,039 2;1.79 2,386 27,176 27,448 Universily Tot4l 57,374 ~203 61,002 59,853 59,874 60,418 61,383 62,696 63,587 64,963 Albany State College Armstrong State College Augusta College Oayton State College Columbus College Fort Valley State College Georgia College Georgia Southern College Georgia Southwestern College Kennesaw State College North Georgia College Savannah State College Southern College of Technology Valdosta State College West Georgia College 1,555 2,882 3,739 2,m 4,573 1,814 3,369 6,626 2,153 3,903 1,930 2,112 2,583 4,901 5;1.71 1,889 1,896 2,944 2,992 4,045 4,159 3,248 3,692 4,476 4;1.70 1,765 1,734 3,434 3,468 6,603 6,830 2,225 . 2,329 4,195 4,m 1,950 1,984 2,143 2,115 2,959 3;1.58 4,m 5,548 5,660 6,050 1,893 2,922 4,252 3,603 4).83 1,870 3,554 7,018 2,344 5,383 1,990 2,211 3,499 5,835 6,351 1,893 2,680 4,091 3,358 3,985 1,837 3,778 6,526 2,259 5,821 1,979 2,011 3,610 6,095 6;1.50 1,911 2,746 3,896 3,131 3,845 1,819 3,940 6,935 2).37 6,866 2,023 1,908 3,581 6,514 5,980 1,902 2,732 4,113 3;1.90 3,716 1,811 3,893 7,611 2,072 7).96 2,028 1,694 3,795 6,611 6,141 2,005 3,051 4,461 3,484 3,626 1,735 4,302 8,766 2,080 7,946 2,120 1,824 3,769 7,056 6,396 2,104 3;1.32 4,839 3,667 3,803 1,915 4,522 9,841 2,154 8,614 2,181 1,932 3,778 6,950 6,710 2,306 3,702 5,238 3,869 3,904 2,rm 4,830 11,238 2,151 9,140 2,353 2,075 4,026 7,337 7;1.52 Senior College Tot4l 50,388 52,445 55,104 57,008 56,173 57,332 58,705 62,621 66,242 71,518 Abraham Baldwin Agric. College . 2,450 Atlanta Metropolitan College 1,344 Bainbridge College 565 Brunswick College 1,129 Dalton College 1,428 Darton College 1,999 DeKalb College East Georgia College 450 Floyd College 1,195 Gainesville College 1,569 Gordon College 1,375 Macon College 2,482 Middle Georgia College 1,474 South Georgia College 1,152 Waycross College 433 2,322 1,386 639 1,198 1,533 I,m 414 1,450 1,590 1,412 2,688 1,410 1,074 501 2;1.15 1,585 662 l,2S4 1,755 1,911 444 1,607 1,679 1,451 2,%2 1,395 1,244 542 2,182 1,661 621 1,305 1,654 1,964 415 1,673 1,762 1,506 2,982 1,430 1,172 555 1,979 1,453 575 1,243 1,622 1,770 416 1,278 1,744 1,365 2,828 1,293 1,059 469 1,803 1;1.94 657 1,184 1,512 1,624 453 1,202 1,656 1,342 2,699 1,262 1,045 481 1,770 1,281 718 1;1.57 1,648 1,683 8,786 456 1,259 1,849 1,246 2,708 1,354 854 551 1,723 1,367 814 1,297 1,693 1,760 9,116 513 1,204 1,905 1;1.90 2,948 1,385 784 536 1,895 2,138 1,425 1,570 808 852 1,338 1,332 1,866 2,160 1,893 1,9J.t 10,566 12,661 617 60S 1,485 1,6J.t 2,160 2,3n 1,403 1,423 3,513 3,918 1,472 1,469 1,010 1,038 503 623 Tho-Year College Total 19,045 19,526 7.0,706 20,882 19,094 18,214 27,420 28,335 31,95-1 35,709 SYSTEM TOTAL 126,807 132,174 136,812 137,743 135,141 135,964 147,508 153,652 161,783 172,190 FALL IlNROl.LMENT 1933 - 1989 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 8,035 9,006 9,695 10,543 11,572 12,987 13,653 13,736 12,845 10,052 13,937 10,682 1945 11,498 1946 22,651 1947 25,210 1948 26,900 1949 21,217 1950 18,417 1951 15,312 1952 18,671 1953 20,221 1954 22,827 1955 24,723 1956 25,479 1957 1958 1959 1960 1%1 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1%7 1968 25,545 28,268 28,838 30,686 32,988 35,2n 38,584 44,552 52,364 60,232 67,687 76,231 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 19n 1978 1979 1980 83,281 96,321 105,424 108,779 111,161 118.106 131,005 126,910 128,745 126,367 126,189 126,807 Sources: Quarterly Enrollment Reports, Annual Reports 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 132,174 136,812 137,743 135,141 135,96-1 147,508 153,652 161,783 172,190 ., 6 TABLE 2 SELECTED DEMOGRAPIDC CHARACfERISTICS FALL 1989 ,.;'., TOTAL ENROLLMENf ETHNIC GROUP GENDER Institution Black Non- Hispanic N % White Non- Hispanic N % All Other" N % Male N % Female N % Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State University Medical College of Georgia University of Georgia 12,090 23,039 2,386 27,448 817 6.8 3,900 16.9 232 9.7 1,536 5.6 9,622 79.6 17,649 76.6 2,013 84.3 24,681 89.9 1,651 13.7 1,490 6.5 141 5.9 1,231 4.5 9,422 77.9 9,836 42.7 1,165 48.8 12,752 46.5 2,668 22.1 13,203 57.3 1,221 51.2 14,696 53.5 University Total 64,963 6,485 10.0 53,965 83.0 4,513 6.9 33,175 51.1 31,788 4&!J Albany State College 2,306 1,949 84.5 339 14.7 18 0.8 796 34.5 1,510 65.5 Armstrong State College 3,702 491 13.3 3,108 83.9 103 2.8 1,185 32.0 2,517 68.0 Augusta College 5,238 816 15.6 4,254 81.2 168 3.2 1,895 36.2 3,343 63.8 Oayton State College .. 3,869 530 13.7 3,230 83.5 109 2.8 1,614 41.7 2,255 58.3 Columbus College 3,904 704 18.0 2,990 76.7 210 5.4 1,475 37.8 2,429 62.2 Fort Valley State College 2,097 1,961 93.5 125 6.0 11 0.5 839 40.0 1,258 60.0 Georgia College 4,830 765 15.8 3,957 82.0 108 2.2 1,889 39.1 2,941 60.9 -,' Georgia Southern College 11,238 1,397 12.4 9,658 85.9 183 1.6 5,125 45.6 6,113 54.4 Georgia Southwestern College 2,151 373 17.3 1,752 81.5 26 1.2 785 36.5 1,366 63.5 Kennesaw State College 9,140 320 3.5 8,600 94.1 220 2.4 3,526 38.6 5,614 61.4 North Georgia College 2,353 55 2.3 2,28S 97.2 13 0.6 908 38.6 1,445 61.4 Savannah State College 2,075 1,752 84.4 2n 13.4 46 2.2 855 41.2 1,2.."0 .58.8 Southern College of Technology 4,026 594 14.8 3,225 80.0 207 5.1 3,352 83.3 674 16.7 Valdosta State College 7,337 1,128 15.4 6,126 83.5 83 1.1 3,060 41.7 4,2n 58.3 West Georgia College 7,252 1,022 14.1 6,120 84.4 110 1.5 2,702 37.3 4,550 62.7 Senior College Total 71,518 13,857 19.4 56,046 78.3 1,615 2.3 30,006 420 41,512 58.0 Abraham Baldwin Agric. College Atlanta Metropolitan College Bainbridge College Brunswick College Dalton College Darton College DeKalb College East Georgia College Floyd College Gainesville College Gordon College Macon College Middle Georgia College South Georgia Collegge Waycross College 2,138 1,570 852 1,332 2,160 1,934 12,661 605 1,634 2,347 1,428 3,918 1,469 1,038 623 212 9.9 1,522 96.9 137 16.1 202 15.2 35 1.6 343 17.7 2,356 18.6 99 16.4 113 6.9 84 3.6 254 17.8 761 19.4 216 14.7 213 20.5 66 10.6 1,922 90.0 29 1.9 7ffJ 83.2 1,100 82.5 2,106 97.5 1,571 81.2 9,645 76.2 505 83.4 1,505 92.2 2,226 94.9 1,153 80.7 3,069 78.4 1,234 84.1 805 77.6 549 88.1 4 0.2 19 1.2 6 7.0 30 2.3 19 0.9 20 1.0 660 5.2 1 0.2 16 1.0 37 1.6 21 1.5 88 2.2 19 1.3 20 1.9 8 1.3 1,011 47.3 596 38.0 337 39.6 468 35.1 902 41.8 655 33.9 5,460 43.1 198 32.7 604 37.0 1,054 44.9 571 40.0 1,333. 34.0 693 47.2 373 35.9 226 36.3 1,127 974 515 864 1,258 1,279 7,201 407 1,030 1,293 857 2,585 776 665 397 52.7 62.0 60.4 64.9 582 66.1 56.9 67.3 63.0 55.1 60.0 66.0 52.8 64.1 6"'.7 Two-Year College TOlal 35,709 6,613 18.5 28,128 78.8 968 2.7 14,481 40.6 21,228 59../ SYSTEM TOTAL 172,190 26,955 15.7 138,139 80.2 7,096 4.1 n,662 45.1 94,528 54.9 Includes American Indian or Alaskan Natives, Asian or Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics Full-Time - graduate/professional (10 or more hours), undergraduate (12 or more hours) Part-Time graduate/professional (less than 10 hours), undergraduate (less than 12 hours) Sources: Quarterly Enrollment Report, IPEDS EFI Report 7 li\tlLb "L, SELECTED DEMOGRAPIDC CHARACIERISTICS FALL 1989 (Continued) STATUS AVERAGEAGB Full-Tune N % Part-Time N % Undergraduates 10,893 90.0 10,042 43.5 2,145 89.8 23,229 84.6 1,197 10.0 12,997 56.5 241 10.2 4,219 15.4 20.4 yrs. 25.1 24.9 20.7 46,309 71.2 18,654 28.8 22.3 I,m 76.8 534 23.2 228 1,943 52.4 1,759 47.6 25.6 2,928 55.9 2,310 44.1 24.6 1,478 382 2,391 61.8 24.4 2,353 60.2 1,551 39.8 25.0 1,836 87.5 261 12.5 21.4 3,116 64.5 1,714 35.5 23.2 - '., 9,618 85.5 1,620 14.5 20.4 1,527 70.9 624 29.1 23.3 4,125 45.1 5,015 54.9 25.4 1,890 80.3 463 19.7 21.8 1,626 78.5 449 21.5 22.7 2,476 61.5 1,550 38.5 23.9 5,367 73.1 1,970 26.9 22.6 4,%7 68.4 2,285 31.6 21.6 47,022 65.7 24,496 34.3 23.2 1,571 73.4 567 26.6 23.4 722 45.9 843 54.1 24.1 348 40.8 504 59.2 26.1 714 53.6 714 46.4 25.3 1,053 48.7 1,107 51.3 23.4 1,002 51.8 932 48.2 25.2 4,308 34.0 8,353 66.0 24.7 225 37.1 380 62.9 24.0 780 47.7 854 53.3 25.0 1,512 64.4 835 35.6 22.3 1,074 75.2 354 24.8 22.2 1,283 32.7 2,635 67.3 26.4 828 56.4 641 43.6 22.9 736 70.9 302 29.1 24.6 268 43.0 355 57.0 27.0 16,424 45.9 19,235 54.1 24.5 ,. 109,755 63.7 62,435 36.3 23.2 8 ENROlLMENT BY DECLARED MAJOR FALL 1989 Discipline UnderGraduate Graduate/ All Professional Other Total Agriculture 969 Architecture and Design 903 Arts and Humanities 5,047 Business 25,432 Computer SciencejData Processing 4,200 Education 9,190 Engineering 6,186 Engineering Teehnology 4,888 Foreign Languages 377 Mathematics 1,033 Nursing 8,53S Public Affairs/Social Services 2,816 Allied Hea1thjHea1th Sciences 1,908 Life Sciences 3,818 Physical Sciences 1,558 Social Sciences 7,572 Trade and Industrial - 331 Transfer/Core Curriculum 24,294 Other 3,002 305 305 650 3,909 516 7,947 1,739 91 110 302 716 798 118 616 483 1,202 311 24 4 72 189 32 122 1 11 3 3 123 13 21 29 13 27 3 1,527 17 1,298 1,212 5,769 29,530 4,748 17,259 7,fJ26 4,990 490 1,338 9,374 3,627 2,047 4,463 2,054 8,801 334 25,821 3,330 Professional Dentistry Medicine Veterinary Medicine Law Other Medical ResidentsfInterns 200 709 300 1,254 1,765 14 200 709 300 1,254 1,765 14 SYSTEM TOTAL 112,059 24,360 2,234 138,653 Note: The above data should be used with caution since they include all students and their current intended major. The data do not reflect the enrollment of students who have actually applied and have been accepted into a program, which often does not occur until the second- or third year. Excludes Nursing which is reported separately Includes such programs as Home Economics, Communications, and Interdisciplinary Studies Includes Pharmacy, Social Work, Journalism and Forestry at the University of Georgia only Source: Student Infornlation RCfXJrting System 9 DEGREES AND CERTIFICAlES CONFERRED BY INSTITUTION FY1980 - FY1989 Institution FYl980 FYl981 FYl982 FYl983 FYl984 FYl985 FYl986 FYl987 FYl988 FYl989 Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State University Medical College of Georgia University of Georgia 2,190 3,716 694 5,658 2,496 3,596 678 5,439 2,682 3,637 625 5;3'79 2,630 3,482 690 5,624 2,622 3,682 673 5,333 2,532 3,678 655 6,006 2,580 3,656 649 5,671 2,532 3,871 5&S S,563 2,602 3,899 631 5,511 2,633 3m 547 5,636 University Total 12,258 12,209 11,323 12,426 12,310 12,871 12,562 12,552 12,643 12,793 Albany State College Armstrong State College Augusta College Cayton State College Columbus College Fort Valley State College Georgia College Georgia Southern College Georgia Southwestern College Kennesaw State College North Georgia College Savannah State College Southern College of Technology Valdosta State College West Georgia College 233 484 430 197 7ff} 219 746 1,309 480 263 363 249 401 906 1,010 194 433 403 260 697 213 736 1,307 454 420 399 181 371 941 90S 206 330 432 266 727 215 753 .1,329 438 380 . 429 203 394 1,007 899 236 365 450 334 720 191 7(JJ 1,289 434 474 412 171 456 967 891 216 359 425 353 627 2S4 726 1,301 415 S30 389 203 442 959 906 218 383 510 301 652 238 70S 1,321 429 514 39S 198 486 996 1,021 252 371 503 318 (ffl 236 731 1,336 461 S82 448 236 462 1,258 1,093 263 386 467 288 671 243 739 1,278 490 713 428 181 579 1,323 1,180 281 408 S66 267 668 23S 813 1,396 458 7(JJ 483 196 500 1,367 1,156 ZTl 4S1 531 329 5'T1 m 83S 1,4.U 466 901 4SO 220 510 1,443 1,159 Senior College Total 8,099 Abraham Baldwin Agric. College 467 Atlanta Metropolitan College 95 Bainbridge College 48 Brunswick College 173 Dalton College 180 Darton College 278 DeKalb College East Georgia College (JJ Floyd College 117 Gainesville College 164 Gordon College 144 Macon College 248 Middle Georgia College 198 South Georgia College 156 Waycross College 47 7,920 . 459 95 47 184 167 262 48 106 173 109 265 223 159 61 8,008 436 118 50 184 168 294 74 125 146 142 217 212 156 63 8,156 3'T1 126 67 195 214 278 53 122 169 148 220 2(JJ 144 47 8,105 400 104 71 232 179 271 44 135 152 156 263 258 179 65 8,367 372 115 56 207 195 308 50 111 209 144 281 252 165 4{) 8,894 388 114 67 147 169 317 53 123 211 174 297 28S 172 70 9,229 332 140 99 159 203 314 661 54 117 22S 173 275 ?98 166 54 9,554 356 116 94 194 182 289 S87 48 126 255 193 297 2S2 151 70 9,~ m 187 107 160 202 301 691 44 113 2S6 225 300 235 142 66 Two-Year College TOla! 2,375 2,358 2,385 2,440 2,509 2,511 2,587 3,270 3,2-/.0 3,337 SYSTEM TOTAL 22,732 22,487 22,716 23,022 22,924 23,749 24,043 25,051 25,437 ::!6,018 Note: Includes certificate, associate, bachelor's, advanced certificate, master's, education specialist, first professional, and doctorate awards Fiscal Year - Summer through Spring quartcrs Sources: FYI980-FYl985, HEGIS 2300 2.1 Rcports; FYI986 - fYl989, IPEDS Cl Reports 10 .l.~~J FACULTY mGHESf DEGREE NOVEMBER 1989 ~~~ .":~ Institution Doctorate No. % Professional No. % Master's Baetalaureate No. % No. % Other No. % Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State University Medical College of Georgia University of Georgia 608 86.6 675 78.0 217 33.8 1,598 84.1 10 1.4 32 3.7 316 49.1 80 4.2 77 11.0 151 17.5 90 14.0 203 10.7 6 0.9 4 0.5 16 2.5 18 1.0 1 0.1 3 0.4 4 0.6 1 0.1 University Total 3,098 75.4 438 10.7 521 127 44 1.1 9 0.2 Albany State College Armstrong State College Augusta College Qayton State College Columbus College Fort Valley State College Georgia College Georgia Southern College Georgia Southwestern College Kennesaw State College North Georgia College Savannah State College Southern College of Technology Valdosta State College W~t Georgia College 89 57.1 92 56.4 103 60.2 57 54.8 126 61.8 82 54.3 114 61.3 290 56.2 77 60.6 189 75.6 62 55.9 70 54.3 57 40.7 200 68.7 184 68.2 4 2.6 0 0.0 1 0.6 1 1.0 1 0.5 2 1.3 2 1.1 3 0.6 0 0.0 3 1.2 0 0.0 3 2.3 3 2.1 2 0.7 0 0.0 63 40.4 70 429 63 36.8 38 36.5 77 37.4 67 44.4 68 36.6 215 41.7 49 38.6 58 23.2 48 43.2 55 42.6 74 52.9 89 30.6 85 31.5 0 0.0 1 0.6 4 2.3 5 4.8 1 0.5 0 0.0 2 1.1 6 1.2 1 0.8 0 0.0 1 0.9 1 0.8 6 4.3 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 29 1 0.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Senior College Total 1,792 6IJ.3 25 0.8 1,119 37.7 29 1.0 6 0.2 Abraham Baldwin Agric. College Atlanta Metropolitan College Bainbridge College Brunswick College Dalton College Darton College DeKalb College East Georgia College Floyd College Gainesville College Gordon College Macon College Middle Georgia College South Georgia College Waycross College Two-Year College Total 25 27.5 18 32.1 21 58.3 20 30.3 31 SO.O 20 28.2 72 28.4 8 42.1 12 21.1 20 27.0 21 38.2 47 43.5 28 40.6 15 30.0 5 38.5 363 33.6 1 1.1 1 1.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.4 3 1.2 2 10.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 8 0.7 64 70.3 37 66.1 9 25.0 34 51.5 21 33.9 49 69.0 178 70.1 9 47.4 42 73.7 52 70.3 29 52.7 58 53.7 38 55.1 30 60.0 8 61.5 658 m.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 5.6 6 9.1 4 6.5 1 1.4 1 0.4 0 0.0 3 5.3 2 2.7 5 9.1 3 2.8 3 4.4 5 10.0 0 0.0 35 3.2 1 1.1 0 0.0 4 11.1 6 9.1 6 9.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 17 1.6 SYSTEM TOTAL 5,253 64.4 471 5.8 2,298 28.2 108 1.3 32 U.4 Note: The faculty data above include full-time teaching faculty, general administrators, academic administrators, public service faculty, librarians, and counselors who hold Board approved academic rank and are employed on at least an academic year contract. Part-time faculty are not included. Source: Faculty Information System 11 THE NEEDS FOR THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA IN THE 19909 ;'> 12 GEORGIA'S CHANGING POPULATION The most visible indicator of college enrollments is the state's population. As Georgia has grown so has the University System. Georgia's population has steadily increased over the century and since the 1960's has been fueled by a high rate of in-migration from other states. Georgia is now the eleventh largest state in the nation. Population increased by 16.4% between 1960 and 1970j the next decade saw a 19% jump. From 1980 to 1990, total population is likely to expand by 21% (Table 1). Particularly relevant to college enrollments is the fact that, from 1960 until recently, the number of persons of college age (1524) steadily increased. Current and projected population data now indicate a much different outlook for numbers of traditional college-age persons (Tables 2 and 3). Georgia's total population is projected to increase by 17%. However, after the years 1987-1989 which felt the effects of a strong increase in births during 1969-71, there is likely to be a leveling of 15-24 year-olds over the next decade. From 1990 to 2000, the number of 15-24 year-olds is projected to increase by only 6.4%, much less than 1% per year. Moreover, substantially all of this small increase will be due to the increase in blacks who traditionally have not enrolled in higher education to the extent whites have attended. The number of white 15-24 yearolds is projected to remain level over the next decade. Further evidence that the next ten years will experience low growth in 15-24 year-olds is the projected loss of persons aged 25-34, which means that fewer persons are passing through the 20-29 year-old age group. Growth is expected to pick up over the next decade in the younger age groups (0-19 years old), making it likely that the years 20002010 will again be expansionary times. The recent projections of high school graduates by the Western Interstate Corrnnission on Higher Education (WICHE) suggest that the number of high school graduates in Georgia will increase by 17% between 1990 and 2000, with most of the increase occurring after 1995. Other estimates indicate actual declines in the numbers of persons of college age in Georgia. The recent study by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) used data from the National Planning Association (NPA) to project fewer 15-24 and 15-34 year olds in the year 2000 than in 1985. The SREB study estimates that such a decline would result in 15,000 fewer college students in Georgia by the year 2000 if the rates at which students enroll in college remain the same. Even using the above projections made by Georgia's Office of Planning and Budgeting, which fall between the higher and lower estimates made by various other groups such as SREB, WICHE, and the NPA, the overall future will be much different than the recent past. It is clear that beginning in the 1990' s, substantial increases in enrollments will have to be drawn from tapping population groups which heretofore have not attended college at high rates. 13 Population Ten-Year Changes on TABLE 1 1960 3,943,116 Georgia Population Change 1970 1980 1990 4,589,575 5,463,105 6,630,420 2000 7,780,422 646,459 16.4 873,530 19.0 1,167,315 21.4 1,150,002 17.3 1960 - 1980: Census figures 1990, 2000: OPB projections 14 TABLE 2 Georgia Population Projections 1990 Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS -Tot-al 1,519,131 523,487 524,548 583,579 594,280 2,885,395 6,630,420 White 964,475 341,885 352,455 403,818 416,054 2,196,939 4,675,626 1995 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 1,596,299 553,245 528,151 573,830 593,763 3,358,819 7,204,107 1,006,968 353,043 343,497 391,404 410,900 2,510,011 5,015,823 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 1,673,709 583,085 531,782 564,025 593,228 3,834,593 7,780,422 1,049,482 364,214 334,544 378,962 405,685 2,824,315 5,357,202 % Change 1990-1995 0-14 5.08 15-19 5.68 20-24 0.69 25-29 -1.67 30-34 -0.09 35+ 16.41 TOTALS 8.65 4.41 3.26 -2.54 -3.07 -1.24 14.25 7.28 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 10.18 15-19 11.38 20-24 1.38 25-29 -3.35 30-34 -0.18 35+ 32.90 TOTALS 17 .34 8.81 6.53 -5.08 -6.16 -2.49 28.56 14.58 15 Non-White 554,656 181,602 172,093 179,761 178,226 688,456 1,954,794 589,331 200,202 184,654 182,426 182,863 848,808 2,188,284 624,227 218,871 197,238 185,063 187,543 1,010,278 2,423,220 6.25 10.24 7.30 1.48 2.60 23.29 11.94 12.54 20.52 14.61 2.95 5.23 46.75 23.96 Whites 15-24 o -4 2 Blacks 15-24 17 10 16 15-24 6.4 2.8 7 1 17.3 6.5 24.5 8.2 14.3 .01 18 7.0 16 TABLE 4 North Georgia Population Projections 1990 Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS -Tot-al 226,418 83,827 83,265 84,464 86,718 489,912 1,054,604 White 191,158 71,461 72,154 73,628 75,836 442,951 927,188 Non-White 35,260 12,366 11,111 10,836 10,882 46,961 127,,416 1995 0-14 229,839 192,863 36,976 15-19 83,587 70,493 13,094 ; ," 20-24 81,229 69,567 11,662 -', ,;-~ 25-29 82,918 71,904 11,014 30-34 86,286 74,784 11,502 35+ 549,010 492,493 56,517 TOTALS 1,112,869 972,104 140,765 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 233,294 83,342 79,181 81,367 85,860 608,650 1,171,694 % Change 1990-1995 0-14 1.51 15-19 -0.29 20-24 -2.45 25-29 -1.83 30-34 00.50 35+ 12.06 TOTALS 5.52 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 3.04 15-19 -0.58 20-24 -4.90 25-29 -3.67 30-34 -0.99 35+ 24.24 TOTALS 11.10 194,567 69,513 66,969 70,177 73,723 542,348 1,017,297 0.89 -1.35 -3.59 -2.34 -1. 39 11.18 4.84 1. 78 -2.73 -7.19 -4.69 -2.79 22.44 9.72 38,727 13.,829 12,212 11,190 12,137 66,302 154,397 4.87 5.89 4.96 1.64 5.70 20.35 10.48 9.83 11.83 9.91 3.27 11.53 41. 19 21.18 17 TABLE 5 Metro Atlanta Population Projections 1990 Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS Total 617,444 202,235 213,787 263,950 274,774 1,214,718 2,786,908 -Wh-ite 406,210 136,060 147,950 187,801 195,632 938,831 2,012,484 Non-White 211,234 66,175 65,837 76,149 79,142 275,887 774,~24 1995 0-14 662,361 439,801 222,560 15-19 218,413 144,590 73,823 . , :," 20-24 25-29 211,389 259,445 142,319 183,079 69,070 76,366 30-34 276,645 197,544 79,101 35+ 1,456,654 1,111,499 345,155 TOTALS 3,084,907 2,218,832 866,075 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 707,343 234,612 209,000 254,943 278,516 1,698,914 3,383,328 % Change 1990-1995 0-14 7.27 15-19 8.00 20-24 -1.12 25-29 -1. 71 30-34 0.68 35+ 19.92 TOTALS 10.69 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 14.56 15-19 16.01 20-24 -2.24 25-29 -3.Ld 30-34 1.36 35+ 39.86 TOTALS 21.40 473,423 153,130 136,700 178,366 199,459 1,284,355 2,425,433 8.27 6.27 -3.81 -2.51 0.98 18.39 10.25 16.55 12.55 -7.60 -5.02 1.96 36.80 20.52 233,920 81,482 72,300 76,577 79,057 414,559 957,895 5.36 11.56 4.91 0.28 -0.05 25.11 11.83 10.74 23.13 9.82 0.56 -0.11 50.26 23.69 18 TABLE 6 Middle Georgia Population Projections Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS -Tot-al 323,363 117,927 112,805 121,428 117,806 589,222 1,382,551 1990 White 168,849 64,218 62,769 70,817 69,526 392,883 829,062 1995 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 336,346 123,910 116,438 118,749 116,490 679,013 1,490,946 172,219 65,435 62,199 67,404 66,528 438,015 871,800 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 349,368 129,925 120,074 116,040 115,156 769,495 1,600,058 175,584 66,659 61,634 63,984 63,506 483,481 914,848 X Change 1990-1995 0-14 4.01 15-19 5.07 20-24 3.22 25-29 -2.21 30-34 -1.12 35+ 15.24 TOTALS 7.84 2.00 1.90 -0.91 -4.82 -4.31 11.49 5.15 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 8.04 15-19 10.17 20-24 6.44 25-29 -4.44 30-34 -2.25 35+ 30.60 TOTALS 15.73 3.99 3.80 -1.81 -9.65 -8.66 23.06 10.35 19 Non-White 154,514 53,709 50,036 50,611 48,280 196,339 55:1,489 164,127 58,475 54,239 51,345 49,962 240,998 619,146 173,784 63,266 58,440 52,056 51,650 286,014 685,210 6.22 8.87 8.40 1.45 3.48 22.75 11.86 12.47 17.79 16.80 2.86 6.98 45.67 23.80 TABLE 7 :~.. Southeast/Coastal Population Projections 1990 Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS Total 156,641 55,748 57,569 53,787 51,939 259,847 635,531 White 88,862 32,962 34,291 33,754 33,643 183,715 407,227 Non-White 67,779 22,786 23,278 20,033 18,296 76,132 228,304 1995 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 165,262 61,175 60,149 52,762 51,015 296,731 687,094 91,594 35,155 34,355 32,154 31,840 203,852 428,950 73,668 26,020 25,794 20,608 19,175 92,879 258,144 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 173,940 66,619 62,743 51,724 50,090 333,904 739,020 % Change 1990-1995 0-14 5.50 15-19 9.73 20-24 4.48 25-29 -1.91 30-34 -1. 78 35+ 14.19 TOTALS 8.11 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 11.04 15-19 19.50 20-24 8.99 25-29 - 3 . 8 11 30-34 -3.56 35+ 28.50 TOTALS 16.28 94,332 37,359 34,422 30,541 30,027 224,137 450,818 3.07 6.65 0.19 -11.74 -5.36 10.96 5.33 6.16 13.34 0.38 -9.52 -10.75 22.00 10.70 79,608 29,2"60 28,321 21,183 20,063 109,767 288,202 8.69 14.19 10.81 2.87 4.80 22.00 13.07 17.45 28.41 21.66 5.74 9.66 44.18 26.24 20 TABLE 8 Southwest Georgia Population Projections Age Group 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS -Tot-al 195,265 63,750 57,122 59,950 63,043 331,696 70,826 1990 White 109,396 37,184 35,291 37,818 41,417 238,559 499,665 1995 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 202,491 66,160 58,946 59,956 63,327 377,411 828,291 110,491 37,370 35,057 36,863 40,204 264,152 524,137 2000 0-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35+ TOTALS 209,764 68,553 60,784 59,951 63,606 423,630 886,322 111,576 37,553 34,819 35,894 38,970 289,994 548,806 % Change 1990-1995 0-14 3.70 15-19 3.78 20-24 3.19 25-29 0.01 30-34 0.45 35+ 13.78 TOTALS 7.45 1.00 0.50 -0.66 -2.53 -2.93 10.73 4.90 % Change 1990-2000 0-14 7.43 15-19 7.59 20-2L~ 6.41 25-29 0.00 30-34 0.89 35+ 27.72 TOTALS 14.98 1.99 0.99 -1. 34 -5.09 -5.91 21.56 9.83 Non-White 85,869 26,566 21,831 22,132 21,626 93",137 271:,161 92,000 28,790 23,889 23,093 23,123 113,259 304,154 98,188 31,034 25,965 24,057 24,636 133,636 337,516 7.14 8.37 9.43 4.34 6.92 21.60 12.17 14.35 16.82 18.94 8.70 13.92 43.48 24.47 21 GENERAL ECONOMIC TRENDS Georgia's economy must adapt to the changing world and national economic challenges and its University System must assist in this effort. In its acclaimed report Workforce 2000, the Hudson Institute described these economic changes and their implications for the preparation of the workers who can meet these challenges. In general, the report projects that the American economy will grow at a good pace, boosted by greater productivity and fuller participation in a strong world economy. Manufacturing will continue to lose as a share in the American economy over the 1990's as service industries will be responsible for most of the new jobs. Certain trends in the workforce which already are evident will accelerate over the next decade. The population of the U.S. and the workforce will grow more slowly than in the past and consequently tighten labor markets, causing employers to use more capital- intensive resources. Also, the average age of the workforce will increase as fewer younger workers are available. The persons who do enter will tend to be women. The Hudson Institute estimates that almost two-thirds of those entering the workforce in the 1990's will be women with well over half of all women acquiring jobs. Minorities also will increase as a proportion of new workers; some estimates have their share of new entrants almost doubling over the next decade. During that time, five out of six new workers will be nonwhite, women and immigrants. In the job market, with the exception of the service occupations, the jobs which are growing at the greatest rate are in fields that demand the highest education and skill levels. Workforce 2000 estimates that over 40 percent of new jobs will require workers to have skills falling in the highest categories of language, mathematics and reasoning. Currently only 24 percent of jobs require these levels of skills. Conversely, a much higher proportion of new jobs will require" the lowest level of skills compared to the current job market. The Workforce 2000 report made several recommendations that have important implications for Georgia and its University System. The report recommends that the University System" must take an active concern in the economies of nations throughout the world and assist in developing balanced economic growth worldwide. Another priority is to increase through better preparation the productivity of the growing numbers of service workers, especially in health care, education, retailing and government. The report also recommends the fuller involvement of minorities in the economy, which is a necessity in light of the diminishing pool of younger workers in the 1990's. This fuller involvement will hinge largely on the more effective education of minorities. Finally it is emphasized that the success of an increasingly complex economy will depend upon the improved educational preparation of all workers. As the report notes: "between now and the year 2000, for the first time in history, a majority of all new jobs will require postsecondary education." 22 ECONOMIC NEEDS OF GEORGIA The Georgia Department of Labor monitors and projects workforce demand in the various industries and by type of occupation. Recently, the process used by the Department has been refined and yields information on employment trends which can provide a context in which the University System can determine future program. directions. This information, in conjunction with regional and local needs data, can be used as a basis for initiating or reacting to new or different program thrusts. Primarily due to the very rapid growth in employment in the Atlanta area, Georgia has consistently exceeded the national employment growth rate over the past several years. This growth trend is expected to continue. Following is a summary of the major findings excerpted directly from the Department of Labor's analysis, which is based on projected needs to the year 2000. Industry Trends Industry employment in Georgia experienced a shift away from the manufacturing sector during the past forty years. In 1948, manufacturing employment was 36.3 percent of total nonagricultural wage and salary employment. By 1980, manufacturing industries in Georgia accounted for only 24.0 percent of nonagricultural jobs. This trend has continued at a more rapid pace in the 1980s. By June of 1988, the manufacturing sector's share of nonagricultural employment slipped to 20.4 percent. Georgia's economy added 396,660 jobs between 1980 and 1986. Nonmanufacturing employment contributed 91.6 percent of this overall gain, with explosive growth in the service and retail trade industries. These two sectors account for nearly two-thirds of the state's employment growth in this decade. Although agricultural crop production continued to lose employment, the overall industry posted a moderate gain due to healthy employment increases in livestock production and agricultural services. Overall employment in nondurable goods manufacturing remained stable as losses in some industries offset gains in others. From 1980 until 1986, textile mill products reduced employment by 15,772 or 13.6 percent. Employment in its sister industry, apparel and textile products, declined by 2,178 jobs. Foreign competition is largely responsible for the employment decline in these industries. Less expensive imported textile and apparel goods made significant advances into U. S. markets because of a strong dollar and cheap labor abroad. In addition, subsequent efforts to raise productivity, primarily by means of automation and closing outdated factories, further reduced employment in these industries. In general, industry trends established during the 1980s are expected to continue into the next century, although the overall growth rate will slow to a more sustainable level. Following are summaries of projected employment for 2000 as compared to 1985 by major industrial division (Table 1). 23 ". Agriculture, forestry, and fishing will see a continued decline in agricultural production, especially crops. Livestock production will be aided by a strong demand for poultry and dairy products. Agricultural services related to a growing urban population, such as nurseries and landscaping, will experience substantial growth. Long-term farm problems - ranging from recent drought conditions and low commodity prices to farm debt - will limit growth potential "in this division. Mining, the smallest major industry division in terms of numbers employed, will maintain its percent share of total employment. Basic products from this industry are necessities in the construction and manufacturing sectors of the economy. Employment growth in construction should moderate over the next several years, especially in residential and nonresidential building construction. However, the need to rebuild, replace, and maintain the state's highways, water and sewer systems, bridges, and other public facilities should provide employment'opportunities over the long term. Special trade contractors, in particular, will experience strong employment growth. During the next decade, most sectors of the manufacturing economy will experience slow employment growth. Both durable and nondurable goods employment will decline as a percent of total employment. Exceptions to this general trend include substantial growth in printing and publishing and the electrical machinery, equipment, and supplies industry. Two major industries - apparel and primary metals - are not projected to experience any significant increases in employment. Foreign competition will continue to be a factor as Georgia manufacturers try to retain their share of the market. Transportation employment will maintain its relative ranking among industries between 1985 and 2000. However, deregulation of the airline industry and the current trends toward reduction i railroad employment and competition among deep water ports will moderate growth in what was one of Georgia's fastest growing major industries. During the 1990s, trucking and warehousing will be the dominant growth industry in the transportation division. Slow but stable growth should characterize the communications and utilities industries as they respond to population growth and business activity in the state. Communications employment will also be affected by technological advances, so workers with the most current training will always be in demand. As the state's population continues to grow, the demand for removal and safe disposal of waste material will result in increased demand for sanitary services. Wholesale trade employment is projected to grow at a decreasing rate and comprise a smaller proportion of the state's total employment by the turn of the century, even though growth in the value of sales will not experience a corresponding slowdown. This scenario is based on the expectation that business will continue a trend toward eliminating the "middle man" and localizing distribution facilities. The retail trade division will remain a primary source of employment growth in the years ahead. It will increase its share of total employment in the state even though the consumer-driven economy of the 1980s is expected to slow in the next decade. As disposable income increases for some sectors of the population, 24 '. retailers of general merchandise, apparel and accessories, and food can expect steady growth. The largest retail employer - eating and drinking establishments - shows no sign of stagnation as more and more people eat away from home. Employment growth in the finance, insurance, and real estate division will be somewhat slower than in the 1980s. Automation, especially in financial services and insurance, will have a moderating effect on recent high growth trends. However, banks and other financial institutions continue to open branch offices and provide an expanded range of financial services to a growing urban population. Also, increased demands by individuals and companies for health and liability coverage will provide additional growth opportunities for the insurance industry. Employment in real estate, which is more sensitive to business cycles, could move up or down quickly over the next several years. By the year 2000, nearly one-third of all workers in Georgia will be ~ployed in the services division. The three largest employers in the services'sector at this time - business, health, and educational services - will add over 200,000 jobs to the state's economy by 2000. It is important to note that a significant portion of the increase in business services employment consists of job classified under temporary help and employee leasing. Much of this employment is scattered among a wide range of industries. In fact, some analysts argue that much of the phenomenal employment growth of business services simply reflects the shift in existing accounting, clerical, janitorial, and security activities from other industry classifications to the services category. Many of the new jobs being created in both the retail and service sectors are part-time in nature, and this trend is expected to continue. The hospital and education portions of state and local government employment (classified under health and educational services, respectively) are projected to experience high growth through the next decade, while the remainder' of the government sector is expected to grow at a slower rate than the economy as a whole. The number of government jobs will likely decrease as a percent of total employment. However, employment levels will rise steadily as local governments attempt to catch up in providing services to an expanding population base. In summary, only a few industries are projected to reduce employment by the turn of the century. Declining employment is expected in agricultural crop production, primary metals, miscellaneous manufacturing, apparel, leather and leather products, railroads, and water transportation. Crop production employment has been falling due to automation and the decline of the family farm. The primary metals, apparel and textile products, leather and leather products, and miscellaneous manufacturing industries face tough competition from foreign producers with a cost advantage. Railroad and water transportation have been declining for some time and will likely continue to do so as trucking and airline transportation expand. Occupational Trends Georgia's economy is projected to generate more than 900,000 jobs between 1985 and 2000. Although an impressive number, this 33.3 percent growth represents a significant slowdown from the 57.1 percent increase in employment experienced in the previous IS-year period. 25 Occupational employment opportunities will shift toward opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of required skills and training. For example, the two broad occupational categories with the highest average level of required education - I.'. managerial and management-related and professional, paraprofessional, and technical - will experience above-average growth rates for the 1985-2000 period. At the same time, high growth is expected for low-skill occupations in the sales and service occupational groups. In contrast, economic and technological changes will lead to slower-than-average growth in the three broad occupational categories (clerical and administrative support; agriculture, forestry, and fishing; and production, operations, and maintenance) that contain greater numbers of occupations requiring a medium level of education and training. Following are summaries of the projections through the year 2000 for the major occupational categories (Table 3): Employment of managerial and management-related workers will increase by more than 62,000'jobs, or 35.9 percent, between 1985 and 2000. This overall growth rate masks conflicting trends among different types of management occupations. High growth rates are projected for management occupations concerned with fiscal responsibility, productivity, and expansion of markets. In fact, general managers/top executives and financial managers will account for one-half of the total gain in jobs for this major category as increasing competition forces companies to continually scrutinize productivity and profitability. Similarly, the numbers of marketing, advertising, and public relations managers will increase as the markets expand. Thanks in part to the continued strength of the convention/tourist industry in the state, employment growth of food service and lodging managers will' remain strong. On the down side, restructuring will cause slowdowns in the growth of middle-management occupations, especially for industrial production and construction managers. The professional, paraprofessional, and technical occupational group will move from the third largest to the second largest between 1985 and year 2000. Although the group as a whole will exhibit an above-average growth rate, at least 40 percent of the listings in this category have growth rates below the norm. Many of these are the traditional high skill/high pay occupations (e.g. doctors, dentists, lawyers) where a surplus of workers currently exists. The most sizeable high growth occupations in this major group include technical occupations where workers develop computer hardware and software systems that are increasingly in demand. Projections indicate a 79.8 percent increase for electrical/electronic engineers and a 96.0 percent increase for computer systems analysts for the 1985-2000 period. Growing faster than any other occupation, the number of paralegal personnel will more than double by the turn of the century as legal service providers cut costs to remain competitive. Health service providers will also make greater use of paraprofessional and technician level workers as health care costs continue to soar. 26 in Employment growth in the sales and related occupational group will be second only to that of the service group, primarily due to huge numerical gains retail sales and cashier positions. Additionally, rapid growth is projected for occupations that sell services, such as travel agents, financial service sales, and counter and rental clerks. The number of clerical and administrative support workers will increase more slowly than the average between 1985 and 2000. Although this group is projected to add over 140,000 jobs by 2000, its share of total employment will decline. Increasing automation in the office makes these jobs vulnerable. Many types of narrowly defined clerical occupations - stenographers, bookkeeping clerks, file clerks, etc. - will grow very slowly or even shrink in the coming decade. Widespread implementation of computer-based office systems 'designed to improve productivity means that employers will seek clerical and administrative' support workers with broader based skills, as well as computer literacy. Employment in the service workers category will exhibit the highest growth rate, and will add more jobs than any major group except for the very large production,. operation, and maintenance occupational category. The largest increase, nearly one-half of the total for this group, will occur in food and beverage occupations. The rise in dual wage-earner and one parent households means that more meals are taken away from home than in years past. Protective service occupations will continue to expand much faster than employment as a whole. The majority of this growth will be in the protective services industry as opposed to government hiring of law enforcement officials. Guards and watch guards will be one of the largest and fastest-growing occupations in the service category, as contracting for protective services becomes standard business practice. Growth of most health service occupations will continue to be faster than average, except for those in the low-skilled aide and orderly occupations. Rising health care costs have fueled the demand for people with a wide range of knowledge and skills to assist patients who are recovering at home. Cleaning and building service jobs will also continue to increase much faster than average, as more and more firms contract for cleaning services once performed by their own employees. In looking at the figures for maids, janitors, and cleaners, we must recognize that the numbers are somewhat inflated because many of these jobs are filled by temporary and part-time workers. The number of agriculture, forestry, and fishing workers will grow very little, or not at all, between 1985 and 2000. In fact, the rise of the corporate faro, with its emphasis on automation and productivity, will result in a decline in the number of farm workers. Total employment in this major group, however, will remain steady due to increases in agricultural jobs associated with urban expansion. Growth in lawn and landscaping services for both individuals and businesses will cause the number of gardeners and groundskeepers to grow by t~o thirds during the closing years of this century. While the production, operation, and maintenance group will remain the largest by the year 2000, its share of total employment will drop. Although growth in the construction trades will keep pace with overall employment, production occupations will experience sluggish growth. Economic restructuring of the work 27 ", force, especially because of increased automation, will mean slow growth for production jobs in general as manufacturers strive to remain competitive in a tightening world market. Of all the production occupations, machine setters, operators, and tenders will experience the slowest growth. These jobs are most susceptible to cutbacks due to automation and the exporting of jobs overseas to areas of cheap labor. In spite of this trend, some occupations in this group are in growing industries and are expected to make modest gains. These occupations include precision and offset lithographic printing workers, optical and dental goods precision workers, and laundry and dry cleaning operators. Because machines always need maintenance, growth of mechanic, installer, and repairer occupations will stay just ahead of the average. Employment for bus, truck, and diesel engine mechanics will increase steadily due to continued expansion of over-the-road transportation. Furthermore, high growth rates are projected for most occupations concerned with the installation and maintenance of electronic machines and equipment, which now pervade all sectors of the economy. Georgia's Changing Labor Needs Georgia's civilian labor force increased by 52.6 percent, or 3.5 percent annually, between 1970 and 1985. By the turn of the century, however, the work force is projected to increase by only 2.4 percent annually for an overall gain of 36.8 percent from 1985. Population projections for 2000 reflect a sharp decline in net migration based on economic forecasts that indicate a slowdown in employment growth. Indeed, the rapid employment growth that attracted so many workers to Georgia in recent years is already beginning to moderate. A combination of changes in labor force participation rates and differential population growth will influence the composition of the work force. Women, Blacks, and Hispanics are expected to represent a greater share of the labor force through continued growth of labor force participation compared to that of white males. Furthermore, higher fertility rates during the last decade among blacks and Hispanics will produce a proportionately larger share of the working age population by 2000. The most significant demographic trend for Georgia's labor supply in the year 2000 is the dramatic slowdown in the growth of the age group from which entrylevel workers are usually drawn: the 15 through 34 year old age group. Although a severe shortage of entry level workers is not expected, the age group from which they are drawn will grow at a much slower rate for the next 12 years. While the number of 15 to 19 year olds increased by 29.9 percent between 1970 and 1985, only a 22.8 percent gain is expected for the period between 1985 and the year 2000. More important, however, is the projected decline in the growth rate of the 20 to 34 year old age group. After recording a 56.7 percent increase between 1970 and 1985, this group is expected to increase by only 10.0 percent between 1985 and 2000. These projections indicate that while the labor market for entry level workers may be somewhat tighter than in the past, there could 28 be a shortage of young experienced workers from the 20 to 34 year-old age cohorts .",'. (from which new supervisors and managers are largely drawn) This scenario represents a reversal of the labor supply situation that existed in the 1970s as the baby boomers came of age, providing an abundance of new entrants and young skilled workers to the labor force. The traditional supply of young skilled workers, as well as properly trained new labor force entrants may not be large enough to fill the job openings of the year 2000. In the near future companies will need to shift their recruiting efforts to people already in the work force, disadvantaged youth, and other typically underutilized sectors of the population. If employers expect to meet their demand for properly trained workers in the early part of the next century, they may need to take a more active role in developing the skills of these groups. As the economy and work force shift from agriculture and manufacturing to other areas, better educational preparation will become paramount because the"executive, professional, technical and sales occupations require significantly more education (Table 4). It is estimated by the Department of Labor that 90.57. of professional~ 70% of executives, and over 50% of sales workers have some college experience. Dr. Joseph G. Freund of the Georgia Department of Labor analyzed the educational implications of the demands growing out of the projected work force needed in Georgia in the 1980s. Using the projected numbers of workers to be needed in each occupational group in 1990, he estimated on the basis of national norms the numbers of workers in each group who should be educated at various levels (less than 4 years of high school, 1-3 years of college and 4 or more years of college). He concludes that by 1990, Georgia will need 718,884 college graduates (Table 5). As of 1987, 602,917 workers held college degrees with about 650,000 projected by 1990, leaving Georgia 70,000 short of its needs. Dr. Freund notes that this shortfall is consistent with the disparity of persons in the Georgia population with 4 or more years of college (17.5%) as contrasted to the total U.S. population (26.2%). The analysis also concludes that 1,297,256 workers with 4 years of high school will be needed by 1990. Freund1s data indicate that by 1990 the number of Georgians with a high school education aged 25-64 will number less than 1 million, which represents nearly a 23% shortfall of high school graduates as workers compared to U.S. averages. This shortfall is reflected in the figures which show 67.7% of Georgians aged 25-64 with 4 years of high school as contrasted to 86% for the U.S. in general. 29 TABLE 1 Georgia Employment by Major Industry Division Estimated 1985 and Projected 2000 Annual Averages INDUSTRY 1985 PERCENT ANNUAL OF AVERAGE TOTAL 2000 PERCENT ANNUAL OF AVERAGE TOTAL NUMERICAL PERCElfr QlANGE OIAHGE TOTAL ALL INDUSTRIES 2,819,360 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing Mining Construction Durable Goods Manufacturing Nondurable Goods Manufacturing Transportation Communications and Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Services Government 49,600 7,950 143,600 217,500 335,000 115,840 62,950 198,700 449,950 136,400 890,970 210,900 100.0 1.8 0.3 5.1 7.7 11.9 4.1 2.2 7.0 16.0 4.8 31.6 7.5 3,758,000 52,570 11 ,380 186,050 264,900 400,700 155,320 86,430 245,470 641,610 202,990 1,256,930 253,650 100.0 1.4 0.3 5.0 7.0 10.7 4.1 2.3 6.5 17.1 5.4 33.4 6.7 938,640 2,970 3,430 42,450 47,400 65,700 39,480 23,480 46,770 191,660 66,590 365,960 42,750 33.29 5.98 43.14 29.56 21.79 <19.61 -34.08 37.29 23.53 42.59 48.81 41.07 20.27 TABLE 2 Georgia's Leading Growth Industries Ranked by Numerical Employment Increase 1985-2000 INDUSTRY Miscellaneous business services Eating and drinking places Health services Educational services Special trade contractors Wholesale trade, durable goods Food stores, total Retail trade, general merchandise Hotels and other lodging places Miscellaneous services Local government Printing and publishing industries Trucking and warehousing Personal services Automobile and recreational vehicles Banking Textile mill products Electrical machinery, equipment, and supplies Wholesale trade, nondurable goods Real estate ADDITIONAL JOBS 1985-2000 78,850 77 ,730 67,750 56,100 33,660 32,710 29,650 23,780 21,250 21,200 20,700 20,500 20,080 19,340 16,650 16,410 15,290 14,330 14,060 13,730 30 ". TABLE 3 Employment Growth by Major Occupational Group 1985-2000 Management and Related PERCEN! CHANGE 36 N1..lHERICM. CHANGE 62,000 Professional, Paraprofessional, Technical 38 180,000 Sales and Related 41 120,000 Clerical and Administrative Support 30 142,00.0 Services 45 190,000 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing 4 3,000 Production, Operations Maintenance 26 230,000 ..;:.; 31 TABLE 4 OCCCUPATIONS OF EMPLOYED PERSONS 25-64 YEARS OLD BY YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETED, MARCH 1987 (BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS) Exec., Mgr. & &Admin. Professionals Sales Clerical Service Agr., Fish. Forestry Product. Oper. &Maintenance Less Than 4 Yrs. H.S. 4.6 .8 7.9 5.3 25.8 34.3 27.8 1-3 Years 4 Yrs" College 4 Yrs. H.S. College or More 25.7 8.6 41.0 54.3 48.8 23.1 14.1 24.1 27.8 18.0 46.6 76.4 27.0 12.6 7.4 44.2 13.1 8.3 52.2 15.0 5".0 32 '. TABLE 5 1990 GEORGIA WORK FORCE BY MAJOR CLASSIFICATION AND YEARS OF EDUCATION Less Than 4 Yrs. H.S. 4 Yrs. H.S. 1-3 Yrs. College 4 or More Yrs. College Executives Professionals Sales Clerical Service Agric., Fish, Forestry Production TOTALS 8,414 4,044 26,459 27,635 118,256 38,008 268,233 491,049 47,008 43,477 137,321 283,131 233,679 48,978 503,662 1,297,256 42,225 71,282 80,718 144,954 82,505 14,516 144,730 580,930 85,236 386,240 90,431 65,698 33,919 9,197 48,243 718,884 By 1990, Georgia's economy will need to have 718,884 college graduates. In 1987, we have about 602,917. Georgia Population - age 25-64 U. S. Population - age 25-64 4 yrs .. or more college 4 yrs. or more college 17.57. 26.27. Georgia Population - age 25-64 U. S. Population - age 25-64 4 yrs. high school 4 yrs. high school 67.77. 867. 33 NEEDS FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AN UPDATE OF THE 1982 PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT In the early 1980s the University System of Georgia conducted a comprehensive assessment of the needs for specific higher education programs and services and the nature by which the System should respond to these needs. Focusing on the 1980s, this extensive evaluation considered the elements of access, supply, demand, and quality concerning major academic program areas: Business, Science and Technology; Teacher Education; Health Professions; Agriculture and Home Economics; and the Public and Social Sciences. The recommendations from this earlier assessment proved to be valuable guides in setting the agenda for the development of the University System in the 1980's. Many of the issues and suggested actions are still relevant. The current planning process sought to build on the excellent base established by the 1983 needs assessment, whose recent and comprehensive nature meant that the current process could concentrate on updating the data and recommendations contained therein. For each of the five program areas, the update made new or revised proj ections of supply and demand, looking ahead to the 1990' s. In addition, the 1982 recommendations concerning the improvement of program quality or access were examined to determine their current status and future relevancy. This update was conducted by many of the institutional faculty and staff who participated in the original Needs Assessment. Agriculture and Home Economics Georgia is an agricultural leader in a nation that leads the world in agriculture. Agricultural enterprises occupy almost 25 percent of the state's land area, and provide the bulk of raw materials for its processing and manufacturing firms. Georgia agriculture is diverse, with current farm cash receipts of more than $3.5 billion, almost evenly divided between crops and livestock. In addition, the state boasts the largest commercial forest acreage in the nation. Agribusiness operations pump $15 billion into the state's economy every year and forestry adds another $8 billion. But Georgia agriculture and the related educational programs do not exist in a vacuum, isolated from demographic, social, economic and political trends that affect the rest of society. Among those that are likely to have a continuing impact include an increase in population as a result of in-migration from all parts of the country, a decrease in the age group from which the college has traditionally drawn its students, a change in farm structure to fewer and larger operations with fewer full-time farmers, a citizenry that is generally older, more urban and more health-conscious, and an increased dependence on worldwide international trade with domestic prices of agricultural commodities being influenced by export sales. Furthermore, we can expect many changes in consumer preferences and needs, almost overwhelming scientific and technological advances, and increased demands by competing interests on the state's natural resources. This part of the Needs Assessment update examines the status of the academic instructional programs which prepare students to enter occupations and 34 professions related to agriculture. Research and service, the other two important components of the University System's role in agriculture, will be addressed in the section on economic and community development. Those who will lead Georgia's agriculture into the next century will come from the institutions of higher education. Likewise, the science and education that will drive agriculture will emerge from the research and educational programs of the institutions of higher education. Therefore, if Georgia is to remain as one of the leading states in the Southeast and continue to contribute significantly to the national and international output in agriculture, the University System must place a high priority on effective agricultural education and research. Supply and Demand Following are the major findings based on the average annual demand for graduates from agricultural programs from 1985-90 and the supply of graduates from these programs in 1986-87. 1. There is an average annual demand for 1,467 graduates from agriculture-related programs. Since 1983, the demand for managers, . .- " " . marketers, and merchandisers has increased while the annual demand has decreased for direct farming-related employment, especially production specialists. 2. The number of agricultural graduates (baccalaureates, masters and doctorates) will take care of only 30 percent of the total demand in agriculture. In every instance the number of agricultural graduates is insufficient to fill the annual demand. The supply of agricultural graduates ranges from a low of 23 percent of the annual demand for scientists and engineers to a high of 54 percent of the annual demand for educators and information specialists. In the early 1980's there were approximately three jobs in agriculture for every agricultural graduate. Presently there are 3.3 jobs for each graduate. 3. Since the supply of agricultural graduates is only 30 percent of the annual demand, the jobs in agriculture are available to be filled by graduates from the agriculture-related fields. In the 1983 Needs Assessment there were only 186 agriculture-related graduates per year. The data for 1986-87 show 285 graduates in agricu1turerelated fields. Two factors contributed to the increase. In the present study more degree specializations were included in the agriculture-related fields than in the previous study. Also, there has been a sizeable increase in the number of graduates in the related fields of business and management in the University System institutions. In 1986-87, 90 graduates in business and management were available for agricultural employment in marketing, merchandising and as sales representatives. 4. The total supply of agricultural and agriculture-related graduates 35 (730) is still insufficient to fill the employment demand. In fact, the total supply will fill only half of the demand. Through 1990, scientists, engineers, managers, sales representatives and marketing specialists will account for three-fourths of the total Georgia employment openings for new college graduates with expertise in food and agriculture. 5. Since the demand for 1,467 graduates was projected to occur annually through 1990, it was of interest to project the supply of agricultural graduates. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCBS) of the u.S. Department of Education projected a decrease of ten percent over the decade from 1982-83 to 1991-92 in the number of graduates. Based on these data, the available supply of Georgia graduates for the employment opportunities in agriculture would decline five percent from 1986-87 to 1991-92 (the last five years of the decade projected by NCES). Thus, in the early 1990s, there would be only 423 agricultural graduates and 271 graduates in allied fields annually to fill the 1,467 job openings in agriculture. Directions and Actions Many of the recommendations of the 1983 Needs Assessment have been acted upon over the past six years. No additional universities/colleges have been authorized to offer degree programs in Agriculture, Forestry, Home Economics or Veterinary Medicine. Existing teaching programs at all levels in the food and agricultural sciences have been strengthened. Professional programs in Veterinary Medicine and the Veterinary Medical Technician program have been strengthened. Financial support has been maintained and has enabled some improvement in research and extension programs. No associate degree programs in Agriculture, Forestry, Home Economics or Veterinary Medicine are being offered in the vocational technical schools. The current study concludes that the above recommendations are still valid and that these directions should be continued through the 1990's. In addition, the update recognized new or continuing needs that should be priorities in the early 1990's as seen in the following recommendations: 1. Additional funding should be provided for graduate fellowships in Agriculture, Forestry, and Veterinary Medicine. 2. In addition, the update recognized new or continuing needs that should be priorities in the early 1990s as seen in the following recommendations: A Biocontainment Research Laboratory in Veterinary Medicine should be constructed. The University System should support innovative programs in Agricultural Biotechnology, International Agriculture, Agribusiness, further agricultural products processing. animal science, and in emerging industries such as ornamentals and turf. 36 Support should be provided for new teaching thrusts in the Forestry curriculum, effective student counseling, faculty improvement and continuing education. The 1983 Needs Assessment addressed separately the area of Home Economics -another field in transition as society and technology change. Supply and Demand The recent update of the Home Economics Needs Assessment is based on a 1987 study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (as applied to the State of Georgia) of the annual demand for higher education graduates through 1995. The supply figures are based on the number of University System graduates in 1986-87 from Home Economics related programs. 1. The annual demand for 1,113 graduates in home economics through 1995 is lower than that determined in the previous study. The fact that jobs filled by associate degree graduates were omitted in the latter study may account for the lower demand. 2. The annual supply is 290 Home Economics graduates, which will take care of only 26 percent of the total demand in home economics. In every instance the number of home economics graduates is insufficient to fill the annual demand. The supply ofhome economics graduates ranges from a low of 14% of the annual demand for administrative and managerial professionals to a high of 44% of the annual demand for family and community service professionals. 3. Since the supply of home economics graduates is only 26 percent of the annual demand, the jobs in home economics are available to be filled by graduates from home economics-related fields. 4. Since the previous study in the early 1980 I s there has been a sizeable decrease in the number of annual graduates in home economics (from 503 to 290). Also, there has been a slight decrease in the number of home economics-related degrees awarded (from 565 to 536). 5. The total supply of home economics and home economics-related graduates (826) is still insufficient to fill the employment demand. In fact, the total supply will fill only three-fourths of the demand. 6. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) of the U. S. Department of Education projected a decrease of ten percent in the number of graduates over the decade from 1982-83 to 1991-92. Based on these data, the available supply of Georgia graduates for the employment opportunities in home economics would decline five percent from 1986-87 to 1991-92. Thus, in the early 1990s there would be only 276 home economics graduates and 509 graduates in 37 allied fields annually to fill the 1,113 job openings in home economics. In the early 1980s there were approximately three jobs in home economics for every home economics graduate. Presently there are approximately four jobs for every home economics graduate. I Directions and Actions The 1983 report recommended that no additional institutions should be authorized to offer degree programs in Home Economics and none have been. In fact, no Home Economics programs have been added, although a Ph.D. program has been proposed by the University of Georgia. The update of the 1983 assessment did find that two of the earlier recommendations need attention at this time as follows: 1. The costs and benefits of existing Associate Degree Home Economics programs should be evaluated carefully. 2. Consideration should be given to providing additional funding for graduate fellowships in Home Economics. Public and Social Services While not receiving the notice that comes with programs which prepare students for occupations related to business, technology or the health professions, academic programs which prepare students to carry out and administer publiclysupported services are increasingly needed to respond to the challenges of our changing society and economy. These economic and social changes, some of them wrenching, are challenging traditional views of family life, education, childrearing and society's responsibilities for criminal justice, social work, and care for the elderly, homeless, and the sick. It is now more critical than ever to improve how we organize, administer and carry out public and social activities and responsibilities. Professionalization within the disciplines as well as the public recognition of it is a slow process. However, it is now clear that there is a need for betterprepared individuals to deal with the complexities of living in the 190' s. Life in both rural and urban areas will become more stressful as population increases, environmental issues become critical, and the nation's economic health struggles to improve. The areas of public and social services continue to be subject to change because of the democractic process. Job markets will fluctuate as the economy changes -- often in the direction least helpful to the populations they serve. The state's troubled, poor, and illiterate, the state's unemployed, physically and mentally ill, uneducated, and handicapped will always have unmet needs. Program excellence is essential if we are to improve the quality of life for Georgia citizens. Supply and Demand As was noted in the 1983 report, it is difficult to draw a precise relationship between a student's preparation in specific academic disciplines and individual career fields in the public and social services. Study in many arts and sciences disciplines may relate in some way to these occupations and, frequently, students 38 do not follow the same higher educational preparation for these fields. This situation renders an analysis of supply and demand extremely difficult. For purposes of this update, however, the public and social services were narrowly defined to a few identifiable academic programs including among others: Public I Administration, Social Work, Criminal Justice, Social Sciences (including History and Geography) and Recreation. The major findings related to supply and demand are as follows: 1. Since 1983, there has been a net increase of 17 degree programs offered by the University System institutions. Twenty-three institutions and four external degree centers offer at least one of these programs; in 1981, only 16 institutions were so involved. 2. Enrollment in graduate programs in Public Administration increased by 51 percent from 1984 to 1988. Undergraduate programs in Criminal Justice added 365 students, a 26 percent change. Social Work programs increased their enrollments by 25 percent at the undergraduate level and 45 percent at the graduate level from 1984 to 1988. \',\ 3. From 1982 to 1988, degree production remained level in Social Work and increased only slightly (3%) in Criminal Justice and declined by 9 percent in Public Administration. 4. Most programs have additional capacity and could accept additional students. 5. Demand for graduates from all levels of Criminal Justice programs continues to be high but the existing programs appear to be able to handle the current applicant pool. 6. The demand for Master of Social Work programs is increasing due to recent changes in the state laws requiring the M.S.W for licensure. 7. Demand for Public Administration programs is strong but may be met through the strengthening and expansion of existing programs. 8. Demand stemming from education, hospitals, personal care facilities and state government should remain strong. Program Issues and Recommendations The 1983 Needs Assessment concluded with a number of findings, issues, and recommendations. The newly collected data have affirmed many of those findings. However, the University System did choose to offer new programs in Public Administration, Parks and Recreation Management, Social Work, Law Enforcement and Corrections, and Social Science baccalaureate areas. Where programs have been discontinued, in every instance at least one new program has been initiated in another University System institution to offset the phase-out. At least some of these actions would seem to run counter to the 1983 recommendation to maintain 39 current levels of programming in all areas except, possibly, Social Work. The recommendation that any new needs for Public Administration programs be met through cooperative arrangements was not heeded as three new programs were established since 1983. It is possible, however, that these new programs were justified in terms of providing geographic accessibility, a criterion which was recognized in the 1983 study. In response to the earlier recommendation to monitor and identify any needs for additional Social Work programs, the University System added a Bachelor's program at Albany State College and a Master's program at Savannah State College. In 1986 the Georgia legislature passed a bill requiring the M.S.W. for licensure which has had implications for current and prospective social workers. Presently only one institution in the University System offers an accredited M.S.W. program. There is evidence of a growing need for additional accredited programs at the Master's level for both the traditional and working student. The number of students graduating from Criminal Justice programs has increased by 3% since 1982, even though there is a 23% decline in the number of students in University System programs. Most of this increase has occurred at the graduate level. Demand is very high for all levels of graduates. The update of the 1983 Needs Assessment yielded the following findings and recommendations, some of which suggest the continued relevance of certain of the earlier recommendations. They are made with the continued observation tha~ the challenge of serving the multitude of human needs has never been greater. There are those who are homeless, hungry, abused, and abusive. Present governmental and economic realities have created a need for creative, knowledgeable professionals to work with fewer resources to accomplish more. This is true for both the public and the social services areas. As more people become available throughout the state with degrees and experience, employers will grow to value the merit and worth of professionally educated practitioners. 1. Because of reported funding deficiencies in new Public Administration programs and the need to have these programs accredited, it is recommended that the University System examine the feasibility of offering cooperative programs between institutions which have existing programs, rather than initiating new and independent programs. Because excellence is a stated goal of the University System, and recognizing that professional accreditation requires adherence to national educational standards, it is recommended that existing programs obtain the resources needed to begin work towards program accreditation before new programs are approved. 2. In light of the new relationship of licensure to the M.S.W., it is recommended that the University System consider approving the development of additional Master of Social Work degree programs to meet the needs of the traditional and non- traditional student. 3. The numbers of Criminal Justice programs should be monitored to assure that student demands are met. 40 4. Given that cooperative programs are more cost-effective than new autonomous programs, it is recommended that the Board of Regents examine optimal program implementation models before approving new programs in the area of public and social services. 5. The area of public and social services particularly is beset by a lack of information on supply and demand. The University System should consider ways to develop a comprehensive source of valid and reliable data pertaining to public and social services programs. 6. There continues to be a need for the provision of degree programs for military personnel. The central issues and discrepancies surrounding the provision of such degree programs continue to be those that were identified in the 1983 report. The University System should explore opportunities to provide higher education at or near military bases, giving attention both to special skills and personal development programming for the military while assuring that high standards of quality be maintained in all System offerings on military installations. Teacher Education ",.,.,' Perhaps no other program in higher education has the potential to contribute more to the betterment of the state and country and, at the same time, help its own enterprise. The University System's efforts to become preeminent will depend significantly upon the number and preparation of students seeking its services. The essential element to increasing the college participation rate as well as the preparation of entering freshmen is the school teacher. Elsewhere in this report, it is recommended that stronger linkages be forged between schools and colleges, recognizing, in Ernest Boyer's words, lithe seamless webll connecting the colleges and the schools. Since the first wave of school and teacher education reforms in the mid-1980's, improvements have been made nationally. Georgia has been a leader. But much remains to be done; in a real sense, the more difficult task is to shift improvement efforts from a focus on visible, statewide changes to an increased emphasis on what occurs daily in the local classroom between the teacher and the students. Attracting, preparing, and retaining performance oriented individuals in the teaching profession must become a priority if improvement is to take place. Supply and Demand Fourteen University System institutions offer teacher education programs. In 1987, there were 264 separate baccalaureate degree programs offered by those institutions, down slightly from the 270 offered in 1983. As in 1983, it is found that there is adequate 8ccess to these programs statewide, including at the graduate level. Following are the general findings of the needs assessment update: 1. In 1986-1987, there were 4,904 teaching position openings compared to 1,700 teacher graduates from the University System of Georgia. Most of the 41 openings (97%) were created by attrition. The recent Quality Basic Education legislation has increased the need for new teachers as have recently adopted higher admission standards for entry into colleges and universities, which create a greater need for college-related coursework. 2. Baccalaureate degree production increased by 7% from 1983 to 1987. However, certain teaching specialties declined in degree production including Art, Special Education, Health Education, Business Education and Industrial Arts. 3. In 1986, the Georgia Professional Standards Commission reported position openings for various specialties. In only Health/Physical Education does the supply of graduates exceed demand. In all of the other areas studied, the number of graduates, compared to openings is low. Especially critical are fields such as science, mathematics, foreign language and special education. 4. The preparation of persons with graduate degrees in Education is also relevant to the flow of new teachers into the classroom. There are programs with initial preparation at the post-baccalaureate level although most graduates seeking degrees at the masters level have been in the teaching force or are being prepared for administrative or support positions. Overall production has declined since 1978 by 42%. 5. As is true nationwide, a declining number of Blacks in Georgia are earning degrees in teacher education. Only 161 Bachelor's of Science degrees in Education were awarded to black students in 1987 compared to 316 baccalaureates in 1978. In 1986, blacks were awarded only 8% of the total teacher education baccalaureates; those degrees represented only 3% of the teacher position openings. 6. Not unexpectedly, since baccalaureate enrollments and number of graduate students are related, graduate degree trends for blacks follow the same pattern. At the master's level, almost 65 percent fewer degrees Were awarded to blacks in 1987 than in 1978 (182 vs. 516), and the proportion of total education graduate degrees held by blacks declined from 14.6 to 10.6 percent. At the doctorate level, the number of degrees awarded to black students doubled over the same period, and the black proportion increased as well; even so the numbers remained very small. When the baccalaureate and the Master's pictures are combined, it is evident that the flow of black Georgians from the University System to the public school classroom is declining. At the same time, it must be recognized that this decline has occurred in a state that is one-third black. Directions and Actions During the past few years, the University System of Georgia has placed on its agenda the improvement of teacher education programs as a Systemwide priority. Planning and action for improvement have been characterized by cooperation among the various individuals, groups, organizations and agencies directly contri buting to policy development and being affected by decisions relating to teacher education. 42 Since 1984, the following actions have been taken: 1. Systemwide standards have been established for admission to teacher education. 2. A formal review procedure was authorized for the review and improvement of teacher education programs. As a result, 39 teacher preparation programs in twelve institutions of the University System were placed on probation with the mandate to submit a plan for improvement. Since that time 26 programs have been removed from probation, 10 programs discontinued and 3 remain on probation. 3. An external review committee for the improvement of teacher education was appointed to provide an overview of teacher education within the University System, to identify the strengths of the programs, to compare the programs in Georgia with model programs and to aid in determining the criteria for quality. The report from this committee, Improving Undergraduate Teacher Education in Georgia, carried 44 recommendations. Many of the ,.. ' recommendations have been implemented and have served as the impetus for 1t~] a number of changes in the preparation of teachers. 4. Additionally, there has been increasing activity in creating opportunities for public shools and schools/ colleges of education to cooperate in seeking solutions to special problems or concerns and to review the current curriculum in teacher education. 5. In the Special Funding Initiative recommended by the Chancellor and approved by the General Assembly for FY89, $1 million was used to establish four teacher education centers at non-university level institutions. These centers, established at Georgia College, Georgia Southern College, Valdosta State College and West Georgia College, are serving as resource centers for the public schools in the area, developing programs of applied research, working to update teachers in their teaching areas and developing cooperative and collaborative relationships with neighboring institutions to offer needed programs and initiate change in existing programs. Much has taken place since 1983 to improve teacher education in Georgia. The institutions individually and the System collectively are placing higher priority on the preparation of teachers. Nevertheless, a comparison of the recommendations in The Eighties and Beyond (1983) with those found in Improving Undergraduate Teacher Education in Georgia (1986) and the data in the current report updating the earlier assessment leads to the following recommendations: 1. The University System should continue efforts to analyze and evaluate teacher preparation programs and to identify ways to move them toward changes being incorporated in exemplary programs throughout the country. The University System should establish an incentives program to encourage schools, colleges and departments of education to pilot new approaches in teacher preparation programs. 43 2. Each teacher education program should continue to gather and analyze data and information on its graduates to determine its effectiveness in producing competent and effective teachers. 3. To expand the positive impact of its resources and in order to encourage outreach programs to the public schools, the University System should consider developing an in-load formula which enables higher education faculty to provide services to the professional staff of Georgia IS elementary and secondary schools. 4. The University System should undertake a comparative study of campus-wide enrollments, credit-hour production and the funding formula for schools, colleges and departments of education in relation to other programs at the same and other institutions within the System. S. With the stateI s concern for quality education and the impending loss of teachers from the public schools, a program should be initiated jointly by the University System and the Department of Education for the early (middle school and junior high school) identification and academic assistance of students with an interest in and aptitude for teaching. Incentive programs such as scholarships, grants and low interest and forgivable loans, should be created to attract academically superior students to teaching. 6. In order to increase the number of minority students choosing teaching as a career, a special program for academically promising students at middle and high school levels should be established; the incentives program consisting of scholarships and loans with repayment by service options for promising minority students who wish to teach should be continued and enhanced; the Board of Regents should consider providing incentives for teacher producing institutions to increase their proportions of minority enrollees and graduates in teacher preparation programs. 7. The University System should continue to assist institutions which have traditionally prepared a large proportion of Black teachers to meet program review requirements. 8. The University System should establish new programs in Teacher Education only if interinstitutional cooperative efforts prove impractical, particularly at the Master I s and Education Specialist levels. New programs should be approved only after careful review which confirms clearly demonstrated need and an acceptable level of quality and support of existing programs and graduates at the proposing institution. 9. The professional component of Teacher Education programs should be strengthened by strong emphasis on supervised clinical and field experiences and consideration for lengthening the student teaching requirement. 44 Health Professions The University System of Georgia has invested heavily in the preparation of professionals to meet Georgia's health care needs. While there still are some areas in Georgia without a good distribution of health manpower. the situation continues to improve both with respect to the location of educational programs and their graduates. One of the general findings of the 1983 Needs Assessment concerned the lack of an information system for projecting the supply and demand for different categories of health care workers. The report recommended that the System maintain statistics on applicants and enrollments in individual health programs and that a mechanism be developed for the collection, compilation, analysis and distribution of manpower data related to all health professions for which educational programs exist within the System. In an important way. the update of the 1983 Needs Assessment not only reports on progress since that time but in itself represents a substantive response to the recommendation for the establishment of a formal. continuing protocol for needs assessment and program adjustment. To update the 1983 report. staff from the Medical College of Georgia agreed to develop a needs assessment procedure which could be used not only in this present update but regularly in the future to keep current the supply and demand situation for health manpower. The following describes the rationale and components of this new procedure. Needs Assessment Model for Health Manpower The establishment and direction of every academic program in the health professions must be justified on the basis of need. Such a needs assessment is particularly important in determining the capital and operational investments required and in evaluating the ultimate effectiveness of the program. Unfortunately. it is not possible to predict accurately future health professional manpower needs. Various models have been used in such projections. The "disease" model attempts to measure manpower requirements by assessing the aggregate burden of disease, disability and dysfunction of the population. The "treatmentll model estimates need by the cumulative time and services required to treat disease. The IIdemand" model assesses need by the actual and projected utilization of care. Each model has appropriate justification. Recent European experience. however. has shown that basing manpower requirements on disease or treatment needs often leads to the overproduction of manpower and subsequent professional underemployment or unemployment. The United States has generally avoided this problem by basing manpower assessment and planning on a marketoriented or demand model. In this model the demand for health professional personnel depends on the actual and expected utilization of services. Utilization of care, in turn, depends on such factors as: Availability of health providers Accessibility of patients to providers Magnitude and growth of the population 45 Economic potential of the population Facilitating payment mechanisms including third party insurance and private/public benefits or subsidies Educational level of the population Perceived health status/health consciousness of the population. The following framework identifies the various steps to assess manpower needs for selected health disciplines using the demand model: A. THE ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT NEEDS FOR A SELECTED DISCIPLINE Current Numbers (Number of currently licensed/credentialed personnel; number of actively employed personnel; number of fulltime equivalent personnel). Current Distribution (Distribution of personnel by gender, age, race, geographic location, type of employment, etc.). Current Need (Current needs for licensed, actively employed and full-time equivalent personnel by such distributional factors as gender, age, race, location, type of employment). B. THE ASSESSMENT OF PROJECTED NEEDS Projected Demand (Demographic and socioeconomic trends together with the health status, health awareness, health delivery, health utilization factors which affect the need/demand for health personnel). Projected Supply (Projected supply of health personnel based on recruitment, training, production, in-migration, retention/attri- tional factors). Projected Need (Projected need for licensed, employed and ful1time equivalent health personnel based on balance of demand/ supply) . C. THE ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS "Non-System" Programs (Number, identity, location, and type(s) of "non-System" educational programs for the health discipline together with the current applicant pool, admissions, enrollment, graduates). "System" Programs (Number, identity, location, and type( s) of "System" educational programs for the health discipline together with the current applicant pool, admissions, enrollment, graduates). D. THE ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR "SYSTEM" ACTION Standing Recommendations (Status of standing recommendations and their implementation). Future Directions (Anticipated developments involving the health 46 discipline in the ensuing decade and their impact on the System). Proposed RecOlmDendations/Initiatives (Recommended "System" actions relating to responsive program planning, development, change and ~: evaluation) .~ E. SUMMARY (Summary assessment of current and projected need and of the response of the System). Following are current applications of the above needs assessment model to selected key health professions: Nursing, Dentistry, Dental Hygiene, Medicine, and Physical Therapy. Other key disciplines will follow over the coming year and all will be regularly updated. In each case, the results include a summary of supply and demand, a description of the major actions related to recommendations in the 1983 report and suggested future directions and actions. Nursing The need for nurses has increased dramatically and the University System is attempting to respond to this priority with available resources. The University System has taken many actions in response to the 1983 recommendations in the Needs Assessment report. In 1986-87, a special task force suggested a series of actions to address the nursing shortage systematically and in each of its dimensions including: professional role and status, employment conditions, program access, program articulation, recruitment and retention policies, and licensure criteria. Since 1983, several new nursing programs were added including: a cooperative doctoral program at the Medical College of Georgia and Georgia State University and a Master's program at Albany State College. Also, the Chancellor IS 1988-89 Special Funding Initiative addressed directly the nursing shortage by adding over $1 million to expand existing programs. As a result, nursing program enrollments increased by over 500 students. Supply and Demand: The major findings related to supply and demand are as follows: 1. In the decade 1990-2000 the state of Georgia must anticipate a substantial increase in the demand for direct patient services. This demand will require an expansion in the pool of nurses, including both registered nurses (RN) and licensed practical (LPN) nurses. It is expected that the number of full-time equivalent nurses (RNs and LPNs) will have to increase from an estimated total of 40,919 in 1990 to between 66,395 and 67,995 in the year 2000. This means that there must be an annual increment of 2,548 to 2,708 FTE RN and LPN nurses over the next decade in order to achieve projected supply/requirement levels by the year 2000. These net annual requirements, however, must be adjusted for historical attrition rates, so that between 5,548 and 5,899 RN and LPN nurse licensees must actually be added to the nurse pool each year over the next decade. 2. Of this total requirement of 5,548 to 5,899 nurses, it can be assumed that: Approximately 3,400 nurses (RN and LPN) will be added annually from the graduates of existing nurse education programs. 47 Approximately 800-1,900 nurses (RN and LPN) will be added annually by in-migration or occupational re-entry. 3. These 4,200 to 5,300 nurses (RN and LPN) are still short of the annual projected need by 600 to 1,348 nurses. Furthermore, if the contention of the National Leage for Nursing is correct, the actual sho~tage of nurses will be even greater than these figures suggest. Recommended Directions and Actions While recognizing that a totally effective response to the nursing shortage must stretch beyond higher education and include actions by the health care industry to address issues such as salaries and working conditions, it is also evident that the University System needs to keep nursing education as a high priority. The anticipated shortage should be addressed by such means as: Increasing the production of nurses Encouraging in-migration of nurses Reducing career attrition of nurses Promoting the employment of non-nurses It is clear that every effort must be made to preserve the integrity of the existing nurse educational programs, to maintain and increase applicant quality and numbers, and to increase student retention. Associate degree and baccalaureate programs for registered nurses must increase the number of their graduates to compensate for any reduction in the number of graduates from LPN programs and to assure the presence of nurses with the education required for tomorrow's increasingly sophisticated health technologies and the concomitant complexity of nursing care required. Existing and contemplated programs must be designed for articulation between LPN and associate degree programs, associate and baccalaureate degree programs, between generic baccalaureate programs and RN programs, and between baccalaureate and higher degree programs. Graduate programs must be supported to assure the critical supply of nurse specialists, administrators, educators, and researchers. Since the academic market is driven by the job market, no long term improvement in the production of nurses can occur without urgent steps being taken to further define the role of nurses in direct patient care, to clarify their professional relationships with physicians and administrators, to enhance their salaries and benefits and to otherwise promote their overall career satisfaction. Such measures are essential for reducing attrition and assuring career retention. It is therefore recommended that the University System: 1. Establish recruitment and marketing programs capable of attracting academically able students into nursing. 2. Augment resources and provide alternative program plans in existing associate and baccalaureate degree nursing programs for the purpose of preparing more nurses who are capable of providing quality care. 48 3. Promote the recruitment and retention of quality faculty in nursing. 4. Support a lower student/faculty ratio for safety in the clinical experiences as well as for fuller development of all students. 5. Encourage and support major health care providers in the establishment of programs to attract and retain competent nurses in the health care delivery system. 6. Cooperate in the continuing monitoring of nursing needs in Georgia with the relevant agencies. Dentistry The dental profession is changing as it places more emphasis on disease prevention, care for the elderly and reaching populations which heretofore were not inclined or able to take advantage of dental care. Supply and Demand Following are the key findings with respect to supply and demand for dentists: 1. In the 1990s the State of Georgia must anticipate a substantial increase in the demand for dental services. This demand will require an expansion in the pool of dentists. It is expected that the number of dentists will have to increase from an estimated 3,271 active dentists in 1990 to between 4,416 and 4,776 active dentists by the year 2000. Owing to attrition through death, retirement, change of career, and out-migration, there will be a loss of 755-789 Georgia dentists in the 10-year period. Thus over the period 1990-2000 the State of Georgia will need an additional supply of 1,900 to 2,294 active dentists. 2. Of this total requirement, it is assumed that: The School of Dentistry at MCG will produce 500 dental graduates with approximately 85 percent (or 425) locating their practices in Georgia. An additional 1,475 to 1,869 dentists will have to be supplied by in-migration and licensure. Recommended Directions and Actions Since the 1983 Needs Assessment, the School of Dentistry at MeG has maintained its 1982 enrollment of 50 entering students per year as recommended. However, Emory University closed its undergraduate program in Dentistry. It is clear, therefore, that every effort must be made to preserve the integrity of the existing dental educational program. Specific recommendations to the University System include: 1. Maintain the present program in dentistry at the 1982 level of 50 entering students per year. 49 2. Strengthen student recruitment programs to ensure a continuing demand for careers in dentistry from well-qualified applicants. 3. Encourage a renewed emphasis in dental education on oral disease prevention, health promotion, dental care for the elderly and others with limited access to dental care, and life-long education of dental graduates. 4. Define and direct the develoPment of a program for public education and outreach activities related to oral health that will involve both the public and the profession. 5. Monitor the performance and outcomes of the dental educational programs with respect to their relevance, efficiency and overall effectiveness. Dental Hygiene Since the 1983 Needs Assessment, the Dental Hygiene profession and its preparatory programs have experienced various strains and pressures. The profession is adjusting to the changing practices of dentists, which in some cases expands the demand for the hygienist's services and in other situations, decreases it. In addition, there has been a recent challenge to the current system for educating dental hygienists in the form of a proposed alternative training program using private dentists instead of higher education programs. Supply and Demand The key findings concerning supply and demand are as follows: 1. In the 1990s the State of Georgia must anticipate a substantial increase in the demand for dental hygiene services. This demand will require an expansion in the pool of dental hygienists. It is expected that the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) dental hygienists will have to increase. from an estimated total of 1,971 in 1990 to between 2,894 and 3,136 in the year 2000. This means that there must be an annual increment of 92 to 116 FTE dental hygienists over the next decade in order to achieve projected supply levels by the year 2000. These net annual requirements, however, must be adjusted for historical attrition rates, so that approximately 200 dental hygienist licensees must actually be added to the hygienist pool each year over the next decade. 2. Of this total requirement of 200 hygienists it is estimated that at least 100 hygienists can be added annually from the graduates of the existing state dental hygiene programs at their present level of activity. In addition, 72 hygienists can be added annually by the state dental hygiene programs if they achieve the maximum use and productivity of their existing resources. The remaining required hygienists can be added by increasing dental hygiene student enrollment capacity through flexible programming, by in-migration of dental hygienists and by reducing career attrition. 50 Recommended Directions and Actions At the present time the prospects for Dental Hygiene as an academic discipline in the State of Georgia are clouded by proposed legislation now before the State Legislature. The legislation would amend the Dental Practice Act to permit "certified dental hygienists" to be trained by private dentists under an alternative training program approved by the Georgia Board of Dentistry. This proposal significantly impinges on the nature of Dental Hygiene as a discipline, on the nature, quality and scope of future hygienist services and, of course, on the public interest. At the present critical juncture, therefore, it is recommended that the University System take the following steps: 1. Present the state legislature with the fundamental issues which the proposed change in the Dental Practice Act poses, not only to the dental hygiene and dentistry professions but to the public interest. 2. If the proposed change in the Dental Practice Act is not passed, the System should become an active consultant to organized dentistry in planning the future of dental hygiene as a recognized advocate of the public s interest. 3. Support the new SELECT program for dental auxiliary recruitment in Georgia. 4. Emphasize efforts to recruit non-traditional students including minorities, former military dental technicians, males, and mature women seeking to re-enter the job market. 5. Strengthen scholarship and other financial assistance for dental hygiene students through the Georgia Dental Education Foundation and encourage sponsorship of "scholarship contracts" by individual dentists. 6. Modify the undergraduate curriculum in dentistry to include the interaction of dental students and dental hygiene students in academic, clinical and field experiences. This will foster greater commitment by dentists to the employment and utilization of dental hygienists in their practices. 7. Work through academic dentistry to educate practicing dentists on the potential rolf'..'): professionally trained hygienists in marketing dentistry, enhancing periodontal services, reducing malpractice risks, and assuring quality control. 8. If the Dental Practice Act is amended to permit the proposed certified dental hygienist program, the System should develop a contingency plan to terminate the existing associate degree programs and retain limited baccalaureate and graduate programs to provide dental hygienists for public health, educational, hospital and military situations. 51 Medicine In their 1983 report "The Eighties and Beyond: A Commitment to Excellence" the Regents recommended that the University System maintain its present programming in medicine, which has been done. It was also recommended that residency opportunities at the Medical College of Georgia be increased, particularly in the area of family practice and that an examination be made of the appropriateness of state funding for Georgia students in educational programs in medicine located outside the System. These recommendations have been fully implemented. Moreover, the emphasis in the 1983 report to support outreach activities such as education of the lay public and school students, demonstration projects related to health care delivery, consultations, and continuing education activities in order to increase public awareness of health care has been followed. Since 1983, as recommended, better statistics are being maintained and programming is being developed in the health professions to include curricular emphasis on prevention of disease and an examination of methods of health care cost containment. Also public service, continuing education, and research programs are being formed to contribute to the solution of the problem of escalating health care costs. Supply and Demand At the time of the 1983 Needs Assessment, several studies had projected an oversupply of physicians in the United States. Since 1983 a number of factors have gained prominence which will affect the demand for physicians. The following factors will reduce the demand for physicians: Increase in the number of HMOs. Increase in the number of PPOs. Increase in the number of IPAs. Increase in cost containment efforts. Increase in strict case management with centrally managed care of all the health care needs of an individual or group of individuals in an HMO or PPO environment. Increase in the number of non-physician health care providers. Increase in health promotion and disease prevention programs. Nevertheless, the demand for health care services and therefore for physician manpower is expected to rise substantially in the 1990s. This anticipated increased demand-is related to an: Increase in population. Increase in the number and proportion of the elderly population. Increase in the number and proportion of the population with chronic health problems. Increase in the number and proportion of acutely ill, hospitalized patients with intensive, critical and complex care needs. Increase in the number and proportion of patients requiring ambulatory care services. Increase in the number and proportion of patients requiring long term health care. Increase in the number and proportion of patients requiring sophisticated technological skills and care. Increase in the number of AIDS patients. 52 Increase in the number or patients with drug-abuse related problems. Increase in insurance coverage of the enormous unmet needs of the poor, teenage pregnant women, the chronically mentally ill, the homeless, and the elderly. On balance. there are strong indications that the surplus of physicians projected for the year 2000 will be far less than anticipated; indeed. a shortage of physicians may well develop early in the next century. The supply of physicians for the period 1990-2000 was estimated from recognized federal models which augment the active supply of physicians with new entrants and subtract annual losses due to deaths and retirements. Emphasis was placed on the most recent federal model which assumes only a moderate increase in manpower supply over the next decade. The future requirement for physicians was estimated from recognized federal models which reflect patterns of service utilization and productivity as well as projected changes in population. trends in health insurance benefits and other factors affecting utilization, such as changes in prices of services and summary determinants not directly measured by consumer prices. Emphasis was placed on the Graduate Medical Education National Advisory Committee projection which assumes lower physician manpower requirements than other federal models. 1. In the decade 1990-2000 the State of Georgia must anticipate a substan- tial increase in the demand for medical services. This demand will require an expansion in the pool of physicians. including both allopathic and osteopathic practitioners. It is expected that the number of active. non-federal physicians will actually increase from an estimated total of 11.206 in 1990 to a total of at least 13.186 in the year 2000. This is a decade increase of 1.980 physicians or an annual increase of 198 physicians. 2. While this increase is occurring. approximately 2,440 physicians will be leaving practice by death. retirement and career changes for an annual attrition of 244 physicians calculated at 2.0 percent of the average manpower pool. 3. To accommodate the annual increase in the manpower pool of 198 physicians and the annual attrition of the pool. of 422 physicians will require 442 physicians entering the manpower pool each year over the next decade. 4. The four medical schools in the State of Georgia graduate 358 physicians a year. These graduates, however. cannot engage in practice until after they have completed their residency requirements. The number of firstyear residency positions in Georgia is virtually the same as the number of annual physician graduates. Approximately 70 percent or 251 of these resident physicians locate their practices in Georgia each year. 5. The State of Georgia will therefore supply 57 percent of its own physician manpower needs over the next decade. The remaining annual supply requirements must be met by in-migration from other states and countries. 53 Recommended Direction and Actions If the Georgia health care delivery system is to function optimally over the next decade. it is essential that the available physician manpower pool be maximally effective. As was true in the 1983 Needs Assessment. there is still not an adequate distribution of physicians in certain rural areas or in some medical specialties. The active physicians. therefore. should be optimally available to the patient population consistent with the maintenance of a "critical physician mass." The number. location and nature of physician residency positions could favorably influence this distribution because the residency program determines to a great extent the specialty and location of the practice. Furthermore. appropriate measures should be taken to assure optimal patient access to primary medical care. Provision. therefore. must be made for such matters as adequate patient communication and transportation and for physician reimbursement. In view of the anticipated needs and the progress made since 1983. it is recommended that the University System: 1. Continue its present levels of programming in medicine 2. Maintain active recruitment of minority students, female students and students from low-income families along with appropriate opportunities for scholarships and loans. 3. Increase residency opportunities at the Medical College of Georgia, particularly in the primary care disciplines. 4. Work with appropriate public and professional agencies under the "land grant college" concept of extension services to assure patient care in areas of difficult or limited access. 5. Continue to support outreach activities such as education of the lay public and school students, demonstration projects related to health care delivery, consultations, and continuing education activities in order to increase public awareness of health care and disease prevention practices. 6. Work with the Georgia Center for Health Statistics to implement a mechanism for the collection, compilation, analysis and distribution of manpower data related to all health professions for which educational programs exist within the System. 7. Increase curricular emphasis on the prevention of disease and on methods of health care cost containment including public services. continuing education. and research programs which will help moderate escalating health care costs. 54 Physical Therapy Physical therapists provide diagnostic and rehabilitative services designed to relieve pain, improve functional mobility, maintain cardiopulmonary function and limit the disability of people suffering from a disabling injury or disease. Physical therapists use various therapeutic procedures including exercise, massage, application of heat or cold, electrical stimulation, and the application of assistive devices such as crutches or canes. Physical therapists also work closely with patients' families and instruct family members in continued home treatment. Finally, physical therapists are deeply concerned with such disease prevention and health promotion activities as we11ness and fitness programs. In 40 states, including the State of Georgia, the physical therapist is now permitted to evaluate patients without medical referral. Twenty-one of these states also permit treatment of patients so evaluated. Physical therapist assistants work under the direct supervision of physical therapists. They administer uncomplicated active and passive therapeutic exercises, therapeutic massage, and treatments involving heat, light, sound, water, or electricity for patients whose conditions are relatively stable. The basic occupational preparation for physical therapists involves a four-year bachelor's degree, a 12-16 month certificate program for students with baccalaureate degrees in other disciplines and an 18-36 month master's program for students with baccalaureate degrees in other disciplines. The preparation for physical therapist assistants includes completion of high school and a twoyear program leading to an associate degree in physical therapy. The American Physical Therapy Association's CAPTA) Commission on Accreditation in Education currently accredits educational programs for physical therapists and physical therapist assistants in the following six specialty areas of practice -- cardiopulmonary, clinical e1ectrophysio10gic, neurologic, orthopedic, pediatric, and sports therapy. Physical therapists are licensed in all states. Eighteen states require licensure of physical therapist assistants. In Georgia, physical therapists and physical therapist assistants who have graduated from accredited and approved programs are licensed by written examination administered by the Georgia Board of Physical therapy. SupplY and Demand There are several factors which are expected to moderate or reduce the demand for physical therapists in the 1990-2000 decade. These include the following: Application of prospective payment policies to physical therapy services. Focus on cost-effectiveness and utilization control. However, a number of factors are expected to strongly increase the demand for physical therapy services in the 1990s. They include an increase in: 55 Population (20%) Elderly population Sports medicine Population concern for wellness and fitness Education/care of handicapped children Intensity of care needed by hospitalized patients Hospital rehabilitation facilities Patient demand for physical therapy Physician perception of the value of physical therapy Home health care (and reduction in length of hospital stay) In the next decade the State of Georgia must anticipate a substantial increase in the scope of and the demand for physical therapy services. This demand will require an expansion in' the pool of physical therapists and of physical therapist assistants. 1. It is likely that in-state migration of "Non-System" graduates will roughly balance out-of-state migration of "System" graduates. 2. It is expected that the number of licensed physical therapy personnel will have to increase from an estimated total of 1,913 licensees in 1990 to between 2,931 and 3,063 licensees in the year 2000. This means that there must be an annual increment of 102 to 115 licensed physical therapy personnel over the next decade to achieve projected requirement levels by the year 2000. 3. Approximately 94 physical therapist and physical therapy assistant licensees will be added annually from the graduates of existing entry level physical therapy programs. 4. These 94 therapists/therapist assistants, however, are still short of the annual proj ected need for 102 to 115 physical therapy personnel. It is, clear, therefore, that every effort must be made to preserve the integrity of the existing physical therapy educational programs and to increase existing program capacity or encourage continued in-migrat10n from other states, or both. Recommended Directions and Actions The 1983 Needs Assessment recommended that the University System maintain its present programs-in Physical Therapy and continue to monitor the supply-demand ratios to determine the need for possible program size increase. The System has implemented this recommendation. At this time, however, a number of developments are likely to have a critical impact on physical therapy in the next decade. These developments include: Increased demand for physical therapists and physical therapist assistants. Changing demographic patterns, changing patterns of disease and changes in the expectations for and in the delivery of care are expected to increase the demand for physical therapy personnel beyond earlier projections. 56 Increased scope of physical therapy training and of physical therapy services. Emerging technologies and increasing interest in such areas as acute care, geriatric and infectious disease care, home care, interdisciplinary care and independent practice are expanding the scope of physical therapy' training and of subsequent physical therapy services. Increase in entry-level qualifications. The American Physical Therapy Association is convinced that increased knowledge and increased scope of services demand additional entry-level qualifications. This conviction is shared by many physical therapy faculty members and practitioners. Not surprisingly, the association continues to press for a Master's Degree as the entry-level qualifications for physical therapists. This will, of course, affect university interest, faculty recruitment/retention, employer demand, etc. Increased demands on academic programs. Existing physical therapy programs are currently operating at capacity. For this reason any significant increase in employment demand will require additional qualified faculty and an expansion or proliferation of program facilities. Furthermore, this will increase the pressure to designate and use additional clinical training sites both in hospital and non-hospital settings. Increased demands on physical therapy employers. In a situation of increased manpower requirements greater attention will have to be given to career recruitment/retention of physical therapists and of physical therapist assistants. These efforts will necessarily have to address such issues as higher salaries, better promotion opportunities, increased opportunities in professional and personal development (continuing education; research), greater independence in direct patient care, wider scope for patient intervention, additional involvement in policy making and greater administrative support. The anticipated job market for entry-level physical therapists and physical therapist assistants in Georgia substantially exceeds earlier proj ections. Fortunately the physical therapist applicant pooi continues to be impressive. As one observer indicated, physical therapy programs are the "hottest spot on campus. II It is therefore strongly recommended that the University System: 1. Maintain all entry-level programs in physical therapy at full capacity with optimal resources. 2. Aggressively recruit students to increase the applicant pool for "System" physical therapist assistant programs. 3. Maintain the advanced level programs at full capacity to ensure a pool of qualified faculty for existing and anticipated entry-level programs. 57 4. Expand entry-level programs in physical therapy by 20 percent in the next five years. This will permit the production of physical therapists and of physical therapist assistants to approach proj ected demand without relying either on in-migration or on-the-job training of physical therapy auxiliaries or aides. Business, Science and Technology The 1983 Needs Assessment evaluated the needs of Business and Industry for the programs and services of the University System and the relationship of these programs to the state's economic development. Since 1983, the value of the University System's involvement in Georgia's economic development has become even more evident, which caused the current planning process to establish the University System's role in economic and community development as one of several strategic planning areas. Accordingly, the following update of the Business, Science and Technology Needs Assessment concentrates primarily on the business and industrial demands and needs for the graduates of key academic programs. The economic development roles of the colleges and universities through other services and activities are addressed in a later section. Supply and Demand 1. The analysis of supply and demand indicated that demand would likely exceed the supply of college graduates through the 1990's in the following areas: - Business and Management Business Management and Administration Banking and Finance Marketing Management and Research Business and Commerce (General) Business and Commerce (2-year programs) - Communications - Computer and Information Science - Engineering Electrical Engineering Industrial Engineering Engineering Technologies - Mathematics - Interdisciplinary Studies 2. The demand for graduates prepared in Engineering, technologicallyrelated and scientific fields will increase and extend into new areas of business, industry and government. The University System's current capacity to meet the demand of Georgia I s business and 58 industries for technologically-prepared persons is not sufficient in several program areas, including certain Engineering fields. 3. Student interest and preparation to enter the above fields in which demand may exceed supply must also be considered. To meet society's needs for certain kinds of graduates requires not only that the University System possess the program capacity but, also, that sufficient numbers of students wish and are adequately prepared to enter the college programs. This latter condition may limit the ability for the more technologically-related fields to expand their production to meet societal demands. 4. The University System's capacity to supply graduates in some of the technological fields also is currently limited by the number of available faculty. Student-faculty ratios are already high relative to similar institutions in other states. And competition is fierce for faculty in fields such as Engineering and Computer Science. 5. Demand is growing for graduates for Associate and Bachelor's Engineering Technology programs, especially in areas of the state whose economies are experiencing technological growth through the military and industry. Unmet needs are emerging especially in Central, South, and Northwest Georgia. Recommended Directions and Actions The 1983 Needs Assessment resulted in specific recommendations concerning certain academic programs related to business, industry and technology, primarily Engineering and Engineering Technology. The thrust of these recommendations was to consider the extension of these programs to other areas of the State (especially to Southern and Central Georgia) and to a range of potential user groups, including business and industry, the military, and others. There was also a recommendation that the concept of high technology outreach centers be explored for Central and South Georgia. While this has not occurred, two Research and Development Centers were established in South Georgia, representing a broader approach to linking University- System business and technological expertise to industry needs. Since the 1983 report, the University System has responded to many of these recommendations. In 1985, a study of Engineering was conducted to determine the best way to meet the state's needs for Engineering education. Several options were explored including the establishment of a second Engineering School and the conversion of existing Engineering Technology programs to professional Engineering. The study found that, at that time, an insufficient pool of qualified and interested high school graduates existed in Georgia to support the inauguration of a new school and that the adequate funding of existing programs was a higher priority. In addition, it was found that the field of Engineering Technology continues to play an important role in meeting state needs. This examination resulted in the development of the Regents Engineering Transfer Program (RETP) which seeks to develop the first two years of a professional Engineering curriculum in several senior and two-year colleges across the state. Currently four senior colleges and four two-year colleges offer freshmen and 59 sophomore coursework which is coordinated with the lower division Engineering curriculum at Georgia Tech. The key to the Success of the program will be how effectively Georgia Tech faculty and staff work with the participating colleges in setting standards and developing curricula that yield both the perception and the reality of a continuous and effective route to the Engineering baccalaureate. Moreover, the program's success will be seen in the extent to which Georgia Tech admits qualified RETP students to the programs they desire on the same basis as their native students. Georgia Southern College as part of its planning for regional university status again made the case for the development of a second state Engineering school. Georgia Southern argues that the standards used in the 1985 study to identify high school graduates qualified to enter Engineering programs were too high and, furthermore, that the Quality Basic Education Act may already have increased the numbers of qualified students. In response, the Central Office is continuing to monitor closely movements in the levels of student preparation and interest in Engineering. The Chancellor's staff recently updated the SAT and grade performance of high school graduates on which the 1985 Regents' Engineering study was based. Disturbingly, the data for the 1988 high school class continue to show low numbers of graduates from Georgia high schools with the requisite preparation in mathematical and verbal skills to begin professional Engineering study. Specifically, compared to four years ago, the results show the same or even fewer numbers of high school graduates who wish to study Engineering and are academically prepared. Moreover, of the students so interested and prepared, Georgia Tech either offers or is willing to offer admission to all but 2-300 of these students. This update along with the uncertain performance of the new Mercer University Engineering School in attracting enrollments strongly suggests that very careful study is needed before the establishment of a second professional School of Engineering. One of the secondary advantages of the RETP is as a means to identify the extent of unmet demand by qualified students for a professional Engineering education. While low or slow enrollment growth in these programs would not necessarily mean the absence of such demand by qualified students, high enrollments and successful performance would indicate the presence of strong student interest and preparation for Engineering study. The response to questions of when and how to extend Engineering or Engineering Technology programs to other areas of Georgia also is influenced by the high \' costs of providing engineering, scientific and technological education. Laboratories equipped with state-of-the-art instrumentation will be needed if Georgia is to compete successfully in these fields. Faculty must receive salaries competitive with those in industry if they are to remain in teaching. Also, sufficient numbers of faculty must be available to provide quality technological education. Discussions have also continued concerning the future role of Engineering Technology and the need for a second professional School of Engineering. In 1989, the Board of Regents approved the conversion of Southern College of Technology's program in Architectural Engineering Technology to a professional Architecture program. This change was based on understandings that demand does 60 exist for additional professional architects, that the conversion will be accomplished without the need for increases in the Regents funding allocations, and that the new program will maintain a mission that significantly differs from the professional architecture program at Georgia Tech. As part of the examination of Southern Tech's proposal to convert its Architectural Engineering Technology program, the issue of converting Engineering Technology to a professional Engineering school once again emerged. This conversion issue, however, is more far-reaching than the Architecture question. Many more dollars, students and faculty are involved. Questions of geographical access regarding the placement of a second school of Engineering would be raised if such a school were located close to Georgia Tech. And there is still a belief by many that the Engineering technologist has an important role in the workplace. In this regard, and as a way to build on the establishment strength of Southern Tech, consideration should be given to the suggestion in the 1983 report to expand and strengthen technology programs and to consider their extension to other areas of Georgia primarily under the auspices of the Southern College of Technology. There is a growing demand for technology graduates of both associate and . ,. ~ , baccalaureate degree programs. While baccalaureate graduates do face some licensing and role confusion, it is evident that graduates from Southern Tech are in high demand, valued by bus iness and industry, and enj oy successful careers. Several of the larger technical institutes under the State Board of Technical and Adult Education are establishing associate degree programs in Engineering Technology and interest has been expressed by several University System two-year colleges to develop such programs. This growing interest and demand would support an expansion of Southern Tech's current role in Engineering Technology over the next decade. This expansion might involve the Southern College of Technology taking leadership in helping to establish associate degree programs in Engineering Technology at selected University System colleges, especially two-year colleges. At the same time, Southern Tech could establish a network of junior and senior level off-campus programs at the sites of the associate degree programs to enable their graduates to continue their studies toward the baccalaureate degree in the same field. Georgia's economy, especially in the Central, South and Northwest regions, would benefit greatly by such access as would the students interested in these programs. The statewide leadership of Southern Tech is based in its specialized strength and institutional commitment to Engineering Technology. However, such leadership should be in cooperation with the programs in other regional institutions, namely Georgia Southern College, Fort Valley State College and Savannah State College. Indeed, until the issue of the establishment of a second Engineering School at Georgia Southern College is resolved, responsibility for serving Southeast Georgia (Statesboro, Savannah, Brunswick areas) should remain with the programs at Georgia Southern College and Savannah State College. At this time, the economic development needs of Georgia, the academic preparation levels of available students and the cost-effectiveness of various options, suggest strongly a deeper, not a lesser, involvement wi th Engineering Technology in Georgia through the leadership of the Southern College of Technology. Naturally, the University System should watch carefully any national movements in professional licensure or accreditation which could serve to diminish the role 61 ~nd value of Engineering Technology relative to professional Engineering programs. In the field of Business Administration, there is concern in the System over how to respond to issues affecting the quality and reputation of the many programs. Recently, new regulations from the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), the professional accreditation agency which accredits Business Administration programs, have made accreditation exceedingly difficult for those institutions which offer both the Master's (M.B.A.) and Baccalaureate Business Administration (B.B.A.) programs. Under the new standards, institutions which offer both levels must have the M.B.A. accredited for the Bachelor's program to be considered for accreditation. Accreditation of the M.B.A. requires a significant additional investment in faculty with research backgrounds for many of the University System colleges now offering it. The loss in value of the unaccredited M.B.A. or B.S. is not clear. Several options should be explored including the cost of upgrading current M.B.A. programs to achieve accreditation, dropping M.B.A. programs to allow the Bachelor's program to be accredited, having some colleges join a developing alternative accreditation group, or maintaining the current status, assuming the lack of accreditation in this field-does not unduly affect the reputation of the college or the options of the graduate. On the basis of the above findings and analysis the following recommendations are offered concerning how the University System institutions and their academic programs can meet more effectively the needs of business and industry: 1. The decisions as to when and how to expand technological education in the University System should be subject to the following considerations in addition to the extent of state demand for graduates of technological programs: a. The extent to which there exists a sufficient pool of students who are prepared to begin college study in technological education. b. The costs, available funding and likely effectiveness of available options for extending technological education (e.g., new Engineering programs, expanded existing programs, conversion of existing programs, use of telecommunications, etc.). c. The needs of regions of Georgia without direct access to various forms of technological education. 62 d. The needs of the state and its regions for economic development which is related to technological education, research and service. 2. Through the Georgia Institute of Technology, the University System has developed an institution with national stature in technological and scientific education. The University System should build on this existing strength by ensuring that Georgia Tech has the resources needed to be competitive with its peers. 3. The need and demand for Associate and Baccalaureate Engineering Teclmology graduates should be confirmed with reference to specific areas of Georgia. Two-year Engineering Teclmology programs should be established where indicated to be followed by off-campus upperlevel baccalaureate programs offered by the Southern College of Teclmology in cooperation with other senior colleges which offer Engineering Technology programs. In Southeast Georgia, Georgia Southern and Savannah State Colleges should offer the upper level programs. Moreover, consideration should be given to establishing the Southern College of Technology as the state's capstone institution for Engineering Technology because of its specialized program strengths. Part of this capstone role would include the establishment of off-campus upper-level programs leading to the baccalaureate degree on the campuses of two-year colleges which offer the associate degree. 4. The University System should encourage and support joint schoolcollege efforts to interest and prepare more school students to undertake technologically-based education. These activities would be especially valuable in regions in which there is interest in starting new engineering and technology-related programs. 5. The University System needs to address directly the issue of the professional accreditation of Business Administration programs, deciding whether such accreditation is necessary and affordable and which schools should be encouraged to seek accreditation if deemed necessary. 63 >: ,.' ! miles - 64 - REGIONAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT In addition to the needs assessment conducted for the major program areas, planning involved all of the senior and two-year colleges in a consideration of needs for higher education in their respective regions. Each college was assigned to one of five regions of the state (Figure 1) and asked to develop as a group their specific views on regional needs and how best to meet them. A summary of the results of this needs examination (Table 1) does not necessarily reflect a full consensus of all institutions in a region, especially in terms of how identified needs should be met. In these cases, alternative responses were reported. STATE NEED TABLE 1 Additional Services for Meeting State Needs for Higher Education (as identified through regional planning) PROGRAMS OR SERVICES TO MEET NEED Middle Georgia Improved access to Engineering Programs More formal transfer arrangements with Georgia Tech; additional Engineering faculty at feeder colleges through Regents Engineering Transfer Program Technologists New associate and upper-level baccalaureate programs involving two-year and senior colleges Health Care Administration (Medical Records, Respiratory Therapy, Radiology) New and expanded associate degree and 2+2 Allied Health programs Nursing Care Expanded Nursing programs at the associate and baccalaureate levels; expansion of Master's in Nursing program Public School Teachers Expanded Teacher Education programs Increased participation in college and degree attainment by Georgia citizens with special attention to minorities Additional geographical access to baccalaureate programs in Macon and in the Barnesville area: Senior colleges offering upper level programs in Macon and Barnesville Changing Macon and Gordon College to Senior colleges Systemwide early intervention programs Increased access to graduate education, at Master's level Graduate programs in Savannah, Albany, Brunswick, Valdosta, Americus; Cooperative doctoral programs in Administration, Supervision and Counseling at Georgia College 65 STATE NEED Educational needs of adults, including literacy preparation Economic and community development assistance (data collection and analysis, planning, expert assistance) Highly-prepared public agency administrators PROGRAMS OR SERVICES TO MEET NEED Expanded continuing education programs More formal, directed coordination of services of various regional colleges to business and industry; an R&D center in Middle Georgia Cooperative doctoral program in Public Administration Atlanta Area Need to strengthen and streamline student articulation among Atlanta-area institutions to make full range of services more accessible Stronger, more formal coordination procedures or structure among metro institutions Greater access by area citizens to graduate programs Better coordination policies concerning service responsibilities and scope Needs of Gwinnett Countians for higher education Full development of Gwinnett Center Needs of North Fulton Countians for higher education Consideration of programs/center in North Fulton North Georgia Technically prepared graduates to serve the growing carpet and other industries in the Dalton area Vocational-technical programs through Dalton College Technologists prepared beyond the associate degree, especially in Dalton area B.S. programs in Technology Access to general academic programs in the Ringgold-Fort Oglethorpe areas Dalton College Center in Ringgold-Fort Oglethorpe areas More Nurses prepared at the baccalaureate level B.S. Nursing program offered through Dalton and Kennesaw Colleges Carpet and other industries require more managers prepared in Marketing, Management, and Accounting B.S. Business Administration programs 66 STATE NEED Additional access to baccalaureate programs in Northeast Georgia corridor Access to undergraduate education in Cartersville area Internationalization of the Economy (1-75 Corridor) PROGRAMS OR SERVICES TO MEET NEED Residence Center at Gainesville College to offer programs in Business, Education, and possibly Nursing and Criminal Justice in conjunction with North Georgia College; this Center idea could be expanded to a Northeast Georgia Educational Center, including Lanier Tech as well as Gainesville and North Georgia Colleges and perhaps other System institutions Joint programs offered by Kennesaw and Floyd Colleges International program involving Kennesaw, Dalton and Floyd Colleges aimed at strengthening cultural awareness, foreign language preparation and support services provided by the colleges Coastal-South Georgia Regional needs related to health, economic development, engineering and technology manpower, school teachers and administrators, cultural and social development Programs: Doctoral programs in Education (Ed.D.) and Public Administration Ph.D. in Marine Sciences and Biology Master's in Social Work, Business Adminis- tration, Fine Arts, Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Psychology, Allied Health Bachelor's in Education, General Studies and Nursing at Brunswick and East Georgia Colleges 67 RESPONDING EFFECTIVELY TO STATE NEEDS: GREATER INVOLVEMENT, HIGHER EFFICIENCY, AND DiPROVlID QUALITY 68 INCREASING PARTICIPATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION The most advanced states culturally and economically also have the highest rates of participation in higher education. College enrollment and achievement are greater in states with higher per capita incomes and a social tradition of valuing education through the college level. Indeed, higher educational attainment, economic success and cultural progress are entwined fully. Southern states in general, including Georgia, have been hampered in promoting college enrollment by the lower personal incomes and previous educational attainment of their families. These states do not have as rich a history of college-going states as other regions. Georgia ranks very low in terms of the rate at which its citizens go to college, which results from two factors: low high school completion and a low rate at which high school graduates enroll in college. In 1988-89, Georgia ranked only 42nd among all states in the number of high school graduates per 1,000 population and 40th in the number of college students per high school graduate. Moreover, Georgia ranked next to last of all states in the number of first-time college students compared to the number of high school graduates. This combination of low high school and college performance results in Georgia ranking 44th in the number of college students per 1,000 population. The situation with respect to minority enrollments in college is especially troubling in the face of such low college-going rates. While Georgia is doing somewhat better than many states in attracting more minorities to its colleges, it is also true that minorities, especially blacks, still enroll in college at much lower rates. In the United States, the percentage of black high school graduates entering college has decreased from 34 to 28 percent since 1978. The percentage that minorities are of the total student enrollment is not rising and in some cases is declining. While the numbers should be increasing, they are steady or declining. The number of black high school graduates increased by 25% over the past ten years in the U.S.; the number enrolled in college declined by 2.0%. In 1986, only 10.9 percent of blacks over 25 had completed four years of college or more, while the rate for whites was 20.1 percent. In 1985, of the 1. 05 million high school seniors who took the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) only 70,000 (9 percent) were black. Of the blacks taking the test, 73 percent scored below 400 on the verbal section and 64 percent scored below 400 on the math portion, while only 31 percent of the whites scored below 400 on the verbal and only 22 percent had math scores below 400. A disastrous series of related situations is developing. Public high schools are becoming more heavily minority. Minorities tend to drop out of high school to a greater extent and now, when they do graduate from high school, they are less likely to go to college. Black males are hit hardest by this unfortunate sequence. The facts are that the extent to which minority students graduate and then enroll in college determines not only college enrollments, but also the eventual development of minority faculty. As we have progressed as a society, access to higher education is now limited 69 more by a combination of economic and educational background factors than by race. While low incomes and educational attainment plague both majority and minority populations, especially in the south, it is also true that minorities, especially blacks, tend to be disproportionately poorer and less educationally prepared. The University System has made progress since the 1970' s in attracting more minority students. In Fall 1989, both the numbers and percentage"s of minority students increased, which reversed a trend since the early 1980's in which the numbers remained relatively constant while the percentages declined. The Challenge Since the 1970's, the University System of Georgia has been a leader in extending higher education opportunity to many first-generation Georgia college students and in blending excellence into a highly accessible network of colleges and universities. Our System has attempted to do the right things and is committed to increasing the participation of all students. For too many potential students, however, the University System has remained out of reach. For a variety of reasons, after substantial progress through the 1970' s and early 1980's, the enrollment of minority and disadvantaged students and the hiring of minority faculty have stalled as is the trend for the nation as a whole. If the :.' ... University system is to keep its moral promise to the citizens of Georgia, access to its institutions of higher education must be extended further to the underrepresented. The economic and social welfare of the state and its University System depends on the extent to which a higher proportion of its citizens can be drawn into higher education. In seeking to increase participation, the University System is faced with many challenges growing out of the character of Georgia's current and future population. Following are the characteristics of the kinds of students who will have to be pursued if higher education is to increase "the percentages of population going to college (Hodgkinson, 1986): 1. Students from poorer backgrounds. 2. Students from single-parent families. 3. Students from minority backgrounds. 4. Students from inner city or from rural backgrounds. 5. School students who are likely dropouts. 6. Students needing financial aid. 7. Students needing remedial education before beginning college work. 8. Students whose parents have not gone to college. 9. Students who do not recognize the value of college compared to immediate military service or post-high school employment. 10. High school students not enrolled in the college preparatory curriculum but in "general or vocational programs." 11. Older persons who have not gone to college but who now, for economic or other reasons, may be persuaded to see the value of further education. 70 New Directions and Actions The University System and higher education in general have been relatively successful in eliminating many of the legal, geographical and financial barriers for persons who are motivated and reasonably prepared educationally. ~y and large, it has been these students who have been drawn in by higher education as it has been extended since the late 1960s. Now, the challenge is greater as colleges and universities must reach for students who require a deeper, more personal approach and additional educational preparation if they are to choose to attend college. It is not enough to place campuses or programs within commuting distance and provide financial aid. A deeper commitment is required to reach persons who are not likely to have the educational interest or preparation without some sort of intervention. Underlying the considerations and conclusions described below is the strong belief that effective approaches to increasing participation in college must recognize the interrelated, ladder-like nature of educational preparation. Such approaches need to address the preparation and motivation of students not only after entering college but while. they are still in high school. Success at a higher educational level depends upon success at an earlier stage. It is essential that students on lower rungs of the educational ladder have clear understandings of just what is expected in the way of skills and knowledge if higher rungs are to be negotiated. In addition, more effective ways must be found to help students up the ladder when they stumble or hesitate. Many of the following recommendations are based on this need to connect levels of education through clearer expectations and preparation. There are three main areas needing emphasis if participation is to be increased. First, of course, is to reach more effectively the younger persons who are still in school. These persons must be helped to stay in school and to participate in curricula that prepare them for college. A second strategy concerns the vast group of people who already are beyond traditional school or college age. In light of Georgia's history of low participation in college, there certainly exists a large population of older persons who could better their economic and social situations by furthering their education. The increasing numbers of displaced homemakers and workers seeking to upgrade their status in making transitions to and within the workplace are examples of persons who could benefit from higher education. Third, while considerations of how to increase college participation will focus primarily on attracting more students to college, it is also important that the resulting participation be successful. First generation, lesser prepared students drop out of college in greater numbers. Minority students particularly have low rates of retention in college and go on to graduate at professional schools at lesser rates. Retaining students in college is as important as having them enter. 71 Reaching Students While in Scbool .... .. ..,. . ' The greatest potential for increased participation lies in motivating and preparing more school students to consider college study. Many more students have the potential to succeed in college than ever seek to enter. The challenge is to find ways to reach students who do not have the motivation to attend college and help them to recognize the value and practicality of attending. Evidence suggests that increasing proportions of school students, especially minority students, are not motivated and educationally prepared to enter college. A high proportion of students of all ethnic groups need remedial education; college retention rates are low; moreover, higher percentages of minority students are choosing to do other things than going to college, such as the military, proprietary school, or immediate employment. It appears that college is not valued as much or is not seen as worth the cost or effort as other pursuits, especially those that yield more immediate monetary rewards. As the University System seeks to interest and prepare a wider range of students for college, it should be noted that those students who are most prepared and interested in going to college likely have already been reached. These are the students in the top one-third of their high school classes and typically are from families and economic backgrounds that reflect a high value on further education. The vast majority of other students may not even be enrolled in college preparatory curricula but in general-track or vocational programs. Minority school students represent a disproportionate percentage of these "other students. II Just as important, many of these school students grow up in family, social and economic situations in which the value of and preparation for college do not have a high priority. These students do not have persons immediately around them who are personal, visible examples of the value of college and who can explain practically how to go about preparing for college. Efforts to increase standards for college entrance in the public schools have been and continue to be needed. However, to attract a wider range of students into college, more will have to be done to help more students reach these standards. This applies to students of all races. Superior and good students take the initiative in learning or are taught and motivated to do so. They will find ways to rise to the standards. However, other students, students with as many learning weaknesses as strengths, require more skilled, sensitive teaching and coaching. If these students are in environments which can offer this encouragement and special attention through parents, relatives, teachers and so on, they will move toward college as well. Without this personal attention and direction, these students will likely not develop the educational values and preparation that lead toward successful college study. Many, if not most, college-school efforts in the past to reach disadvantaged students have focused on school students who already have higher levels of motivation and academic preparation. Ways must be found now to help schools reach a wider range of students who do not get the firsthand personal encouragement and preparation for college. Schools need the help of colleges to prepare and motivate these students because there is no substitute for the direct and personal relationship that comes from school students being associated with college students, faculty, and programs while still in school. 72 Schools simply do not have the numbers of people and resources to do this alone. This cooperative effort will have as its goal to motivate and prepare for college eighth, ninth, and tenth grade students who are not moving effectively toward college. The full range of a college's resources will be used, including students, faculty and staff. Some of the activities may involve the following: Working with local schools to identify students who without additional attention and help would not attend college. This early identification must be done early and involves personal, individualized assessment of strengths and weaknesses in a student's educational motivation and preparation. Assessments should be developed that let school students know early and continuously to what extent they are moving toward college. Considering the adoption, in conjunction with the public schools, of a formal program by which the University System's College Placement Examination, or related assessments, would be given to high school juniors (as is now being done in Ohio on a statewide basis). Providing school students with college tutors and advisors who will personally convey the value of going to college while assisting in additional academic preparation and advising. Follow-through is critical. This activity will succeed most if the college people can stay involved with individual students and monitor their progress until college entry. Establishing Summer Academic Programs on college campuses for students early in their high school careers and for high school seniors and graduates who show promise but would otherwise be denied admission. Creating special courses and programs offered by college staff and students which would help school students improve their academic skills and test-taking abilities which relate to college readiness. These programs can be based on the magnet approach, which makes students feel special and important. Too often, the special academic programs target only the better students. Bringing students to college campuses regularly to participate in academic, social and sports events which provide a view of college life. Staffing study programs with college students in the schools and community centers on weekends and at night. Developing joint school-college career workshops in which school stu- dents can explore various careers, and how to prepare for them academ- ically. Through these activities, students will be better able to see the link among school preparation, college study and career goals. = In summary, the following recommendation is made to focus University System efforts at reaching those school students who otherwise would not be inclined toward college: 1. The University System should develop early intervention programs in which the colleges and universities work actively and directly with the public schools, their faculties, and their students to prepare and motivate more students to attend college. 73 Increasing The Participation of Non-Traditional Students Of the 12.2 million students enrolled in higher education institutions. 42 percent are 25 years or older. (National Center for Education Statistics, 1986). This is a five percent increase over the past decade, and predictions are that this percentage will rise. Three-fourths of the students enrolled in higher education institutions are part-time and the majority are women. In the Summer issue, 1988, the College Board News reported the results of a survey that indicated that the adult share of the total college enrollment is approximately 45 percent and is expected to reach 50 percent by the 1990s. Student characteristics in the University System reflect the changing profile of the typical college student. The fall quarter 1988 enrollment data indicate that the average age of University System undergraduates is 23.1 years. For System two-year colleges, which enroll only freshmen and sophomores, the average student age is almost 25 years. Only in two of the 34 University System institutions (Georgia Institute of Technology and Southern College of Technology) do males constitute a majority of the enrollees. In the two-year colleges. a majority of the students are enrolled on a part-time basis; most of these individuals have families and/or jobs. In many of the System institutions, today's "typicall1 student is very different from the undergraduate of the decades past. There exists a vast number of Georgians who have graduated from high school and not received a college degree. As society changes, families become more fluid. women are required to work outside of the home. more jobs require some formal higher education, and more workers need to be prepared differently to adapt to a changing job market. Colleges and universities should view meeting these emerging needs as ways to increase the participation of more persons in higher education. To do so, however, will require colleges to recognize and respond to the specific interests and needs of these older students. Many of these interests are economically and practically motivated. Different ways. must be found to present and deliver higher education which will gain the interest of and be relevant to these students. Continuing education, non-credit programs and activities may have an important role in reaching persons who are not familiar or comfortable with the academic, collegiate setting or experience. While continuing education programs often are not as academically-oriented as the regular curriculum, they bring students to a campus setting in which they are able to experience the excitement and value of higher forms of learning and the connections of academics with practice. Accordingly, such programs have the potential of motivating older students toward collegiate study. While the technical institutes with their vocationallyspecific emphasis may have initial advantages in interesting these students, collegiate institutions with their academic offerings also have advantages, not the least of which is the prestige of collegiate degree study and the response of the more mature learner to the higher levels of study in the arts and sciences and the professions. Over the past several years, University System policies have been modified in recognition of the changing nature and needs of the clientele. For example, the extra fee for off-campus classes has been eliminated (these classes almost always have had majority adult enrollment); audit policies have been liberalized to require only evidence of high school graduation or a GED certificate; students out of high school or college for five years or more can enter transfer programs without taking the SAT or ACT; at some institutions, career degrees 74 (A.A.S.) and certificate programs do not require SAT or ACT testing for admission; and non-degree seeking students may enroll for up to 20 quarter hours of coursework without SAT or ACT testing. In order to meet the challenges of this "non-traditional" student, many of the institutions have begun to review policies related to admission, curriculum, and so on. It would now seem advisable that these students receive System-wide attention leading to the following recommendation: 2. The University System should identify and implement proactices to meet the needs of non-traditional students. The following actions should be considered: a. To extend the offerings and services of University System institutions beyond the campus to make them available to this new population; b. To develop a flexible schedule of classes to accommodate the student _-having work and/or family responsibilities; c. To consider registration by mail, by phone, and in evening hours; d. To offer student services during extended hours; e. To develop a fee structure which does not penalize part-time students; f. To offer classes year round including a strong offering of classes in the summer; g. To consider providing adequate parking for those students who must drive to the campus; h. To explore need for day care services; 1. To develop a new type of "catch-up" studies for the student who bas been out of academics for a number of years. Retention and Success in College For participation in higher education to be of most value, it is important that students, once enrolled, are provided the support needed to persist in college until their goals are met. The University System has several programs which address the special needs of students who are at high risk in continuing their college education. The Summer Enrichment Program eases the transition of minority students with academic deficiencies from high school to college in an effort to improve retention rates. Both the students and the faculty who have participated in the program believe the program is effective in giving the students a better understanding of what is expected of them in college and addi tional educational preparation for their first year in college. One college reports that 80 percent of all students who participated in this program exempted one or parts of Developmental 75 Studies. Unfortunately, this program is only offered at six University System institutions, OWing to financial constraints. Another effective program for strengthening the participation of at-risk college" students is the Minority Advising Program which addresses the special problems faced by minority students which ultimately cause them to leave college. Many minority students experience cultural alienation, social isolation, academic problems, racial harassment and financial difficulty. The consensus of students and faculty is that the program has been effective in the retention of students. However, these programs have suffered from a lack of financial support, which is typical for activities out of the academic mainstream. Special System funding is now being allocated to these programs which will begin to highlight these programs and give them the priority they" need. Special mention should be made of the Developmental Studies Program of "the University System, which has been a national leader in recognizing the needs of many students for additional preparation before beginning degree-credit college study. The" University System of Georgia is one of only a handful of state systems which have dared to define clearly through common statewide standards and assessment the extent of the need for such education. The experiences of states such as Arkansas, California, New Jersey, Tennessee and Texas are very similar: well over one-third of entering students in need of additional preparation. All other states certainly share this same problem but most choose not to outline the problem so clearly and simply elect to blend this remedial work into the regular degree-credit college curriculum. While the approach taken by Georgia, Florida, New Jersey, and others does cause discomfort about the role and support of colleges in this function, this straightforward approach has many positive benefits, not the least of which is that underprepared students gain the level of help they need while the quality of the undergraduate curriculum "is maintained. Moreover, the presence of the program sends the correct signals to the public schools about the specific nature and importance of preparing for college. While it is hoped that over time fewer students will need this extra form of preparation as they prepare more effectively during their school careers, the absence of such a program now would deny thousands of students the skills needed to begin quality undergraduat~study. 3. The efforts of the University System to help enrolled students to succeed in college should be expanded, especially the Summer Enrichment and Minority Advising Programs. 4. The Developmental Studies program should be seen and supported as an integral part of the effort to increase participation in higher education while strengthening its quality. Institutional Commitment to Increased Minority Participation The report of the University System Steering Committee on Increasing the Participation of Minorities in Higher Education stated that: !Ieach University System institution needs to establish a stronger commitment to incteasing the participation of minority students and faculty. Making this goal a priority is not only right morally but sound educationally, especially in light of how a diversity of people and their ideas enrich the college and university experience. As our 76 I institutions are committed to be the home for a more diverse mix of students and faculty, then too will increasing numbers of such students feel more at home in our colleges and universities, leading to higher achievement and more positive social experiences." In its report, the Committee recognized that the basis of such commitment lies in concepts that are normally intangible such as attitudes, climate, belief and purpose. Each college and university needs to build a commitment to this goal of increased minority participation by making concrete and tangible these ideas. The key to institutional action is the President. In this office resides the authority to set institutional priorities and to undertake critical initiatives. The Board of Regents and Chancellor hold this office accountable for carrying out System priorities. The Committee called for two things to happen more specifically and regularly. The Regents and the Chancellor should reaffirm a clear priority for the increased participation of minority faculty and students. And it must be made clear to each president that he or she will be held accountable for acting on this priority. The report concluded with the following recommendations: 5. Each institution should set a high priority on hiring minority faculty, supporting these efforts through expectations , incentives and resources from within the institution which promote and highlight successful recruitment. 6. The Chancellor should meet with each president formally to discuss and ultimately agree on concrete goals for increasing the participation of minority students and faculty. These goals should reflect the different contexts within which each institution resides and should represent a realistic description of what should be accomplished over the coming year. The qhancellor should include an assessment of the president's success in meeting these goals as one part of the subsequent overall evaluation of the president for that year. New Directions and Actions The University System and higher education in general have been relatively successful in eliminating many of the legal, geographical and financial barriers for persons who are motivated and reasonably prepared educationally. By and large, it has been these students who have been drawn in by higher education as it has been extended since the late 1960s. Now, the challenge is greater as colleges and universities must reach for students who require a deeper, more personal approach and additional educational preparation if they are to choose to attend college. It is not enough to place campuses or programs within commuting distance and provide financial aid. A deeper commitment is required to reach persons who are not likely to have the educational interest or preparation without some sort of intervention. 77 THE ROLE OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM IN ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The past two decades have brought enormous demographic, economic, and political changes in this country and have presented tremendous challenges to Georgia's society and economy. Forces such as migration from rural to urban areas, gro.wth of economic sectors in addition to agriculture and manufacturing, shifts in I employment opportunities from manufacturing-based to service-oriented occupations, and foreign labor market competition are forcing the consideration of new strategies on the part of government, educational institutions, and business. Increasingly, our public universities and colleges are being asked to play a more active role in economic and community development efforts by focusing their knowledge-based resources on the development of the economic infrastructure needed to adapt to this rapidly changing environment. These initiatives are increasingly being viewed by faculty and administrators as mechanisms for advancing the education, research and public service missions' of universities and colleges and as ways to enhance the reputation, enrollments, and funding base of the institutions. Events in Georgia have paralleled national trends. From 1960 to 1980, the population and employment in Georgia grew by more than 38 percent, fueled :'" primarily by employment opportunities in service-based industries. Projections indicate that population and employment growth should continue in Georgia through the 1990s, although at a slower rate than the previous two decades. The growth pattern, however, will not be uniform. Rural areas of Georgia face losses in population and jobs, while urban areas are struggling to meet the needs of their increased populations and businesses. These differing conditions suggest that no single strategy for economic and community development is appropriate for the entire state; rather, any successful strategy must take into account the unique resources and obstacles facing a particular community or region. Higher education is promoting economic development in several ways. Perhaps the most important and basic way is through its regular campus and disciplinary based instructional programs through which students are generally and specifically educated for effective future performance as citizens and workers. This most fundamental contribution to economic development is often not recognized. However, any survey will find that the presence in a state or community of quality basic public and higher education is a first priority for economic development. Higher education also promotes economic development through its basic and applied research activities which yield results which are eventually or immediately helpful to the economy or community. In addition, colleges and universities provide continuing education programs for employees who wish to extend their education. The University System of Georgia is in a unique position to enhance state, regional, and community economic development efforts. In fact, the Governor's Growth Strategies Commission specifically recommended that the publiclysupported universities and colleges be the focal point for a variety of economic development efforts by developing research and service programs directed at the problems of communities facing economic growth or decline. In order to assist the University System institutions in their efforts to stimulate economic and community development, the Growth Strategies Commission recommended that the state support the University System's efforts to bolster faculty research and service in the ways that encourage regional development and opportunities for 78 new business location and expansion. In addition the Commission called for the state to (a) include the University System in any mechanism designed to coordinate economic development efforts within state government; (b) continue to support cooperative research ventures between Georgia's universities and the private sector; (c) encourage university and college efforts to provide training, cultural enrichment, and technical assistance programs to local communitiesr and (d) promote university and college programs in international studies and international business. Many states are looking to their higher education systems to assist economic development. There are few, if any, state system plans that do not calIon colleges and universities to take a leadership role in such development. However, it is also true that seldom do the plans or the subsequent actions of higher education match state hopes for higher education's contribution. " The high expectations have not been met because the general goals of economic development are not followed by plans which are specific about what kinds of services will be provided by higher education. Moreover, while it is a fact that colleges and universities contain in their faculties and staff a vast reservoir of knowledge and expertise, it is" also true that a great majority of these resources do not view the activities that assist economic development as a priority. Most faculty are prepared as academic scientists and as such are devoted first to their discipline, and only secondarily to service to their surrounding community. The faculty reward system is based on recognition of activities centering on the academic discipline, particularly research. Moreover, most faculty are inclined toward teaching and research activities which are directed to concerns and content rooted in and directed toward the advancement of academic theories of their respective disciplines. In contrast, faculty activities geared toward economic development must focus first on the actual problems and challenges presently facing businesses, industries "and communities. As the University System considers how to expand the roles that its colleges and universities play in economic and community development, it needs to evaluate several approaches to such expansion including the involvement of a wider range of institutional academic faculty and staff as well as expansion of the specialpurpose extension and service activities. In considering both these and other options, it is critical that the resulting plan of action be specific about the kinds of services to be provided by what higher education resources. New Directions and Actions The University System may perform a variety of roles in serving economic and community development in Georgia. These roles may be grouped into three basic categories: Academic Instruction, Academic Research and Scholarship, and External Service. The last role refers to instructional or research efforts which meet the needs of persons or organizations not formally part of the academic community. Continuing education instructional programs and applied research are the two primary forms of these services to the external community. In addi tion to these roles, the growing importance of the international dimension to Georgia's economy is recognized and considered as a special role. 79 Academic Instruction Perhaps the key economic development role of System institutions is the development of persons through its academic instructional programs. both in general education and particularly in disciplines relating directly to meeting employer demands for prepared workers. These demands are increasing and changing as the economies of the various regions of the state change. The following statements from the National Alliance of Business in Employment Policies, Looking To The Year 2000, demonstrate the role education will play in a new economy. "During the late 1970' s and early 1980' s, 20 million new jobs were created; only 5 percent were in manufacturing while 90 percent were in the service and information industries. By the end of the century, an estimated 5 to 15 million manufacturing jobs will be restructured. An equal number- of service jobs will probably become obsolete. While the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics estimates 16 million new jobs will replace lost jobs between 1984 and 1985, nine out of ten of these new jobs will be in the service sector. Figures projected for the rest of the century for the entire economy point to disruptions in the labor market many times more severe than previous1y". "Changes in the nature of existing jobs or creation of new jobs wi11likely require higher levels of skills. Young workers. immigrants (including undocumented workers) and others seeking entry level jobs will therefore face more intense competition for fewer unskilled and semi- skilled jobsll lIBy 1990, an estimated three out of four jobs will require some education or technical training beyond high school. As the future economy becomes more based on knowledge and on thinking, communication and technical skills, business, industry and society will look to higher education to prepare the greater percentages of persons needing such higher order capacities. The development of these qualities have traditionally been a major role of colleges and universities which they carry out through their academic undergraduate and graduate instructional degree-credit programs. The foundation of any future economy will continue to lie in the quality of those employed, and the primary means by which higher education will influence the economy will lie in-how well it continues to graduate persons who are prepared for effective employment through its general and job-specific academic programs. Basic Academic Research All great university systems conduct research which may involve the creation of new knowledge, the re-ordering or re-interpretation of existing knowledge, or the testing of current theories and views to establish more firmly a base for the further advancement of knowledge. The process of searching, discovering and probing is rooted in attempts to resolve an issue, solve a problem, or answer a question. In academically-based research, these questions grow out of the academic discipline itself in an effort to advance or refine knowledge; these questions may not have direct or immediate connections to a problem or challenge being faced by a business, industry or community. In other cases, the research 80 process is based on a problem or question that emerged or was initiated external to the university. Often, the latter form of research is called "applied" and the former, "basic." While this can be a useful distinction, it is also true that what starts out as "basic" may in time result in findings or further research that are very much applicable to questions being faced by society. Or research that grows out of a practical problem being faced by society .may generate findings that expand or lead to new theories of knowledge. Good examples of the ultimate practical impact of basic academic scientific research are the advances in high technology made possible through superconductivity research. It is also true that high quality academic research institutions in geographical proximity attract industries which are based on advanced knowledge and technology. Part of this attraction can be due to research directly relatedto the industry; however, the attraction is also based on the positive relationships which can develop among the academic scientists and professionals from private industry who share the same basic interests and disciplines. Service It is in the category of activities responding directly to the external community that holds the most potential for expanding higher education's contributions to economic and community development. There are two basic kinds of external services: Continuing Education: based on the instruction of persons who wish to continue their education through non-degree coursework in non-traditional settings (off-campus). Applied Research and Knowledge: based on faculty researching a specific problem experienced by a business or a community or transferring existing knowledge or expertise to solving a problem or implementing a solution. Continuing Education Since the 1983 Needs Assessment, University System institutions have expanded their continuing education activities through organized instructional programs (usually non-credit); advisory services; and use of the university libraries, conference facilities, or other resources connected with" the academic community. Faculty members often organize special conferences, and provide off-campus noncredit courses and special programs to train groups of citizens or professionals for more effectiv~ functioning or leadership in a community. These activities serve numerous clients, including agencies of state government; the state legislature; farmers and agribusiness firms; public development groups; adults participating in organized instructional programs; professional groups such as practicing attorneys, pharmacists, and accountants; officials of county and municipal governments; and public school officials. Often special programs are organized to serve regularly a particular client group, such as law enforcement officers, state and local government employees, members of the state legislature, and managers of private firms. Continuing education activities will be even more needed as the economy continues to become based increasingly on technology and knowledge. The changes require persons continually to upgrade their skills to adapt to the employment needs of 81 the economy. The needed skills and preparation of persons employed in fields such as Agriculture, Education, the Health Professions, and Public or Governmental Administration are changing rapidly and continuously. As Georgia's economy changes and new business and industry develop and some old ones recede, Georgians will need help in starting new careers or changing occupations, developing new skills, coping with changing life and family styles. While some progress has been made since 1983 in recognizing more explicitly the importance and legitimacy of continuing education, such instruction still is not accorded the status to make it a higher institutional and faculty priority. Crucial to raising the status of continuing education is greater recognition within the faculty and institutional reward system, including salaries, promotion and tenure. Current Board of Regents' policies on promotion and tenure allow institutions and their faculties to recognize and reward continuing education instructional activities within the superior teaching criterion. The extent to which institutions and their faculties actually confer such rewards will help to determine just how far a University System priority on economic and community development will advance. While the continuing education programs at the universities gain much attention for their valuable services, the senior and two-year colleges are in a special position to identify needs and to respond directly and specifically with their own resources. Given the central role in their local and regional communities. these colleges could expand their roles in continuing education. Based on the review of the 1983 recommendations and the above analysis and discussion. the following recommendations are made: 1. The University System should continue to support continuing education activities and programs which extend the education of practicing professionals and contribute to economic and community development throughout the state. A basic level of funding should continue at each institution including support for a director and office to coordinate these activities. 2. The University System's senior and two-year colleges should consider ways to expand their continuing education activities to their service areas. Since they are closest to local needs, these local and regional colleges can play a special part in community and economic development. 3. Institutions of the University System should continue to provide the general public in their service areas with cultural opportunities such as art exhibits, dramatic productions, lectures, and other programming which enrich the intellect and expand the spirit. Increased resources have been provided to expand public service programs; examples are the Foreign Language and Cultural Centers funded in 1988 as part of the Chancellor's Special Funding Initiative. 4. System institutions should continue to offer support services designed to provide technical assistance and personnel retraining for governmental agencies at all levels and non-profit social agencies. This 1983 - 82 recommendation has continuing relevance. The Georgia Center for Continuing Education continues to offer support services for teclmical assistance and personnel. Additional resources have been directed to system institutions involved in these activities. Other units in the system, such as Kennesaw College's Al Burrus Institute, have recently developed outreach programs. 5. System institutions with teacher preparation programs should continue to work closely with local school systems to develop in-service (or staff development) programs for teachers in the public schools; formal lines of communication have been established between the local school systems and System institutions to provide a free flow of information and to develop an integrated program of quality improvement at all levels of public education. Research efforts should be encouraged to assist public schools. 6. The System should continue to support the offering of continUing education programs for health professionals by those institutions equipped to provide them. These programs should be designed to meet the needs of practitioners for the latest information in their respective fields. System institutions should develop a wide range of service activities in the health area designed to educate the general public in preventive health measures. Extensive continuing education programs are offered by the Medical College of Georgia; these programs are significant in upgrading and maintaining a quality health care delivery system in the state. The Medical College of Georgia continuing education programs, which are designed to assist physicians in maintaining and upgrading skills, are especially noteworthy. 7. Continuing education services should be coordinated among University System institutions. Unnecessary duplication must be avoided. The geographical proximity of an institution to the need being served is an important criterion already recognized in Regents policies for determining which institutions should provide services. However, consideration also should be given to supplementing these policies based on geographical proximity with criteria that recognize the special strengths of institutions with statewide or regional missions which- may overlap local service areas. A procedure should be developed to assure that decisions about who offers specific continuing education services are fair and based on what will best serve the community in terms of access and quality. Applied Research The second category of service activities concerns the application of research and knowledge to meet the economic and community needs. Faculty may conduct research into a problem being experienced by a business, industry or community or transfer existing knowledge or expertise to a problem or task in the outside community. 83 Colleges and universities organize to offer these services in several ways. The most common and visible way has been to establish formal. structured programs whose purpose is economic development and which are staffed by persons dedicated to these goals. The Cooperative Extension Service of the University of Georgia and Fort Valley State College. the Smali Business Development Center at the University of Georgia. the Georgia Tech Research Institute. the Advanced Technology Development Center of Georgia Tech. and the Urban Life Center at Georgia State University are examples of such structured approaches to the application of academic knowledge and research findings to the specific problems and needs of business and industry. These formal programs have been very successful for several reasons. primarily owing to their clear sense of mission and a staff whose external orientation is fully supported and expected. The results are programs that are readily identifiable by the public which in turn leads to greater reliance on their services. A related way to organize economic development services is emerging through the Chancellor's recent Special Funding Initiative through which several research and development centers have been established which act as focal points in coordinating the economic and community development efforts of faculty and other resources of several institutions ina region. These centers differ from the formal operations described above in that they do not retain their own staff but utilize the existing faculty and staff of participating institutions. The success of these operations will hinge on the extent to which the leadership of the centers identify clear problems and tasks to be addressed and then mobilize and coordinate the various contributions of each institution. Colleges and universities also may contribute to economic development through the service efforts of the regular academic faculty reaching out individually to the economic and wider communities. Most academic faculty are not involved in such activities and this naturally limits higher education's contribution to economic development. However. there are several understandable reasons for these limitations. First, relatively few faculty are inclined to apply their academic disciplinary expertise to problems that are driven and structured by forces external to their discipline. Second, and even more fundamental, is that few institutions reward faculty for focusing on such applied, externallyoriented teaching and research. While public service is commonly recognized as a legitimate faculty activity, standard practice finds faculty having difficulty gaining promotion, tenure and salary recognition by concentrating efforts in this area. Whether through the regionally-based centers or through the individual or group efforts of individual faculty, the key to increasing the contributions to economic development rests with finding ways to tap the resident expertise and research skills of the faculty who are the foundation of our system. The primary resource a college or university has to offer is its regular academic faculty. The issue is how to encourage these faculty to apply their talents externally. The key to such encouragement lies in the reward structure and the extent to which it recognizes faculty participation in economic development. For faculty, the most significant rewards are tenure, promotion, and salary merit increases. Other sources of assistance such as reduced teaching loads, student support, and travel funds can be used as inducers. 84 Current Regents' policies allow for service-oriented economic development activities to be recognized and rewarded through promotion and tenure decisions, especially through the criterion related to academic achievement. Some institutions, notably the University of Georgia, have institutional policies that contain specific criteria and procedures for recognizing, documenting and evaluating a range of external service activities. Presumably, faculty who-are truly excellent in these activities gain significant academic rewards for performing them. In sum, the procedures and policies exist at the System level and at least at some institutions to encourage faculty who are so inclined to engage in external economic development services in addition to their instructional and as complements to their research efforts. The extent to which institutions and their faculties actually do begin to give such rewards will determine whether substantially more faculty become involved. As the planning groups addressed how the various compo~ents of the University System could contribute to economic development, a major concern emerged with respect to the coordination of the many potential efforts. Several instances of duplication of services were noticed within the University System and between the University System and other agencies. The potential overlap of services from universities with a statewide mis-sion such as Georgia Tech's ATDC or the University of Georgia's SBDC and the regional or local colleges is particularly serious. Also, the growing role of the technical institutes and their external services under the State Board of Technical and Adult Education presents a potential conflict needing attention. The University System's approach to the coordination of its economic development efforts should be based on two principles. The first is that there exists a vast number and range of state needs to be met, meaning that each institution can play a significant role without overlapping its services with other institutions. Second, it is not possible to establish in advance institutional roles with sufficient detail to guarantee that duplication will not occur. Decisions on inter-institutional divisions of services must be accomplished as specific needs emerge and various institutions prepare to offer services to meet them. At these times, an independent perspective such as that found in the Central Office must help to resolve any service delivery conflicts. As the University System seeks to contribute more to the state's economic development efforts, it will become increasingly important to establish linkages with other state agencies which contribute to, and in some cases, specialize in these development functions. The University System needs to be involved at early stages in the recruitment and assistance activities of such groups as the Governor's Office and Georgia's Department of Industry and Trade. This timely involvement will enable the state to involve the University System as an integral part of marketing efforts to attract new industry and should place the System in a more strategic position to respond to needs as they emerge. The following recommendations are made to direct the University System's approach to economic and community development: 1. The University System should encourage faculties and their institutions to undertake activities related to economic development. These activities may include instruction, applied research and other assisting activities through which the expertise of faculty is brought to bear directly on the state's economy. Promotion, tenure 8S and faculty compensation policies should be examined and revised to enable the more specific and fuller recognition of these services. The purpose of such recognition is to enable faculty and staff who are so inclined to view economic and community development public services as a priority of the University System. 2. The University System should continue to support the activities and programs with explicit economic and community development functions such as the Cooperative Extension Service, Agricultural Experimental Station, the Small Business Development Center of the University of Georgia, the Georgia Tech Research Institute, and the Advanced Technology Development Center of Georgia Tech. These specialpurpose organizations are effective because they are staffed with persons who are oriented directly and solely to economic and community development. 3. The University System should support the development of regionally- based centers, institutes or programs geared to researching and solving regional problems. The University System should support the research and development centers created through the Chancellor's 'J,',;' 1988 Special Funding Initiative. These centers provide an .', ')i, organizational focal point for the faculty and staff already at a college to apply their talents and expertise to regional economic and community development. The development of any regional universities should be based primarily on a mission which emphasizes research that is applicable directly to the special issues, problems and needs of a surrounding region. Such a mission would center on the development of inter-disciplinary institutes which focus faculty effort from various disciplines on specific problems growing out of the needs of a region. 4. The System should develop an improved central capability for the coordination of education, research, and services for business and industry. In the past, it has been possible to allow individual units in the University System a great deal of autonomy, with only general guidance. Conditions in the future, however, will require central planning and coordination to minimize unnecessary duplication of services while assuring that a wide range of needs are met within available resources. In considering potential situations of service duplication, the special service strengths and geographical advantages of each kind of institution should be taken into account in making decisions about which institutions should offer programs in a community. The Vice Chancellor for Services and appropriate staff should be responsible for coordination. This office should initiate a systemwide review of the current delivery of economic and community development activities, the current status of interinstitutional communications and coodination, and then develop policies and procedures to minimize unnecessary duplication of services and activities. 5. The University System should work with other groups and state agencies with economic development roles to assure and coordinate 86 its timely involvement in marketing and other assistance activities. -I This coordinated involvement should be based on the following actions: a. Development of formal communication mechanisms among institutions, state government agencies, and business and industry; b. Publicizing to state government agencies and business and industry the economic development capabilities within the University System and encouraging these entities to make greater use of University System resources; c. A process to identify economic and community developlrient needs and goals. d. Procedures to enable quick identification of available institutional services. e. Direct relationships in public service between individual state government agencies and individual institutions and faculty members. 6. The System should strengthen those research elements in its several institutions which have achieved national recognition and which can make substantial contributions to the economic growth of business and industry in Georgia -- including engineering, physical science, computer sciences, the life sciences, business administration, and engineering technology. Available resources can best be used to keep these areas competitive with those of other states. This recommendation, made in the 1983 Needs Assessment, has continuing relevance. Efforts should be sustained to strengthen those research elements which have received national recognition. 7. The System should continue to strengthen its ties with the business community by expanding programs of applied research and extension for business and industry. This recommendation was made in 1983 as part of the Needs Assessment and increased resources have been directed to the System's institutions involved in industrial extension and business assistance to smaller firms. International Programs Any forward-looking discussion of higher education and economic development must include an examination of the role of international programs. The changes now occuring call for a careful evaluation of higher education's capacity to help meet the challenge of a global economy. International business and investment has clearly been a very significant component in Georgia's economic grmvth during the past decade. This trend toward a global economy is likely to accelerate in the future. The influence of the Pacific Rim, the European Economic Community and the world's under-developed countries on economic activity in the United States and, in particular, in Georgia, cannot be questioned. The 1990's will bring the following: 87 Increased emphasis on the development of human resources ; . . . . .... . ,; that are functional in a multinational environment Expanded international cooperation among universities in education and research. Increased international working relationships between universities, industry and governmental organizations. More multinational business ventures. Many colleges and universities have offered international programs that could be clasified as summer enrichment courses. A number of institutions have also signed agreements to promote faculty and student exchange with foreign universities. These activities are important and should be strongly encouraged in the future. Continuation of past programs, however, even at an expanded level, will not be sufficient to place the University System of Georgia among the leaders in international efforts. Such leadership will come only wi th successful promotion and expansion of existing programs and the development of creative new programs involving research and services to foreign countries and international exposure for students and faculty. . International markets are vital to Georgia businesses. Increasingly, Georgia companies and corporations cross national borders for products, component parts, customers, markets, and cooperative ventures. There is evidence that public education in Georgia and the U.S. is now providing more language, geographic, and international studies opportunities. More System units are beginning to address international education. More than half of the four-year institutions in the nation report that their libraries have increased their international resources and materials, have hired more faculty with international expertise, and are offering more courses with an international focus. Study and travel abroad programs for faculty and students have increased. There is much progress to report in the area of international education for the University System. Isolated examples of creative and inventive efforts to expand international education in our universities and colleges abound. Yet there is much to be done. There has been a great deal of discussion in recent years about restoring American competitiveness abroad. As never before, we face competition from Europe, Japan, and even many of the more advanced developing countries. While managers may be able to get by with minimal international expertise, they may not be competitive internationally if European and Japanese firms do a better job of adaptation and interaction. Regardless of what the University System does to spur improvement in undergraduate instruction, in technological development, increase research, and expand public service, at some point, our future graduates will likely be interested in doing business internationally, to go abroad, to sell, service, and perhaps make the product. The ability to do these tasks as effectively as possible in a wide variety of contexts may well spell the difference between competitive success and failure in the future for Georgia businesses. 88 ~;~y::~ The following general reconunendation speaks to an expanded international emphasis r~J1;~';<~~ in the University System: 1. The University System should expand its current programs with an international focus and lead in the development of new efforts involving: Diversified language education. Foreign assignments as part of cooperative education and internship programs. Establishment of operational programs for education and research in foreign countries .1 89 COORDINATION OF INSTITUTIONAL ROLES IN RESPONDING EFFECTIVELY TO STATE NEEDS As the Needs Assessment and the sections on increased participation and economic development make clear, the University System of Georgia will be expected to meet a great range of state needs over the next decade. Moreover, its 34 colleges and universities will be eager to expand their roles and services to meet these needs. In light of these growing state needs and institutional aspirations, the University System must have in place policies and procedures that will make the institutional responses orderly, effective and from a System perspective, efficient. While ideally the University System would meet all state needs, the facts are that resources are limited, causing choices to be made and priorities determined concerning what needs to meet and what roles each institution should play in doing so. This planning section addresses the key issues concerning how state needs and institutional roles should be aligned over the next decade. The first section discusses the development of a recommended set of policy principles to apply when the University System is faced with demands for more higher education through the senior college (Baccalaureate/Master's) levels of higher education in areas of Georgia not now served by full senior colleges or universities. Currently, several two-year colleges are expressing the desire to meet these needs by converting to senior college status. Policies are needed that will allow the Regents and Chancellor to address emerging needs from various locales and regions in a consistent and fair manner. The second section concerns the role which University System institutions, especially two-year colleges, should play in meeting the state's needs for technical-vocational education after high school. The growth of the state technical institutes under the State Board of Technical and Adult Education and their recent interests in offering associate degree collegiate education have confused further the roles of each sector in meeting state needs for vocational-technical programs below the baccalaureate level. The way in which this issue is resolved will affect significantly the role of two-year colleges in the University System. The next sections address directly the questions of the roles of the various categories of institutions and their relationships to the others. The suggestions that the structure of the University System be altered to establish new kinds of institutions or to change the status of others are addressed. A new category of university, the regional university, is described and recommended, a direction that already has been approved by the Board of Regents. Recommendations are made which reaffirm the value of two-year colleges but suggest broadening their roles. In addition, the respective roles of the System's universities and senior colleges were examined and reaffirmed in detail. University System Policy on Extending Upper-Level Baccalaureate Programs Providing adequate access to baccalaureate-level undergraduate education throughout a State is one of the highest priorities of any public system of higher education. By most standards, Georgia has developed a very accessible system of access to public baccalaureate education. The University System of Georgia has 90 fifteen two-year colleges and fifteen senior colleges distributed across the state. The University System differs from most state systems in that it has as many senior as two-year colleges; most states rely on two-year, community colleges to a much greater extent. This relatively large number of senior colleges reflects the System's response over the years to pressure from growing population areas to add the junior, senior and graduate offerings to existing two-year colleges. This pattern has had three effects. First, many of the senior colleges still maintain a heavy focus on providing access to the local region, accepting a vast majority of students who apply including those not prepared to begin degree-credit study. Second, the University System is, relative to other state systems, more expensive to operate owing to the larger number of colleges which offer the more expensive upper levels of instruction. Third, many of the colleges have small enrollments which result from the efforts to provide access by physically locating colleges in sparsely populated areas of Georgia. Need for Consistent Approach While the University System now provides relatively good access to the baccalaureate degree through the wide geographical availability of senior colleges and their off-campus programs, pressures to provide further access will continue due to the natural desire of even the smaller communities to have their own senior colleges. These pressures are exacerbated by the disproportionate growth being experienced in certain areas of Georgia that do not now have senior colleges such as Gwinnett County, Dalton, Macon, and Brunswick. These communities will not understand readily a rebuff to their desires for a senior college based on the presence of senior colleges located in other areas of the state, some of which have low enrollments. Recently, Georgia's continued growth has led to the development of off-campus programs and centers in other communities which did not have local two-year colleges or. full access to baccalaureate study through a local senior college. This approach has led to the development of formal residence centers in Brunswick, Dalton, Dublin, Camden County, Macon, Newnan, Robins Air Force Base, Gainesville, and Gwinnett County. These centers involve the delivery of formal programs to off-campus sites by existing colleges and universities. Frequently, services from multiple institutions are offered with a local two-year college providing lower division courses and a senior college establishing a center to deliver the final two years of selected baccalaureate programs on the campus of the two-year college. As the University System addresses these inevitable pressures for expansion from growing communities, clear guidelines and policies are needed to ensure that each case is dealt with fairly and consistently. These guidelines should recognize the need to balance the local goals of further access through expansion with the systemwide goals for using scarce state resources most efficiently. In short, the needs for further access must be weighed against the danger of spreading resources over too wide a range of services, resulting in a dilution of System quality. 91 Recommended Directions and Actions In 1988, a planning committee composed of academic administrators and faculty was appointed to develop recommendations for how the University System should respond to the pressures for further access to baccalaureate education. The committee approached the issue by framing a set of steps which should be taken to meet the emerging needs of an area for further access to baccalaureate education. The committee addressed not only the nature of these steps but also which kinds of institutions should be responsible for delivering the additional services. In developing these recommendations, the committee saw no compelling need for new, free-standing colleges in any area of the state. The committee1s approach was based on the need to address expansion very cautiously and to ensure that need and demand will translate into significant enrollments before more permanent, higher level resources are committed. The population and enrollment outlook described in the Needs Assessment suggests strongly that the University System should guard against costly expansion which cannot be reversed if enrollments do not materialize and the services are found to be cost-inefficient. The general thrust of these recommendations supports the directions stated or implied in current Regents I policies on off-campus courses, programs and residence centers but serves to extend and clarify their meaning. Stages of Response The committee considered carefully a wide range of options for extending the availability of upper-level and graduate education including the establishment of residence centers and branch campuses as well as the conversion of existing two-year colleges into senior colleges. The committee recommended four steps, each of which should be taken in order, as expansion of undergraduate education opportunities is considered. These four steps represent a hierarchy of offcampus instruction as follows: Step I. The Teaching Station. A Teaching Station is defined as any site where no more than 25% of work toward an undergraduate degree can be earned and where no more than 50% of the work toward a graduate degree can be earned. Criteria for offering courses at a Teaching Station: a. The average enrollment in all courses at the station should equal or exceed the following values for courses to be continued beyond the third quarter at a teaching station: Lower Division 26; Upper Division 18; Graduate Division 9 b. The above instructional productivity standards can be waived when there is a contract with an external agency or group that guarantees funding at the level required. 92 Step II. The Off-Campus Degree Program The Off-Campus Degree is defined as a sequence of courses offered by a System '\' ."' institution in an off-campus location which leads to a specifically authorized .,';:' Regents I degree. Normally, off - campus 'degree programs will be expected to follow the implementation of the teaching station. Only upon a demonstrated demand will the teaching station be eligible to become an off-campus degree. Criteria for establishing an Off-Campus Degree Program: Prior to the request for the approval of an off-campus degree, the unit asking for approval will ask the Chancellor's office to have a survey of need conducted in the area. The survey should be managed by qualified personnel who have no conflict of interest. In assessing need, the following factors should be considered: a. Area educational/economic factors suggesting the degree, such as a pressing need of a local school system to have a program to prepare a category of teachers in short supply, or a need for particular degrees in order to attract or hold industry. b. A sufficiently large population available to support more than one cycle of the degree. Step III. The Residence Center. A Residence Center is a facility authorized by the Board of Regents at which offcampus graduate and/or undergraduate degrees and other approved services are offered. Normally, a residence center will be expected to follow the implementation of the off-campus degree program. Only upon a demonstrated demand will the off-campus degree programs be eligible to be located in a residence center. The residence center should have a formal organizational structure with a director and some full-time faculty assigned to it. Criteria. for establishment of a Residence Center: Prior to the petition for the approval of a residence center, the unit asking for approval will request the Chancellor's office to have a survey of need conducted in the area. In assessing the need, the same factors should be considered as are indicated for the off-campus degree programs. However, justification of a Residence Center should require substantially greater, broader and_more long-lasting needs which suggest a more permanent higher education presence. Step IV. Branch Campuses. A Branch Campus is a sub-unit of a University System institution approved by the Board of Regents. A Branch Campus is authorized to offer all of the degrees within its approved mission, role and scope. Normally, branch campuses will be expected to follow the implementation of the residence center. Only upon a demonstrated demand will the residence center be eligible to become a branch campus. Criteria for the establishment of Branch Campuses: a. Demand for services in a densely populated area is such that a campus is clearly indicated by a needs survey accomplished as in Steps II and III above. 93 b. Academic programs, as well as other campus services, are needed to meet the educational needs of the community. Student organizations, student service activities, residence halls, and similar activities are examples of these types of services. c. Programs offered on the branch campus must have enrollment and credit hour production that meet the productivity levels above. d. Prior to the establishment of branch campuses, some financial support should be expected from the local community. Institutional Roles in Extending Programs The committee's planning and recommendations were based on the belief that no new free-standing colleges should be established. The determination of which institution should offer off-campus services should be governed by geographical proximity and service relevance. If lower division services are needed in an area then the nearest two-year college should provide themj the need for upperdivision or graduate services should be met by the nearest senior college. Following these criteria will help to ensure that the colleges providing the offcampus services bring quality and experience to the kind and level of programs needed. The effect of the above conclusions reinforces the System's approach to the twoplus-two arrangement of extending full baccalaureate program access to an area served only by a two-year college. This combination of local two-year college lower division coursework along with a nearby senior college extending the culminating upper-level courses is a proven, cost-effective way to provide access to baccalaureate education. Many states rely on this method to a great extent even in very large population areas. The Florida system has shown the value of this approach and now has branch campuses of existing universities in six sites including the large metropolitan areas of St. Petersburg, Fort Lauderdale, Daytona Beach and Fort Myers. In each case, the branch campus only offers upperdivision and graduate study and relates closely to and relies on the lower division programs of the local two-year college. Given the effectiveness of this two-pIus-two, two-year to senior-college approach to extending baccalaureate education, it follows that only under extraordinary circumstances should new free-standing senior colleges be established or should an existing local two-year college be converted to senior college status. These conditions would include an enormous population base and attendant need and demand, as well as clear geographical or other impracticality of extending a nearby senior college into the local area. Qual!ty of Extended Services The committee also addressed the quality of off-campus instruction and programs. Its report included recommendations that make more explicit the current System policy that requires off-campus work to be of similar quality as that provided at the main site. The committee noted the considerable amount of off-campus work in the University System, primarily in the forms of courses and programs and also 94 the frequency with which these services are delivered by part-time faculty. Consequently, the final report recommended that the policies be reaffirmed, and in some cases strengthened, with respect to the procedures for gaining Regents' approval of off-campus courses and programs. In addition, the committee suggested that the Chancellor consider a policy to limit the amount of instruction in an off-campus degree program offered by part-time faculty. Recommendations The following specific recommendations should provide direction for any further extension of undergraduate education in the State of Georgia: 1. Regents' policies should be supplemented or amended to include the specific steps outlined above for the extension of further access to undergraduate education. In developing these policies, the Chancellor and Board of Regents should establish criteria for moving through each stage of the progression as suggested above: teaching station (courses), offcampus programs, residence centers, and branch campuses. 2. Wherever geographically and programmatically possible, a two-year college should serve off-campus needs calling for lower division courses or programs and a senior college or university should serve upperdivision needs. 3. Any future consideration should be based on following the policies and procedures recommended above, which call for successive steps to be followed with progression to the next step always justified by greater unmet need. The two-year college should be considered for conversion to a senior college or to offer upper-level programs only when two conditions prevail: a. Extraordinary population needs in a specific area or region. fi. Geographic, economic or educational impracticality of extending the programs and resources of an existing senior college to meet the needs of a specific area. 4. Current Regents' policies governing the quality of off-campus study and use of part-time faculty in such programs should be reviewed in light of the-recommendations made by the off-campus study Planning Committee. 95 The Role of the University System in Meeting State Needs for Vocational-Technical Education During the 1960s, leaders in Georgia recognized the need to provide more opportunities for citizens to obtain education beyond high school. The ambitious efforts responding to the need to make education more geographically available to serve the growing number of baby boomers resulted in building throughout Georgia both junior colleges in the University System and area vocationaltechnical schools under the State Board of Education. Very early some feared duplication of effort and difficulty in resource allocation. An example is found in the 1963 report made by the Governor IS Commission to Improve Education, in which it was observed that the structure of postsecondary education in Georgia involving governance by separate boards could be expected to lead to conflicts over the roles and functions of the junior colleges and area vocational centers. Those conflicts were averted and duplication was kept to a minimum for two decades, primarily because only one sector, the Board of Regents, possessed the authority to grant degrees. This degree-granting authority and the capacity to offer college-level degrees served to differentiate the roles of the two sectors because only degree programs require the offerings of arts and sciences general education that is associated with colleges. However, in 1981 this differentiation of the missions of colleges and vocational-technical schools began to blur when several vocational-technical schools were granted the authority and supporting funds to offer "high technology" Associate of Applied Technology (AAT) degrees. In March of that year, the Quality Basic Education Act was amended to provide for a Board of Postsecondary Vocational Education. At that time, State leaders indicated that there was no intention of creating a second system of public higher education and that these institutions would not become colleges. The Emerging Issue Nevertheless, in spite of those intentions, there is a growing concern that a second system of public colleges in Georgia is developing. Both the State Board of Technical and Adult Education (SBTAE) as well as many of its 32 technical institutes seem to be moving toward the inclusion of degree programs as part of their mission. Increasingly, these institutes are seeking accreditation from collegiate accreditation agencies, namely, the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, the same agency which accredits colleges and universities within the University System. Previously, the vocational-technical institutes sought accreditation through the Commission on Occupational Education Institutions; however, in order to offer associate degrees through an accredited program, it is necessary to seek regional accreditation through the Commission on Colleges. Such accreditation is costly in terms of necessary additions to staff, faculty and library resources, some of which will duplicate University System resources. Once accreditation is achieved and more degree programs are added, these institutes will be recognized, in effect, as community colleges since they will offer a full range of adult and continuing education, technical programs and associate degree programs. Should this occur, a potentially damaging and divisive conflict of interest could develop between the Board of Regents and the Board of Technical and Adult Education. The distinctiveness of the mission of each sector could be lost and programs 96 duplicated. In effect, there could develop a second system of public higher education in the state, with each of these systems offering a range of associate degrees. To build upon its existing education programs, the University System sought ways to control the possibility of duplication and, in the process, promote the efficient use of state resources. Accordingly, the Board of Regents has supported the development of various types of cooperative arrangements with the vocationaltechnical institutes. Following the official establishment of the Postsecondary Board on July 1, 1986, the Regents and that Board began discussions to revise the contract regarding the joint operation of the vocational divisions at the four University System colleges at Bainbridge, Brunswick, Clayton, and Dalton. The resulting Agreement was approved by both Boards in early 1988. The Board of Regents also authorized a policy which allows technical institute faculty "members and their dependent children to be eligible for in-state tuition rates although they may have resided in the State less than one year. "" ~...... f, ' .. -: In addition, two separate liaison committees were established, one composed of Board members from each system and one composed of college and institute presidents. Results of joint meetings "of the Board Committees included the statement by Technical and Adult Board members that they were not interested in duplicating current University System coursework but did favor the support and further development of cooperative associate degree programs. Consideration of Options In Spring, 1988 the University System Planning Steering Committee identified relationships with the technical institutes and, specifically, the role which University System colleges should have in delivering postsecondary technical education, as an issue that will affect greatly the future roles of University System colleges, especially the two-year colleges. A planning committee of nine presidents was appointed, most of whom were heads of two-year colleges. At the same time, a committee of presidents of the technical institutes was formed to parallel the Regents Planning Committee. In November, 1988 the Presidents Committee produced a report which examinE?d the key issues such as: accreditation, transfer of credit, program and funding duplication, and respective roles in offering general education. However, the committee concluded that a more fundamental examination of statewide governance roles and responsibilities was needed as a basis for considering the full range of options for delivering postsecondary technical education. The committee identified six governance options for anaTysis. Three of these options presumed that two separate boards would continue to govern public higher education in Georgia: Status Quo - No substantive changes would be made in the current missions of and arrangements between the two boards. Intensified Cooperative Efforts - Continued efforts by the joint liaison committees to work cooperatively would be made, including agreements regarding associate degrees, cooperative degrees, and the transfer of credit. Separate Missions - The Board of Regents would offer academic coursework creditable through the baccalaureate degree and the SBTAE institutes would offer only career or occupational certificates and degrees. 97 Three other options were based on a single governing board approach with an emphasis on combining colleges and institutes, where appropriate, and embracing in Georgia the "community college" concept: Two-Year Colleges Under the State Board of Technical & Adult Education -The 15 two-year colleges in the University System would be moved under the SBTAE. New Two-Year College Board - The 15 two-year colleges in the University System and the 32 institutes under the SBTAE would be moved under a newly created board for two-year or community colleges. Technical Institutes under the Board of Regents - The 32 SBTAE institutes would be moved under the Board of Regents. After reviewing this report and conferring with the Regents, the Chancellor urged the Committee to renew its efforts to develop effective cooperative efforts. The options which were based on governance changes were rejected as premature and impractical. The sense of the respective liaison committees of Board members was that there was still time and room to build toward cooperation while clarifying the distinctive roles of the two ,sectors. Both the Chancellor and the SBTAE Commissioner addressed a joint meeting of presidential liaison committees in February, 1989, and charged the combined groups to identify specific methods by which the two Boards could cooperate more effectively. Recommended Directions and Actions Following two months of intense negotiations by the Executive Committees of both presidential planning committees, a Memorandum of Agreement was developed to serve as a framework for cooperative efforts between the two boards and their respective institutions. This Memorandum of Agreement has been approved by the Board of Regents and the State Board of Technical and Adult Education and follows in its entirety. Memorandum of Agreement Between- the BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA and the STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL AND ADULT EDUCATION WHEREAS: The Board of Regents and the State Board of Technical and Adult Education adopted in February, 1989 a Statement of Operating Philosophy, which is attached and is incorporated by reference, which establishes the need for cooperative efforts on behalf of students and the minimization of duplication of efforts, and WHEREAS: It is in the best interests of the citizens and taxpayers of Georgia that every effort be made to coordinate and not duplicate the activities of both Boards; and WHEREAS: It is the desire of both Boards and their respective institutions to provide increased and enhanced student access to postsecondary education programs and services; and WHEREAS: The Board of Regents and the State Board of Technical and Adult 98 Education endorsed in February, 1989 the document, An Agenda for Vocational Education: Shared Goals for the Next Five Years, which calls for the coordinated delivery of vocational education services; and WHEREAS: There is broad understanding that the Associate of Arts (AA) and the Associate of Science (AS) degrees are the core-based transfer degrees of the University System of Georgia and that the focus of this Memorandum of Agreement is upon career associate degrees; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by both Boards that: 1. Career associate degree opportunities will be made broadly available and convenient to students through the network of colleges and technical institutions. 2. Career associate degrees will consist of the Associate of Applied Technology (AAT) degree of the Department of Technical and Adult Education and the Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree of the University System. 3. The !AT degree is the career degree of the Department of Technical and Adult Education which will be offered independently by those institutions which are accredited by the Commission on Colleges (cae). 4. The AAS degree is the career degree of the University System which has both transfer and non-transfer options. It will be made broadly available on a cooperative basis with the University System institutions delivering the general education component and Department of Technical and Adult Education institutes delivering the technical component. The AAS degree will also continue to be offered independently by University System institutions. 5. The American Association of Community and Junior Colleges/Occupational Education Task Force Report and Southern Association of Colleges and Schools guidelines will be utilized in developing and delivering the career associate degrees; all such degrees will contain a minimum of 25 quarter credit hours of general education. 6. Transfer of credits among the Department of Tec1mical and Adult Education institutes and University System institutions will be upon the discretion of the receiving institutions and subject to normal review procedures. All baccalaureate and transfer associate degree programs in the University System require students to exempt or complete Developmental Studies and to pass the Regents' Test. 7. The cooperative participation of colleges and tec1mical institutes will be recognized on the credentials presented to students. 8. Based upon the identification of optimum institutional relationships at the State Board/staff levels, local liaison/coordinating committees will be established to develop and implement cooperatively developed and delivered career associate degree opportunities. 99 9. Changes in existing cooperative relationships to reflect the terms of this Agreement may be initiated by institutes and colleges and approved by their respective boards. The interests of students should be considered during the review and implementation process. 10. . The successful implementation of. this Memorandum of Agreement is dependent upon the availability of adequate funding to the Board of Regents and the State Board of Technical and Adult Education. This Agreement supports the following key points: The activities of each Board should not be duplicated. Transfer of credits earned in technical institutes will be at the discretion of University System institutions. A clear division of responsibility for the kind of degrees to be offered by each Board. An increased emphasis on cooperative degrees in which colleges and institutes each contribute their portion of a program which will give more Georgians access to associate degrees. This Agreement recognizes the growing state need for workers who not only are prepared for specific jobs but who have developed the knowledge and skills typically growing out of the study of general education. It is becoming increasingly vital for persons entering the technically-based workplace to be able to read, write, reason, think logically and continue to learn. Therefore, the Agreement supports the wider availability for collegiate degrees which combine an emphasis on job-specific preparation with academic general education. The Agreement is based on the willingness of the University System to provide collegiate general education coursework needed to support associate degree career programs. The'general education offered by the University System for this purpose must be at a college level although the courses do not necessarily have to be part of the core curriculum which will automatically transfer to a University System senior college or university. The success of this Agreement will be determined partly by the extent to which University System institutions effectively serve students at the technical institutes and make it practical for the institutes to participate in granting degrees through the authority of the University System colleges. An aggressive outreach of the colleges to the technical institutes should remove any basis for additional technical institutes to seek independent degree-granting authority and accreditation as colleges. In addition to the obvious cost benefits to the State following such cooperation and minimization of duplication, are the benefits to the technical education students who would gain access to one of the University System's most basic missions -- the provision of academic general education. Students choosing to complete the University System core curriculum open opportunities leading to the bachelor's degree. While the cooperative efforts should keep to a mInImum the nwnber of such situations, when a technical institute does offer associate degrees it will be 100 necessary for the University System to develop specific policy governing transferability of any credits granted by the institute. In those cases in which the technical institute wishes to have its credit accepted for transfer toward a baccalaureate degree, requirements similar to or the same as are applied to University System students should be expected of the transfer students from the technical institutes. Most of the discussion of the University System's role in postsecondary technical education has focused on the provision of general education by the University System while the State Board of Technical and Adult Education institutes offer the technical work. However, as more fields become based technologically and as technology advances, educational preparation will need to focus on advanced levels of knowledge and skills based in the sciences, mathematics, and other general education disciplines associated with learning, thinking and communication skills. The presence and strength of such instruction and curricula in the University System mean that its colleges are in a position to continue and even expand their roles in offering the technical components of a technical education, especially in those fields which require more substantial components of academic education. On the basis of the above analysis, it is recommended that the University System take the following actions: 1. Make broadly available appropriate general education collegiate instruction to students seeking associate degrees at technical institutes. 2. Determine the demand for such general education coursework and coordinate service relationships among colleges and institutes. 3. Ensure that local liaison/coordinating groups are established to determine the specific nature of each college-institute service relationship. 4. Develop System level policy on the transferability toward the associate or baccalaureate degree of credits earned at the technical institutes. 5. Maintain as a future possibility the replication of the community college type arrangements at Bainbridge, Brunswi.ck, Clayton and Dalton Colleges. This structure has served to limit unnecessary duplication among colleges and technical institutes in these areas of Georgia and may be indicated in the future if duplication cannot be controlled in other locales in which colleges and institutes are in close proximity. 6. Determine technical/professional/occupational fields whose educational preparation requires, or should require, a significant component of collegiate transfer-level general education. The preparation of students seeking to enter these fields is best provided by University System colleges through more rigorous A.S. or B.S. degree programs. 101 Institutional Roles Within The University System of Georgia The planning process identified at an early point the need for a re-examination of the basic institutional structure of the University System. A number of systemwide, regional and institutional groups examined the key questions concerning the University System structure including: 1. Is the current array of kind and number of institutions the most effective in pursuing the three System priorities of access, quality and efficiency? 2. Are the missions of current categories of institutions still appropriate? 3. Are new kinds of institutions needed, such as regional universities? 4. Should two-year colleges expand their roles, including the possibility of some becoming senior colleges? The consideration of University System structure is critical at this point in the history of the University System because pressures have grown over the 1980s to expand the availability of institutions at the university and senior college levels. Several senior colleges wish to become some form of university; many two-year colleges desire senior college status. Throughout the discussions and analysis of these questions, an overriding principle was the need to clarify and distinguish to a greater degree the missions and roles of the various groups of institutions. This differentiation or division of labor has long been recognized as a strength of the University System of Georgia. As pressures mount from institutions to expand their missions, and in the process become more alike than distinctive, the differentiation of roles is threatened. The experiences of the many state systems which have not maintained a structure based on distinctive institutional roles and scope are predictable and commonly recognized: needless duplication, inefficient use of state resources and a dilution of the quality of existing institutions and programs. Given these dangers, these issues were considered carefully in light of their relationship to the basic System goals ~f access, quality and efficiency. The goal of preeminence will be attained only if supporting resources are available, and they will not be if institutional services are duplicated unnecessarily. The role of the senior colleges was addressed explicitly and also in the context of exploring tile need for and nature of proposed regional universities, particularly how the latter would differ from the senior college. Moreover, the discussions concerning the possible conversion of certain two-year colleges to senior institutions caused a comparative examination of the role of the senior college. The result was a clearer understanding and affirmation of the current role of the senior colleges in the University System. The examination of University System structure centered on a careful consideration of the proposed development of a new category of institution: the regional university. The current value and roles of two-year colleges were studied and recommendations made concerning their future mission. In addition, the roles of the System's universities and senior colleges were examined and reaffirned in detail. 102 Regional Universities A major part of University System planning involved the establishment of five regional planning groups whose constituent colleges were charged to evaluate the needs of a region for higher education and to recommend more efficient and effective ways to meet those needs. The work of all of these groups, with few exceptions, emphasized the need for more coordination among a region's various colleges and the initiation of additional programs primarily at the baccalaureate and Master's level. Regional planning in the two southern regions of Georgia took on an added dimension as each group focused on the perceived need, rationale, and drive for some form of university-level presence in its area. Needs assessments were conducted and interpreted to show need for doctoral programs in certain professional fields, especially Education and Public Administration. Most of the program implications, however, were at the Master's and baccalaureate level and particularly involved the off-campus extension of baccalaureate programs to the sites of regional two-year colleges. The South-Southwestern planning" region included Abraham Baldwin Agricultural, Albany State, Bainbridge, Darton, Valdosta State, South Georgia and Waycross Colleges. The needs assessment resulted in recommendations for new programs primarily at the baccalaureate level to be located at the two-year college sites to provide greater access. Master's programs in Social Work, Education and Public Administration (D.P.A.) and a Doctor of Arts (D.A.T.) in Teaching were also indicated. The research proposed would be closely correlated with the service function and be applied in nature. The relationship would be coordinated through the centers established under the Special Funding Initiative. The organization of resources through a center approach would be used as a model for establishing additional centers when there are needs in South Georgia that can best be met by a coordinated approach. The colleges in this region considered several options for delivering the above programs and recommend a "Confederated University" to be called the University of South Georgia. governance would not change nor would the management of individual campuses, which would retain their autonomy. The emphasis on coordination would be implemented through a regional council composed of the seven presidents (perhaps with a rotating chair). The Council would construct a consolidated budget, although each college would submit its individual budget to the Board of Regents. The second regional university proposal emerged from the institutions in Southeast Georgia, involving Armstrong State, Brunswick, East Georgia, Georgia Southern, Savannah State College and the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography. The proposal was based on a regional assessment which identified needs for selected bachelor's programs at the Brunswick and East Georgia College campuses and Master's degrees in Social Work, Business, Fine Arts, Physical Therapy, Psychology 103 and Allied Health. Two doctoral level programs, in Education and Marine Sciences, are proposed as was a School of Engineering. In addition, the proposal included the establishment of Centers for the Arts and Culture and for Regional Development, as well as an Institute of Government. Research would be applied in nature and related to the solution of regional problems . As originally proposed, each of the four participating campuses would retain many of their current programmatic and service characteristics. The Skidaway Institute would continue its research mission and Savannah State College would remain autonomous. There would be a substantial change in administrative structure. The regional university would have, under" this model, a president reporting to the Chancellor, a provost and chief executive officer for each campus and a provost for university-wide academic programs. The president would be responsible for presenting the university budget and for assigning the budgetary allocations to the individual campuses. The individual campuses would be headed by a provost, reporting to the President, charged with the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of the campus. Within the university, there would be university-wide colleges headed by Deans, including professional areas, such as health, education, business, professional studies (e.g., social work, public administration), and engineering. The proposed regional university would be a new institution subsuming the above institutions, excepting Savannah State College, which would participate as an affiliated unit as described below. The new university would be managed by one p~esident. Addressing the regional university issue was a complex matter, requ1r1ng the simultaneous consideration and balancing of the University System's approach toward satisfying each of its three basic goals: access, quality and efficiency. Following is an analysis of the regional university issue according to these System planning goals. Additional Access to University-Level Activities The two regional proposals for university status detailed the many needs of South Georgia which would be addressed by a regional university. The proposals cited the region's challenges concerning family income, economic structure, health, public education and cultural development and suggested how a new approach to higher education would help meet these needs. These challenges are apparent. Not so apparent in the planning, however, was the need for a new university to address them since a majority of the programs and services proposed for the new universities could be provided without university status. It is true that the increased emphasis on research and its application, which has fueled the drive for university status, has great potential value for addressing the specific problems of South Georgia. 104 The planning process concluded that a regionally based university-level institution would have a positive impact on South Georgia for the following reasons: 1. No public university exists. below Georgia's Fall Line, an.area which includes 61% of the state's land and houses nearly 37% of Georgia' s ~ ~ people. The people in these regions, on the average, are poorer and not as well educated and their communities are not as well developed cultur- ally and economically. Within this region lies the City of Savannah, the only metropolitan area of over 200,000 population in the South which has no university within 40 miles. 2. A university located within the region would be better situated to understand and to respond directly to the region's needs in education, social and public services, and economic development. While the extended services of statewide universities are important, faculty living within the region would be closer to the region's problems and their solutions. 3. A regional university would permit more South Georgians closer access to a limited number of advanced graduate programs. The regional location \~ of these programs would allow professionals in given areas to remain on their jobs and with their families while pursuing further study. Efficient Use of Resources Meeting a state's needs for higher education, which are unlimited, must be balanced against the resources available to do so, which are limited. In any consideration of the creation of new universities, it must be clearly understood that: (1) faculty research and advanced graduate instruction are more costly than programs at the senior college level; (2) sound principles of statewide coordination of public higher education require that the more costly and advanced programs serve a broader geographical area, often the whole state. These expensive programs and services are most efficiently offered by a single or fewer institutions which would make the program available to the whole state through such mechanisms as cooperative extension, cqoperative doctoral programs, and teclmical and business development centers. To gain access to these costly programs and services, it is not unreasonable to expect students or other clients to travel to the university for advanced graduate study. The University-System of Georgia has followed these principles in resisting the expansion of -advanced graduate programs and research through the elevation of -.:, ,;. senior colleges. In carrying out its comprehensive mission in graduate educa- tion and research, the University of Georgia serves all of Georgia, as does Georgia Tech for Engineering and the Medical College of Georgia for many of the health professions. On balance, the University System has been effective in providing advanced graduate, research and other university-level services through its universities with statewide missions. The reach of the System l s current uni- versities for national preeminence has been made possible in no small part by the careful concentration of resources on fewer, not more, centers of graduate and research work. And these existing universities will require additional sup- port in attaining the next levels of quality. For these reasons, the University System should be extremely cautious in considering revisions to its structures to include additional higher cost institutions. 105 The planning process, however, has examined carefully a range of ways by which University system resources can be used more effectively. Much of this attention is centering on the concept of regional coordination, an idea advanced by the Chancellor as the basis for the Special Funding Initiative. Regional coordination is one way by which the System's diverse range of colleges and universities can be managed more efficiently by: Regulating the Growth of High Cost Programs High cost programs, when offered, should be offered from a single location and not be duplicated at other institutions in a region Allowing for the Greater Mobility of Resources Under a regional coordinating structure, the resources of each institution in a region would be considered as part of the whole and transferable across institutions. The regional concept is important to the future of the University System. If applied with its original intent, the regional concept strengthens the case in support of some form of regional" university by making it clear that some of the projected additional costs of university status may be defrayed by the increased efficiency in the operation of existing institutions. Quality through Strong Institutional Missions The University System of Georgia currently has a clear and differentiated structure. A distinct division of responsibility exists among institutional missions concerning teaching, research, public service, level and kind of programs and services. The introduction of some form of regional university may alter this structure and occur at a time when existing universities (and the senior and two-year colleges) have current funding needs which must be met if the System's drive for greater quality is to continue. In thi~ context, any decision to support additional universities should include strong assurances for maintaining the differentiated missions throughout the University System and strong protections for the funding priorities at existing universities. The creation of any new university-level institutions must not result in a loss of purpose and direction among current institutions, a diminution of the role of Georgia Tech, University of Georgia, Georgia State University, or the Medical College or the blurring of current funding priorities. These assurances and protections may be recognized by observing the following principles in considering changes in University System structure: 1. The missions of the existing four universities should not be duplicated by the establishment of new kinds of institutions. The mission of any new regional university should be clearly defined and understood as to programs, services, and emphasis on faculty teaching and research. Following is a statement unanimously endorsed by the University System Planning Steering Committee: 106 "The development of regional universities should be based on the formal definition of their mission and role of serving regional needs. Specification of the role of the regional university should be accompanied by the establishment or the reaffirmation of the roles of each type of institution in the University System by categories of institutions sharing similar roles. The categorization of System institutions into groups such as research, comprehensive and regional universities, senior colleges and two-year colleges should be descriptive enough to identify the primary mission and role of each type of institution." "These missions should specify the nature of services and programs which each category of institution may be allowed to propose for development subject to regular System program approval procedures and the availability of funding as determined by the Chancellor and the Board of Regents." "The several institutional missions, taken together, should recognize the distinctions as among statewide, regional, and local service areas and should identify those programs and services to be offered on a statewide basis which should not be duplicated by institutions at regional and local levels. The missions should also indicate which programs and services to be offered regionally should not be duplicated locally within the region." "These missions should specify, to the extent possible, the relative emphasis placed on teaching, research and scholarship, and public service as among the categories of institutions." 2. The graduate and research mission of a regional university should be different from that of existing universities. Research and related graduate programs should be limited to areas that have direct and immediate applications to specific regional needs. The distinction between such regionally applied research and the research conducted at existing universities should be define~~ The focus of graduate programs should fallon students who are practicing professionals in the region, in contrast to the preparation of academicians. 3. If several regions are to be involved, the structure for a regional universit~should be similar and capable of being applied in each region over time. 4. The regional university may involve several institutions but should be structured around a lead institution. Other regional institutions may be formally related to the university through some form of affiliation. The form and nature of such affiliation, however, should not deter the affiliated senior colleges and two-year colleges from their current and primary teaching missions. Two-year colleges should remain two-year colleges although selected higher level programs may be offered on their campuses. Senior colleges, in selected programs, may join their graduate faculty to those of the lead institution in offering programs on their campuses while retaining their senior college status. The possibility of joint graduate programs as between a senior college(s) and the lead institution should be explored further. 107 j 5. The nature of the relationships among the several institutions in a rei gional university needs to be specified more clearly. Neither the South.' east nor the Southwest regional proposal is sufficiently descripti about the relative responsibilities of each campus in programming an' budgeting, and as to their lines of governance, management and accountability to the Chancellor and Board of Regents. 6. Given that the regional university and lead and affiliated institutional components would be new to the current structure of the University System, existing Regents' policy concerning elevation to university stab~ should be reviewed. This process should yield procedures and criteria for determining when institutions' and regional groups of institution;s anJ are ready to attain status as either a lead or affiliated institutiun of a regional university. These criteria should be pertinent to region desiring to be considered for regional university status. 7. To ensure existing institutional missions are given the funding prioriDj needed, development of any new universities should be supported through additional funding to the University System. Following is the statement endorsed by the University System Planning Steering Committee: liThe development of any new university-level institutions supported by funding beyond the levels required to address est priority of the University System -- namely, providing the tot funding needed for each current institution to carry out effective~1 its mission within the current University System structure as deter-' mined by the Chancellor and the Board of Regents. These current funding requirements should be specifically defined so that their priority can be addressed concurrently and expeditiously with the consideration of new initiatives . " 108 Conclusions and Recommendations The area south of Georgia's fall line includes 60 percent of the state's land mass and approximately 37 percent of the state's population. For purposes of convenience, this area can be divided into two regions -- southeast Georgia and southwest Georgia. Each of these regions contains a major population center - Savannah in the Southeast and Albany in the Southwest. A Comprehensive (in terms of enrollments and programs) four-year institution of the University System is located in each of the regions -- Georgia Southern College (Statesboro) in the Southeast and Valdosta State College (Valdosta) in the Southwest. Georgia Southern is approximately 50 miles from Savannah; Valdosta State is approximately 80 miles from Albany. Savannah is served by two four-year System units (Armstrong State and Savannah State); Albany is served by a four-year unit (Albany State) and a two-year unit (Darton College). Additional System services are provided in the Southeast by East Georgia and Brunswick Colleges (two-year) and by the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography. Additional services in the Southwest are provided by Waycross, Bainbridge, South Georgia and Abraham Baldwin Agricultural Colleges (two-year). The two southern regions of the state share some of the same economic, social and educational problems. Each has expressed a strong desire for additional services from the University System to assist in the solution of those problems. Proposals for the creation of a regional university have surfaced in both regions and have significant public support. As discussed in a separate section, one of these proposals (from the Southwest) envisions a "confederated" university involving a loose assemblage of all institutions in the area into a single university. These proposals were reviewed by consultants employed by the University System to determine the "readiness" of institutions in each region for the assumption of the responsibility for the provision of university-level services. Their "readiness" review was centered on (but not limited to) the most mature of the institutions in each region -- Georgia Southern College and Valdosta State College. The consultants concluded that "Georgia Southern College should be made a regional university .. based on an assessment of the institution in several key areas: its overall enrollment level, its admission standards, the strengths of the faculty and the proportion of the faculty holding the terminal degree, the scope of its undergraduate programs, the scope and productivity of its graduate programs, its library collection, the research activity of its faculty, its public service programs, and the accreditation status of the institution and its professional programs." The consultants also concluded that "Valdosta State, as a single institution, is ready in many respects to assume a position as a regional university within the southwestern section, and to target its resources on selected applied research and service projects." The consultants pointed out, however, that the college's current enrollment does not meet the standard set by Regents I policy for a changeof-status and that the recent loss of AACSB accreditation of the School of Business is a cause for added concern. They voiced an opinion that more can be done by the School of Education to develop cooperative programs that would benefit the schools in the region. They also suggested that the college review its admission practices and the scale of its developmental studies efforts. They offered their assessment that the changes necessary to bring Valdosta State to complete "readiness" could be accomplished in the near future. 109 I The consultants did not reconnnend adoption unchanged of either the "confederated" ~I!. or "merged" regional university concepts. They also suggested that the Regents I _ current criteria for change-of-status (from Type II to Type I institution) be reviewed with the possibility of refocusing the importance of the enrollment criterion within other significant criteria attendant to changes-in-status. The Chancellor and his staff have prepared a set of guidelines as measures for determining the "readiness" of an institution for regional university status. These guidelines are discussed in another section of this document. Organization. At least three organizational. or organizationally related. proposals have been considered during the planning process. The least complex of the proposals is based on the assumption that most. if not all. of the System's fouryear institutions currently fit the profile of many of the institutions designated as "universities" in other states. There is some support within the University System to take action similar to that taken recently in the state of South Dakota. where. by virtue of legislative action and the governor's signature. all state colleges became state universities -- but with the provision that no additional funding would accompany the change of designation. Such action would not alter the existing missions of the current four-year institutions within the University System. A second proposal stems from a regional approach and would involve a loose linkage of area institutions (two-year and four-year) in a "confederated" structure (university) designed to promote coordination of activities. In this proposal. the governance mechanism would not change; each institution would remain an autonomous unit. A regional council of presidents would. in essence. be the agent of coordination for the regional university. Under this structure. each participating institution would submit a budget for Board consideration; at the same time. however. the council would submit a consolidated budget with established priorities for meeting regional needs. Institutional proposals for new programs would be coordinated through the council (regional university) structure. A third proposal also takes a regional approach, but with a substantial change in administrative structure. In this proposal. area four-year and two-year colleges. with one exception. would be _merged for adminsistrative purposes. creating a regional university with a single president reporting through the Chancellor to the Board of Regents. The largest and most complex of the campuses would be the main campus of the University, with the other campuses. in effect. becoming branch campuses of the University. . While not formally presented during the planning process. a fourth organizational alternative exists: the designation of selected institutions (based on level of enrollment. complexity of program mix. and other criteria) to serve as regional universities in given sections of the state. These institutions would be "stand alone" institutions insofar as organizational structure is concerned. Neighboring four-year and two-year institutions would not be linked to the regional universities in any formal manner ("confederated" or "merged"). Obviously. a simple change-of-designation could be effected for the selected institutions; for any meaningful impact on the affected regions, however. expanded services should be offered by the selected universities. 110 Each of the organizational alternatives outlined above has assets and liabilities. A simple change-of-designation for all four-year colleges from "college" to "university" would be easy to effect but would be cosmetic at best if a change in level of services did not follow. A "confederated" structure involving a number of four-year and two-year colleges couldarguably promote cooperation and coordination. As proposed, however, nobody is really "in charge." Essentially, the regional university would be a structure in name only; its effectiveness would depend upon the "good faithll of the institutions involved and their ability voluntarily to subordinate institutional goals to regional goals. The "merger" approach would solve the "who I s in charge?" problem and would structurally promote regional coordination of effort. At the same time, however, the amalgamation of a number of differing levels of institutions with differing missions into a single administrative entity very likely would lead to an unfortunate diminution of some facets of those missions which are both needed and necessary. Further, the "merger" approach would, in effect, create a system within a System, a situation alien to the time-tested and validated organizational pattern established in 1932. Perhaps the most clear-cut and "clean" option organizationally is the designation of individual institutions as regional universities to serve the various sectors of the state. The public perception, however, is that such a decision would leave parts of the sector unserved. That perception may very well have some basis in fact, absent the solution of territorial conflicts involving neighboring institutions. Eligibility and Readiness Guidelines for Regional University Status. When Regents I Policy 206 was developed and approved by the Board, an institutional changeof-status from four-year to university-level was viewed in terms of a type of university already in place within the University System. With the development of the concept of the regional university, the established guidelines for such a change- in-status no longer have complete applicability. The regional university will differ significantly from other Type I (university) institutions in assigned mission. Its mission will be more sharply focused (on sectional needs) and significantly less comprehensive. It should be noted, however, that the existence ofa limited mission does not suggest limited quality of the services offered. The following eligibility and readiness guidelines for regional university status are established. The institution must serve an area of the state in which reasonable access to the services of an existing university (either comprehensive or regional) is not available. The area must have an extensive population base to support the efficient and effective delivery of university-level services, a base that will ensure adequate levels of demand for those services, particularly in the area-of graduate instruction. While population density will be an important factor to be taken into consideration, that factor may be negated by the proximity of an existing university. The institution must have an existing enrollment base sufficient to support expanded graduate program and research activities. The institution should have in place graduate programming of sufficient breadth and depth to support an expanded effort. These programs should be productive in terms of number of degrees annually awarded. Programs should be in place in at least seven CIP (Classification of Instructional Programs) areas, producing a total of 300 graduates annually. 111 The institution should demonstrate through the level of faculty credentials the critical mass necessary for expanded graduate-level academic program and research activities. At least 65 percent of the faculty offering instruction at the junior/senior level must hold the terminal degree (doctorate or equivalent). At least 90 percent of the faculty offering instruction at the graduate level must hold the terminal degree (doctorate or equivalent). At both levels, there must be an established rationale for the determination of equivalency to the doctoral degree; there must also be an orderly process for faculty appointment to membership on the graduate faculty. The library resources of the institution must be capable of supporting those programs and activities which may be developed as part of the regional university mission. The institution must demonstrate through its admission standards for undergraduates a solid base for further efforts at the graduate level. While the SAT is not the sole criterion for judging the level of admission standards, it serves as one important indicator. The average SAT for entering freshmen must place the institution in the upper third of the averages for all fouryear institutions. The enrollment "mix" at the institution must also be supportive of expanded levels of service. In terms of overall enrollment, a minimum of 35 percent of quarter credit hours generated should be at the upper division level. The institution should show student retention factors at an appropriate level for expansion of graduate and research activities. Such retention factors form the base for an effective enrollment mix at the undergraduate level. The retention of full-time freshmen for one year should be at the 80 percent level; the graduation rate for entering full-time freshmen within five years should be at least at the 35 percent level. The latter standard should be seen as a minimum, and the change to university status should be accompanied by actions to push graduation rates to levels approaching the other categories of universities. Specialized program accreditation is important as one external measure of institutional effectiveness. All existing major graduate and professional programs should hold such accreditation from an appropriate agency recognized by the Council on Postsecondary Accreditation (COPA). As a regional university, the institution will be expected to expand its efforts in -developing external funding sources through the award of research and instructional grants and contracts. At a minimum, an institution must demonstrate its base ability in this area by its success in obtaining at least $300,000 annually in external grant and contract funding to supplement any state support of an expanded emphasis in graduate study and research. Further, the institution must demonstrate the potential for attracting general private support through fund-raising. A base of $1.5 million of endowed funding \wuld be one way to demonstrate this capacity to generate community support. Given the emphasis on direct service to the region as part of the intended mission of a Regional University, the institution should demonstrate evidence of effective outreach in extending its instructional and research efforts. 112 The general profile of the institution is of greater importance than anyone of the individual guidelines outlined above. Nevertheless, an institution seeking regional university status must demonstrate the existence of a solid base which will support the effectiveness of expanded services at the graduate and research level. Mission. By Regents' policy and practice, four-year (Type II) institutions within the University System (with the exception of special purpose institutions) offer a generally comprehensive array of baccalaureate programs, a limited number of master's degrees and Ed.S. (sixth-year Specialist in Education) programs. These institutions also offer service programs which vary in scope and complexity. While many of the four-year institutions (particularly the residential institutions) enroll students from all areas of the state, their basic missions are to serve the regions of the state in which they are located. In contrast, existing university-level (Type I) institutions, both comprehensive and special purpose, offer a more comprehensive array of baccalaureate degree programs with a greater degree of specialization, a wider range of programs at the master's and Ed.S. (where applicable) levels, and extensive programs at the doctoral (Ph.D., Ed.D., other) level. Broadly based research (both applied and "pure , II or theoretical) is one of the primary missions of the current universitylevel institutions. The size and complexity of university service programs far exceed that of the four-year institutions. With lesser applicability to Georgia State University, the university-level institutions have state-wide instruction, research and service missions. In determining the mission of a regional university, characteristics must be identified that differentiate it from both four-year institutions and existing university-level institutions. That differentiation lies primarily in the level of complexity of programs to be offered at the graduate level and of research activities. The level of complexity will be greater than that of the four-year institution, less than that of the existing university-level institutions. Integral to the differentiation of the regional university's mission from that of existing university-level institutions is the defined service area. The regional unversity will offer a comprehensive array of baccalaureate degree programs (not unlike the four-year institutions). Master's level programs (as well as Ed.S. programs) will be generally limited to professional areas of high demand. The regional university, because of its expanded mission, may offer a greater breadth of programming at the master's level than that offered by fouryear institutions if a critical mass of students is available for support of expanded programming. A clearly differentiating factor in the mission of a regional university is authorization for the offering of a limited number of doctoral level programs. These programs will, like those at the master's level, be in high-demand areas and professionally oriented. They will not be researchoriented Ph.D. programs. The primary target group for all graduate instruction will be practicing professionals in the region who are " pl ace bound. II Great care must be taken in the differentiation of the research component of the mission of the regional university from that of existing university-level institutions. The site for "pure," or theoretical, research is irrelevant, since the results of such research are easily disseminated. That statement is also applicable to some forms of "applied" research. There are advantages, however, to the location of certain types of research activities that are directly responsive 113 to area or regional needs in the area where the needs exist. Applied research conducted on-site can be of great value in assisting in the solution of an area's particular economic, educational and social problems. Properly focused at the regional university, such research can be more readily responsive to those needs. Organized (as opposed to programmatic) research at a regional university must not attempt to duplicate expensive broad-based research programs at existing I university-level institutions. Fiscal prudence dictates a limitation of the scope of the research authorized to those programs which are indigenous to the section of the state served by the regional university. The term " regional" accompanying the university designation explicitly defines the mission of the institution as being less than state-wide in nature. The focus of the mission -- in instruction, in research, and in service -- must remain clearly on regional needs. Any attempt to broaden that focus will be unnecessarily duplicative of activities already organized and effectively implemented by those university-level institutions with state-wide missions. The mission of that regional university must be complementary to, not duplicative of, the missions of existing university-level institutions. Further, where possible and where efficient, the regional university's activities should be linked to the statewide activities of existing universities, supplementing and enhancing the quality and extent of those activities. The mission of the regional university will, therefore, differ from that of fouryear institutions in the following areas: (1) the regional university will have expanded responsibilities in the area of instruction (within the limitations as noted above) j (2) the regional university will assume organized research activities as a formal part of its mission (again, within the limitations as noted above). The mission of the regional university will differ from that of the existing universities in the following areas: (1) the focus of all activities -- instruction, research and service -- at the regional university will be sectional in nature, not state-wide; (2) academic programming at the graduate level will be generally limited to professional areas of high demand; (3) organized research will focus on needs indigenous to the section of the state served and will be applied in nature. Funding. The current formula which provides the mechanism for the Board of Regents I annual appropriation request will not provide funds sufficient to support a significant change in System structure. To draw upon the current level of funding for the development of regional universities would have a negative impact upon the continuing development of the System as a whole, slowing the momentum of the existing university-level institutions and reducing the capacity to respond effectively to-oemonstrable needs at the four-year and two-year colleges. The regional university will have an expanded mission (in contrast to a four-year institution) primarily in the areas of graduate instruction and applied research. These added functions will require additional funding for implementation and continuation. Therefore, it will be necessary to request such additional fW1ding over formula to maintain funding integrity for ongoing operations. The best vehicle for requesting such additional funding is through the Special Funding Initiative which was established in FY 1989. The Special Initiative was designed to provide funding for quality-added services throughout the University System. Funded at the level of $10 million in FY 1989 and $4 million in FY 1990, the Special Initiative has resulted in significant advances throughout the System. Since the creation of regional universities will result in expanded services to the area of the state served, the Special Funding Initiative concept is appropri- ate. The development of regional universities once they have been established . " ..: can proceed only at a pace allowed by available funding. Therefore, that develop- ment must be undertaken in self-contained segments following the fiscal year structure. Additional programs or activities will be initiated only when funding is assured for those programs and activities. Proposed Organization -- Georgia Southern University. The southeastern region of the state is host to five System institutions (East Georgia College, Brunswick College, Armstrong State College, Savannah State College and Georgia Southern College). The colleges collectively offer a comprehensive array of associate and baccalaureate degree programs which serve the region well. Each of the institutions offers service programs varied in scope and addressing regional needs. Established Regents' policy permits the offering of external degree programs by four-year institutions at two-year college sites. Such offerings are now provided in Brunswick. The region's needs are less well-met in the areas of graduate instruction and research. The expansion of services in these areas (in line with the proposed mission of the regional university) will support the enhancement of the region's economic and social development. Such expansion is important to the entire region; however, addressing the needs of the population center in Savannah is key. While Savannah is served by Armstrong State College and Savannah State College, together offering a comprehensive undergraduate program, neither is currently positioned by size of enrollment or complexity of programs to respond fully and effectively to the need for graduate instruction and research. Georgia Southern College, the most highly developed institution in the region and the institution with the enrollment base and complexity of undergraduate programming needed for support of expanded graduate instruction and research programs, is located in Statesboro, approximately 50 miles from Savannah. If the needs of the region -- particulary Savannah -- in the areas of graduate instruction and research are to be met, a means must be devised to utilize as fully as possible the strengths of all three four-year institutions. That means must not sacrifice the focus on undergraduate instruction now existing at all three institutions. The separate development of graduate programs and research activities at all three institutions leaves the region with a fragmented approach to meeting its needs. While direct duplication is avoided by a division of responsibility at Armstrong State College and Savannah State College with reference to graduate instruction, neither institution has the critical mass of faculty and students necessary for expansion of graduate programming. Research activities are at a minimurrr- because of the funding pressures of undergraduate programs. While Georgia Southern College has more highly developed programs of graduate instruction and research, it has yet to achieve its full potential for serving the region. As confirmed by the recent consultants' report, it is "ready" to provide expanded services. Savannah State College builds upon a distinguished record of service as a traditionally Black institution; the college has broadened its constituency, while maintaining its historic mission. Armstrong State College has built a distinguished record as a primarily undergraduate institution during its briefer history. The undergraduate degree programs offered by both institutions are sound and of value to the Savannah metropolitan area. Their focus on undergraduate instruction should continue; theirs can be an important contribution to the expansion of 115 services in the region at the graduate level and in the area of research. That contribution. however. must be in terms of a coordinate. regional approach. It is proposed that the necessary coordinated. regional approach be developed as follows. Georgia Southern College will be designated Georgia Southern University. effective July 1. 1990. A companion designation will be "a regional university of the University System of Georgia." Effective July 1. 1990. Armstrong State College and Savannah State College will be designated "a unit of the University System of Georgia and an affiliate of Georgia Southern University. II Each institution will maintain its autonomy as an undergraduate college but will participate in the graduate and research activities of Georgia Southern University. All undergraduate degrees will be awarded by the colleges; all graduate degrees will be awarded by the University. The chief administrative official at Savannah State will hold the title of "President of Savannah State College and Provost of Georgia Southern University. II The chief administrative official at Armstrong State will hold a respective title. They will participate in University Provosts Council. The University president will be the chief administrative official for graduate instruction and research activities offered by the University. Day-to-day supervision of graduate instruction and research activities will be -the responsibility of a newly created position of University Vice President and Dean for Graduate Studies and Research. An associate dean will be based on each of the two campuses in Savannah to coordinate graduate instruction and research activities offered on site. The University Vice President will chair a University Graduate Council and a University Research Council, with membership consisting of appropriate faculty members from Armstrong State College. Savannah State College and Georgia Southern University. A University Graduate Faculty will be established. with membership consisting of those faculty members from all three institutions whose professional credentials are deemed appropriate and applicable to programs offered. Guidelines for graduate faculty membership will be established by the University Graduate Council (Charts 1 and 2). Graduate programs currently authorized for Armstrong State College and Savannah State College will continue to be offered on the campus where they are currently offered. Any new programs proposed under the aegis of Georgia Southern University in Savannah will be offered on the campus-where the most appropriate facilities and support services are available. Extraordinary care must be taken not to duplicate high cost/low yield programs at several locations within the Georgia Southern University structure. A part of the review of any new programs proposed will involve the physical location of such programs. Great sensitivity must be exercised in deveioping the affiliations and partnerships in the graduate program areas. The participation of Armstrong State College and Savannah State College must be fully significant to the graduate efforts of the regional university. The structure will eliminate the current fragmented approach to graduate studies and research, will provide the mechanism for delivery of such services in Savannah, and will involve both the campus and faculties (as appropriate) of the Savannah colleges in University activities. This structure does not contemplate a formal affiliation of East Georgia College, Brunswick College, and the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography with the University. As has been noted, the current policy on external degree programs can be appropriately applied for the delivery of under- 116 graduate (or graduate) programs on the two-year campuses. The position of the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography and its possible relationship with the regional university structure requires further study. Recommendations 1. It is recommended that a new category of university be established in the University System: the Regional University. The result would be three categories of Type I institutions: Type I (Comprehensive); Type I (Special Purpose); and Type I (Regional). 2. It is recommended that the Board approve the "Eligibility and Readiness Guidelines for Regional Universities" as outlined previously. 3. It is recommended that the Board approve the "Statement of Mission for Regional Universities" as outlined previously. 4. It is recommended that the Board consider the utilization of the Special Initiative mechanism as outlined previously for presentation of funding requests in support of the initial development of regional universities. 5. It is recommended that the Board approve a change-of-status for Georgia Southern College from a Type II (four-year) to a Type I (regional university) institution, effective July 1, 1990, with the participation of Armstrong State College and Savannah State College under the organizational structure as outlined previously. 6. It is recommended that the Board approve, in principle, changes of status for Valdosta State College, and other institutions that may qualify from Type II (four-year) to Type I (regional university) institutions at such time as they meet all eligibility and readiness requirements as determined by the Board; that a target date for the change-of-status of Valdosta State College be established as July 1, 1992. 117 Board of (egents Chancellor. I President, Georgia Southern University r----- University Provosts Council University Vice President and Dean for Graduate Studies and Research AssoCia!e Dean - I University I University .I Assoc~ate Dean ', ..... ' University Center Graduate Council Research Council University Center at Armstrong at Savannah State State College College Graduate Faculty 118 ' .' .; Board of IRegents Chancellor I President, Georgia Southern University University Provosts Council School of Arts and Sciences School of Business School of School of School of University College Education Health and Technology of Graduate Professional Studies and Studies Research I University Vice President and Dean for Graduate Studies and Research 119 Role of the Two-Year College in the University System of Georgia Some two-year colleges in the University System of Georgia are uncertain about their roles for a variety of reasons, some having historical roots, and others springing from more recent trends and pressures. In contrast to the community/junior two-year colleges in most other states~ most University System two-year colleges were established by the Board of Regents as transfer-oriented institutions and some continue to function more as senior colleges without the final two years of the baccalaureate curriculum. These roots have affected greatly the development of these colleges and their status today. One effect is that a natural urge exists at some institutions to evolve into a senior college. Faculty and staff often are hired who are from or aspire to senior college ways and roles. Consequently, as the State has grown and demands for access to senior colleges have increased, many of these junior colleges have been elevated to senior college status. Examples are Armstrong State College, Clayton State College, Columbus College, Georgia Southwestern College, Kennesaw State College, North Georgia College, Valdosta State College, and West Georgia College. This tendency to view themselves as truncated senior colleges continues in many of the two-year colleges today, and some harbor aspirations to become full senior colleges. Over the past year, some interest has been expressed by at least eight University System two-year colleges. The frequency and consequent legitimization of this pattern of conversion from junior to senior college status has resulted in a unique ratio of two-year to senior colleges within the University System. In most states the number of twoyear institutions (normally under a separate Board) more than doubles the number of senior-level colleges. In Georgia, there are now as many junior as senior colleges. While adding the technical institutes to the number of University System two-year colleges would result in ratio more resembling other states, it is also true that Georgia I s technical institutes do not function as colleges as they come closer to doing in many other states. The transition of so many two-year colleg~s to senior colleges has been justified by the need to provide geographical access in a state with the vast land mass of Georgia. In a real sense, senior colleges in Georgia are expected to fulfill for their geographi cal "access areal I an open-door role which in many states is provided by two-year colleges. This approach has led to a larger number of smaller institu tions, two-year and four-year alike, and to a system structure which does not take advantage of the efficiencies offered by a heavier reliance on twoyear colleges. This emphasis on the traditional junior college transfer-oriented mission also has kept some two-year colleges from embracing other functions typically found in community colleges, especially concerning postsecondary vocational, technical and adult education. As originally encouraged by the Regents and by preference of some of the two-year colleges, the focus has been heavily on general academic programs and those occupational programs which require significant components of general education, such as Nursing, Business, Pre-Engineering and so on. Many two-year colleges also are concerned about the relatively neH Georgia system of 32 technical institutes which is growing, partly to fill the vacuum created 120 by the lack of community colleges. As these institutes inevitably move to estab- lish degree programs, they are beginning to duplicate the general education . ;" ~ programs offered through the University System's two-year colleges. Many of the colleges fear that the more occupationally-oriented programs (with lower tuition) offered by the technical institutes will be favored by increasing numbers of Georgians. And as these institutes add general education programs, their prof ile will come to resemble the community college model, which was not embraced by the University System. This would result in clear duplication and lead to a reconsid- eration of the Georgia's postsecondary education structure. Primary responsibility for providing education to high school graduates who are not prepared to meet System standards for placement for degree-credit study is spread among the System's senior and two-year colleges. In fact, there are instances in which senior colleges place more emphasis on this remedial function than do some two-year colleges. While historically black senior colleges tradi- tionally have embraced this open-access role, compared to other state systems it is somewhat unusual for other senior colleges to assume more responsibility than the two-year college in this capacity. One reason for some senior colleges having relatively open admissions has been the perceived need to provide for residents of rural Georgia areas access both to senior colleges and at the same time to the special programs designed to meet the needs of the less prepared ",-,.,;,, student. The sparse populations in these rural areas have forced the combination of these two forms of access into a single kind of institution--the open admissions senior college. One result has been that many two-year colleges are now feeling competitive pressure from senior colleges in their regions. Significant numbers of both kinds of colleges remain relatively small compared to their counterparts in other states. Since the number of college-age persons is not projected to increase substantially over the next decade, competition among two-year and senior colleges (particularly residential institutions) is bound to increase. While some two-year colleges continue to grow, and at a rapid pace, many of the two-year colleges are especially vulnerable. Recently there has been much discussion about the role of the two-year college in providing wider access to the baccalaur~_atedegree by offering junior and senior level coursework. Assuming that the need for such additional work is real, the issue concerns whether the two-year college should be encouraged to expand its own offerings to provide such access (and in effect become a senior college) or whether a nearby senior college should make these courses available through external degree 2!0grams, a residence center or a formal branch campus, depending upon the nature-and extent of need. Much of the uncertainty about roles in the two-year college centers on how the University System will involve the two-year college in extending access to the last two years of the baccalaureate degree: as the host campus and the provider of the first two years of the baccalaureate or as a full four-year institution. It is possible that the resolution to this issue will vary according to the local or regional conditions. As the University System considered the development and application of the regional university concept, several of the two-year colleges, especially in South Georgia, wished to be part of a regional structure involving multiple institutions. This desire may be based partly on the fear of losing enrollments to such a regional university and partly on an eagerness to enrich their missions as part of such a university, especially through added upper-division programs. 121 Finally, underlying most of the above reasons causing the uncertainty over the two-year college role is the concern over the small size of many of the collegesand the likely increased competition for future college students should the numbers of 15-24 year aIds not increase significantly through the year 2000, as projected. This competition may come not only from technical institutes outside of the University System but also from senior colleges within the System. Findings and Conclusions Following are the major findings and conclusions growing out of various planning activities and discussions including various needs assessments and the several planning committees examining vocational-technical education, system structure, extension of the baccalaureate degree, and increased participation in higher education: 1. Some two-year colleges are uncertain and uncomfortable about their present and future roles. The missions and roles of two-year colleges in" the University Systemmust be clarified and strengthened if these institutions are to thrive over the next decade. Some two-year colleges are comfortable with their present roles and are enjoying considerable success. These institutions will need to be given appropriate attention so that they may also better serve their areas. 2. Some believe that, compared to other states, there already is an adequate number of senior colleges in the University System in comparison to the number of two-year colleges. The System needs a substantial base of two-year colleges, as does any system of public higher education, for the following reasons: a) The two-year college is the most cost efficient institution in providing general education which is transferable to baccalaureate degree programs. b) The two-year college I s institutional function is dedicated totally to teaching students in their early college years - a function which_is difficult to replicate when faculty also have upper-level and graduate responsibilities. c) Because faculty are prepared to devote their instructional efforts primarily to beginning college students, most twoyear colleges are well-suited to address the needs of underprepared entering students, of whom there will be larger numbers as the University System seeks to increase participation in colleges. 3. The college-age population is not projected to increase much in the 1990s and many two-year colleges will face increasing competition for college students. Competition from technical institutes and University System senior colleges is strong. To the extent possible, non-duplicative roles need to be defined for each kind of institution with respect to students served. 4. The University System of Georgia relies on two-year colleges to provide the first years of a baccalaureate education to a much lesser extent 122 ". than most states. The University System would increase its efficiency I. if more students began their studies in two-year colleges, given the __ . lower cost of the two-year colleges and the unused capacity of some ! of the two-year colleges. 5. Three two-year colleges now effectively function as community colleges by delivering postsecondary vocational programs under the contract with the State Board of Technical and Adult Education (Bainbridge, Brunswick, Dalton). There are many other communities in which colleges and technical institutes are in close proximity. While this model will be increasingly difficult to replicate as the system of technical institutes becomes more fully established, the option should remain open in case the recoIJIl1eI1ded cooperative arrangements among two-year colleges and technical institutes do not succeed. 6. Conversion of two-year colleges to senior institutions is costly and would increase competition for enrollments at the junior, senior, and beginning graduate levels, which are more expensive to operate than the freshmen and sophomore instructional levels. It normally is more cost-effective and less duplicative to have the needs for upper-level instruction of a population within a two-year college service area to be met through some form of extension of a nearby senior college's programs and services. While not ideal, this two-pIus-two arrangement has served many states, and large population centers within these states, very cost-effectively. For both educational and cost reasons, the upperlevel branch college should grow from an existing senior college. It would be much more difficult for a two-year college to add courses and facutly in developing a mission which is entirely new than for a senior college to extend an existing function. 7. While the two-pIus-two approach is more cost-effective in most cases, there may be instances in which local needs might be met more costeffectively by converting a two-year college to senior college status. These exceptions would necessarily be based on the demands of a population area sufficiently large to support a senior college coupled with conditions which render impractical the extension of the kind and amount of resources needed through a senior college in the region. Recommended Directions and Actions On the basis of the above findings and conclusions, the following directions and actions, many of them new, are recommended: 1. The State of Georgia and its University System need a strong network of two-year colleges, owing to their unique strengths in teaching and in serving the needs of place-bound students, including those who are less prepared. Moreover, the two-year college is the System's most cost-effective form of institution. The University System of Georgia should place increased emphasis on utilizing the two-year colleges as a point of student entry to the University System. 2. The two-year colleges in the University System should strengthen their missions as appropriate to each service area to respond to current and future needs and challenges. 123 3. The mission of the two-year college should continue to focus on the provision of the first two years of a baccalaureate degree, but should be enriched by including greater emphasis on the following activities, which respond to needs identified by the needs assessments: a) Joint formal activities with the local schools to increase the participation of students in college. These efforts should seek to interest and prepare school students as early as possible in their careers. These programs should target eighth, ninth and tenth graders who might not otherwise be inclined toward college. b) Two-year colleges should embrace as one of their primary roles that of providing developmental studies for students who are not prepared to begin college degree-credit study immediately. Moreover, the two- year colleges should increasingly be seen as the primary provider of developmental studies in the University System. As more senior colleges choose to phase down their developmental studies programs, they should be encouraged to invite a two-year college to extend its developmental studies program and faculty to their campuses (the students would be counted in the two-year college enrollment). When geographically practical, such students should be guided to two- :'; , year colleges. c) Two-year colleges should cooperate with nearby technical institutes in developing cooperative career associate degree programs in which the two-year college would offer the general education and related field courses required for the degree. d) Two-year colleges may seek to expand their career offerings in those program areas in which a significant level and amount of transfer general education is required. Employers are expecting better general education skills in a wider range and level of occupations. e) Two-year colleges should seek closer linkages with specific senior colleges regionally. By strengthening the core curriculum offerings through these relationships,_ student transfer would be improved. Each two-year college should work on developing closer relationships with those senior colleges and universities that accept a majority of its transfer students. The offering by the senior college of programs on the campus of the two-year college should be encouraged when~ustified by need. As one possible way to build closer relationships and increase System efficiency, the Chancellor and Board of Regents might consider the conversion of smaller two-year colleges into two-year branch campuses of a nearby two-year or senior college. 4. The existing policies and procedures (Section 206, The Policy Manual) governing the consideration of converting a two-year college to senior college status should be supplemented by the process and criteria outlined in -the above section on "University System Policy on Extending UpperLevel Baccalaureate Programs." This process calls for specific steps to be followed in expanding the availability of upper-level study. These recommendations would require that a senior college should first. offer courses and then programs, after which a residence center would be established, which could evolve into a formal branch of the senior college. Each step represents additional services, culminating in a formal upperdivision branch of an existing college, which is linked programmatically to the lower-level instructional programs of the local two-year college. These steps should be followed with progression to the next step always justified by greater unmet need" The two-year college should be considered for conversion to a senior college or to offer upper-level programs only when both of two conditions prevail: 1. Unique or large population or service needs in a specific area or region, including unmet needs for full-time baccalaureate study. 2. Geographic, economic or educational impracticality of extending the programs and resources of an existing senior college to meet the needs of a specific area, including unmet needs calling for the greater availability of full baccalaureate programs. ,-\ ~.. 125 Role of the University It is critical to the effective use of resources that the role of universities within the University System clear1y differs when compared to the roles of regional universities and senior colleges. The current roles of the System's four universities are distinctive and should be continued as described by the following statements: The University System's four universities (Comprehensive and Special-Purpose) are characterized by comprehensive program offerings at the baccalaureate level, a wide range of graduate and professional programs, extensive theoretical and applied research activities, and wide-ranging technical assistance and public service programs. With lesser applicability to Georgia State University, the comprehensive and special-purpose Universities have instruction, research and service missions that are statewide in scope. The size and complexity of university service programs far exceed that of the senior colleges. Because of their depth of resources and expertise; Georgia's universities have an obligation to provide a wide range of technical assistance and public service to the State, often through coordinated efforts with senior and junior colleges. The concentration of both graduate instruction and research at these four universities recognizes that a critical mass of research scholars, extensive libraries, academic support, and special facilities are necessary if these activities are to be nationally competitive. Graduate instruction and research of high quality require large expenditures of funds. Further, they cannot be conducted in isolation. The interrelationship and interdependence of fields of knowledge make exceedingly difficult the provision of high-level work in one subj ect without the provision of similar work in related or cognate subjects. In general, these university roles should be continued but with an increasing degree of differentation among the individual universities and according to the following guidelines: (1) The University System will continue to concentrate support for major research and service activities in the four universities. This clear division of function positions the four universities well in their drive for national preeminence. (2) It should also be recognized that the roles of the existing universities must be coordinated with each other. The System must guard against unnecessary program and service duplication among the four universities, especially in the graduatelevel and professional program areas. (3) With respect to graduate and many professional programs, each university should be viewed as having a statewide 126 mission" which creates a stricter standard for the determina- tion of whether or not a program duplicates another within the state. Accordingly" proposals for new Ph.D. and profes- sional programs should be evaluated carefully to ensure that such duplication will not occur among the four universi- !I ties. Where instances of duplication now exist" steps should be taken to coordinate these programs through sharing resources, focusing on different research emphases, and other measures to limit duplication of labor. Role of the Senior College The senior college in the University System of Georgia has a role which is significantly more distinctive than its counterparts in other states. This clarity of role should be continued as described below: The role of the senior college is characterized by a limited number of associate degreeprogram offerings, relatively comprehen- sive offerings at the baccalaureate level, and graduate programs below the doctoral" level in areas where the college has demon- ....; .:\ strated unusual competence and for which the local student demand is high. These Master's and Specialist level programs are general- ly in professional areas and typically serve the needs of placebo- und persons. While many of the four-year institutions (particular- ly the residential institutions) enroll students from throughout the state, their basic missions are to serve the areas of the state in which they are located. The senior colleges have a limited research mission, with most research discipline-oriented for the enhancement of instructional effectiveness. More complex research activities are governed by the existence of available resources and the specific competencies of faculty in given areas. The senior college is assigned an important role in the provision of public service and continuing education programs designed to meet the needs of the citizens within its service area. The above senior college role has served the State and the University System well in coordinating resource use across the System. While this role should be continued, there will be pressures to alter and, in some instances, expand this role in the 1990s. The major forces for expanded roles concern the desires to convert to regional university status, to expand the range and number of Master's degree programs, and to extend upper-level and graduate programs to areas not currently served by a senior college. In addition, the University System has reached a point at which some of its senior colleges should raise their admission standards. Many of the senior colleges historically have been expected to provide relatively open access to students in their area of the state. One mission of the System's three historically black colleges should continue to be the provision of access to many students with the intellectual capacity to achieve but with deficiencies in academic preparation. With the growth of the two-year colleges across the state, it may now be possible, however, for certain senior colleges 127 to revise standards for admission, shifting some of the responsibility for serving the less well prepared students to other colleges whose mission clearly embraces such a role. The following policies are recommended to guide the University System in maintaining the distinctive role of its senior colleges: (1) The decision and schedule for naming additional regional universities should be based on the needs of various regions for applied research and graduate services, on the availability of state funding which will allow other System priorities to be advanced as well, and the readiness of colleges to change status. 'While these conditions have been defined, the decisions on the requests of specific colleges will require a careful balancing of needs, funding and readiness, all of which can only be evaluated at the time of the request. (2) Master's level programming in the senior colleges should continue to focus on professionally-oriented disciplines, serving the needs of local practitioners. Proposals for programs aimed at preparing academicians should be reviewed rigorously with respect to student .......... ,' demand (immediate and sustained) and need, the presence of bigh'" quality at the undergraduate level in the program area, the existence of a sufficient number of faculty to support the program, etc. (3) Some senior colleges may need to offer upper-level and graduate services in areas of Georgia not now served by a senior college. The cost-effective use of state resources suggests that when additional upper-level and graduate services are needed in an area served only by a two-year college, they should be provided by a nearby senior college, which already has experience in offering these services. (4) Some senior colleges should raise their entry standards, shifting service to the lesser prepared students to other senior and twoyear colleges. 128 ASSURANCE & IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA While public higher education systems must be accessible to a wide range of citizens, the most notable characteristic of the best systems is a reputation for quality. The best systems exhibit quality in two ways -- by attracting students and faculty who have the best preparation and credentials and by challenging and nurturing the further intellectual development of these students and faculty. Both reflections of quality are legitimate and important and the 'best public higher education systems are structured to encourage these approaches to quality across the different institutions and often within the colleges or universities. Both views of quality rest at least implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, on three imperatives. First, clear and specific standards should define quality in terms of student and faculty accomplishments or characteristics. Also, there must be some recognized way to determine to what extent the standards have been met. Third, there should be clear policies and understandings as to the rewards, and recognition for achieving the standards. A worthy goal for the University System of Georgia is to become recognized nationally by the year 2000 as one of the .top five state systems of higher education. This is a reachable goal, given the solid base which exists for further progress. The following section outline specific directions and actions to initiate, and in many cases to continue, in attaining greater quality. The discussion centers on four components that are directed toward higher perfvrmance: faculty, students, programs and institutions. Following are descriptions and recommendations for how each element can be improved. Faculty Quality Determining the best strategies for attracting and retaining the best faculty for the University System of Georgia must recognize that the roles of the System's colleges and universities do and should differ, especially with respect to the relative emphasis placed on teaching and research. Faculty in institutions with different missions are expected to meet different responsibilities. While all faculty who wish to be tenured and promoted in the University System are expected by Board of Regents policy to show evidence of superior teaching, service to the institution, academic achievement in the forms of scholarships and research and professional growth and development. The same policies also allow institutions and their faculties to place different emphases on these four general activities. While teaching is_the primary activity throughout the System, faculty at the four research universities are expected typically to spend significantly more time on research than faculty in senior and two-year colleges. The consideration of how the University System of Georgia should continue to strengthen the faculty in its various institutions should be guided by three priorities, which will be especially relevant to faculty recruitment, retention and development over the next decade: 1. Continued University System concentration of major research activities at the four existing universities. 2. Increased recognition of importance of college teaching and teachingrelated scholarship and research activities. 129 3. Responding effectively to a growing imbalance of demand compared to the supply of faculty. Major Research Activity Indeed, the relative emphasis placed on research that has national and internatiQ1i\" . al currency is the key characteristic which marks the different roles of ~ state's colleges and universities. These forms of research are expensive, requiring faculty who already have or who show promise of developing natiomi reputations. Recruiting and maintaining such research faculty is expensiv~ These faculty are in high demand and command high salaries and often cos~ supporting resources in the forms of laboratories and research assistants.. Consequently, all state systems must, for reasons of cost, limit the number m institutions whose faculty conduct major research. When these research prograros; and activities are concentrated in a few institutions, the resulting researo. is of a higher quality for two reasons. First, with fewer institutions involvedJ.. more resources can be directed at those so designated. Second, major researi . in a certain field benefits greatly by the same level of research being carriei out in related disciplines within the same institution. The University System of Georgia has been fortunate to have a system which boasts a clearly differentiated structure with respect to major research activity., Any efforts to strengthen faculty should support this structure, which me~ recognizing that recruiting and retaining faculty at research universities ~; require a special set of strategies in recognition of the wider, more competitive market in which the research university resides. Effective Teaching The quality of University System faculty will be known most for its effectivenes in teaching -- the activity by which faculty apply and exercise a vast majorit~ of its expertise and influence. As important as major research is in high~ education, the University System has no higher overall priority than teachin~ However, research and related publishing efforts often seem to dominate facultJ reward systems, not only in universities but also in senior and two-year colleges~ Through the 1980's, various national repQrts have called for the revitalizatiw of college teaching through increased recognition and reward for its importanc~, There are several ways that the University System might heed these calls as it seeks to strengthen its faculty resources. The first way is to recognize more explicitly and broadly various forms of scholarship be related~o effective teaching. While acknowledging the importance ~ major basic and applied research, most faculty in any system of higher educatio~ actually direct most of their research and scholarship efforts to a form ~ scholarship that makes an area of knowledge more understandable for themselvesn their colleagues and their students. While perhaps not adding appreciably t~ the national or international store of knowledge, this research can be important to more effective teaching and to the fuller interpretation of existing knowledge., The Carnegie Foundation and other higher education experts recently have calle~ for the clearer definition and recognition of these kinds of efforts to reinterpre~ and reorganize knowledge in the interest of better teaching. A second way to encourage faculty emphasis on teaching is to support the importance of the emerging efforts to assess the outcomes and effectiveness of colleg~ 130 instruction. Described below in more detail in the section on "Institutional Effectiveness," faculty activities that seek to define and measure how well faculty teach and how well students learn can be a most legitimate form of teachingrelated research and scholarship, especially if the results were to be systematically analyzed, reported, and used for further study and instruction improvement. While faculty in all University System institutions could legitimately undertake such research and scholarship activities that strengthen teaching, faculty performance in the senior and two-year colleges would particularly be enhanced by the encouragement of these teaching-related functions, which contribute to the teaching priority of these colleges. Faculty Shortages Recruiting and retaining the best faculty throughout the University System must now take into account the impending imbalance of demand for new faculty. over supply. While shortages already exist in some disciplines such as Engineering, Business Administration, Computer Science and so on, it is generally agreed that by the mid-1990's, certainly by 1997-98, the shortage of faculty will be felt in virtually all arts, science and professional fields throughout the nation. This shortage will be caused by a projected continuation of the drop in the supply of new Ph.D.'s since the mid-1970's and by an increase in the number of faculty reaching retirement age. In light of this impending situation, the University System of Georgia must be positioned to compete nationally to attract and retain faculty as all state system will be doubling their efforts to recruit new faculty. It will be important that the University System be seen as attractive to prospective and current faculty in terms of salaries, retirement benefits, tenure and promotion policies, teaching loads and student-faculty ratios. Recommended Directions and Actions To succeed in strengthening the quality of its faculties in the 1990's, the University System must meet the challenge posed through the intense national competition for new faculty. In order to recruit and retain the best faculty, the University System must capitalize on its current structural advantages in which major research activity is concentrated in a limited number of institutions, its emphasis on teaching effectiveness, and offer faculty the kinds of rewards and advantages that make the System attractive. The University System of Georgia has four universities in which the vast majority of major researcElactivity is carried out. While nationally prominent research does occur in senior and two-year colleges on a limited basis, it is of a more isolated nature and more likely to be related to instruction, the primary activity of these colleges. The emergence of a new type of institution -- the regional university -- is not expected to alter the current concentration of major research activity in that the research enouraged by the regional university will be applied in nature, focused on regional problems and limited primarily to professional disciplines such as Education and Public Administration. To assure that the University System is attractive to current and prospective faculty, it is critical that each college or university in the University System can compete with its peers on a national and regional basis. While all institutions may seek faculty in a national market, institutions that emphasize major 131 research especially must compete against peer institutions across the United States. The 1989 SREB-state average faculty salary data show that the University System of Georgia has slipped significantly since the early 1980's when it was ranked first of the fifteen SREB states. In 1989, the University System ranked fifth. More important, the relative salaries of specific types of institutions show-that Georgia State University and the University of Georgia have fallen to seventh among their peer research universities. Such a ranking surely hampers these institutions in their quest for the nation's best faculty. Moreover, given the lower salaries generally in the southern region, this mediocre regional ranking likely means even lower rankings in the national context. Faculty salaries at the Medical College of Georgia lag far behind regional and certainly national averages. Depending on academic rank, the salaries of clinical science faculty range anywhere $10,000 to $40,000 below the 50th percentile of medical schools in the southern region alone. Georgia's public senior colleges now place sixth in the south in average faculty salaries -- a position whose improvement would allow these colleges to compete more effectively in the south. The two-year colleges in the University System also rank sixth of the fifteen SREB states, again leaving room for improvement. An important goal for the 1990's would be for the University System to raise the faculty salaries in each of the major categories of institutions to levels which approach the top ranks of their peer institutions in the SREB states. In addition to salaries, there are other benefits which may serve to attract the best faculty to the University System. Given the national scope of competition faced by the research universities, benefits such as the capacity to permit incoming faculty members to maintain their current retirement plan may be- the edge needed to compete favorably with similar universities in other states. The University System recently has moved to establish an optional retirement plan in which faculty could elect plans other than the State Teachers' Retirement System, which has a ten-year vesting requirement. This progressive action is nearing fruition with the 1990 legislative session. Another positive point of import to faculty concerns the possibility of faculty receiving leaves wi th or without pay to undertake further profess ional development. While the University System does not recognize "sabbaticalleaves, II System policy does permit presidents to grant with Board approval such leaves if the institution will benefit. The attraction of new and further development of resident faculty are helped also by System policies that encourage the special recognition of superior faculty as through designated Chairs and Professorships. These special faculty posi tions recognise outstanding achievement and carry the prestige of title and the extra compensation that either in the form of additional salary or professional benefits such as travel, research assistants, and equipment. The University System should encourage the establishment of such positions in its colleges and universities. Moreover, the System might show its special interest by requesting increased appropriations for its endowed Chairs matching program in which an institution receives $250,000 of state support to match $750,000 of funding raised to establish 132 a faculty chair. Georgia would then follow the examples of the surrounding states that already have advanced and richly-supported programs of this kind. While the above all are explicit actions that will help the University System compete favorably with other state systems for faculty, the System must position itself in an even more fundamental role to respond effectively to the impending shortage of faculty in the 1990's. This role calls for increasing the numbers of new faculty prepared in the System graduate schools, a process that involves the identification and recruitment of greater numbers of the better undergraduates in Georgia and the nation and providing them with the academic and the financial inducements required. Of course, an additonal effect of greater numbers of good graduate students in the University System will be the positive effect on the quality of research, which depends directly on the level of assistance available to the major faculty researchers. Finally, the University System is at a point in the history of higher education in the United States and in terms of its structure which would favor a rnaj or systeIll initiative in revitalizing college teaching. Since the University System of Georgia has a clear division of responsibility for the focus of major basic research in a few universities, this structure frees the System's senior and two- year colleges to emphasize teaching to an extent institutions in other Systems do not. In this way, the colleges can provide national leadership responding ,... , ... to a clear public consensus on the need to improve and make a higher priority of college teaching. The University System should encourage and support the efforts of faculty in its colleges to find ways to improve teaching and to reorder reward systems to give greater weight to teaching. Specifically System colleges could begin to set teaching and learning standards for the various disciplines and to develop ways to evaluate faculty and student performance accordingly. Procedures and criteria could be constructed that would create a system for rewarding those activities with the potential for improving teaching. The following recommendations are based on the above discussion: 1. The responsibility for conducting major basic research activities should continue to be concentrated in the four universities -- Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia State University, Medical College of Georgia and the University of Georgia. In the interest of using resources effectively, the System should limit the number of institutions which are expected to compete naturally at the highest levels. 2. The resear~h mission of the new regional universities will be applied in nature, focused on regional problems and limited primarily to professional fields. 3. The Board of Regents will continue to seek additional competitive compensation and other benefits for University System personnel. The University System should recognize that inducements in the forms of salaries and other academic recognitions and benefits needed to recruit and retain the best faculty will differ depending on the role of the institution. Research universities need to be able to compete with their institutional peers nationally. 133 4. Faculty salaries for the major institutional categories should be brought to the first quartile of peer institutions in the SRKB states by the mid __ 1990's. 5. The University System should actively encourage its senior and two-year colleges to become national leaders in the development of ways to raise the priority of and strengthen teaching in higher education. A University System cOlIDDittee should study ways by which teaching-related research and scholarship activities could be defined and recognized fully in the academic reward structure. Student Quality Along with faculty, the quality of higher education is determined by student performance, which in turn depends upon the academic preparation which students bring to the various levels of college study and the standards to which these students are held as they climb the educational ladder. The capacity of a college or university faculty to reach its potential for quality teaching and research is closely linked to the ability of students to benefit from the highest levels of those activities. It is particularly important that students are prepared to begin college study of a high quality and that institutions establish standards and evaluation procedures which assure that such preparation exists. The University system of Georgia has been a national leader in setting standards for beginning college-level study and evaluating all incoming students to ensure that they have met them. College Placement Standards Through its College Placement Examination and other assessments, Georgia has one of the few public higher education systems in the nation which have established statewide learning skill standards in reading, writing and mathematics for beginning college-level work. Most state systems allow their individual institutions to set their own standards for placing into college-level study, which typically are lower than the minimum statewide standards in the University System of Georgia. While these higher standards result in greater numbers of students placed in developmental studies before being promoted to regular college study, the fact is that many students in developmental studies programs in Georgia would be directed immediately to college-level degree-credit study in other state systems with lower standards. Moreover, in 1986 the University System raised these minimum standards for all institutions. The presence of these statewide standards does not interfere with the University System's commitment to providing access because the standards do not affect admission to the college but placement in degree-credit study. Most graduates of Georgia high schools can be admitted to an institution; however, if the placement standards are not met, students are directed first to non-credit developmental studies programs where they can prepare to meet the higher expectations. These programs are essential elements in the University System's effort to strengthen quality while increasing access to enable more Georgians to enroll in higher education. These twin goals of access and quality can only be met by the University System's commitment to providing the supplementary preparation (Developmental Studies) needed by many entering students to meet the higher standards. 134 College Preparatory Curriculum In addition to these entry-level skill standards and evaluation, the University System has implemented an extensive effort to inform high school students of the kinds of courses and skills which should be emphasized to prepare for college. The University System has been a leader in constructing, in conjunction with the College Entrance Examination Board, the College Preparatory Curriculum (CPC) which makes clear to all school students what courses to take and what skills to develop to prepare effectively for college. The pre-college curriculum is a result of cooperative effort between the State Department of Education and the Board of Regents to ensure that high school graduates are better prepared for college level work. Beginning in Fall 1988, this curriculum has been required to enter regular college programs. Several measures were taken to publicize the new curriculum requirements including the distribution of pre-college curriculum booklets to all high school counselors in the state, discussions of the booklet with high school personnel, and counselor workshops sponsored by the Board of Regents and the State Department of Education throughout the state to discuss the 1988 precollege curriculum requirements. Based on a Central Office study of the impact of the CPC for students entering in Fall 1988, it appears that most "students are completing the CPC and that the comp1eters show both higher high school grades and higher SAT scores than those who do not complete the CPC. However, the study also indicated that blacks fall short in completing the CPC as compared to white students. Thirty-six percent of blacks do not complete the CPC and fifteen percent of whites have at least one CPC deficiency. Students with CPC deficiencies tend to go in greater numbers to two-year colleges and senior colleges; few enroll in universities. Similarly, two-year colleges, in particular, enroll many of these students, who typic1ly have lower high school grades and SAT scores. In general, the impact of the CPC appears to be positive, when seen in light of recent State Department of Education data indicating more students selecting the college preparatory program. Additionally, data are limited since 1988-89 was the first year to be monitored. On the other hand, still fewer than half of school students are in college preparatory programs. Also disconcerting is that many students who complete the CPC still do not possess the verbal and mathematical skills needed to qualify on the SAT or College Placement Examination to exempt Developmental Studies. These early findings support the belief that the prescription of courses and content through required programs such as the CPC are effective if enforced, but not necessarily sufficient to ensure that incoming students develop the key learning skills that are essential to learning at higher levels. The importance to college success of the skills of reading, thinking, writing and mathematical reasoning are not automatically developed and nurtured through the knowledge gained in prescribed content-based courses. College Preparatory Assessment in Schools Continuing University System efforts to have potential college students take appropriate coursework to prepare for college and to evaluate their readiness to begin college study creditable toward a degree will pay dividends in the form of better prepared entering students. However, especially as the University System 135 seeks to interest a larger proportion of school students to prepare for college, additional steps will be needed to assure that college-level learning skills are developed in school. A critical need of most state systems of public schools and higher education is for better ways to evaluate the progress of school students in developing the skills and knowledge needed fo! college at points early in their school careers. Currently, few states have statewide assessment procedures that can give a wide range of students, not just the most talented, an idea of whether they are making satisfactory progress in developing the reading, writing and mathematic skills needed to begin college study without having to enroll in developmental education. School students need at each grade level, a clear idea of the progress they are making in developing college-level skills. Currently, Georgia and most other states do not have an organized evaluation system to let average students know early and throughout high school the extent to which they are developing the learning skills needed to begin college without having to take Developmental Studies. Existing testing programs are designed to measure minimum high school graduation competencies or functional literacy skills and probably cannot be adapted to include higher college-entry measures; the content . '. '". does not address the higher level skills needed for college. It is also question- able to what extent tests such as the SAT and ACT could be used. The purpose of the SAT and ACT is to identify among the more able students, not to measure and diagnose weaknesses of the average to lesser prepared students. In addition, these tests, which are not administered until the 11th or 12th grade, are offered too late to be of much help to the students who need it. Three of the possible approaches to the development of such early-warning, collegerelated, school-based assessments are the Early Mathematics Placement Testing program (EMPT) in Ohio, the Regents Testing Program in New York and the P-ACT Plus of the American College Testing Corporation (ACT). In Ohio, the actual mathematics placement examination given to entering freshmen at Ohio public colleges and universities is made available to high school juniors across the state. The results signal to these students whether or not they are on course in developing the skills needed to begin college. The weaknesses with the Ohio approach are that the assessment is late in the school career, which may not allow sufficient time for the student to adjust. In New York, the public schools and over half of their students participate in taking a series of common, statewide content-based tests covering the basic college preparatory coursework in grades 8-12. All students in the "Regents" curriculum take the same examination after completing various levels of courses in such subjects as History, English, Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, the various foreign languages and others. These tests are scored locally but checked centrally to assure cornman standards across the state. The advantages of these assessments are that over time it is possible to determine what levels of performance on these examinations correspond to successful preparation for college. Eighth, ninth and tenth graders get early cues as to their progress. In addition, these statewide assessments provide important cornmon standards which supplement local school course grades as indicators of academic progress. The local grades within most state public schools simply vary too widely among schools J which can dilute their meaning as indicators 136 of college preparation. These statewide assessments help to interpret such variations. ','.' A third approach is the series of assessments being marketed by ACT. Geared ultimately to the development of English, Mathematics and other skills and knowl- edge needed to begin college without developmental studies, tests have been developed at the eighth, tenth and twelfth grades which check the sequential progression of students in meeting these standards. As with the other approaches described, the ACT assessments are based on standards well above those required for minimal high school competency but are not as narrowly focused as the more highly-powered ACTs or SATs. In short, these assessments concentrate on helping school students who may not be in the top quarter of their class but who could prepare successfully for college if given the proper encouragement and direction early enough. Admissions Standards While the level of preparation of entering students is a central factor in determining the quality of higher education in a state, all state systems also must ensure that their admission standards do not preclude the provision of appropriate access. The proper balance of quality and access is difficult to determine and system policies need to pursue both goals. Most state systems, including Georgia's, are essentially open, or at least nonselective, admissions in that a high school graduate could be admitted to some college or university with the most modest of grades or standardized test scores. The average SAT scores of the University System of Georgia for 1987-88 was 873, which represented an increase of 33 points over the 1976-77 average of 840. While it is impossible to compare the preparation of entering students to other state systems because of the varying structures and the lack of reliable comparative data, it is probably true that the Georgia levels are lower than the national average. This is because the average performance of high school students in the SATs are lower than other states and any public higher education system will (and must) reflect the educational levels of the general population. As the University System seeks to build quality while increasing access in the 1990s, there are several points which should guide admissions policies. First, it is important to keep pressing for the improvement of student preparation across all institutions. To do this and still maintain appropriate access will require a continuing distinction to be made between admission to an institution, on one hand, and placement in degree-credit collegiate study on the other. The University System of Georgia noW makes this distinction by allowing standards for being admitted to be less rigorous than those required for actually beginning study creditable toward the degree placement. This difference in admission and placement standards has led in many of the colleges to substantial enrollments in Development Studies programs, which help the unprepared student to begin degree-credit work. Maintaining this distinction is important in pursuing greater access and quality simultaneously and also places the University System of Georgia as one of only a few state systems which takes this sound approach. A second policy issue concerning admissions is the extent to which certain institutions in a state system should be allowed or encouraged to be selective. The systems which are recognized as highest quality gain their reputation typically from the superior characteristics of the students and faculty at a few of their 137 institutions, most frequently their flagship universities. For several understandable reasons, the University System of Georgia has not reached a point at ~hich it boasts a number of institutions which are highly selective with respect to student admissions. The Georgia Institute of Technology is very selective but has a specialized role, which limits its services primarily to students and faculty interested in engineering and technological education. The University of Georgia is becoming more selective with significant gains made in Fall, 1989. However, the University of Georgia is not as selective as its counterparts in other public systems worthy of emulation such as the primary universities in Wisconsin, North Carolina, New York, Illinois, Texas, Virginia and Florida. There are very understandable reasons for the slow growth in selectivity, the major one being that in contrast to many other states, the University System in the past has not had other universities which could begin to offer state residents interested in disciplines other than Engineering or the Health professions an alternative major residential university experience. For example, in each of the state systems mentioned above, there is more than one major residential statewide university. Consequently, UGA is under continuous pressure to keep its standards at levels that will allow access to the state's only comprehensive residential university, a situation in which it is difficult to raise entry standards significantly. These pressures, notwithstanding, the quality of the University System as a whole and of UGA in particular would be strengthened by continuing this past year's efforts to raise admission standards at UGA. University faculty would be better able to teach and research to potential, recruitment of faculty will be enhanced, and the reputation of greater selectivity will spawn greater numbers of even more highly prepared entering students. Moreover, higher admission students at UGA would result in guiding additional students to other University System institutions, which would benefit from the increased enrollments of better students. A third and related question concerns the extent to which certain of the senior and two-year colleges should raise their standards for admitting and placing students. The issue centers on the respective roles of these colleges in providing geographical access to higher education. Currently and in the past, all of the two-year colleges and many of the senior colleges have embraced the prOVision of access as a responsibility to be discharged by keeping admission standards low and supporting substantial developmental studies programs. Exceptions, some very recent, to this practice have been North Georgia College, Southern College of Technology, and Georgia Southern College. What is very notable and distinctive in the University System of Georgia is the admission and placement standards of the two-year colleges, which, while generally lower, do come very close to those of the senior colleges. These standards are significantly higher than those in community colleges in other state systems, reflecting the unique role of Georgia two-year colleges which emphasize collegiate transfer curriculum identical to their sister senior colleges and universities. The similarity in entry standards among the two-year and senior colleges is due also to many of the senior colleges viewing themselves as high access institutions. Georgia is a large state geographically and many of the senior colleges provide access in their regions which normally would be provided by a two-year college in smaller states with more community colleges. Many of the senior colleges began as tHo-year institutions but were converted to senior college status to provide geographical access to the full baccalaureate degree. 138 In considering how entry policies might be changed to improve quality, it was found that it was not unusual for senior colleges in other southern states to have similar standards, although two-year colleges in other states generally had completely open-door admissions and no or lower placement standards. However, in the better public systems nationwide, there normally are a greater number of senior colleges that have entry standards which are distinctively higher than other senior colleges in their systems. The University System of Georgia would seem to be at a point at which it could encourage certain of its senior colleges to raise entry standards as a way to improve quality. At the same time, geographical access to higher education could be maintained by encouraging other nearby colleges to extend access through modest admission standards. This would mean an increase in and a greater concentration of developmental studies programs in some of the two-year and certain senior colleges. This shift of responsibility would assist certain senior colleges to become somewhat more selective, allowing a higher level of teaching and learning for those students and faculty who are so inclined. Some will question the effect on the quality of two-year colleges if they were to serve greater proportions of lesser prepared students. There are several responses to this concern. First,. most two-year colleges in other state systems have as their measure of distinctiveness and quality their effectiveness in acting as open access institutions which serve all students according to their needs upon entry. Most states have community colleges which offer all levels of educational preparation from basic adult education through the sophomore year in college, as well as a wide range of occupational offerings. These colleges especially have become recognized for their effectiveness in helping less prepared students to prepare for successful college study through developmental studies as well as to offer the first two years of the baccalaureate degree. These two-year colleges are especially suited to provide the deep and personal teaching and counseling needed because their faculty's entire mission is directed to teaching freshmen and sophomores. Their attention is not diverted by upper-level and graduate study and research. The mission and focus of the two-year college can more readily accommodate levels and forms of education such as developmental education that lead up to college study. In short, shifting more responsibility for addressing the needs of underprepared students to the two-year colleges does not have to lower the quality of these institutions if the University System comes to view as one of their important roles being leaders in increasing access to higher education in Georgia. In taking a larger system responsibility for serving underprepared students, the two-year colleges can retain their current quality by assuring the integrity of the core curriculum and baccalaureate-creditable programs through adherence to strong and clear standards for placement in degree transfer programs. Standards for Student Progress The quality of colleges and universities also depends upon how well students perform and are helped to perform after entering degree-credit study. Standards and related assessments will vary by different institutions depending upon the levels of preparation which students bring to the college. However, it is reasonable to expect some level of common performance standard across all institutions 139 in a system. The University System of Georgia has been a leader in the use of the Regents Test which assures that undergraduate students have developed basic college-level skills in reading and writing. While the standards are modest, they do assure a certain level of competency and accountability. Discussions are now occurring as to the value of developing other systemwide assessments geared to a higher level of student accomplishment in their undergraduate programs. If any consensus has emerged, it suggests that student assessments external to course grading are valuable but that each institution should develop its own based on distinct general education and major programs. Recommended Directions and Actions The University System of Georgia is in many ways a national leader in assuring and raising the quality of student performance. It should continue its efforts to work closely with the public schools and the students to make clear the courses and skills needed to succeed in college through the College Preparatory Curriculum and the College Placement Examination. Given the need to pursue both access and quality goals, the University System is wise to distinguish between admissions to the institution and placement in degree-credit programs. Given the strong foundation laid by the System through these two efforts, it is ready to explore in conjunction with the State Board of Education a third approach to the more effective preparation of school students for college. As described above, this would involve the development of a statewide assessment program to indicate to a wide range of schoo] students throughout high school the extent to which they are developing the skills needed to enter college well-prepared. As these various steps produce larger numbers of better prepared high school graduates, the University System needs to be positioned to offer them appropriate academic challenges. To this end, the University System should consider encouraging certain universities and colleges to raise their admission standards. At the same time, care must be taken to ensure that students not meeting these higher standards have appropriate access within the System, especially through an augmented role for the two-year and certain senior colleges in addressing the needs of the lesser-prepared students. Finally, with so much focus upon the improved preparation of entering students, it should not be forgotten that the chief responsibility of colleges and universities lies in developing and challenging student intellects after entry. The University System should continue to consider ways to assess the effectiveness of institutions in nurturing student growth. Specifically, the System might encourage individual institutions to develop standards and assessments that measure what happens to students after entrance. Accordingly, the following specific recommendations are made concerning the improvement of student quality: 1. The University System of Georgia should continue to support the College Preparatory Curriculum and its policies and procedures on placement. 2. In conjunction with the State Department of Education, the University System should explore the value of developing a school-based early assessment program to indicate the progress students are making in developing the reading, writing, mathematics and thinking skills needed to begin study in the University System without developmental studies. Existing programs such as those developed in New York and Ohio and by ACT should be examined. 3. The University System should consider encouraging universities and certain senior colleges to raise their admission standards. At the same time, System colleges should be encouraged to address the needs of students not prepared to meet the higher admissions criteria of the universities and colleges that move in this direction. 4. The University System should promote the continued discussion of how to assess student performance after entering college. The goal of such assessments should be the improvement of student learning and the higher standards that result. Coordination of Advanced Graduate Programs and Research The quality of a system's advanced graduate programs and major faculty research efforts depends inordinately on the clarity with which certain of the System's institutions are invested with this role and the extent to which the roles of each involved university are clear and coordinated with the others. The great cost of these research activities, especially if they are to be conducted with the highest quality, makes it impossible for public higher education systems to duplicate these efforts across several institutions and achieve the highest quality in them. Accordingly, as the University System of Georgia pursues the goal of preeminence in advanced graduate study and research, it must pay increased attention to the coordination of institutional roles and activities in these areas. The key to role differentiation will lie in the careful review of new instructional program and research project requests. Moreover, it will no longer be sufficient to allow the coordination of expensive programs to stop with the review of requested new programs. Increasingly, it will be necessary to coordinate advanced graduate research efforts within the same discipline when two or more uni\i'ersities are involved. Review of New Graduate Program Proposals The Program Review Planning Committee examined the effectiveness of University System procedures for considering the approval of proposed new programs. Having and applying strong program approval procedures is one of the key tools in directing future University System resources to programs of high need and quality. The University System has matured and its colleges and universities generally have established a considerable base of programs within their understood missions and roles. The System is at a point at which further program growth must be considered very carefully so as not to dilute the strength established in its existing programs. The System is entering a time when the important goal of extending access through the establishment of new programs needs to be balanced carefully with the critical priority to support and strengthen the quality of existing programs. This is especially true with respect to expensive researchbased graduate programs. The Planning Committee found that the basic process "for proposing and approving new degree programs is sound. II Accordingly the Committee I s recommendations speak to the refinement or strengthening of the current procedures lito make a good process even better. II The Committee did offer specific suggestions for the more rigorous review of graduate program proposals. The Planning Committee pointed to the need for more definitive and, in some cases, detailed formal proposals and their subsequent evaluation. Proposed new graduate programs deserve greater scrutiny than those at earlier levels of study. This principle is commonly accepted by other state systems and its practice will be even more critical in the University System of Georgia as it seeks to build the quality of its graduate offerings in the face of the high cost of establishing such programs. If for no other reason, the higher cost of graduate programs suggests closer examination. 142 The Committee report states that: Substantive differences exist in the nature of the information needed to evaluate programs at different degree levels and in the criteria that are applied in the evaluation of that information. Significant differences will exist in the information required to properly prepare and evaluate a proposal for a new doctoral program versus a master's degree program, which in turn will be judged differently from a baccalaureate program or an associate's degree program. Accordingly, the Committee recommended that the outline for proposals for new programs be elaborated to clarify necessary substantive distinctions among proposals at different degree levels. There are several areas that were determined to need special, additional attention as part of the evaluation of new programs, especially concerning potential costs and quality. The future costs of the proposed programs need to be projected with great care and precision. The changes in faculty, organizational and capital resources and associated costs required to meet the criteria specified by the specialized/professional program accreditation association should be determined. The proposal should contain financial plans that make it clear how the required changes will be funded. If the institution is unable to determine exactly what changes will be acceptable to an accreditation association in the future, then a financial plan should be constructed for each possible option. As the current guidelines state, if the proposed program cannot be securely funded through current levels of funding or on the basis of enrollment-generated growth, the proposal should specify what other institutional activities or programs would be altered, consolidated, contracted, or eliminated to provide the resources needed to finance the new program. The Planning Committee also highlighted the need to evaluate the potential quality of proposed new programs. The Committee called on program faculty as well as institutional and Central Office staff to assess the qualitative dimensions of the proposed new programs with respect to faculty, students, library and other resources. The Committee report states: In several sections of the present outline for new program proposals, descriptive information is requested but an evaluative assessment of that information is not required. This often places the burden of making evaluative judgments of such things as the adequacy of existing resources and faculty to support the program and the appropriateness of the curriculum design solely on the shoulders of administrators at the institutional and system levels. The faculty responsible for proposing new programs should share that responsibility and be expected to include not only descriptive information, but also evaluative assessments of the degree to which that information meets the criteria and expectations that are held for new programs. The Committee recommended that the outline for proposing new programs be modified to include not only requests for descriptive information, but also evaluative assessments of the degree to which basic expectations and criteria for program quality will be met. In recommending more attention to the evaluation of quality of the proposed programs, the more frequent use of consultants external to the institution was suggested. This is especially important and a common practice in other states, particularly when considering graduate and advanced graduate programs. In the latter cases, the use of out-of-state faculty consultants "Would bring peer judgment to bear from wider and more appropriate perspectives. While not mentioned in the Committee report, the selection of consultants should be a joint process involving the institution and Central Office staff. Coordination of Major Research Activities To the extent possible, the major research efforts of the several universities should be coordinated within the System to ensure the efficient use of expensive faculty and equipment. Major organized research activities are those efforts by faculty supported by Ph.D. programs, structured through designated centers or organizations and receiving categorical financial support through the institution, Board of Regents or external funding sources. Resources for such efforts must not be needlessly duplicated. To limit such duplication, the number of similar research programs across institutions should be discouraged and joint or cooperative research efforts should be encouraged. The instances of universities having advanced graduate programs in the same disciplines should be limited. When this does occur, the efforts of universities should be coordinated to the extent possible to ensure different emphases within the same general program. Where duplication is anticipated or emerges, the institutions involved should seek to share faculty and equipment-resources to build on strengths and minimize duplication. The Chancellor's Office will need to apply the system perspective to the coordination of these major research activities. Recommendations The following recommendations will support the more effective coordination of advanced graduate programs and major research activities across the University System: 1. The current procedures for reviewing proposals for new graduate programs should be distinguished from and made more rigorous than the reviews of proposed programs at lower ~egree levels. 2. The new graduate program review procedures should pay special attention to projecting the specific steps needed to assure high program quality and the various costs associated with doing so. 3. Current and future funding sources should be identified clearly as part of the review of new graduate programs. 4. Arange of professional academic perspectives should be involved in considering the financial and qualitative requirements of proposed new graduate programs. 5. To the extent possible, the major research activities and programs conducted by faculty within the University System should be coordinated and unnecessary resource duplication minimized. The Chancellor should take steps to limit the instances of similar advanced graduate programs across universities. When this does occur, the research efforts of the various faculty should be coordinated to focus on different emphases or to encourage resource sharing and joint interinstitutional arrangements. Academic Program Quality Improvement The major goal of University System planning must be the improvement of the quality of its programs and services while assuring access and operational efficiency. Quality improvement necessarily requires evaluation to ascertain the current status of a program or service. Additionally, the evaluation process requires the presence or development of minimum standards against which an assessment can be made. These standards could be developed by comparing the programs as services under review to similar programs or services within or outside of the state or could involve a comparison of the current and past status of programs or services. Critical to reaching a nationally eminent position for the University System is the adoption of evaluation and quality improvement measures. While a planning process of less than two years duration could not undertake the evaluation of all major programs, the recognized need for such evaluation and improvement encouraged the planning committee to develop and recommend policies and procedures for an evaluation process which would give the University System the necessary tools to identify specific ways to improve quality and to mark the path to preeminence. Value of Program Review The University System of Georgia recognized the potential value of program review in the early 1980's not as a way to identify programs to be retrenched (as was true in many states) but as a means to determine how to improve the quality of specific programs. The recommendations of the University System Coordinating Committee for the statewide Needs Assessment typified the rationale and priorities which point to the establishment of formal program review procedures: The most important task facing the University System in the eighties and beyond is the improvement of the quality of public higher education. The success of the System in the sixties and seventies was often measured by one factor - growth. To meet dramatic increases in enrollment, programs, facilities, and institutions were added wi1;.h alacrity. The success of the System in the years ahead will be measured not in terms of growth but in terms of the level of quality by which Georgia's citizens are provided with the knowledge and expertise necessary to address critical social, economic, and technical problems. Each decision made by the Board of Regents must be governed by the principle of quality improvement. The University system must develop the means of evaluating the performance of its institutions against those standards that have been identified as the best nationally. Later in the same section, the Committee recommended that: The Board of Regents develop and implement a system of program evaluation for institutional and system-wide utilization, with the establishment of specific qualitative criteria which lend themselves to measurement; that this system of program evaluation be designed to involve both internal and external evaluation to ensure results that are both disinterested and objective. Since 1983, while no formal system-wide program evaluation was established, the University System has conducted statewide reviews of selected professional programs. 145 In October, 1988, a University System Planning Committee was formed and charged with "developing recommendations for the review of existing academic programs. The planning committee, including eleven System academic faculty and administrators, engaged in extensive analysis and discussions of existing policies and procedures, interacted with key members of the Chancellor's staff and carefully reviewed procedures utilized by other state systems. The report of the planning committee recommended that "a systematic process of review for existing degree programs be established and that the presidents submit to the Chancellor a description of the program review procedures their institutions will employ as well as a schedule indicating when specific programs will be reviewed every five to ten years. 11 The report recommended also that these institutionally-based reviews " culminate in a summary report to the President and the Chancellor that includes (1) the basic strengths and weaknesses of the program reviewed, (2) a listing of the specific recommendations for program improvement, and (3) an overall assessment of the health of the program and the conditions under which it should continue to be offered." In emphasizing the idea that program evaluation should be governed by self-study directed by individual institutions; the planning committee stated that the reviews " should be conducted by those who are most closely associated with planning and implementing the program. Furthermore, the University System and the institutions in the System cannot afford nor do they desire to create and fund a new administrative function to conduct program reviews from a third-party perspective." Recommended Directions and Actions As the report of the academic planning committee was received by the Chancellor's staff, members of the University System Planning Steering Committee and others from settings which added further perspectives on program review, the value of taking a system-wide approach was emphasized. It is not unusual for faculty and academic administrators based at institutions to emphasize individual institutional self-study and control and that action must emanate from that level; however, the clear trend in many states is to open the review of academic programs on individual campuses to the comparative light shed by similar programs on other campuses. While faculty may be in a position to evaluate programs on their campuses, an objective review is more likely if persons from other institutions and perspectives participate in that process. The trend in program review in the various states has been toward the simultaneous review of similar programs across a system. This trend has gained strength as more state systems rely on program review for the improvement of program quality. Individual institutions and their faculties seemed to have become comfortable with having their programs reviewed along with similar programs at other colleges and universities. In addition, the growing experience with such lateral program reviews is showing that the results can typically be used for positive purposes related to improvement, including the identification of funding needs. As a state system and its institutions seek to strengthen programs, it is important to move beyond single campus reviews to evaluations in which the programs of individual institutions are viewed in light of similar programs both within the system and outside of the state. These comparisons provide reference points for assessing and revising program standards and practices. It is important that the typical review process will portray an individual program as strong in some areas and able to be strengthened in others. Knowing the kinds of standards, practices, and resources in similar programs across the state and nation provides a basis for quality program improvement. Confining program reviews to the campus without references to similar programs in other institutions narrows the opportunities for growth that result from other institutional program practices. Arguments for a broader approach to program review involving other institutions are especially germane in a University System whose goal is to be recognized as one of the nation I s finest. Such recognition is earned when the academic programs within the component institutions are recognized by faculty in other states as of high quality. Thus, the path to the goal of national preeminence must be based in the development of references across institutions in and outside of Georgia. The challenge ahead lies in how best to build into the program review procedures these broader references and still maintain the primary role of faculty for conducting the actual reviews. The key to meeting this challenge lies in the application of the traditional academic concept of faculty peer review. Peer review of academic programs is carried out by faculty from the same kind of program from across the institutions within a state system, and perhaps from other states. Peer review builds into the evaluation process the standards and perspectives of programs beyond the individual campus. In such reviews faculty make judgments of quality and in the process transmit ideas for building higher standards and stronger practices. As state systems have sought to move their program review procedures to a plane that involves qualitative judgments and not just quantitative measurement, the need for specialized peer judgment becomes apparent. The faculty peer approach will assure that primary responsibility will flow to the faculty in the programs to be evaluated. Therefore, the planning committee I s urging against the creation of a new state-level administrative evaluation function would be respected. The reviews would be conducted, in the Committee I swords, "by those who are most closely associated with planning and implementing the programs. II \ While primary responsibility should occur at the faculty level, most state systems which undertake serious qualitative system-wide program reviews have concluded that for several reasons some role must be played by the state-level system agency. The main reason is that another perspective outside of the faculty and the campuses needs to be involved. Even with the use of the faculty peer approach, the fact is that colleagues are reviewing colleagues who will in their own turn be reviewed by colleagues. While colleagues, of course, can be candid and faculty are professionals who are expected to take seriously the welfare of students and the System as a whole and the State, it is also true that it is difficult in this kind of review for the perspective of the System, the students and the taxpayer to be embraced. State government looks to the state higher education agency, not to individual institutions, for accountability. This is especially true when the state agency is a consolidated governing board as occurs in Georgia, Florida, New York, North Carolina and Wisconsin, among other states. It follows that the state board needs to have some direct, responsible hand in the review process, even if only to attest that it is done consistently, objectively, and systematically. Some state systems have seen legislative and executive office officials and staff become directly involved in program review when the state agency and the system institutions appeared reluctant to take the initiative for such reviews. The other reason suggesting a role for the state-level agency lies simply in the need for a centralized body to assume responsibility for the coordination and direction of the reviews involving a number of institutions in the System. On the basis of the foregoing discussion the following recommendations are made: 1. The University System of Georgia should establish a formal procedure by which its principal academic programs are reviewed periodically. The purpose of such reviews would be to determine the quality of programs and how they can be strengthened. The reviews should be conducted systemwide so that each institutional component of the same program is reviewed at the same time. The program categories should be defined broadly enough to allow completion of a full cycle of reviews in seven years. 2. The schedule as well as the substance and procedures for the reviews should take into account to the extent possible the requirements of the specialized professional accreditation associations. Every effort should be made to coordinate these reviews, at least in the collection and use of information. 3. The actual reviews should be conducted through a process of faculty peer review involving a team of faculty representatives from University System institutions which house the program to be evaluated. Additionally, the peer review team should include program faculty from institutions outside of Georgia. In selecting peer evaluators, it will be ilDportant to establish the appropriate institutional program peer groups. For example, the graduate and professional level programs may look to their counterparts in other states. 4. The faculty peer team should review the program at each of the involved institutions according to schedules, procedures and criteria established by the review team in cooperation with the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will coordinate and administer the system-wide reviews. s. The choice and schedule of programs to be reviewed and the identification of peer institutions and faculty should reflect the different missions and scopes of the System1s institutions, especially with respect to university-levelj. nstitutions whose peers should normally be drawn from universities outside of Georgia. Promoting and Assuring Institutional Effectiveness In addition to addressing directly the quality of faculty, students and programs" srengthening the quality of higher education demands a focus on the total institution as well. A planning committee was appointed to explore how the University System can best assure that each of the colleges and universities is functioning appropriately and, most important, can promote the quest for higher levels of performance. The committee decided to build on the concepts of institutional effectiveness, assessment and planning and elected to develop a set of guidelines and recommended policies that would hold each institution responsible for planning, evaluating and improving its own operations. Under this approach" the Chancellor will expect that each college or university will have formal procedures for setting institutional priorities, for evaluating how well the goals have been realized, and for planning actions leading to regular improvement in . all functions, for which the Chancellor will wish to see evidence. Institutional Effectiveness The movement to assess higher education's effectiveness in producing its desired outcomes is a manifestation of the need to demonstrate accountability in an increasingly competitive economy. It has its roots in such recent historical events as the "Proposition 13" accountability/cost containment initiative in California in the 1970s, and more recent public school reforms in several states, including Georgia. Fuel has been added to the fire by several widely publicized critiques of higher education, including Professor Alan Bloom's national best seller, The Closing of the American Mind. The observations of such credible insiders as Ernest Boyer (Carnegie Foundation), Derek Bok (Harvard), and former Secretary of education William Bennett, coupled with perceived u.S. disadvantage in world economic competition and adverse comparisons of "our" college students with "theirsll have combined to cast in doubt the effectiveness of American higher education. Partly in response to such negative publicity, the Higher Education Task Force of the National Governors I Association released a report in 1986 on institutional effectiveness, titled IITime For Results. lt That report contained a six-point ltaction agendalt which emphasized the primacy of undergraduate instruction, instructional improvement and the assessment of instructional outcomes. The following quote from that report embodies the essence of the task force's conclusions: ltColleges and Universities can no longer take for granted the learning that should be occurring on their campuses. lt In the same vein, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools began working in the early 1980s to revise its Standards for Accreditation. The resulting Criteria for Accreditation, published in 1985, shifted the focus from !'resources and reputationlt to lI effectiveness and outcomes. II They contain one entire section on ev effe aluat ctivenes ionll and s lI (Section III), which institutional research .sltp eci In fic ad requir dition, ements effect i for ven II pl ess ann ing provis and ions are included in the other five sections as well. All of this pressure to engage in self-assessment and improvement is directed toward a common goal: identifying, then demonstrating the effective attainment of the desired results -- or intended outcomes of higher education. In the most positive sense, this undertaking promises to lead not only to improvement 149 in what we now do, but also to a re-examination of higher education's priorities and a redefinition of its goals and objectives. For more than a decade, the University System of Georgia has practiced some forms of assessment through such programs as the Basic Skills Exam/Developmental Studies Program and the Regents' Test. The former is a placement and remediation program for entering students; the latter is a "rising junior" test of reading and writing ability. Both programs are forms of assessment, and they represent the nucleus of an assessment program in the University System. Since 1986, the University System has studied national developments in assessment practice and encouraged its units independently to explore means of assessing their effectiveness. This focus has produced a standing Assessment Advisory Committee, an Institutional Assessment Clearinghouse, two Systemwide workshops on assessing institutional effectiveness, an Assessment Consortium of System institutions, two task forces organized to study specific assessment topics, and a quarterly newsletter devoted to developments in the field. Issues in Institutional Assessment Although the need to satisfy the SACS criteria is a sufficient motive to implement minimal assessment techniques on a campus, by itself it may not be sufficient justification to undertake a comprehensive, innovative program with optimum potential impact on the institution. Another reason to perform institutional assessment is to satisfy public accountability. Publicly supported institutions have an inherent responsibility to demonstrate the effective performance of their mission, and assessment offers an excellent means to that end. Here again, however, assessment merely to satisfy public accountability probably will fail to produce the educational benefits of which a well founded program is capable. Finally, there is a school of thought that assessment represents a means to monitor and compare institutional performance in relation to pre-selected standards. This is a legitimate viewpoint in some contexts,but the committee does not feel that it is consistent with the University System's plans or intentions regarding the development, implementation and use of assessment methods. It is, rather, the prevailing view among those studying assessment in higher education and that of the committee that the most legitimate purpose for undertaking assessment is to improve the effectiveness of the functions assessed. It follows from this, then, that an assessment program is truly valid only to the extent that its findings enable the institution to identify deficiencies or problems and design and implement solutions. Assessment programs that merely report data by which institutions can be compared and ranked or that merely perform assessment tasks prescribed to satisfy external administrative requirements, without regard to their utility in improving effectiveness, do little to achieve the true purpose of assessment. There also are two schools of thought on the proper locus of control in the assessment of public higher education. One espouses centralized, statewide or systemwide, design and management of the process. The other insists that the proper origin and management of each assessment program should be at the site of the functions assessed; that is, each institution itself. 150 Since the beginning of its efforts to foster growth in the area of assessment, the University System of Georgia has emphasized the latter approach. Because the central purpose of assessment is to identify the best means of improving the functions assessed, the process must be designed and conducted and its results analyzed by the professionals closest to those functions. From stating specific expected results to designing and implementing the means of improving effectiveness, institutional ownership of the assessment process is essential. Recommended Directions and Actions Although the most appropriate combinations of assessment techniques cannot be externally prescribed, neither can a Systemwide program involving all units in . meaningful institutional assessment develop without a sound operational framework and clear direction from the Board of Regents/Central Office level. A sound framework consists of the few broad elements which all valid assessment programs have in common and within which they will operate to best advantage despite their variety of specific forms. Leadership and direction are best provided by an official statement of Board policy concerning the assessment of institutional effectiveness. The following are the key components of a policy statement which provides the minimal context necessary for the further development of a Systemwide planning and assessment program: 1. The existence of a formal institutional planning structure and process is essential to the ongoing conduct of planning. 2. Systematic institutional assessment and improvement based on assessment findings should be integral aspects of the planning structure and process. 3. Faculty involvement in both the planning and assessment process and structure is essential to derive the greatest benefit from those activities. 4. If budget allocations and other institutional decisions are not closely linked to the planning-assessment-improvement process, that process will be hindered. 5. As a basic principle, flexibility in specific institutional and intrainstitutional approaches to assessment must be permitted by System policy. At the same time, the policy should encompass the full range of academic and non-academic programs on each campus. With these five principles as a basis, the following policy statement on planning and assessment is recommended for approval by the Board of Regents: Section 200 - Organization 209.01 Each institution shall have a plan, submitted to the Chancellor's office, which will contain the institution's current goals and priorities, a summary of significant assessment results and associated improvement objectives, and action plans by which institutional priorities, including improvements in effectiveness, will be achieved. 151 209.02 Each institutional plan will describe the planning structure and process by which institutional priorities are set, systematic assessment of institutional effectiveness is conducted, and the results of assessment are used to achieve institutional improvement. The faculty of each institution shall be involved in developing the plan and shall be included in the structure by which the plan is implemented. 209.03 Each institution shall link its major budget allocations and other major academic and administrative decisions to its planning and assessment process. 209.04 Assessment procedures may differ from institution to institution, but each program shall include the assessment of: basic academic skills at entry, general education, specific academic program areas, and all academic and administrative support programs. In addition, the Connnittee reconnnends that the wording of Section 300 of Academic Affairs, General Policy be changed by substituting "effectiveness" for "economy," as follows: The Board shall look to the Chancellor to make all inspections and surveys of institutions in the System and to report thereon to the Board, as may be necessary to keep it fully informed of the standards of scholarship maintained at each institution in the System and the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration of the institution. 152 Special Institutional Assistance While the above directions recommended for the assurance and improvement of the quality of faculty, students, academic programs and overall institutions address the principal elements affecting quality in higher education, any system will experience from time to time institutions having trouble functioning at the most fundamental managerial and academic levels. When a college or university shows signs of such dysfunction, as determined by the Chancellor and/or the president of the institution, it is important for the University System to possess an organized way for examining and then remedying the situation. Over the past year, such an approach has been developed as part of an effort to address the needs of an institution in the System. The approach has proved effective both in determining the basic problems and in determining how to address them. Many who have been involved in this process believe that the same approach could benefit other institutions having trouble functioning at basic levels. Recommended Directions and Actions Based on the proven value of the approach developed over 1988-89, the following narrative describes the format and key elements of this procedure. Upon determining that an institution is troubled, an Advisory Council will be named composed of representatives from the Regents, the Chancellor's staff, the institution, the community, alumni and other constituencies deemed desirable. The Chancellor or his staff representative will serve as Chair. This Council has the responsibility for guiding the process from the early review, factfinding stages through the implementation and monitoring of recommended actions for improvement. The Advisory Council will report its findings and recommendations to the Board of Regents which will direct the Chancellor to carry out those recommendations which it accepts. The review and recommendation procedure will involve the major areas of management and of academic programs and faculty. At least the following general areas will be addressed: Management Academic Personnel and Operations Personnel Appointments Promotion/Tenure Faculty Evaluation Faculty Compensation Policies Regents' Test Procedures New Academic Program Development Fiscal and General Personnel Budget Allocation Budget Review and Development Budget Amendment Process External and Internal Auditing and Accounting Capital Development Process Plant Operations, Safety, Purchasing, Bookstore Grant and Contract Administration 153 Student Affairs Admissions and Recruiting Financial Aid and Federal Regulations Student Discipline Student Records Residence Program Extracurricular Activities Counseling Career Placement Health Services Academic Program Effectiveness Program Objectives Program Structure Student Admissions and Profile Faculty Qualifications Curriculum Library Support Facilities and Equipment Evidence of Program Effectiveness Student Outcomes and Placement Faculty Effectiveness in Instruction, Research and Service Class Sizes and Teaching Loads Tenure and Promotion Profile Teams of staff and faculty drawn from other University System institutions could conduct the actual reviews of each area. For each major academic program, faculty will form the review team. The review teams will make their findings and recommendations for improvement known to the Advisory Council. Experience from the initial use of this approach indicates that members of the review teams from other institutions benefit as well from the experience, which is based on peer review and is a common procedure in academe. On the basis of the above discussion and the positive experience over the past year in implementing a similar procedure, the following recommendation is made: The University System of Georgia should establish in policy a systematic procedure for addressing the needs of institutions determined by the Chancellor to be functioning at an inadequate level of managerial and academic effectiveness. The procedure should include the basic elements and practices described above and should utilize the principle of academic peer review. 154