The creation of the University's newest long-range strategic plan took another step toward its completion Thursday, as Provost Peter Lange presented his latest draft to the Academic Council.
The wide-ranging plan, incorporating 18 months of work, will serve as a blueprint for the growth of the University over the next five to 10 years. Like the long-range plans that have preceded it, the proposal states goals and priorities that promise to influence nearly every aspect of Duke life.
Although some of the plan's goals are very broad-integrating teaching and research, promoting interdisciplinarity and building an excellent faculty in every school-others are more targeted; the plan includes, for example, a focus on investment in the natural sciences and information technology. Altogether, the proposal suggests $660 million in appropriations, about half of which will go to the natural sciences.
Facilities and maintenance will account for $503 million of the spending. "Perhaps no issue has emerged as powerfully as the inadequacy of our facilities," Lange said. In addition to $260 million in funding sources already identified, Lange hopes to add another $255 million from The Campaign for Duke, "quasi-endowment" money and bond issues.
Lange will present the long-range strategic plan to the Board of Trustees this weekend. He expects the final draft to be completed for February's final votes by the Academic Council and the trustees.
Stuart Rojstaczer, associate professor of earth and ocean sciences, expressed disappointment in the plan, calling it "unintellectual" and biased toward money-making research. "Why universities are engaging in this arms race so that we have boys with more toys is really unknown to me," he said.
Lange declined to respond to Rojstaczer's comments, saying Rojstaczer's assertions mischaracterized the plan's motives.
John Staddon, James B. Duke professor of psychology, and Barbara Shaw, professor of chemistry, both voiced concerns about how new research funding will affect faculty. Specifically they asked whether encouraging more grants and creating new research positions would alienate senior faculty or those in areas where research grants are less available. Lange assured faculty that money and grant productivity will not be factors in determining privileges such as space allocations.
IN OTHER BUSINESS: The council unanimously passed a resolution on the structure and new name of the Nicholas School of the Environment, although the preceding discussion was far from harmonious. Continuing debate from the council's Nov. 16 meeting, Rojstaczer criticized the integration of the division of Earth and Ocean Sciences into the school.
"What we are doing with the division of Earth and Ocean Sciences in the NSOE is something that no other major university is doing and it's perpetuating mediocrity in EOS at Duke University," he said.
Lange and NSOE Dean Norm Christensen defended the proposal, citing feedback from faculty and increased enrollment in EOS classes and in the number of majors. "The notion that we are singling out EOS for scapegoating for the impoverished natural sciences is ludicrous," Lange said. "There are historical reasons for all of this."
If passed by the Board of Trustees this weekend, the plan will structure the school's faculty into three branches, include all faculty in tenure decisions and will rename the school the Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.