Why Do We Need an AMP?
How it differs from the strategic plan, campus master plan, and ups
February 25, 2016
Over the past few weeks, CSUF Provost José Cruz has described some of the variables under consideration as the campus continues work to establish the University's first-ever Academic Master Plan (AMP). This is part two on what is an academic master plan and what does it mean.
How will the AMP impact the University’s decisions and actions?
The plan will be reviewed by members of the PRBC (Planning, Resource and Budget Committee). This committee, in turn, will submit their recommendations to the president. President Mildred García will use these recommendations — taking into account internal/external considerations — to create the annual budget letter outlining the University’s fiscal and operational priorities for the year.
How is the AMP being developed?
It is a three-stage process. In the first stage, the PRBC recommended developing an AMP to provide long-term guidance for the University. During the 2014–15 academic year, the Office of Academic Programs, the chair of the Academic Senate, the Academic Senate Executive Committee, the president of Associated Students Inc., the ASI Board, PRBC and the Council of Chairs produced a draft plan. The draft was circulated to the entire campus for feedback in March 2015. The President’s Advisory Board then recommended approval of a draft revised to reflect campus feedback.
During the second stage, members of a steering committee and four subcommittees were appointed to address questions presented in the draft. Progress reports from the AMP Committee were published on the AMP website.
The third stage focuses on refining the draft and then presenting it to the campus.
How were the members of the AMP Committee selected?
Members of the AMP Committee, including the steering committee and subcommittees, were appointed by President García based on recommendations and nominations from the Council of Deans, the chair of the Academic Senate, the Academic Senate Executive Committee and the provost. Membership on each of the four AMP subcommittees was expanded to include additional faculty representation based on feedback from the campus community.
Will the AMP be vetted by the campus community?
There will continue to be multiple opportunities for the campus community to provide feedback.
Later this semester, the first complete draft of the AMP will be shared for comments and input. The campus community may submit anonymous feedback via the AMP website or they may choose to participate in a public, online dialogue.
In early fall, the second complete draft of the AMP will be shared campuswide for additional feedback. In mid/late fall, a revised draft of the AMP will be submitted to the ASI Board, Academic Senate Executive Committee and division heads for comments and endorsement.
Finally, by December, a revised complete draft of the AMP will be shared with the President’s Advisory Board to review and endorse.
The hope is that all members of the campus community will be active and engaged participants throughout the AMP development process.
For more information or the latest updates, visit fullerton.edu/amp