Reimagining Academic Affairs

• Timeline Details

  Phase One: Reimagining Special Action Team (SAT) Work (August 27th–December 13th, 2024)

  The Special Action Team (SAT) has engaged in analysis and dialogue to develop initial recommendations for reshaping Chico State’s academic structure. These recommendations will be presented to the Provost on December 13th. Phase Two of this initiative will start in January.

  Phase Two: Provost and PAC+ Work

  Following the SAT's recommendations, the Provost and Provost’s Advisory Council including associate deans (PAC+) will review the proposed changes, make additional recommendations, and prepare for broad campus input.

  Round One: Campus and Community Engagement (February 2025)

  The first round of engagement will invite students, faculty, staff, and community partners to offer feedback on initial ideas and priorities through listening sessions and surveys. Based on that feedback, the Provost and PAC+ will make additional revisions and recommendations to present to the campus and community.

  Round Two: Campus and Community Engagement (March 2025)

  A second round of engagement will follow, providing a refined set of options for further input, allowing the campus community to provide additional feedback.

  Provost Recommendations to Campus Leadership Teams (April–May 2025)

  The Provost will finalize recommendations based on insights from the engagement rounds and share them with the following key campus leadership teams for their feedback:

  • PAC
  • Academic Affairs Budget Council (A2B)
  • Chairs’ Council
  • PAC+
  • President’s Cabinet
  • Academic Senate Executive Committee

  Preparation for Phase Three: Implementation (June-August 2025)

  In preparation for implementation, the Provost’s office will coordinate logistical planning to prepare for implementation during fall 2025.

• Reimagining Provost FAQs

  Why is this initiative happening now?

  • We’re undertaking the Reimagining initiative now to ensure Chico State academics can adapt to changing student needs, regional demographics, national enrollment trends and other cross-cutting trends in higher education. We need to create a university structure that serves the students we will have for the next 10-20 years, who are vastly different than the students we had at our enrollment peak and before the COVID-19 pandemic.

  Is this initiative financially driven?

  • While this initiative is not primarily budget-driven, it recognizes the importance of efficient resource management and aligning our academic structures with our current size and anticipated future. While it will not close our budget gap, it will reduce costs as part of our larger budget alignment strategy. We are also mitigating the cost of inaction with this work as we look to futureproofing against the national trends. 

  What are we doing to cut spending while the Reimagining process takes place? 

  • Deans and department chairs have been working diligently to improve efficiencies across multiple domains, including class scheduling, frequency of offerings, optimizing class sizes, reducing AWTU and faculty additional employment, non-essential travel, operating expenses and not backfilling some positions. Deans will receive a charge letter at the end of the fall semester to perform audits on the following in the spring – student: faculty ratios, course caps, AWTU, supervision courses, faculty additional employment, and service assignments to find additional efficiencies, identify inequities, and develop consistent practices.

Special Action Team (SAT)

• Charge letter

  [Accessible PDF version (PDF)]

  August 27, 2024

  Greetings Reimagining Special Action Team!

  Thank you again for your enthusiasm in reimagining the future of Chico State’s academic identity and structures. This critical work will help us forge a new path to a robust, vibrant, and sustainable future.

  Charge

  Through a process of investigation, dialogue, and sustained campus engagement, the Special Action Team is charged with developing 2-3 comprehensive recommendations for restructuring academic units in service to our mission, which should be grounded in key aspects of our current challenges and animated by opportunities for continuous improvement.

  Your work should be informed by the following understandings: the changing enrollment landscape, our majority minority and first-generation student population, service to our region, positioning Chico State as forward-facing and academically distinctive, and reflective of our role as the regional comprehensive liberal arts and sciences university of the North State.

  Considerations

  Your primary focus will be on the academic program structure, not the curriculum, although some conversations may naturally emerge around this area.

  I encourage you to think outside the box. There is no "right” number of colleges; in fact, you may recommend a structure with no colleges at all.

  Your recommendations should foster student-centeredness, innovation and creativity, and interdisciplinarity. They should be equity-minded, regionally relevant, and showcase Chico State as a destination campus.

  We want the rest of the CSU to say, "Wow, look at what Chico did!"

  
  First Steps
  As part of the agenda for your first meeting, you should:
  • Select a chair whose role will include working with Holly and Khadish on logistics, administering surveys, and providing regular reports to the Provost.
  • Schedule weekly 2-hour meetings, endeavoring to find a time that most members can attend. Regular attendance is expected; if a team member must miss more than three meetings, please consult the chair and Holly.

  Consultation
  Input from campus constituencies and external partners is a critical component of this work. This may entail, but is not limited to, surveys, listening sessions, focus groups, etc. The Provost's office will assist with these logistics.

  
  While I will not directly participate in your meetings or discussions, I will be available as needed, including regular meetings with the chair as necessary.

  Deliverables
  • Monthly Executive summary of meetings (with action items and owners), activities, summary of consultations (with themes and/or trends), etc.
  • Meet with the Provost Nov 13. (time TBD) to plan for final recommendations
  • Final summary report with 2-3 comprehensive recommendations due December 13.

  Thank you again – I look forward to the future we will build together for Chico State as a result of your important work and creativity!

  
  Go Wildcats!!

• Team
  • Tiffani Anderson, Chemistry and Biochemistry
  • Shawn Brackett, College of Communication and Education
  • Cindy Daley, College of Agriculture
  • Jesse Engebretson, Recreation, Hospitality, and Parks Management
  • Emily Fleming, Biological Sciences
  • Eli Goodsell, Big Chico Creek Ecological Reserve
  • Aishu Gowda, AS Director of Social Justice and Equity
  • Nathan Heggins Bryant, English
  • Ben Juliano, Computer Science
  • Dev Kachiwala, AS Director of Academic Affairs
  • David Leonard, Multicultural and Gender Studies
  • Rachel McBride-Praetorius, Tribal Relations
  • Matthew Meuter, Marketing
  • Rachel Middleman, Art and Art History
  • Rebecca Nelson, Faculty Development
  • William Nitzky, Anthropology
  • Tal Slemrod, School of Education
  • Christian Sullivan, AS President
  • Zanja Yudell, Philosophy

  Special thanks to Holly Ferguson for providing administrative support.

• Campus Engagement Summary 

  [Accessible PDF version (PDF)]

  In October and November 2024, the Special Action Team (SAT) conducted listening sessions and surveys and received input from Chico State employees and partners. Feedback from these sources reveals a complex mix of appreciation for our existing strengths; a desire for a more collaborative, equitable, and student-centered university; and anxiety about the unknowns of restructuring.  

  With limited time and a charge from the Provost to deliver recommendations by mid-December, the team read and analyzed each dataset and used Google NotebookLM, a generative AI/language model tool that helps users analyze and process information from multiple sources to assess feedback from our campus community. Using NotebookLM our analytics subcommittee analyzed data from all 17 listening sessions (including summary notes from SAT members and transcripts from all sessions (n=279)), two surveys (n=114), and feedback provided to SAT in the way of prepared documents, statements, or shared reports to answer the following prompt for all data sources: “What key points and themes emerge from the sources?”. The prompt generated five sets of common themes across the data. We reviewed the five sets of common themes NotebookLM found and summarized these as general takeaways.   

  Access to NotebookLM is currently restricted to personal Google accounts only. 

  Strengths of Existing Programs

  Participants frequently emphasized the strengths and achievements of their respective units:  

  • Hands-on Learning and Experiential Opportunities: Hands-on learning opportunities, including internships, field experiences, and community engagement were seen as key strengths.
  • Faculty Expertise: Respondents consistently identified strong faculty expertise as a key strength across departments.
  • Strong Programs: Units consistently spotlighted their successful programs, pointing to accreditation, high placement rates, and national recognition.
  • Existing Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Several units highlighted their existing collaborative efforts with other departments and colleges.  

  Student Needs and Experiences  

  Participants consistently stressed the importance of keeping student needs and experiences at the center of any restructuring decisions:  

  • Understanding Evolving Student Needs: Participants highlighted the need for increased flexibility, mental health support, career preparation resources, and a strong sense of community.
  • Providing Holistic Support: Participants called for a more holistic approach to student support, including adequate academic advising, mental health services, financial assistance, and support for diverse student populations.
  • Improve Advising and Support Services: Participants identified challenges with current advising and support services, particularly for online and distance education students.
  • Enhance Career Preparation and Connections: Participants emphasized equipping students with the skills and experiences needed for career success.  

  Desire for Collaboration and Efficiency  

  Participants desired a more collaborative, efficient, and equitable university structure:  

  • Enhanced Collaboration and Interdisciplinarity: Participants identified several barriers to collaboration, including administrative hurdles, lack of resources, and siloed departmental structures. Suggestions for improvement included streamlining processes and procedures, providing resources and incentives, and improving communication.
  • Improve Administrative Efficiency: Participants called for streamlining procedures, reducing duplication of efforts, and investing in technology to improve efficiency.
  • Promote Equity: Participants demanded fair workload distribution, equitable resource allocation, and representation of diverse perspectives in decision-making.  

  Anxiety and Uncertainty Regarding Restructuring  

  Our analysis revealed a pervasive sense of anxiety, uncertainty, and distrust among faculty and staff regarding the restructuring process:  

  • Lack of Clarity and Transparency: Participants repeatedly voiced frustration with the vagueness of the Provost’s charge letter that informed the work of the SAT and highlighted the lack of clearly defined goals for the restructuring process.
  • Fear of Negative Impacts: Specific concerns included potential job losses, program cuts, loss of unit identity, disruption of existing successes, and negative impacts on morale and campus climate.
  • Lack of Articulated Vision and Rationale: Participants routinely asked questions about the ultimate purpose and desired outcomes of the restructuring process.  

  Additional Themes  

  Feedback from listening sessions, surveys and other sources revealed additional areas for improvement:  

  • Accessibility: Students are seeking increased accessibility across campus, including accessible furniture, universal design in courses, and more resources to support students with disabilities. Participants also highlighted the need for mixed modality in course offerings, including maintenance of in-person classes and a bolstering of hybrid and online course offerings and programs.
  • Collaboration and Support: Participants expressed a need for greater collaboration between departments and units, increased communication and support from faculty, and more personalized spaces on campus.
  • Funding and Resources: Participants highlighted the need for increased funding and resources to support student learning, including library resources and staffing levels.
  • Reorganization and Restructuring: The feedback suggested several areas where reorganization and restructuring could improve the university's functioning, including clearer communication channels, greater flexibility in staffing, and a re-evaluation of faculty workload expectations. 
• Survey

  We created a survey to collect information from our campus constituents that contributed to the development of 2-3 comprehensive recommendations for restructuring academic units. Your responses helped provide a greater understanding of how to foster reimagining the future of Chico State’s academic identity and structures. This survey was a critical step in listening and acknowledging concerns and opportunities and understanding our campus community’s needs, interests, strengths, and vision for the future.

  A survey based on the prompts from our listening sessions was available until Wednesday, November 20th @ 11:59pm for additional feedback. The survey has now closed.

• Listening sessions

  Listening sessions were opportunities for the Special Action Team to hear your thoughts, ideas, questions, and concerns. We scheduled 3 sessions for campus constituents and 1 session for external constituents; 2 in-person and 2 online. Sessions were automatically transcribed using Otter. We also provided the option for constituent groups to request special listening sessions between October 14th and November 20th.

  We heard from 279 constituents overall—thank you for your time, energy, and thoughtfulness. The listening sessions have concluded for this phase of engagement.

  Scheduled listening sessions

  • October 14th @ 11am-1pm (in-person, CLSA 100, 41 campus constituents)
  • October 25th @ 11am-1pm (online, Zoom, 42 campus constituents)
  • October 29th @ 4pm-6pm (in-person, CLSA 100, 14 campus constituents)
  • October 30th @ 8am-10am (online, Zoom, 11 external constituents: advisory boards, community members, partners, etc.)

  Special listening sessions

  • October 18th @ 9:30am-10:30am (in-person, CLSA 100B, 35 members of Chairs Council)
  • October 23rd @ 5pm-6pm (online, Zoom, 3 Agriculture External Partners)
  • November 1st @ 9am-10am (in-person, FAMC 106, 14 University Farm Staff)
  • November 1st @ 12pm-1pm (in-person, BSS 107, 14 members of Political Science and Criminal Justice)
  • November 6th @ 9am-10am (in-person, SSC 306, 18 members of International Education and Global Engagement)
  • November 7th @ 9am-10am (in-person, BSS 333, 12 department chairs from the College of Behavioral and Social Sciences)
  • November 8th @ 8:30am-9:30am (hybrid, MLIB 459, 10 members of the Faculty Development Advisory Board)
  • November 8th @ 10am-11am (in-person, SELV 104, 13 members of Graduate Council and Graduate Education)
  • November 13th @ 9am-10am (in-person, CLSA 115, 11 members of Online and Distributed Learning)
  • November 13th @ 4pm-5pm (in-person, BSS 333, 9 members of Health and Human Services Task Force)
  • November 18th @ 10am-11am (in-person, MLIB 226, 12 members of Meriam Library)
  • November 19th @ 9:30am-10:30am (in-person, SSC 206, 9 members of Accessibility Resource Center)
  • November 20th @ 4pm-5pm (in-person AYRS 201, 11 members of College of Humanities and Fine Arts)

  Prompts for discussion (October 14th-24th)

  1. Why do you think students come to your unit/college/department/program, and what do they gravitate towards?
  2. How does your unit/college/department/program contribute to students’ education and professional development?
  3. What are the strengths of your department and/or program? How should we build on those strengths to position Chico State as forward-facing and academically distinctive?
  4. What opportunities for collaboration do you see within your unit/college/department/program?
  5. What challenges and/or concerns for collaboration do you see within your unit/college/department/program?
  6. Where do you see future cross-disciplinary opportunities that currently do not exist across the university?
  7. From the standpoint of work and workload, what are some areas that seem most in need of reorganization within your unit/college/department/program? And, what do you feel those changes would accomplish?

  Prompts for discussion (October 25th-November 20th)

  1. What makes your unit/college/department/program unique and distinctive?
  2. What are the key strengths of your unit/college/department/program?
  3. What are students seeking in your unit/department /programs/college?
  4. Have the needs of students changed over the past few years (pre- and post-COVID) in your unit/department/programs/college?
  5. How can your unit/department /program/college improve on satisfying what students seek now?
  6. What units/colleges/departments/programs do you work most closely with and in what ways?
  7. What are some ways the university could provide opportunities and/or remove barriers for greater collaboration across units/colleges/departments/programs?
  8. Where do you see future cross-disciplinary opportunities that currently do not exist across the university?
  9. From the standpoint of work and workload,what are some areas that seem most in need of reorganization within your unit/college/department/program? And, what do you feel those changes would accomplish?
  10. How would you suggest the academic units of the university be reimagined or restructured?
  11. OPEN: Do you have any additional comments or feedback?
• Additional feedback

  We welcome additional feedback and documents via email: sat@csuchico.edu. 

• FAQ
  What was the purpose of the listening sessions?

  • To hear ideas, questions, and concerns about the organizational structure of Academic Affairs at Chico State from faculty, students, staff, and external partners. We used a common agenda to provide a fair opportunity to share feedback across all listening sessions. To our best knowledge, we are the only campus with a special action team that actively hosted listening sessions to provide feedback toward making direct recommendations to the Provost.

  How did the Special Action Team (SAT) use the information gathered from the listening sessions to make recommendations?

  • At least three SAT members attended each listening session to take notes that were paired with automated transcripts from Zoom and/or Otter to combine human perspectives with digital tools. The listening session notes and survey question responses were recorded for thematic analysis. In addition to the listening sessions and survey questions, we actively researched academic structure models to better understand how higher education is structured across the CSU and beyond. We will use the analysis and research to make recommendations.

  How many listening sessions were hosted?

  • Four (4) scheduled listening sessions and thirteen (13) special listening sessions  

  What will happen after the Special Action Team (SAT) makes recommendations to the Provost?

  • Final recommendations from the SAT will be posted to this website. Please see the timeline at the top of this page for further details.