First, I strongly endorse the recommendation that the University pursue a dialogue about a self-definition based on the idea of a "Public Ivy." In several ways, I believe that we have moved in this direction already with the recent implementation of a new general education program and with the revisions that many departments are undertaking relative to their major and minor programs. The report is also accurate in recognizing how we are uniquely suited among Illinois institutions of higher education for taking this direction in our mission.
Second, I appreciate and support the report's attention to the relationship between undergraduate and graduate education and to the important role that graduate programs can play in selected areas in a "Public Ivy." The report is cautious in stressing that graduate programs, especially doctoral programs, be offered in selected areas, but it also recognizes how positively such selected programs can influence the institution's overall academic culture, including the mutually beneficial reciprocity that can exist between the undergraduate and the graduate curriculum. Significantly, the report also recognizes the need to provide these programs with the resources necessary to fulfill their purpose and function within the University.
Third, as a member of the President's Select Committee on Governance and of the Senate's Ad Hoc Committee in Governance, I paid special attention to the relationship articulated in the report between decision-making and the distribution of authority within a governance structure. I hope that, using this report and the discussions on governance currently underway, we can work toward an understanding that our collective fundamental problem is to make the best decisions we can relative to the welfare and future of Illinois State University. Then, as we frame the problem in these terms, we can work toward articulating the role that authority plays within this kind of decision-making.
Back to list
