David Rose, Chair of Economics.
Thank you for turning the five-year review process into a much more meaningful process than it used to be. I began this process by looking at the last five-year review. It struck me as excessively bureaucratic and as serving only one purpose: pile up a bunch of data to facilitate asking for more positions.
The new approach is much more oriented toward encouraging the department to think about things it should have already been thinking about but, life being what it is, they never get around to thinking about. In any case, working through the process of writing up the review and chatting with faculty about it has occasioned many good ideas from my department and made me feel better about being more proactive about having a good department.
Professors will always have stronger incentives to do research than for teaching because research accomplishments are what gets one outside offers. This means that if we are going to take teaching seriously, then we need to be proactive about it. It wont just happen. The 5 year review quite naturally puts needed attention on teaching.
Glen Cope, Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
The program review, assessment, and re-accreditation processes at the University of Missouri-St. Louis have been merged to create a culture of assessment on the campus that will enhance a process of continuous improvement of student learning outcomes, academic standards and processes, administrative processes, and the review and assessment processes themselves.
James Krueger, Vice Chancellor for Managerial and Technological Services
The participation of MTS units in the five-year review process provided employees with the opportunity to reflect on what the division does, how its does it, and what outcomes the division desires to achieve. MTS personnel will continue to improve collaboration, cooperation and partnerships with stakeholders and customers.
Curtis Coonrod, Vice Provost for Student Affairs
The review process was a very valuable experience for our division as it allowed us to critically analyze what we do on a daily basis and to garner excellent feedback from faculty, staff, and most importantly, students.
Emerson Electric Endowed Professor of Technology and Learning and chair, Campus Review Team
I want to personally thank the members of the committee for all of their hard work, especially Tamara Kratochvil who assembled everyone's notes. We also enjoyed working with Tom Brenneman, Executive Director of IS at UMKC. As you can tell by the report, we were impressed with the quality of the ITS self-study and the response we received from faculty, staff and students.