University Planning

Table of Contents | PDF

Chapter VI | PDF
Conclusion

Appendix A | PDF
Response to 1987 Visiting Team Recommendations

Appendix B | PDF
Findings Related to Learning Outcomes

Notes | PDF

Exhibits | PDF

Accreditation Planning Handbook

Adobe® Acrobat® Reader is required to view PDF files

Santa Clara University traces its beginnings to the founding of Mission Santa Clara de Asis by the Franciscan Fathers in 1777. The Mission served as both a religious and an educational center for the Santa Clara Valley’s native population and its early settlers. However, the turmoil surrounding the transfer of California from Spain to Mexico in 1821 and from Mexico to the United States in 1848 greatly lessened Santa Clara’s religious and educational influence.

A new era began in 1851 when the Bishop of San Francisco asked two Jesuit missionaries, Michael Accolti and John Nobili, to open a college at Mission Santa Clara under the direction of the Society of Jesus. During its first academic year, Father Nobili and a handful of Jesuit and lay teachers offered instruction in a variety of subjects to some 40 students. Santa Clara’s continuation was ensured in 1854 when the Jesuit Province of Turin in Italy made a decision to adopt California as a permanent mission field and agreed to provide the faculty and support needed for future growth. The following year, the State of California granted a charter of incorporation to Santa Clara College. In 1857 the college conferred its first bachelor of arts diploma—the first collegiate degree granted by any institution of higher learning in California.

As California grew and changed over the years, Santa Clara College experienced slow but steady growth as it responded to the emerging needs of the larger community. While retaining the centrality of the liberal arts in its curriculum, the College began in the early 20^th century to move toward diversity and professional education—a move that would propel it from a small liberal arts college to a medium-sized university. In 1912 the college became a university in name and in fact with the founding of the Schools of Law and Engineering, accompanied by an expansion of courses in the humanities and sciences. It continued to offer commercial courses in its arts and sciences curriculum until 1926, when it established a separate School of Business and Administration to meet the demands of an emerging urban economy. From the 1930s through World War II, the University’s curricular offerings and enrollment remained relatively stable.

The Second World War had a profound impact on the University. With the return of veterans to college following the war, the student body grew steadily and additional resources became available to support expansion of the University. In 1947, for the first time in the University’s history, enrollment broke the 1,000 mark. Santa Clara was first accredited in 1949.

From the postwar period to the present, the face of the campus has been changing and expanding. In 1961 the University decided to admit women as undergraduate students for the first time, becoming the first Catholic coeducational institution of higher learning in California. Between 1958 and 1968, undergraduate enrollment more than doubled from 1,100 to 2,800 students, the size of the faculty increased accordingly, and several new buildings were constructed including eight residence halls, a student center, a library, and a four-building science complex. Enrollment continued to increase in the early 1970s until the Board of Trustees decided to limit the undergraduate population to 3,500 students so that the University could better address issues of quality. Major construction continued in the first half of the 1970s with the addition of a health center, a new athletic and recreation facility, Louis B. Mayer Theatre, new classroom and office facilities, and extensive remodeling of several older buildings on campus. During this same period, enhancement of the theatre arts program and development of the art and music programs were undertaken.

In 1976 William J. Rewak, S.J., was selected as President of the University, the first chosen by the Board of Trustees rather than by the Superior General of the Jesuit Order in Rome. President Rewak spearheaded the successful completion of a $50 million fundraising campaign, the largest ever undertaken by a Catholic institution in the western United States. During his 12-year presidency, the quality of the student body improved, the faculty grew in size and quality, and 17 endowed professorships were established. The Colleges of Humanities and Sciences were merged into the College of Arts and Sciences, and the graduate Division of Counseling Psychology and Education was formed. Major construction included the Thomas Bannan Engineering Building, the renovation of two other engineering buildings, expansion of Heafey Law Library and laboratories in the Daly Science Center, major renovation of the Faculty Club, and expansion of the Benson Memorial Center to accommodate a new campus bookstore, student lounge space, and improved student activities areas. Prior to his departure as President, Father Rewak brought to fruition a long cherished dream of Santa Clarans—rerouting The Alameda from the center of campus to the eastern perimeter. Completion of the rerouting of The Alameda in 1989 unified the original section of the campus with the more recent additions to the east and provided extensive acreage for future campus development.

In May 1988 the Board of Trustees appointed Paul L. Locatelli, S. J., as the 27^th President of Santa Clara. As he began his presidency, Father Locatelli challenged the University and himself with the question: "Can we provide future generations with a legacy of excellence and leadership appropriate for a university of Santa Clara’s potential?" The accomplishments of the first decade of his presidency highlight how he has shepherded the University toward achievement of its potential. The most significant of those accomplishments include:

• Adoption of a new University Core Curriculum for undergraduate education, reinforcing the basic values of the University by underscoring the strengths of a liberal arts education.
• Completion in 1995 of a major capital campaign of $134 million, exceeding its goal by $9 million.
• Creation of 19 additional endowed professorships structured to support the strategic direction of the University.
• Receipt of three James Irvine Foundation grants: $1 million to fund an "Excellence through Diversity" initiative focusing on multiculturalism; $700,000 for a "Leaders for a Just World" initiative focusing on leadership in the Jesuit tradition and integrated education; and $830,000 for a "Building Partnerships for Diversity" program to promote and advance campus-wide multicultural education initiatives.
• Establishment of a significant endowment for undergraduate merit-based scholarships through a Bannan Foundation gift.
• Enhancement of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, establishment of the Bannan Institute for Jesuit Education and Christian Values, and creation of the Center for Science, Technology, and Society as targeted "centers of distinction" designed to strengthen the University’s academic quality and national recognition.
• Growth of the University’s endowment from $74 million to $346 million.
• Initiation of a $76 million construction and renovation plan to enhance the University’s learning environment.

Father Locatelli’s most lasting contribution to the University, however, will likely be his attention to the refinement of a clear vision of what Santa Clara can become and his orchestration of strategic planning aimed at making that vision a reality. Based on an intensive self-appraisal flowing from the 1987 accreditation self-study and visiting team reports, the "Plan for 1990–95" outlined a vision for making Santa Clara a better university characterized by a strong Jesuit tradition, high standards of academic excellence, cultural and ethnic diversity, a unified campus, a stronger financial base, and more effective planning and governance. Applying lessons learned from that first planning endeavor, Father Locatelli led the campus community through another process that resulted in adoption of a new Strategic Plan in 1996 and its subsequent revision in 1998. The plan was conceived as a living document that would be reviewed and updated periodically as the University and its environment changed and whose essence lay not in the words on paper but in a frame of mind and orientation to action. The strategic vision described in the plan and the major initiatives articulated to support that vision will provide the context for shaping the future of Santa Clara University for many years to come.

Today Santa Clara University no longer finds itself situated amid the orchards and farmland of what was once called the "Valley of Heart’s Delight." Rather it finds itself in the heart of "Silicon Valley," one of the world’s greatest concentrations of high technology industry and scientific activity. As its surrounding environment has evolved from agriculture to high technology, so has the University changed from a small liberal arts college to a medium-sized comprehensive university with a growing reputation beyond that valley. The University, however, remains unchanged in its fundamental belief that the liberal arts are the foundation of all education, in its promotion of service to others, and its commitment to the ideals of Christian humanism in which faith and reason animate the most fundamental human quest—the pursuit of truth and goodness.

Santa Clara University is organized into five major academic units: the College of Arts and Sciences, the Leavey School of Business and Administration, the School of Engineering, the School of Law, and the Division of Counseling Psychology and Education. The College of Arts and Sciences offers 29 majors leading to either the bachelor of arts or bachelor of science degree and has a small graduate program in Pastoral Ministries. The School of Business and the School of Engineering offer professional education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. The School of Law offers a full range of courses in local, state, federal, and international law leading to the Juris Doctor degree. The Division of Counseling Psychology and Education offers a teacher credentialing program, as well as graduate programs in various specialties in counseling and education. The University has targeted three cross-disciplinary programs as intended centers of distinction which are designed to contribute to the overall academic quality, distinctiveness, and national recognition of the University: the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics (established in 1986), the Bannan Institute for Jesuit Education and Christian Values (established in 1996), and the Center for Science, Technology, and Society (established in 1998).

With a total fall 1998 enrollment of 7,707 (6,703 FTE), the University had 4,332 undergraduates (4,282 FTE) and 3,375 graduate students (2,421 FTE). Summer session enrollment in 1998 reached 3,004 (Exhibit III.3.4). A total of 2,430 degrees were awarded in the 1998–99 academic year: 1,229 bachelor’s degrees, 293 law degrees, and 908 other graduate degrees (Exhibit II.2.18). The University faculty in fall 1998 had 399 full-time and 214 part-time members, with a full-time equivalent for the part-time members of 116. Of the 399 full-time faculty, 315 held tenure-track positions and 84 held other continuing appointments in lectureships or adjunct positions (Exhibit III.3.1). The University staff in fall 1998 included 661 full-time members and 126 part-time members. Santa Clara has almost 60,000 living alumni spread through all 50 states and 85 foreign countries.

The University had an operating budget of $164.9 million in 1998–99 and has established an operating budget of $177.9 million for 1999–00 (Exhibit V.4.6). From June 30, 1987, to June 30, 1998, the market value of the endowment grew from $79.8 million to $346.2 million (Exhibit V.4.16). During the same period, annual giving increased from approximately $11.6 million to $26.0 million per year (Exhibit V.4.19). While the University’s total assets increased from $228.3 million in June 1987 to $637.2 million in June 1998, liabilities only increased from $63.5 million to $142.9 million (Exhibit V.4.3).

Located in the city of Santa Clara near the southern tip of the San Francisco Bay, the University has a beautiful 104-acre campus highlighted by the Mission Church at its center. Campus holdings include more than 75 buildings or structures. Prior to the recent construction program begun in 1997, the approximate gross square footage (GSF) of buildings totaled 1,530,000. Since 1997 the University has built major additions to campus facilities totaling more than 137,000 GSF, an almost 10 percent increase in capacity. In addition, the University constructed its first parking garage in 1998 housing 619 parking spaces. The age of the buildings on campus ranges from the Adobe Lodge built in the early 1820s to the Alumni Science Addition and the Malley Fitness and Recreation Center opening in fall 1999. The book value of the University physical plant as of June 30, 1998 was $171 million.

The University is governed by a 36-person Board of Trustees (Exhibit I.1.10), of whom 13 are members of the Society of Jesus. The President of the University is responsible to the Board of Trustees. Another group, the Board of Regents (Exhibit I.1.11), is composed of friends of the University who provide advice and financial support.

The President is supported by an administrative structure organized under a provost and two vice presidents, one for administration and finance and one for university relations (Exhibit I.1.12). Recent reorganization of the administrative structure of the University resulted in the merger under the Provost of the traditional academic affairs and student affairs divisions and the elimination of one vice presidential position. Policy formulation at the University is handled through a collaborative model of governance guided by nine principles of good practice adopted in 1995. Based on these principles, University policy committees review, formulate, and recommend policy to the University administration.

At its meeting on February 24-26, 1988, the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges reaffirmed the accreditation of Santa Clara University and requested a progress report focusing on two topics: (1) the priorities selected under the new administration for the development of the University, and (2) the fiscal status and future projections for the University.

In December 1990 the University submitted the required progress report (Exhibit I.2.3) addressing the issues raised by the Commission. The report summarized the steps taken by the University to strengthen its planning and priority-setting, which culminated in the "Plan for 1990–95" (Exhibit I.3.1) described in the next section. It also reviewed the improved fiscal status of the University since the 1987 self-study and described ways in which the University was strengthening its financial planning and management processes to address the financial challenges it faced.¹ The Accrediting Commission accepted the progress report submitted by the University and waived the requirement for an interim five-year visit.

In addition to the two specific requests from the Commission, the evaluation team for the University’s last full accreditation visit in 1987 made 16 major recommendations. The University’s response to these recommendations is presented in Appendix A to this report.

The 1987 accreditation visiting team made three broad recommendations on strengthening planning at the University. Two were focused specifically on academic planning; the third encouraged Santa Clara to develop an integrated approach to institutional planning that would direct the University’s efforts to prioritize its goals in response to rising expectations and significant demands on resources. The visiting team recommended that Santa Clara "design and implement an institutional planning program which addresses institutional priorities and academic planning as well as physical resources and the long range development plan within the boundary conditions of realistic financial projections." This recommendation was consistent with the perspective of Father Locatelli as he assumed the presidency of Santa Clara in 1988. In reflecting on his first year in office, Father Locatelli observed in the spring 1989 issue of Santa Clara Magazine that

Having identified the potential for Santa Clara and having issued the challenge of taking risks and making choices, Father Locatelli has carefully orchestrated dynamic institutional planning aimed at assuring the future of the University. A review of Santa Clara’s planning efforts over the past decade shows a steady movement toward a more coherent and strategic approach to planning.

Using the recommendations of the 1987 accreditation visiting team as a point of departure, the University moved to a new stage of planning, trying to hone and refine the priorities established in earlier planning efforts. This process resulted in the "Plan for 1990–95" which was approved by the Board of Trustees and Board of Regents at a joint meeting in February 1990. The "Plan for 1990–95" was more focused than earlier efforts, establishing 13 broad goals with 45 sub-goals in five areas: faculty and staff, students, teaching and learning programs, learning resources and facilities, and governance and administration. Many of the goals were also supported by specific action plans, and the plan laid the groundwork for a five-year fundraising campaign of $125 million. Some of the major outcomes of the "Plan for 1990–95" included a new Undergraduate Core Curriculum, a more diverse University community, a physically unified campus, increased attention to student leadership development, and better financial planning. A "Final Report on the Plan for 1990–95" is included as Exhibit I.3.1 to this report.

In fall 1992, a group of top administrators—the President, the vice presidents, the academic deans, and the director of the Center for Applied Ethics—developed a new set of University goals. The new goals sparked intense controversy and led to a yearlong campus discussion that resulted in a revised "Statement of Purpose" (Exhibit I.1.9) and a revised list of nine University goals. While ostensibly a distillation and refinement of the goals established by the "Plan for 1990–95," the new goals appeared to many to have replaced the earlier plan. This misinterpretation resulted in some confusion over the status of the "Plan for 1990–95." In relation to the plan, however, the goals had the virtues of brevity, vividness, and distinctiveness. To clarify some of this confusion, the goals were recast as "University Guiding Principles" (Exhibit I.1.9) which were "intended to focus the efforts of the entire University community toward achieving distinction and distinctiveness in the 1990s."

In spring 1993, Father Locatelli appointed a small Planning Action Team (PAT) to challenge the status quo through a variety of planning initiatives. This group issued reports dealing with reform of the budget process, enrollment management, marketing, administrative reorganization, and several other topics. The PAT concluded its work in January 1995 with a report on strategic planning (Exhibit I.3.2).

In addition to the work of the Planning Action Team, a number of other planning initiatives were undertaken between 1990 and 1995:

• The University Core Curriculum Committee designed a new set of general education requirements and identified the courses and programs to meet these requirements.
• Two groups recommended by the PAT, the University Budget Council and the Budget Advisory Committee, developed more sophisticated approaches to budgeting and financial planning.
• An Enrollment Task Force, also recommended by the PAT, conducted an analysis of those elements of the external environment that pose the most serious challenges to the University and suggested strategies and actions to strengthen Santa Clara’s hand in the face of increasingly stiff competition for excellent students (Exhibit I.3.3).
• The University Facilities Committee submitted a major report on facility needs in spring 1994, developed mini-plans in specific areas, and recommended a comprehensive five-year plan for facilities as background for an update of the Campus Master Plan (Exhibit V.2.2).
• The Technology Steering Committee developed an initial strategic plan for technology (Exhibit V.3.10).

The five years from 1990 to 1995 were a transitional period in planning for Santa Clara. The University began a gradual shift from an inward-looking to a more outward-looking perspective, became more aware of the need to build connections between its mission and its markets, and embarked on strategic planning in several critical areas. However, in its final report, the PAT observed, "the University has not yet consistently taken a strategic approach to planning, effectively coordinated planning, or aggressively implemented plans once they are developed. The linkage between intention and action must be strengthened." The PAT went on to propose that the President launch a new planning effort—one that would reflect an increased emphasis on strategic as distinct from organizational planning, a better integration of the two, and a stronger commitment to acting on both.

The President accepted the recommendation of the PAT and created a new University-wide planning body, the University Planning Council, to direct and coordinate development of a comprehensive strategic plan to strengthen Santa Clara’s academic quality and national reputation. The intent of the new approach to planning was to link Santa Clara’s programs and services more closely with its mission, its markets, and its resources and to aim for comparative advantage in the educational marketplace. As outlined by the PAT, strategic planning was to be conducted through three interrelated initiatives: mission and markets, quality and service, and resources for excellence. Four task forces were appointed to prepare background material and provide perspective for development of a strategic plan by the University Planning Council. Detailed charges for the task forces and the timetable for the overall planning effort were outlined in the final report of the Planning Action Team (Exhibit I.3.2). Reports from each of the four task forces are included as exhibits to this self-study report (Exhibits I.3.4 to I.3.7).

In May 1995, the University Planning Council embarked on a nine-month process of discussion and campus consultation culminating in a report to the campus on strategic planning in January. The Council used principles in The Northbound Train by Karl Albrecht as a guide for the process used in preparation of the planning document.² More than 30 public meetings attended by more than 500 members of the University community were held to provide feedback to the Planning Council on the draft plan. On the basis of the campus dialogue, the Planning Council prepared a final version of the plan, which was submitted to the Board of Trustees for approval on May 10, 1996. The Board of Trustees adopted this Strategic Plan (Exhibit I.3.8) as a "living document subject to modification." To focus strategic planning and guide implementation, three new directional statements were developed to complement the existing "Statement of Purpose" and "University Guiding Principles." These three statements describe the kind of university Santa Clara hopes to become ("Strategic Vision"); the core purpose and the constituencies served ("University Mission"); and the values the University must live out if it is to be successful ("Fundamental Values"). Building on the vision, mission, and values, the plan outlined four strategic initiatives: Community of Scholars, Integrated Education, Continuous Improvement, and Resources for Excellence. The approved plan was intended as a work-in-progress to be refined periodically in response to new ideas and changing circumstances.

The University Planning Council focused its efforts in 1996–97 on the first phase of implementing the strategic initiatives. The Council, in consultation with the President and the Board of Trustees, assumed primary responsibility for overseeing the implementation of actions associated with the major objectives outlined in the plan. In the first year, the Planning Council established responsibilities and timetables for each of the major objectives and initiated planning at unit levels through the deans, vice provosts, and vice presidents (see Exhibits I.3.11 to I.3.14). It undertook a "gap analysis" of Santa Clara’s strengths and weaknesses relative to the Strategic Plan with the assistance of an external consulting firm. This firm, Crane, was retained primarily to advise the University on its market positioning. The Planning Council also began development of initial cost projections and funding strategies for the major objectives outlined in the plan. In keeping with the spirit of the Strategic Plan as a living document and the University as a learning organization, the Council began an assessment of the planning effort after one year’s experience. Key individuals and campus groups were asked to assist in refining the original strategic direction in response to emerging issues, needs, and opportunities.

A revised Strategic Plan (Exhibit I.3.9) was presented to and approved by the Board of Trustees at its February 1998 meeting. The 1998 version of the plan maintained continuity while sharpening its major initiatives and challenges based on the University’s experience and current assessment of the future. To make the strategic vision clear, concise, and compelling, it was restated to lead with the ideal of excelling "in educating men and women for competence, conscience, and compassion." The strategic initiatives were reduced from four to three by incorporating Continuous Improvement into the other three. This resulted in two core initiatives that set the direction for realizing the vision ("Building a Community of Scholars" and "Providing an Integrated Education") and one supporting initiative ("Focusing Resources for Excellence") that provides the means for achieving the vision. The strategic challenges associated with each strategic initiative were revised to reflect the change from four to three initiatives, to sharpen the focus of each challenge, and to point toward active implementation. The list of specific objectives under each strategic challenge in the original plan was replaced with a set of more durable goals to focus and direct action. Each year the strategic challenges and goals are used as a guide for identifying key tactical actions to advance the vision both at the University level and within each school and administrative area.

Several distinctive features of Santa Clara’s Strategic Plan should be underscored:

• As a "living document," it reflects an intentionally fluid approach to strategic planning—one that assumes goals are continually evolving rather than fixed for a predetermined period of time, as were the goals of the "Plan for 1990–95." We believe that this approach is truer than the traditional planning model to the reality of a constantly changing environment, particularly in Silicon Valley but also in American higher education today.
• It presents a flexible framework of themes and challenges rather than a straitjacket of highly specific objectives. This is reflected in the decision to express the plan’s 11 strategic challenges in the form of questions instead of declarative statements. The inquiry format is intended to invite reflection, engagement, and local initiative. We believe that it is more conducive to fostering a "learning organization" than the traditional format of strategic plans.
• It outlines a unique vision of Santa Clara’s role as an institution that makes student learning central; that educates men and women for "competence, conscience, and compassion;" and that acts as a "community of scholars" in pursuing an integrated approach to education. The plan’s explicit concern with justice poses special challenges for Santa Clara as an institution in society and as a community of scholars. (See Exhibit III.1.17, a report on "The Integration of Justice into the Life of the University.")³

Santa Clara is still refining its approach to strategic planning. An important element of this ongoing refinement is the current self-study for reaffirmation of accreditation.

In fall 1997, the University Planning Council issued a Handbook on Program Planning, Self-Study, and University Accreditation to guide the next phase of planning (Exhibit I.4.3). It outlined a five-step strategic planning implementation process: clarifying goals, taking action, assessing progress, making improvements, and focusing resources. Explicitly linking planning, assessment, and accreditation self-study, the handbook invited broad-based participation by faculty and staff in a review of overall institutional effectiveness in the context of the Strategic Plan as well as a self-examination of the schools, major administrative divisions, and selected academic programs and support services for their effectiveness and alignment with the mission and vision of the University.

The University Planning Council was designated by the President as the coordinating committee for the accreditation self-study and three task forces were charged with evaluating the major elements of the Strategic Plan. This organizational structure is outlined in the Handbook on Program Planning, Self-Study, and University Accreditation.

The aim of this self-study is to examine our effectiveness in achieving the core educational objective of "educating men and women for competence, conscience, and compassion" and to explore questions posed by each of the three initiatives presented in the Strategic Plan: "Building a Community of Scholars," "Providing an Integrated Education," and "Focusing Resources for Excellence."

Chapter I has provided a context for the self-study with a brief history and description of Santa Clara University and a review of the University’s steady movement toward a more coherent and strategic approach to planning.

Chapter II is an examination of how well Santa Clara educates men and women for competence, conscience, and compassion in its degree programs. It incorporates the report of the Task Force on Undergraduate Learning Outcomes, which was charged with identifying key learning outcomes at the undergraduate level. The task force initiated an assessment of how effective Santa Clara is in weaving together the University Core Curriculum, school-specific degree requirements, academic majors, and the co-curriculum to achieve those learning outcomes. Appendix B to the self-study presents a detailed report of the findings related to undergraduate learning outcomes. Since the graduate degree programs are all school-specific, each school was asked to identify the learning outcomes for its graduate program and to examine its effectiveness in relation to those learning outcomes in its school self-study.

Chapters III and IV were prepared by the Task Force on Community of Scholars and Integrated Education. This task force was charged with exploring the effectiveness of the educational practices Santa Clara is using to build a community of scholars and provide an integrated educational experience—the two core initiatives in the Strategic Plan.

Chapter V reviews Santa Clara’s success in developing and aligning its resources with its strategic direction. It constitutes the report of the Task Force on Resources for Excellence, which was charged with exploring how effective Santa Clara is in developing the resources necessary for educational excellence and focusing them more sharply on advancing the University’s vision, mission, and values. The task force examined Santa Clara’s institutional capacity and strategic management of its human resources, physical environment, technology and information resources, and financial resources in relation to the goals identified for each in the Strategic Plan.

Appendix A presents the University’s response to the recommendations of the 1987 accreditation visiting team.

To complement the overall University self-study, each school prepared a self-study report examining its effectiveness in relation to the goals and learning outcomes established by its own strategic plan (Exhibit I.4.6). The Handbook on Program Planning, Self-Study, and University Accreditation outlined the questions schools were asked to address in their self-studies. In addition, selected University academic programs and support services and the two major administrative divisions—Administration and Finance, and University Relations—examined progress in relation to their goals (Exhibits I.4.7 to I.4.9). Certain academic programs and support services were chosen to participate in this initial stage of assessment because of their relationship to the immediate strategic priorities of the University. In this way, the institution could make gradual progress in self-assessment without being overwhelmed and could learn from its own experience. Based on the stage of development of the three centers of distinction, the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics served as the exemplary University center. Because of its recent restructuring under a single umbrella organization and the strategic importance of technology and information resources to the future of the University, Information Services also conducted a thorough self-examination. Enrollment Support Services and Undergraduate Admissions were reviewed during this phase of assessment in relation to the recommendations of the 1995 Enrollment Task Force and their ongoing importance in supporting the University’s efforts to enhance the quality and diversity of its community of scholars. The review of the former Division of Student Affairs provided important information for the University to understand better the organizational challenges of providing a more integrated educational experience for students.

During the last two years Santa Clara has undertaken various campus-wide activities as well as efforts within the schools and individual administrative units to stimulate dialogue and foster a culture of inquiry, evidence, and action. The University dedicated October 20, 1997 to a first-ever, campus-wide planning day. Lee Shulman, President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, kicked off the day with a keynote address to a campus-wide assembly. Several consultants were on campus for the day to work with faculty and staff as they began examining ways to gauge the University’s performance. A similar campus-wide day was set aside in October 1998 to provide faculty and staff time away from their routine responsibilities to focus on planning and assessment activities in their academic or administrative unit. Progress reports from the three University self-study task forces were posted on the Provost’s Web page during spring 1999 for campus comment. Presentations were made by the task force co-chairs to the Faculty Senate Council, Staff Assembly Council, and Student Senate seeking comments and reactions to the preliminary findings of their investigations. In addition, a campus-wide forum was held in mid-May inviting comment from all members of the University community. The Provost’s Council and the President’s Cabinet reviewed successive drafts of the self-study report and provided feedback to each task force. In summer 1999 the President convened a day-long retreat of the vice presidents, deans, vice provosts, and other key campus leaders to refine recommendations emerging from the self-study. Each school and administrative area, in a style and manner appropriate to its culture and organization, engaged faculty and staff in discussions around the emerging results of its self-examination. After submission of the formal self-study report, the University Planning Day in October 1999 will be dedicated to engaging the campus in conversation about the conclusions and recommendations from both the University self-study and the unit self-studies and how to use those findings to focus future strategic actions.

In his 1994 Convocation address, Father Locatelli observed that "in today’s world, we must continually reflect about the meaning of academic excellence, our educational practices, and the value of our Jesuit and Catholic identity. We place the institution at risk if we do not engage in this reflection and let it alter how we approach our work." Those remarks capture the importance to Santa Clara of creating and sustaining a culture of inquiry, evidence, and action dedicated to making the University what it aspires to become.

Please direct comments to wasc@scu.edu : Copyright © 1999 Santa Clara University