CTAHR College-Wide Conference 2002 - Pre-Conference Questionnaire Analysis

CTAHR College-Wide Conference: Building A Shared Vision

Pre-Conference Questionnaire Analysis

Summary of the Questions and Objectives from the Conference Questionnaire

Category	Responses (num.)	Responses (%)	Will Stay (num.)	Will Stay (%)
Faculty - Extension	20	20.00%	18	90.00%
Faculty - Instruction	7	7.00%	4	57.14%
Faculty - Research	21	21.00%	18	85.71%
Staff - Administration	11	11.00%	9	81.82%
Staff - County	11	11.00%	8	72.73%
Staff - Department	27	27.00%	17	62.96%
Staff - Other	3	3.00%	3	100.00%
Total	100	100.00%	77	77.00%

Summary of Results from Question 1: “What do you want the College conference to provide to you?”

The most important outcome for CTAHR personnel from the College Conference is the acquisition of a clear idea of the College’s future direction. Forty eight percent of responses expressed this desire. They expect specific information directly from the CTAHR Administration. Another second expressed outcome from the conference focuses on communications. CTAHR personnel want opportunities to network with colleagues, professionally and personally, in order to build teams, forge better relationships and increase commitment to the College. Lastly, some personnel want to receive specific information about CTAHR administrative operations such as purchasing and personnel, programs such as the role of extension vis a vis departments, and communications support such as the role of PIO.

Summary of Results from Question 2: “For the college to thrive in the future, what specific programs/areas of excellence must exist?”

The specific programs/areas to be emphasized by CTAHR can be summarized into three broad categories. They are basic, strategic and applied with integration of REI. In the basic category over nine (9) responses mentioned biotechnology. In the strategic areas/programs category, sixteen (16) mentioned environmental and natural resources (water quality, bioremediation, resource management etc.); ten (10) mentioned community programs (leadership, family resources, Center on the Family and consumer sciences); nine (9) mentioned new product development; eight (8) mentioned sustainable agriculture (IPM, organic etc.); seven (7) mentioned food safety and microbiology; seven (7) mentioned value-added product and processing; and three (3) mentioned livestock production and related products.

In the area of applied research/extension and education category, sixteen (16) mentioned agri-business related areas (marketing, export markets, small business development, entrepreneurship, consumer demand, ag-tourism etc.); eight (8) mentioned nutrition ; eight (8) mentioned distance education, ag-education, graduate program in FCS/Family Resources and four (4) mentioned youth and 4-H program.

Other areas of excellence that were mentioned are forestry, food security, aging, landscape, floriculture, and apiculture. Other non-program areas statements mentioned include: emphasis on tropical agriculture, web-based learning, need to broker various faculty across the College to build teams, reward outputs rather than the individuals and also reward teaching; take a multi-disciplinary approach; link nutrition with the medical school and; need an equitable reward system and be reachable and touchable.

Summary of results from Question 3: “What resources or actions are needed to assure the college’s success?”

Analysis 1	Analysis 2
1. Infrastructure-esp. fiscal	1. Funds for operat., personnel, equip.
2. Money	2. Staffing/Personnel
college grant writer	grant writer
support for PI's grant writing	clerical, faculty, staff
3. Visionary, creative, politically savvy leadership	3. Direction, leadership, focus, priorities
4. Incentives and rewards for good work	4. Attitude - college compact, commitment buy in, unity, values, excellence
5. Focus our efforts	5. Streamlining bureaucracy-esp. fiscal
6. Additional faculty/staff	6. Need rewards and credits
7. Better partnering/collaborating	7. Partnerships within and outside CTAHR
8. Better communication within college	8. Need evaluation/assessment
	9. Need professional development
	10. Need better communication

Summary of results from Question 4
4a. Identify areas in which the college needs to retool its efforts.
4b. Identify areas in which the college needs to reduce its efforts.
4c. Identify areas in which the college needs to eliminate its efforts.

When asked to identify areas the college needs to retool, reduce and eliminate, the faculty and staff respondents recommended improvements in cross-discipline collaboration and integration of R/E/I/Experiment Stations within departments and across the college, including consolidation of underutilized offices and stations, once program visions are focused. Program funding enhanced by staff support for grant-writing, college-wide procedures, such as a hiring handbook, and improved communication between faculty and support staff to facilitate contract tracking and finances were cited by numerous faculty. Strengthening the college capacities for reaching clientele efficiently, including computer technology upgrades, poly-com conferencing, website servicing, and other PIO service roles were recommended. Student recruitment, including up-graded curricula and faculty involvement in targeting students was also a priority.

In the Human Resource/Community Development programs, numerous respondents pointed to the need to examine the role of the college in youth and adult programs, while others called for a reexamination of the urban horticulture programs. Agribusiness efforts at new product development, marketing and diversification for sustainability were a common theme. A need for faculty versed in disciplines, not commodities, was raised. Several respondents pointed to specific needs for areas of excellence in agricultural production, human nutrition, food safety, and environmental resource management.

A wide range of suggestions for improved support functions indicated a frustration with the current situation, including a need to identify the logs from the loggers, accountability, policy clarification, incentives for retirement of personnel, a need for retraining of others, a balancing of workload among instructional faculty, financial rewards for good work, reduction of paperwork, and communication issues between colleagues.

Summary of Strategic Plan Objectives

Because Objectives 1, 2 and 9 have been achieved, written summaries were not provided for 1 and 9.

Based on the following statistical analysis, bolded objectives (8, 12, 13, 14, 20, 22, 23, 24) were those identified as continuing to be of high priority.

	Objective	No. Responses	% #1 Response	=	Relative Priority
1	reorganize faculty skills	16	75%	=	12
2	create staff for new depts.	4	50%	=	2
3	teaching task force	17	53%	=	9
4	distance learning	13	62%	=	8
5	double enrollment	18	50%	=	9
6	4 year & out	54	22%	=	12
7	student career development	53	26%	=	14
8	leadership / rewards	50	44%	=	22
9	eliminate HITAHR	44	23%	=	10
10	integrate across UH system	55	31%	=	17
11	giving campaign	49	22%	=	11
12	industry analysis	52	52%	=	27
13	partnerships with agencies	50	40%	=	20
14	infrastructure needs	51	35%	=	18
15	establish off-campus learning centers	53	25%	=	13
16	stakeholder input	52	25%	=	13
17	support for post-docs	52	13%	=	7
18	faculty exchange	53	13%	=	7
19	international agreements	51	6%	=	3
20	develop relationships w/ clientele	54	33%	=	18
21	CTAHR commo w/ b/ clientele	54	26%	=	14
22	"fee for service, county budgets"	52	37%	=	19
23	urban services-hort/family	54	35%	=	19
24	PIO	53	43%	=	23

Low Priority			High Priority
2 – 7	8 – 12	13 – 17	18 – 23	Ranges
4	7	5	8	(= 24n)

*Relative Priority = (No. Responses) (% of #1 Responses/100)

Written Summaries of Objectives

Goal 1 – Restructure academic and non-academic programs (includes objectives 1-achieved, 2-achieved, 3 and 4)

Objective 2: Seek administrative and departmental support staff input to assist in the development of the new departments.
Mean=2.25
Responses=4
Most felt that this objective was completed. It was felt that it needs to be evaluated and fine-tuned. It was also felt that we now have only half the amount of clerical staff. Support and administrative staff are not involved in program content.

Objective 3: Task force for teaching and learning
17 responses
Mean=2.06
The general feeling is that this has been started already. There is a need for support/funds and rewards. There is also a need to implement the recommendations from a task force and not have it filed somewhere.

Objective 4: Make undergraduate and graduate programs and short courses available electronically to meet the needs of learners in Hawaii, the Pacific, Asia, and beyond.
Mean=1.54
Responses=13
Very positive overall. It will benefit neighbor island faculty. It will develop partnerships with Hawaii, Pacific, Asia. It will make money and CTAHR will have world-wide exposure. Information will be accessible and timely. Can develop certificate program for alumni.
It will be costly and there's a need for accountability. It is time-consuming and there is no method to measure impact. Faculty will need support. Copyright of materials and supplies will also need consideration.

Goal 2 – Recruit and retain students (includes objectives5, 6 and 7)

Objective 5: Increase undergraduate enrollment
18 responses
Mean=2.06
Many felt that this is an unrealistic goal, especially within the time line and the 100% increase. Questions arose on how to manage the increased number of undergraduates with the limited number of faculty. With the increase in enrollment, it was noted that it is also a way to obtain more monies to CTAHR in the future.

Objective 6: Class availability
54 responses
Mean=2.15
Distance education was mentioned as a way to make classes available. Budget cuts have affected the number of faculty who teach those classes. One felt that it was not a good idea to rush students through, that taking the extra semester might be beneficial to many students.

Objective 7: Career development, placement, and postgraduate learning coordinator
53 responses
Mean=2.08
It was felt that career placement is important and will help with recruitment. It is also a good way to gain college alumni and support. Someone stated, "Productively employed students is our greatest legacy."

Goal 3 – Restructure administration and staff (includes objectives 8 and 9-achieved)

Objective 8. Structure College administration to lead by example, provide maximum opportunity for faculty and staff to exercise leadership, and share responsibilities and rewards.
Fifty individuals responded; 23 ranked it at the highest priority. The median rank was 2 within the 1-5 scale. There is an overwhelming feeling among respondents providing rationales for their ranking that the objective has not been met and that it is the administrations responsibility to see that it is. Fourteen of the 16 individuals who provided rationales for their ranking ranked this objective at the highest priority and 10 of the eleven who commented on whether the objective has been met indicted that it has not.

Other individuals simply concur that this is a logical objective and important to them.

Goal 4 – Strengthen alliances (includes objectives 10 and 11)

Objective 10. Integrate the agricultural, environmental, natural, and human ecology educational system in Hawaii, involving other schools at UH Manoa, the College of Agriculture and U of H Hilo, and UH’s community colleges.
Sixty four percent of respondents ranked this objective as a 1 or 2 on the 1-5 scale. While there was no consistent rationale among respondents for their ranking one view seemed more prevalent than others. That is, better integration of CTAHR with other programs will reduce duplication of effort, conserve resources and reduce competition for funds while enhancing program effectiveness.

Objective 11. Hire a College development officer to initiate and implement a giving campaign, coordinating with the UH Alumni Association, CTAHR Alumni Association, and the dean.
This objective was not highly ranked by faculty and staff. It had a median rank of 3 and only 22% of respondents rated it a high priority. Respondent narratives of rationales did not have a clear theme. The most frequent response was to stress the need for non-grant sources of funds to carryout the College’s programs.

Goal 5 - Create economic opportunities for Hawaii (includes objectives 12-17)

Objective 12: Develop procedure to ID needs and priorities for future research, allow clients to provide leadership and to partner in costs. (1-rating, 38% [20])
This objective generated the most comments.
Supporting statements:

Need to have needs assessment process and develop priorities to determine direction for research and extension programs and funding
Process must involve industry/stakeholders to create “buy in”
Partnering in costs by stakeholders to show their commitment

Concerns:

Lack of funds
Industry Analysis process is too commodity specific

Objective 13: Development of interdisciplinary, intercollegiate, interagency, and regional research/learning/outreach teams to respond to state needs and emerging issues. (1-rating, 40%[20])
Comments were diverse, with maybe two matching.
Supporting statements:

CTAHR would improve its visibility
Partnering to have larger more significant programs

Concerns:

HARC seen as competitor

Objective 14: Infrastructure to support research. ( 1-rating, 35%[18])
Mostly individual comments, with maybe two matching.
Supporting statements:

Good research necessary for CTAHR’s reputation and to attract students and faculty
Funding and prioritization needed

Concerns:

Poor condition of current infrastructure
Need funding
Need to prioritize
Need research facilitator to assist with the grant process, budgets, etc.

Objective 15: Consolidation of off-campus facilities into multi-purpose centers. (1-rating, 25%[13])
Supporting statements:

Partnering to share resources
Need for quality centers and facilities

Objective 16: Develop infrastructure so clients can participate in setting priorities for funding of research and learning opportunities, and commodity-specific personnel. (1-rating, 25% [5])
Supporting statements:

Stakeholder input is important for relevant services and for funding from government sources

Objective 17: Bolster capabilities of college to engage in fundamental research, including short-term post doctoral positions to allow infusion of emerging technologies. (1-rating, 13% [7])
Overall, not strongly supported. More comments were not in favor of this idea.
Supporting statements:

Good idea and an essential investment

Concerns:

Less expensive ways to gain information on emerging technology

THEMES for Objectives 12-17:

Develop a needs assessment procedure for industry and college to work together.
Develop interdisciplinary, intercollegiate, interagency, and regional research/learning/outreach teams to respond to critical state needs and emerging opportunities.
Along with the above two items, establish the necessary infrastructure to support the college’s research efforts.

Goal 6 (International) – Improve access to international resources, especially in the Asia-Pacific region (includes objectives 18 and 19)

Objective 18. Develop an exchange and visiting scholars program.
Objective 19. Strengthen existing, relevant international agreements and enter into new ones where appropriate.
Our identity, in Hawaii, is multicultural, tropical and international, with an Asian/Pacific focus. The context we work in is increasingly international. Our programs must show this and develop this area. We have an opportunity and demand for this, from students and other clients.

Goal 7 – Improve information exchange (includes objectives 20 and 24)

As the foundation upon which the Land Grant mission is based, extension activities are critical to the viability of CTAHR. Thus, initiative 3, “[t]ransfer useful knowledge responsively to the community at large,” and goal 7, “[i]mprove information exchange,” of our current strategic plan “is essential to fulfilling the University’s and College’s Land Grant mission” (CTAHR Strategic Plan, 1999–2004, p. 13).

Objectives 20–24, which all fall under initiative 3 and goal 7, address issues related to CTAHR’s relationship with its stakeholders, as well as those that enable CTAHR to better serve them.

The relatively high percentage of “highly relevant” ratings these objectives were given by respondents indicate a need for CTAHR to improve its capacity to make the knowledge generated herein more accessible. It is also indicative of the need for CTAHR to ensure that the knowledge it generates meets the identified needs of its stakeholders.

In analyzing the rationales given by respondents, the following themes emerge:

Communication between CTAHR and its stakeholders, and among members of CTAHR, must improve.
Partnerships between and among the same must be established and maintained.
Dissemination of information generated by the college must improve.
The infrastructure needed for entrepreneurial activities must be developed.

Combined with an overview of the responses to the other survey questions, these themes reveal that in order for the college to remain viable into the 21st century, it must not only make better use of current and emerging technologies to improve communication and share its knowledge with the world, it must also become a place of true community, where collaboration is the rule rather than the exception.

Click here to download a pdf of this analysis.

Contacts:
Catherine Chan-Halbrendt: chanhalb@hawaii.edu, 956-8131
Barry Brennan: brennanb@admin.ctahr.hawaii.edu, 956-8397

Last updated on 12/11/02