Invitation & Schedule

Previous Mission Statement
New Mission Statement

Speakers' Commentary
Dr. Rich Becherer
Dr. Ron Cox
Dr. Debbie Ingram
Dr. Wilfred McClay
Dr. Mark Mendenhall
Dr. Gail M. Meyer
Dr. Irven Resnick
Dr. David Sachsman
Dr. James Tucker
Dr. Kim Wheetley
Dr. Michael Whittle

Review Session Summaries
September 20, 2001
September 26, 2001

Thoughts on Revision of UTC's Mission Statement

Wilfred M. McClay
SunTrust Chair of Excellence in Humanities

Let me begin with several disclaimers. First there is the fact that I have only been at UTC for two years, which likely means that I still have a rather superficial knowledge of the campus and its workings. I'll certainly speak my mind on this occasion, but with the knowledge that my comments may well reflect incomplete information, and in the hope that you'll forgive the inadequacies of a relative newcomer's reflections. Of course, there is also the chance that such reflections may offer a perspective that is harder for long-time insiders to achieve, and I offer them in that hope.

In addition, I have to admit to a considerable skepticism about the value of mission statements. They are especially problematic for academic institutions, which are for a variety of reasons resistant to business (or military) models of management. Moreover, every university in the contemporary world is a multiversity, in which there are far too many separate tasks and agencies and goals at work to fit them all comfortably under a single rubric. Hence, academic mission statements are necessarily long, diffuse, windy, and unwieldy creations, constructed more with a view toward satisfying internal (and external) constituencies than as a genuine management tool. When I was on the faculty of Tulane University, I served on an institution-wide strategic-planning committee which drafted mission statements for the university and each of its divisions. This seemed to me an unusually profitless process, since at best-and the process was rarely working at its best-we were merely providing a descriptive codification of what the respective divisions were already doing.

However, it is always a good thing to take time out to think strategically and long-term about an institution's evolution, and so there is some potential good to be had from this process. At this point comes my third disclaimer, though, which is that I think UTC's existing mission statement is a good one, not much in need of revision. I know that's unhelpful, but that is how it seems to me. Indeed, the only good reason I can imagine for revising the mission statement, other than an externally imposed requirement to do so, would involve a significant change in the university's core activities. Hence, in what follows, I have preferred to think concretely about specific initiatives that I believe would make both plausible and salutary improvements in the UTC environment. How these suggestions might be incorporated into the mission statement is a question that would come later, if the initiatives I suggest were to be embraced.

*****

I have often heard the same question uttered in conversations with people in the community and region about UTC, including several individuals who either are already donors to the university or are potential ones. The question goes more or less like this: "Why can't UTC aspire to be a little Chapel Hill?" The natural response of those of us who know something about higher education, and know what is required to establish and support a world-class research university of the caliber of UNC, is a laugh, or a gently condescending brush-off. But I think that such a reaction is not only impolitic, but wrong. It is easy to tick off all the reasons why such an aspiration is unrealistic. But nevertheless there is something valid and important behind the question, and not only the fact that every great achievement begins with a great aspiration. These individuals want their university, this city's university, to have a visible mark of academic distinction. They want their university to have something extraordinary about it, something they can point to as a source of civic pride, something that can have national visibility. This is by no means an unreasonable desire. Neither it is goal that is unachievable. On the contrary, we should be grateful for such patrons and constituents, who will push us to do better than we do now. The question is, what can we do, or propose to do, that will answer their hopes? If we cannot be a little Chapel Hill, what can we do?

*****

One thing that we could do, which would be well within the current mission and means of this university, would be to create an Honors College at UTC. Such an institution would fit well with the principal mission of UTC, which is the education of undergraduates. It would fill a gaping void in the Chattanooga area, which lacks a nationally visible selective college (one has to go an hour away to Sewanee to find one). If done properly, it would make UTC stand out from all its peer institutions. And it would be financially feasible, since it would not entail the massive infrastructural investments that a "little Chapel Hill" would entail. It would be a very low-cost, institutionally sensible way of putting UTC on the national map.

Let me itemize some of the possible distinctives of this Honors College, as I conceive it:

• It would not be merely an expansion of the existing university honors program, although that would certainly be one way of bringing it into existence. Instead, it would be a genuine honors college, with its own institutional distinctiveness, its own Dean and staff, created alongside our existing structure of undergraduate studies, built around a highly demanding, comprehensive, innovative, and integrated curriculum.
• It would feature a small core of designated core faculty, and a larger group of faculty fellows and distinguished visitors who would teach courses in the Honors College.
• Ideally, it should have a physically distinct setting, including a residential component and a distinct academic building, and should foster an intense pattern of academic, semi-academic, and social activities to build a keen sense of community and esprit de corps.
• It should be small enough to be intimate, but large enough to have the critical mass needed to be collegiate in character. Probably a student body of 200-300 would be optimal.
• Students should be offered extremely strong financial incentives to attend the UTC Honors College, such as unusually attractive scholarships and even stipendiary support, sufficient to attract the very best students in the region, those who would normally go to highly selective private colleges such as Vanderbilt, Sewanee, Emory, Davidson, and the like as a matter of course.

This concept is by no means unprecedented. There are existing analogues to it in various public institutions. The most successful that I know of is James Madison College at Michigan State, which might well provide us with a reliable model in setting up such an institution. There are residential colleges at Rutgers and the University of Michigan, and some of the larger honors programs at large flagship universities such as the University of Texas, which have honors dormitories and other perquisites, perhaps approach it. The University of Louisville has a honors leadership program which offers huge financial incentives to lure students. But what I have in mind would be something perhaps even more ambitious.

The goal would be simply to be to create within a public, metropolitan university an undergraduate educational unit that is academically competitive, in every sense, with the most prestigious private institutions in the region and country. Such an honors college, if successful, would be highly visible, indeed would attract national attention. But it would be a natural extension of the university's current mission, and its existing strengths. We would not be trying to produce fruit that is not of our kind. I think it is highly a feasible goal, and could yield enormous dividends for this university, even in divisions that would have nothing to do with the work of an Honors College.

Moreover, the time is right for such an initiative. We see a growing popularity of honors programs at public universities, due partly to their improving quality, and also due to the astronomical and rising cost of private tuition, both of which have led students, especially those of modest means, to seek alternatives to the crippling debt load that a private college education increasingly promises to entail. Private college and university tuitions are out of proportion with reality, and plenty of highly talented students (and their parents) are looking at alternatives. We can offer them one.

There will be understandable objections to such a plan. Some will view it with suspicion, as a departure from our university's past emphasis on access, outreach, utility to the city-its "public" functions as a metropolitan university. An Honors College may seem at best an elitist institution, cut off from the rest of the university, and at worst a possible source of division and demoralization for existing programs and faculty. The resources going into an Honors College, it will be said, could be more usefully deployed in existing programs. One thinks of the debates over the concept of "magnet schools" in primary and secondary public education. In some ways, this would be a similar debate.

I think these are important concerns, and they point to the need to do such a thing carefully. But they can be answered. There are many ways that UTC can enhance Chattanooga, and is already doing so. But one of the chief ways we can enhance this city is to give it pride in having one of the most outstanding and distinctive institutions in the country. This is what is meant by the desire for "a little Chapel Hill," and that desire is, as I've argued, worthy of our respect.
Furthermore, an Honors College is fully compatible with the existing mission of UTC; indeed, the presence of a substantial group of very high achievers in our midst could raise the bar and raise self-expectations for all of our students (and faculty). It could have an invigorating effect on everything we do.

I leave open the precise character of the Honors College curriculum, but I think it is vital for it to have a particular intellectual or disciplinary or pedagogical focus, rather than being merely a collection of high-octane courses within the usual curricular distribution. In other words, there should be a genuine curriculum, rather than a mere course distribution. Hard choices would need to be made, for the curriculum could be done in a variety of ways. It could be a Great Books curriculum. It could revolve around Urban Studies, with Chattanooga as a kind of laboratory for study. It could focus upon natural sciences, technology, and engineering. There are other possibilities. Making such a choice would require a careful assessment of the existing strengths and weaknesses of our existing faculty and programs. We don't want to invent the wheel. We want to build on what we already have. And we can't do everything.

In the end, an Honors College could provide the kind of top-flight educational opportunity for students of modest economic means that is now largely unavailable to them. Indeed, it could provide something far superior to the selective colleges, precisely because the composition of its student body would escape from the same upper-middle-class socioeconomic profile that is such a fixture in the student body of nearly all expensive selective institutions. It could have an uplifting effect on our current student body, provide an exciting opportunity for some of our more dedicated faculty, and provide a highly visible mark of distinction for the university of this city. It would not be a "little Chapel Hill," but it might be something even better, precisely because it lies within our means. I believe it is worth thinking about, and submit the idea for your consideration.