The committee discussed two broadly framed issues affecting the support
for research scholarship and creative activities within the UNM community.
The first addressed the internal and external perceptions of such activities
and the second dealt with the mechanisms and procedures at UNM supporting
and encouraging such activity. However, both have similar origins;
As UNM has matured into a preeminent research institution, the leadership
and administrative apparatus guiding research, scholarship and creative
activities has failed to keep pace. Speaking strategically, UNMs’
leadership of scholarly activity and vision for research must also evolve
and mature.
In the estimation of many committee members, there is a lack of conviction
pervading UNM regarding the role of research, scholarship and creative
activity within the university’s educational missions. This lack
of conviction is manifest in several ways. While scholarly activity
has greatly expanded during the past two decades, interim or short-term
people have filled key positions such as the associate provost for research.
As a result, only short-term problems were addressed and establishment
of long-term policies and plans suffered (more on this below). However,
the most commonly voiced example of this lack of conviction occurs when
scholarly and creative activity confront the need for undergraduate student
credit hour production. While the importance of student credit hour
(SCH) production in UNM’s funding formula is obvious, the single-minded
focus on this number is shortsighted and in a real way undermines faculty
morale. It places UNM on par with every other institution in the
state whereas it is precisely the ongoing scholarly activity at UNM that
distinguishes it from other state institutions. The intense one-on-one
mentoring of a (graduate or undergraduate) student participating in this
scholarly activity is rarely equaled in the classroom and poorly captured
by a funding formula (while the formula does includes extra compensation
for graduate student credit hours, the committee feels this ignores the
additional effort outside the classroom essential for educating graduate
students). Yet such students significantly enrich the quality of
life in New Mexico whether by giving cutting edge theater performances,
creating new art or literature, publishing scientific articles, or by establishing
their own businesses and becoming employers. UNM clearly leads all
other state institutions in such activity, but emphasis on the SCH formula
ignores this fact.
Secondly, the emphasis on student credit hour production ignores the
essential fact that an institutions’ academic reputation ultimately rests
on the strength of its research and scholarly activities, not on how many
undergraduates it educates. As measured in several ways, UNM has
made tremendous strides in the ranking of its scholarly activities over
the past ten years. The committee feels that UNM has failed to adequately
explain or to take advantage of these strides in presenting ourselves to
the citizens of New Mexico.
Finally, by diverting faculty attention solely to SCH, the creation
of future scholarly works is mortgaged. Heavy class loads drastically
reduce the time and energy available for scholarly activity, while benefiting
few undergraduates with close interactions. If we believe the numbers
and the rankings showing that UNM faculty are among the nation’s best in
many fields, our convictions should allow SCH to vary without diversion
from the ultimate goals of continued improvement. Later we will suggest
ways for seeking efficiencies and economies in encouraging research scholarship
and creative activities.
There are several benefits of a more consistent and explicit encouragement
of scholarly activity at UNM. From the undergraduates’ vantagepoint,
new contributions to contemporary problems appear in the classroom or appear
as new classes almost immediately. While lectures from standard textbooks
might be the students’ expectation, most readily recognize the value of
incorporating the latest insight from scholarly activity into the classroom
setting. Good scholars bring excitement to the classroom, thus enhancing
the quality of the undergraduate experience and eventually, enrollment.
Additionally, as the academic reputation improves, UNM becomes more attractive
to the regional undergraduate, ultimately boosting both student credit
hours and the quality of the student body. While academic institutions
traditionally demarcate faculty responsibilities into teaching, scholarly
activity and service, these categories are by no means mutually exclusive.
At a university such as UNM, teaching duties do not exist independently
of a faculty’s involvement in creative activity. Mentoring of students
in a faculty’s creative activity is an example of a situation combining
both teaching and creative activity outside of the classroom. Teaching
and scholarly activity are simply different facets of the same duty at
any influential modern university.
Other factors beside student credit hour production also contribute
to this failure of conviction. UNM is too often reticent to trumpet
the intellectual achievements of its faculty. Most New Mexicans realize
that the University is much more than the Lobos and take pride in all achievements
of the university. UNM faculty (can and should) provide almost daily
comment in the local media on issues of local, state, national and international
concern. A Pulitzer Prize winner or a national academy member should
be ultimately as valuable to the University’s public image as a conference
championship. This reticence cuts two ways. Not only does the
rest of the state get a narrow view of the University, but internally,
the rest of the University community sees the research, scholarship and
creative activity subtly but consistently undervalued. Again, morale
suffers and the most talented become susceptible to offers from institution
more secure in their intellectual foundations.
The public affairs office unevenly represents the broad range of intellectual
achievements at UNM (perhaps because it is so broad). Continued frustration
over our inability to “Get our message out” or the inability to frame the
discussion in terms of the value of creative activity to the educational
mission instead of SCH production suggest that new approaches to the public
affairs function are a partial solution. The administration and that
office should investigate ways of strengthening UNMs’ image, perhaps by
contracting with a commercial firm experienced in these matters.
The second general issue arising from the research, scholarship and
creative activity at UNM is the failure of the leadership apparatus to
keep pace. The relatively recent rise of UNM as a research university
has overtaken the ability of decentralized administrative functions to
provide the leadership necessary to further advance UNM. When the
central administration does act, it is often to take advantage of an entrepreneurial
opportunity rather than to directly advance scholarly activity at UNM.
This approach inverts the university’s role of first creating new knowledge
and then exploiting it and is a poor basis for improving UNMs’ academic
standing. The only legitimate criteria for decisions affecting scholarly
activity at a university are “Will this decision result in high quality
scholarly activity of (potentially) national impact that will enhance the
academic standing of the university?”
Being fully aware of the economic and political environment within
any university must exist, we cannot stress this point enough. Almost
every decision, whether meeting some perceived need or taking advantage
of some opportunity, should be evaluated first and foremost for academic
quality, not for potential revenue. Taking care of the academic quality
first will ensure, over the long run, taking care of the revenue.
There is just not any other model extant for operating a modern university.
Choosing otherwise affects the campus environment in ways that vary
from department to department. It takes the form of missed opportunities
or at best, opportunities supported at sub-critical levels. Conversely,
it also takes the form of perpetually marginal programs draining resources
with no mechanism for termination or correction. Good administration
must be willing to make the decision to cut under-performing programs.
Otherwise, this not only deprives UNM of opportunities to excel but threatens
UNM’s future by driving away the most innovative people. Salaries
may appear to dominate discussion of faculty compensation, but establishing
an atmosphere supportive of both innovative and traditional creative activity
may ultimately be more cost-effective toward retention and recruitment
of the best people. Recognition and reward do not need to be resource-intensive
processes.
In a real sense, this issue can be described as developing the appropriate
leadership style in research, scholarship and creative activity for the
next phase in UNM’s history. Several factors lead to our optimism
upon addressing this issue. First and foremost is that talented,
committed, and dedicated faculty have succeeded in the recent past in establishing
national reputations for their scholarly activity. Their paths to
success have been varied, but this core of faculty provides an experience-base
the university needs to draw upon. Secondly, these faculty have helped
establish the seeds of a culture of excellence on campus that is the single
most reliable approach to enhancing the reputation of the university.
Finally, with the promotion of the associate provost for research’s office
to vice provost level and with the strategic planning process itself, the
timing and the increased visibility offer the opportunity for implementing
such suggestions.
Granting our assumptions, our conclusions follow. Furthering
scholarly activity must become quality-driven, not money-driven as it appears
to many faculty. When resources are sought for a new program, center,
or activity, the questions that must be answered are “Does this activity
possess the factors necessary to make an impact at the national level (sometimes,
the regional or even local level might be appropriate)?” and “Does it thereby
enhance the reputation (and hence the educational mission) of UNM?”
If the answers are yes, support in the form of the appropriate resources
should be forthcoming. Unfortunately, a combination of missing leadership
and limited resources has combined to make money, not quality, the primary
decision-making criteria.
These two simple criteria, excellence on a national (or regional) level
and enhancement of UNM’s academic reputation, are easy to understand, to
disseminate and are transparent to all involved. At the same time,
making it clear that all activities will be continually reassessed and
reevaluated will ensure some dynamism and evolution are built in to the
process. Many examples of how these criteria may be applied can be
found. Consider the following.
A particularly insidious situation occurs when the opportunity to bring
a large amount of money to UNM arises. While any faculty is welcome
to pursue whatever opportunities they wish, committing university resources
including office space, IDC allotments, faculty positions, matching funds,
and ultimately, the University’s good name, must not be done without the
counsel of faculty active, successful and experienced in scholarly activity
at UNM. Again, the questions “Will this make an impact on a national
scale?” and “Will it enhance the reputation of UNM?” should be thoroughly
explored. Often, the implementation, the management plan or the people
involved are insufficient to ensure success and resources should not be
directed at the “opportunity.” Similarly, if the opportunity is so
poorly connected to the rest of campus that it’s chances of enhancing the
reputation of the University is minimal, it also should not be rewarded
with resources. It takes effective, well-informed, and courageous
administrators to make the necessary decisions.
In a similar vein, consider the role of intellectual property (IP)
at UNM. Again, decisions made here should primarily concentrate on
ensuring the creation of high quality intellectual property, not exploiting
existing intellectual property. It is a mistake to view IP as an
resource needing only the right investment to become a profit center for
the university. What’s more likely to benefit UNM is a faculty-initiated
start-up that licenses their own IP from UNM. Financial success is
more likely to follow from the existence of high quality, motivated faculty
at UNM than from the existence of a separate organization such as STC.
Finally, the success or failure of some programs will not be obvious.
It is therefore The essential to perform an outcomes assessment where some
body is charged with deciding whether the progress, impact and reputation
of these activities is meeting the expectations of the University as a
whole. Therefore, biennial or otherwise periodic reviews should be
instituted to assess all programs, centers, and similar activities.
Again, if national impact and UNM’s reputation are not well served, any
allocation of resources should be reduced.
Faculty with successful programs in scholarly activities can also play
an important role in guiding this process. They offer much in the
way of experience and lessons-learned about how to ensure the success of
the opportunity at UNM. It is essential that this experience be drawn
upon and shared with the rest of campus as a means of furthering the goals
of excellence at UNM. A reluctance of faculty to judge other faculty
must be tempered by the need for UNM to make the best strategic decisions.
The reluctance of any program, unit or department to relinquish control
to administrators must be tempered by trust and faith in administrators
and colleagues making decisions in the best interest of UNM. Under
all circumstances the motivation must be to encourage the highest quality
scholarly activity, not to redress past grievances.
To offer other examples, consider the issue of an allotment, tied to
indirect costs (IDC) generated by externally funded activities, assigned
to schools, colleges and departments and centers. In departments
where funded research generates IDC, these general criteria we’ve been
discussing can help clarify contentious issues. The needs for departments
to offer start-up funds for new faculty, matching funds for contracts and
grants and funds for equipment and infrastructure renewal has become an
essential part of their operation. We strongly endorse “return” of
resources to enable matching funds, startup funds and infrastructure and
equipment support within many departments. In addition, such resources
are often used to reward the principal investigators with overhead accounts
that may be used to further other scholarly activities of the principal
investigator. To some extent, the return of a portion of the IDC
to the generating faculty makes up for the lack of adequate institutional
support for these activities. This is a relatively painless way for
the UNM administration to show support of its successful faculty.
However, at the level of the department or center, accountability should
be established. Instead of becoming an entitlement, deans, directors,
and chairs should be able to explain how their allotments are effective
in furthering the desired goals of the University.
In this light, any young faculty receiving a prestigious award such
as an NSF Career grant has already provided clear evidence of national
impact and enhances the academic reputation of the University. Assigning
matching funds in these situations signals, both internally and externally,
a clear endorsement by the administration of such high quality scholarly
activity.
Another situation arises when an existing department or program has
an opportunity to expand. Often this will require both faculty positions
as well as other resources and the decision involves more than just the
VPR’s office. Such an opportunity should be judged by the same criteria:
Does it have national impact and does it add to the academic reputation
of UNM? If so, the scholarly activity portion should receive the
support of the faculty and administration. If these departments have
little or externally funded research, the committee was unanimous in endorsing
the expenditure of resources generated in departments with externally-funded
research in support of these opportunities. For instance, the research
allocation committee (RAC) is one of very few institutions on campus directly
supporting scholarly activity. A planned, modest increase in resources
coupled with increased attention to award announcements could significantly
improve the careers of junior faculty. While these suggestions may
cost some resources, small amounts can make big differences in many disciplines.
University policies can also be amended to help in such situations.
Such departments often have heavy undergraduate teaching loads. Sabbaticals
are too infrequent to support consistent creative activity. The leadership
and guidance from the administration must be consistent and clear and embody
these same criteria; High quality scholarly activity is the way to improve
the academic reputation of UNM. Therefore, some intermediate steps,
such as a “research semester,” need to be enacted, encouraged or expanded.
This not only provides creative faculty the time needed to create, but
sends a consistent message to all faculty that such activity is a valued
and crucial contribution to UNM.
To cite other issues, the importance of interdisciplinary programs
continues to grow nationwide, with numerous opportunities such as computers
in art, biomedical engineering and multicultural studies requiring explicit
coordination across school, college and departmental lines. Interdisciplinary
programs, for example those involving the hiring of a faculty in biomedical
engineering could require the coordination of several departments in the
school of engineering with the school of medicine. There is no venue
on campus where such interdisciplinary decisions can be discussed.
In addition, for the interdisciplinary centers that already exist, there
is no forum to discuss their relationship with traditional academic departments.
It is critical to establish such a forum.
Therefore, the committee is advocating establishing an integrated process
whereby strategic opportunities in research, scholarship and creative activities
are assessed. Key to evaluating such opportunities is a group of
faculty from many disciplines all with ongoing, successful scholarly programs.
In conjunction with the Vice Provost for Research’s office, such a committee
could help identify the most promising opportunities, offer guidance to
ensure success, catalyze interdisciplinary activities and set priorities.
If successful, such a committee could also monitor the progress of programs
and ultimately, make recommendations regarding resources such as faculty
positions, IDC expenditures and moderate infrastructure expenditures.
Centralizing decision making to take advantage of opportunities throughout
the university does raises concerns. The principal instruction should
be to “first, do no harm” to existing, successful programs. Secondly,
the operations should be as transparent as possible so criteria and decisions
are apparent and can be discussed by the wider community. Furthermore,
it is essential to place some sort of constraint on new programs by introducing
review and evaluation points into the programs’ timeline.
As the citizens of New Mexico are this state’s most valuable resource,
so too the faculty are the University’s most valuable resource. Using
other, very limited resources, this faculty has built world-class programs
in fields of study from performing and studio arts to medical research.
Solidifying and furthering these accomplishments will require the consistent
and far-sighted leadership of research, scholarship and creative activity
as the essential part of UNMs’ educational mission. The challenge
facing UNM today is to implement a long-term vision of the importance of
scholarly activity and to provide the leadership necessary to take advantage
of ever-expanding new opportunities.
BULLETED SUMMARY