LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY and AGRICULTURAL & MECHANICAL COLLEGE

STRATEGIC PLAN

FY 1998-99 to FY 2002-2003

VISION STATEMENT

To be a leading research university, taking undergraduate and graduate students to the highest levels of intellectual and personal development.

MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College (LSU) is the generation, preservation, dissemination, and application of knowledge and cultivation of the arts for the benefit of the people of the state, the nation, and the global community.

PHILOSOPHY

Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College (LSU) is recognized as the state's comprehensive research university by the Louisiana Legislature (House Bill 1) and by the Board of Regents' Master Plan for Higher Education. It is the only Southern Regional Education Board Four-Year 1 University in Louisiana, it is one of only 88 institutions classified by the Carnegie Foundation as Research University I (again unique in Louisiana), and it is a Land Grant and Sea Grant institution. The federal judiciary has also recognized LSU's unique role, stipulating in the 1994 desegregation Settlement Agreement that LSU "shall continue to be recognized as Louisiana's flagship state institution and its only comprehensive research institution. LSU shall continue to have the greatest number of graduate and research programs and selective admissions criteria."

Because of its role, scope, and mission, and because of the degree of selectivity in admissions on both the undergraduate and graduate levels (a degree of selectivity unequaled among the public institutions of higher education in Louisiana), LSU must serve the entire state of Louisiana by providing bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs comparable to those afforded to the citizens of other states at their flagship institutions of higher education.

It is this institution's conviction, accordingly, that LSU will best serve the citizens of Louisiana by pursuing its goal of being recognized nationally as one of the leading public universities in the South and as one of the top twenty public universities in the nation; that it can model the highest aspirations of higher education as a learner-centered, faculty and staff supportive, research intensive, diverse university, with a continuous commitment to public service; and that it must continue to lead public higher education in Louisiana in undergraduate education, graduate and professional education, research, service, and economic development.

CLIENTS and/or USERS and BENEFITS and/or SERVICES

LSU's instructional programs include 202 undergraduate and graduate/professional degrees. The University attracts about 16 percent of the state's total enrollment in higher education, and LSU students come from many ethnic and religious backgrounds. The student body consists of more than 28,000 students from all 50 states and more than 120 foreign countries. Since its first commencement in 1869, LSU has awarded more than 164,000 degrees. The University produces about 20 percent of Louisiana's baccalaureate graduates, approximately 26 percent of the master's degrees, and about 62 percent of the doctoral degrees. Of LSU's 54 doctoral degrees, 48 are unduplicated in Louisiana's public institutions of higher education. With more than 130,000 alumni, LSU ranks in the top 10 percent in the nation in number of graduates. The university has approximately 1,300 full-time and part-time faculty members-more than 85 percent of whom have terminal degrees. The University's success in the leveraging of state funds to obtain federal dollars places it among the best in the nation and represents a good investment of taxpayers' money. The economic result of this activity is the creation of 2,250 new jobs, $55 million in new income for Louisiana households, and $125 million in new sales to Louisiana firms. At any given time more than 2000 sponsored research projects are in progress. Additionally, faculty and staff members and graduate students pursue numerous research projects that are not sponsored by outside agencies. LSU annually brings in an average of $70 million in grants and contracts from federal, state, and private sources-a significant factor for the Louisiana economy. The University Libraries comprise the largest research library in the state and provide services for LSU faculty, students, and staff and for state, parish, and school libraries. LSU injects more than a half-billion dollars into the Louisiana economy annually with direct expenditures of more than $344 million by all units in Baton Rouge, creating sales of nearly $672 million.

EXTERNAL FACTORS AND LIMITATIONS

A number of potential external factors are beyond the control of the University and could significantly affect the attainment of the above goals and the following objectives. Among these factors are new demands, requirements, and/or changes in federal and state statutes, rules and regulations; new or changed criteria for accreditation by regional or specialized accrediting agencies; and changes in the rules and regulations of governing boards. In addition, University funding is dependent upon economic changes on the local, state, national, and/or international levels. Federal and state appropriations may vary depending upon these economic fluctuations and are subject to the special priorities and/or targeted programs corresponding to legislative initiatives.

STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OR AUTHORITY

The following statutory requirements and authorities are applicable to all of the goals below:

The Master Plan for Higher Education, Board of Regents, State of Louisiana, April 1994, p. 18;

Louisiana Constitution of 1994, Article 8, $7; Louisiana Revised Statutes, 17:3216; Reaffirmation of Accreditation, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on colleges, 1995; Louisiana State University Self-Study, 1993-1994; Minutes, Louisiana State University Board of Supervisors, October 24, 1991; United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, Civil Action Number 80-3300, Section "A," p.3 and pp. 20-23

DUPLICATION OF EFFORT

Act 19 of 1998 considers LSU a single program; thus, there is no duplication of effort in the statement of goals and objectives.

USE OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN DECISION MAKING

The performance indicator documentation sheets accompanying the strategic plan provide information on the use of performance indicators in management decision making.

STRATEGIC GOALS

1. LSU must offer excellent curricula and must attract, retain, educate, and graduate highly qualified students

2. LSU must attract, retain, develop, and support excellent faculty and staff

3. LSU must facilitate and encourage research that benefits society and advances knowledge

4. LSU must contribute to the social, economic, and cultural well-being of society

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1.1: External and internal peer evaluators will review 68 percent of the current 202 degree programs by the year 2003 in order to identify and correct weaknesses and set priorities for investing resources. [LSU students, alumni, faculty, staff, alumni and citizens of Louisiana]

Strategy 1.1.1: Identify and implement appropriate review processes (internal program reviews)

Strategy 1.1.2: Evaluate results of reviews and develop memoranda of agreement for improving programs

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Institutional Self Study, Recommendations of Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), and recommendations of specialized accrediting bodies

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of degree programs,

Output: Number of degree programs evaluated by internal program review process, number of recommendations in the Memoranda of Agreement (MOA)

Outcome: Percent of degree programs reviewed

Efficiency: Number and percent of MOA recommendations implemented

. . . . . . .

Objective 1.2: To maintain an accreditation rate of at least 95 percent for all academic programs eligible for accreditation.

Strategy 1.2.1: Identify specialized accrediting bodies appropriate to degree offerings at LSU and determine accreditation requirements

Strategy 1.2.2: Review recommendations from previous specialized accreditation reviews and target resources to respond to key areas of need

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Recommendations of specialized accrediting bodies

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of degree programs with specialized accrediting bodies

Output: Number of degree programs with specialized accrediting bodies reviewed

Outcome: Percent of degree programs accredited

Efficiency: Number of degree programs accredited

. . . . . . . .

Objective 1.3: LSU will increase student success in completing academic programs as measured by increasing the freshman to sophomore retention rate from 77 percent to 82 percent by the year 2001 and by increasing the six-year graduation rate from 47 percent to 52 percent by year 2003 [LSU students, alumni, faculty, staff, Louisiana high schools, and citizens of Louisiana]

Strategy 1.3.1: Increase admission requirements using combinations of high school preparatory courses, high school grade point average, and standardized test scores

Strategy 1.3.2: Increase access and quality of student orientation, academic advising, counseling, and career services

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: LSU Self-Study; BOR Peer data; student assessment/surveys

Performance Indicators:

Input: For freshman to sophomore retention, the number of full-time, first-time degree-seeking freshmen who enrolled at LSU the previous summer or fall; for six-year graduation rate, the number of full-time, first-time degree-seeking freshmen who enrolled at LSU in the summer or fall six years prior to calculation of the graduation rate

Output: For freshman to sophomore retention, the number of full-time, first-time degree-seeking freshmen who enroll at LSU the fall of their sophomore year; for six-year graduation rate, the number of full-time, first-time degree-seeking freshmen who graduate from LSU within six years of entry

Outcome: Increase in the freshmen to sophomore retention rate; increase in the six-year graduation rate

Efficiency: Freshman to sophomore retention rate, six-year graduation rate

Objective 1.4: LSU will increase by year 2000 the information technology access available to students as measured by a 10 percent increase in the number of active network connections in dorm rooms, classrooms, and laboratories [LSU students, faculty, businesses employing LSU graduates]

Strategy 1.4.1: Systematically review student technology needs

Strategy 1.4.2: Develop and implement an infrastructure for information technology access for students

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Student Government Referendum, Self Study, Program Review recommendations, professional accrediting associations' recommendations

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of dorm rooms, number of classrooms, number of centrally managed computer laboratories

Output: Number of dorm rooms, classrooms and centrally managed computer laboratories wired for network access

Outcome: Percent increase in number of active network connections in dorm rooms, classrooms, and centrally managed computer laboratories.

Efficiency: Percent of dorm rooms, classrooms, and centrally managed computer laboratories with active network connections; network connection utilization counts in computer laboratories

. . . . . . . .

Objective 2.1: LSU will develop and implement for all academic and administrative units, long-term faculty and staff plans that consider mission, changing needs in critical areas (e.g., teaching, research, service), and faculty/staff balance (rank, specialization, diversity, full vs. part-time, vacancies/retirements, etc.) by 2003

Strategy 2.1.1: Assign responsibility to deans and department heads/chairs to develop plans; establish time lines; and review plans in a systematic, ongoing fashion

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Self-Study, SACSCOC Recommendations, Program Review Recommendations, Specialized Accreditation Recommendations, peer comparison

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of units

Output: Number of unit plans

Outcome: Percent of units with plans

Efficiency: Number and percent of plans that meet university specifications

. . . . . . . .

Objective 2.2: LSU will increase by 5 percent the cumulative number of awards indicative of national and international distinction won by its faculty by the year 2003

Strategy 2.2.1: Enhance visibility of faculty worthy of national and international distinction

Strategy 2.2.2: Recruit top faculty and provide support packages (salary, space, equipment, graduate assistantship) that enhance ability to reach regional and national distinction

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Peer comparison

Performance Indicators:

Input: Baseline cumulative number of awards, number of tenured and tenure track faculty

Output: Cumulative number of awards

Outcome: Percent change in number of cumulative awards

Efficiency: Number of awards per tenured and tenure track faculty

. . . . . . . .

Objective 2.3 LSU will increase faculty participation in programs designed to provide incentives, support, development, and recognition by 5 percent by year 2003 [LSU faculty, LSU students]

Strategy 2.3.1: Provide incentive, support, and recognition awards for faculty development (teaching, research, and service)

Strategy 2.3.2: Provide annual new faculty orientation and ongoing faculty development workshops for junior and senior faculty

Strategy 2.3.3: Provide individual and departmental consultations on enhancing teaching and learning

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Faculty Senate Recommendations/Resolutions

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of faculty; number of professional development programs; number of incentive, support, and recognition awards for faculty

Output: Number of faculty participating in professional development programs, number of faculty receiving incentive, support, and recognition awards; number of individual and departmental consultations

Outcome: Percent increase in faculty participation in professional development programs; in number of faculty receiving incentive, support, and recognition awards; and in number of individual and departmental consultations

Efficiency: Percent of faculty that participated in professional development programs, received awards, and participated in individual and departmental consultations

. . . . . . . .

Objective 2.4 LSU will increase faculty salaries each year to compare favorably with average faculty salaries at peer institutions by year 2000 [LSU faculty, greater Baton Rouge community, Louisiana citizens]

Strategy 2.4.1: Request legislative funding to improve faculty salaries.

Strategy 2.4.2: Where appropriate, increase student tuition revenue to improve faculty salaries.

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Comparison of faculty salaries with faculty salaries at LSU's Board of Regents peers.

Performance Indicators:

Input: Baseline average LSU faculty salary, baseline average faculty salary at peer institutions.

Output: Average LSU faculty salary, average faculty salary at peer institutions

Outcome: Dollar and percent change in LSU average faculty salary

Efficiency: Ratio of LSU average faculty salary to average salary at peer institutions, percent difference between LSU average faculty salary and that at peer institutions, change in rank among peers

. . . . . . . .

Objective 3.1: LSU will increase by 10 percent the annual level of externally funded expenditures by year 2003 [LSU Faculty, Louisiana citizens]

Strategy 3.1.1 Increase the amount of matching funds and start-up funds.

Strategy 3.1.2: Change method for allocating indirect cost recovery

Strategy 3.1.3: Provide incentives for faculty to develop research proposals

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Peer comparison, analysis of current externally funded projects and funding trends

Performance Indicators:

Input: Baseline annual expenditures from externally funded projects; number and dollar value of proposals submitted, number of professorial faculty

Output: Annual expenditures from externally funded projects; number and dollar value of proposals funded

Outcome: Percent change in annual expenditures from externally funded projects; percent of proposals funded ( number and dollar value)

Efficiency: Externally funded expenditures per professorial faculty member

. . . . . . . .

Objective 3.2 LSU will increase by at least 10 percent expenditures in LSU Libraries by year 2000 [LSU faculty, students, state and local libraries, Louisiana citizens]

Strategy 3.2.1: Continue to make LSU Libraries a priority for temporary and new funding

Strategy 3.2.2: Request legislative funding for library support

Strategy 3.2.3 Make LSU Libraries a priority for new monies and target fund raising for support for the LSU Libraries

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Faculty Senate Recommendations, Self Study, specialized accrediting body recommendations

Performance Indicators:

Input: Baseline annual amount of library expenditures

Output: Annual amount of library expenditures

Outcome: Percent change in library expenditures

Efficiency: Average expenditure per full time professorial faculty

. . . . . . . .

Objective 4.1: LSU will increase by 5 percent the cumulative number of patents, licenses, and copyrights (applied/awarded) by the year 2003

Strategy 4.1.1: Increase resources available for technology transfer

Strategy 4.1.2: Increase incentives for faculty to submit more disclosures

Strategy 4.1.3: Work to minimize impediments to the transfer of technology to the marketplace

Program Evaluation Used to Develop Objectives and Strategies: Peer comparison

Performance Indicators:

Input: Number of LSU employees submitting disclosures for patents and copyrights; number of disclosures (patents and copyrights)

Output: Number of LSU employees named as inventors in patent applications/issued patents and authors in copyrights; number of patent applications/issued patents, number of licenses granted, number of copyrights

Outcome: Percent increase in number of LSU employees named as inventors in patent applications/issued patents and authors in copyrights; percent increase in number of patent applications/issued patents and licenses granted

Efficiency: Percent of disclosures resulting in patents, copyrights, and licenses

. . . . . . . .



LSU Web