“Any Person ... Any Study” within One University Comprehensive Self‐Study Report submitted to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education February 9, 2011 Executive Summary “Any Person … Any Study” within One University Self-Study for the Middle States Commission on Higher Education Submitted by Cornell University February 9, 2011 This comprehensive self‐study of Cornell University, undertaken a decade after the previous Middle States accreditation, takes as its theme the productive tension between Cornell’s historical (and still cherished) goals of accessibility and breadth and its need to function with unity, focus, and efficiency. As we measure the university by the commission’s standards, we find several essential facts or major developments of recent years to be especially relevant: Cornell’s thorough and focused 2010 Strategic Plan; the longstanding decentralization of academic and various other responsibilities; Cornell’s character as the land grant university of New York State; the university’s responses to the national economic downturn, including immediate measures as well as bold changes to create long‐term savings in administrative costs; the approaching retirement of a large proportion of the faculty and Cornell’s proactive response; the commitment to need‐blind admissions and need‐based financial aid; Executive Summary i ongoing efforts to improve our students’ living‐learning experience and to continue or establish means of assessing the quality of student learning. We introduce Cornell in our first chapter, outlining fundamental facts about the university and its individual colleges, describing transformational initiatives of the past decade, and explaining the external context that led to “Reimagining Cornell,” a comprehensive self‐ examination culminating in the 2010 Strategic Plan. Chapter 2 briefly explains our approach to the Middle States self‐study. The first three Middle States standards (Mission and Goals; Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal; and Institutional Resources) are examined in chapter 3, “Institutional Stewardship.” After examining Cornell’s strategic planning process and outcome, we discuss the functions of planning, resource allocation, and renewal, and then describe the university’s revenues, expenses, budgeting, and related areas. We also discuss changes brought about by the global financial crisis. We recommend developing a more coordinated approach to planning, to be achieved along the lines described in the 2010 Strategic Plan. We also recommend further planning for the refurbishment of campus facilities and for campus development as prescribed in the Campus Master Plan. In chapter 4 we address standards 4 (Leadership and Governance), 5 (Administration), and 6 (Integrity). Here we outline Cornell’s administrative and governance structures as well as policies related to integrity and ethical conduct. We take note of several changes in recent years that have centralized certain functions of the university, and we recommend that Cornell continue on this path, so long as doing so does not jeopardize the academic missions of the colleges. We also recommend clarification of the roles of the assemblies, continued momentum on administrative cost‐ saving measures, and full implementation of an in‐process change in management of conflicts of interest. Chapter 5 considers standards 8(Student Admissions and Retention) and 9 (Student Support Services). We first examine admission policies, enrollment targets, and recruitment of underrepresented minorities. Next, we consider graduation and completion rates, advising, career services, ii Executive Summary psychological services, residential life, and other aspects of student well‐ being, as well as grievance policies and privacy protections. We endorse need‐blind admissions and competitive packages of need‐based financial aid, recommend further attention to the retention and success of underrepresented minorities, and suggest that Cornell reconsider the recent policy of allowing applicants to choose an alternate college. We also offer recommendations concerning fostering student health and well‐ being, find room for improvement in academic advising and career services, and suggest that Cornell examine housing issues related to transfer admission. Our next chapter examines Cornell’s compliance with standard 10: Faculty, considering the composition of the faculty, measures of excellence, the role of non‐professorial faculty members, diversity, mentoring, tenure, and other issues. We endorse Cornell’s proactive faculty renewal efforts and support innovative hiring practices and efforts toward diversity. We recommend professional development opportunities for all faculty, including non‐professorial ones, and advise further consideration of the role of emeritus faculty. Urging more consistent university‐wide support for teaching, we recommend more widespread mentoring of junior faculty and incentives for units to better integrate faculty members’ roles as researchers, teachers, advisors, mentors, and agents of public engagement. Finally, we recommend that the university continue to expand cross‐ campus and inter‐campus collaborations, with particular emphasis on the social sciences and business. “Educational Offerings,” our seventh chapter, focuses on standards 11–13: Educational Offerings, General Education, and Related Educational Activities. Here we examine undergraduate education, graduate and professional programs, off‐campus study, and supporting factors such as the library, information technology, and instructional facilities. We endorse moving toward a more unified educational experience for undergraduates, developing stronger ties across colleges, and minimizing obstacles that may prevent students in one college from taking courses in another. We also urge greater attention to the creative and performing arts as well as data collection on undergraduate research. At the graduate level, we recommend that Cornell examine the viability of some small graduate fields as well as the adequacy of programs in English as a second Executive Summary iii language. Other recommendations concern library services and the need for improved means of supporting study abroad. Next we address standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning in chapter 8. Cornell’s many programs are at varying points in their progress toward establishing and using effective assessment practices. We examine the situation across undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs and offer a general recommendation that Cornell ensure ample central support for the assessment project. We also recommend that Cornell use a range of resources for developing assessment activities, provide additional support for assessment‐related work in the Center for Teaching Excellence, and create fora in which units can share assessment models. Standard 7: Institutional Assessment is discussed in chapter 9. This chapter outlines our data collection and analysis services, our current assessment activities, and plans for the future. We endorse the Strategic Plan’s aims for institutional assessment and recommend addressing issues of communication and transparency of data. We also see a need for more data collection in two areas: (1) the links between students’ Cornell experiences and their later careers and (2) the experiences and perceptions of graduate and professional students. In conclusion, we survey the highlights of our self‐study and affirm the need for Cornell University to act as “one university” to maintain and improve its research prominence and to enhance the undergraduate experience. We see administrative efficiency and academic collaboration as means to help Cornell achieve its ambitious goals. iv Executive Summary “Any Person … Any Study” within One University Table of Contents 1. Introducing Cornell University ....................................................... 1 1.1 Facts About Cornell ......................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Mission ................................................................................ 2 1.1.2 Vision ................................................................................... 2 1.1.3 Cornell’s Colleges and Schools ............................................. 3 1.1.4 Cornell’s Leadership ............................................................ 11 1.2 Transformational Initiatives of the Last Decade ........................ 12 1.2.1 Undergraduate Residential Initiatives .................................. 12 1.2.2 Financial Aid Initiatives ....................................................... 14 1.2.3 New Life Sciences Initiative ................................................. 15 1.2.4 “Far Above”: The Campaign for Cornell ............................. 16 1.2.5 Other Initiatives .................................................................. 17 1.3 The External Context and “Reimagining Cornell” ..................... 19 1.4 “Any Person … Any Study” within One University .................... 25 2. Approach to Self Study ................................................................ 27 2.1 Organization of the Self-Study Process ...................................... 27 2.1.1 The Working Groups .......................................................... 30 2.1.2 The Steering Committee ..................................................... 31 2.2 “Any Person … Any Study” within One University .................... 32 3. Institutional Stewardship ............................................................