We need specificity from the provost

The provost released the five-year Strategic Plan for IU last week. The draft is a fairly quick read, and I have very few problems with what it entails.

However, it is just vague enough that I’m not actually sure what it is I’m looking at.
I agree with many of the provost’s goals. The administration wants to focus on international students, diploma completion, the success and safety of undergraduates and the attractiveness and renown of graduate schools and degrees. I can get behind that 100 percent.

However, the language of the Strategic Plan could lend itself to multiple interpretations.
There’s a lot of “we will” and not enough “this is how.”

As it stands, it sort of sounds like the administration’s goals at the beginning of every school year — good for a bit but not extensive enough to span the five-year stretch.
In order to ensure real change, I’d like to see some specifics.

How is it IU will “create a set of pathways that span the liberal arts and the professional schools” or “enhance the academic and life success for our students through high-quality and technologically-enabled advising”?

That could mean anything from replacing administrative computers with Macbooks to having classes taught by robots.

That’s a range of possibilities that I’m not comfortable with.
I do, however, understand the language right now can’t lend itself to specificity until the Office of the Provost narrows its goals.

And, as is the way with politics and any administrative change, it needs to sound productive enough to pass but not finalized enough to scare people away.

But the Provost has asked for the student body’s input on this plan.

This is a chance for students’ voices to be heard, and we need to use it.

This is not an invitation to go and bash the Strategic Plan, though. I absolutely agree IU needs to update current policies and emphasize a focus on student
success.

But now that we have a framework in place, we need to figure out how we will build around it.

In her message from the provost, Robel assures the IU Bloomington community that commentary will,  “guide my revisions as I prepare to submit the plan to President McRobbie.”

This is an invitation we shouldn’t ignore.

We need to, as a whole, fully participate in future planning.

We need to narrow down and make it a step-by-step process. Otherwise, the administration will move forward with a vague list of maybes without a clear idea of what exactly students want and need.

That’s why it’s called a draft — there’s room for
improvement.

­— ewenning@indiana.edu
Follow columnist
Emma Wenninger
on Twitter
@EmmaWenninger.