�ٺ���Ƶ

�ٺ���Ƶ should increase its enrollment of national and international students in the coming years, but it should carefully consider any increases in its enrollment of California students “unless accompanied by commensurate increases in funding from the state,” according to a new report on the .

The summarizes the discussions and findings of three panels that examined whether and how �ٺ���Ƶ should expand in size, enrollment and faculty in the coming decade.

The report recommends that �ٺ���Ƶ “proceed with planning for growth, but should not proceed with implementation until a strategy is defined that supports a high quality educational experience for all students and maintains excellence in the research and service missions of the university.”

Regardless of the ultimate mix of California, national and international students that make up the formula for enrollment growth, the report says, “Significant enrollment increases should not occur without first addressing existing academic resource deficiencies and creating a strong foundation for growth.”

Growth in enrollment should proceed only “if a model can be developed that results in increased financial stability of the university,” the report recommends.

Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor Ralph J. Hexter said the report presents a very thoughtful analysis of the opportunities and challenges created by enrollment growth. “We look forward to expanding the conversation to the broader campus community to be sure we have appropriately considered all the issues,” he said.

The broader campus community, including alumni, neighbors and others, is now invited to review the entire report and provide feedback to Hexter about the ideas presented. Comments should be sent by email to future@ucdavis.edu.

In addition, 2020 project leaders Ken Burtis, faculty adviser to the chancellor and provost, and Karl Mohr, interim assistant executive vice chancellor, along with members of the task forces, will meet with campus constituencies to present the report and solicit feedback.

“We hope the campus community will take the time to read the report and provide feedback,” Burtis said.  “The issues discussed are complex and of critical importance to the future of �ٺ���Ƶ. It is important to hear multiple perspectives to make sure that nothing has been overlooked.”

Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi the 2020 Initiative at the Fall Convocation in September 2011, suggesting at the time that undergraduate enrollment growth of about 5,000 students might be one means to address a number of important campus aspirations: maintaining access to �ٺ���Ƶ, internationalizing the campus, deepening and broadening campus intellectual capacity, and perhaps most important, creating a more stable financial foundation in the face of declining state funding support.

In January, three task forces went to work on specific issues related to growth:

• Academic Resources — How should investments in academic resources be directed?
• Enrollment Management — How can the campus attract, retain and ensure success for the best possible students?
• Facilities Planning — What new facilities would be needed to appropriately support enrollment growth?

Interestingly, few issues remained solely within the domain of one task force. For example, the need for additional classroom space depends on the methods of teaching and instruction in different disciplines, and on the desired student experiences. So, simple statistics on classroom use cannot be the sole consideration in deciding whether to build additional, large lecture halls, or smaller, flexibly configured teaching spaces.

“Hiring of faculty and staff and construction of new facilities should occur in advance of or simultaneous with growth in the number of students,” the report says, “so that the academic experience does not suffer, and realistic estimates of the cost of these investments should be included in the final revenue models for growth to ensure adequate support.”

In this respect, according to the report, the campus’s highest priorities should include:

• Reversing impediments to timely student progress (by increasing course availability and developing more comprehensive and coordinated student advising services).
• Reversing recent trends in faculty-student ratios.
• General improvements in campus infrastructure.