Panels

Panel I:
Perspectives on Benchmarking University Engagement Accomplishments: A National Conversation
Monday, May 23 • Auditorium • 10:20 a.m. - 11:45 a.m.

Panel II:
The Importance of Engagement Data and How They Can Be Used
Tuesday, May 24 • Auditorium • 8:15 a.m. - 9:45 a.m.

The topics of the two panel presentations represent a continuum of the overall conversation and set the stage for the round table discussions and concurrent sessions. The panelists represent higher education association leaders, research-extensive universities, private and government foundations, accrediting bodies, media “ranking” services, and academic classification systems.

Given the growing consensus that institutions of higher education “ought” to be engaged with their communities (however broadly defined), questions arise as to how the public, and the universities themselves, can determine how well those institutions are fulfilling that obligation. Together we will address such questions as these:

  • Can universities and interested organizations come to consensus on the meaning and definition of “the engaged university,” particularly as the concept applies to research-extensive universities?
  • Who are the intended consumers of the benchmarking data? Can their needs be met through a single data collection strategy?
  • Can benchmarking provide a basis for rewarding engagement? For example, what criteria can government and foundations use to allocate support among institutions in ways that encourage greater commitment to engagement? What criteria can academic institutions use as a basis for rewarding faculty in ways that encourage greater commitment to engagement?
  • In establishing such criteria, should we consider some kinds of engagement more valuable than others? For example, should having a faculty member advise a community on remediating chemical plumes in its aquifer count for more than having a faculty member visit tenth-grade classrooms to discuss environmental problems?
  • What specific indicators can we use to represent more effectively the scope of institutional engagement and the ways such engagement benefits the communities and organizations that universities serve?
  • Is it possible to balance the desire for dramatic information about institutional accomplishments with the need for accurate data? That is, can we get beyond anecdotes to measurable data?
  • How can information about university engagement be used to help the public assess the value of an education that includes engagement as a significant portion of its purpose?

Panel I Panelists

Carolyn Dahl, Dean of the College of Continuing Studies at the University of Alabama and Chair of the Benchmarking Task Force of the Council for Extension, Continuing Education and Public Service of the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges; Amy Driscoll, Scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (responsible for developing a new elective classi?cation on engagement); Wayne Smutz, Senior Director of University Continuing Education at the Pennsylvania State University and chair of the Community of Practice on Outreach and Engagement within the University Continuing Education Association; and Marvin McKinney, Program Director for Youth Programs at the W. K. Kellogg Foundation.

Panel II Panelists

Peg Barratt, Director for the Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences at the National Science Foundation; Alexander C. McCormick, Senior Scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and Director of the Carnegie Classi?cation of Institutions of Higher Education; Robert Morse, Director of data research at U.S. News & World Report and head of the America's Best Colleges and Graduate Schools ranking projects; and John Taylor, Director, Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality with the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools.

Panel Moderator

Hiram E. Fitzgerald, Assistant Provost for University Outreach and Engagement at Michigan State University and Chair, Committee on Engagement of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC).