©
Money talks, and rewrites mission statements
The Facts: Under Chancellor Woodson’s new initiative of the Strategic Plan for the vision of N.C. State for the next 10 years, N.C. State’s mission statement will be revised to generalize the previously lengthy mission statement. The new mission statement is under review before it goes to the Board of Trustees, and then to the Board of Governors for approval.
Our Opinion: The amount of bureaucracy this revision must go through should demonstrate the importance and power of this statement. Because of this, it is important for administration and the Strategic Planning Committee to ensure N.C. State’s historical core values are upheld.
The current mission statement reads: “The mission of North Carolina State University is to serve its students and the people of North Carolina as a doctoral/research-extensive, land-grant university. Through the active integration of teaching, research, extension, and engagement, North Carolina State University creates an innovative learning environment that stresses mastery of fundamentals, intellectual discipline, creativity, problem solving, and responsibility. Enhancing its historic strengths in agriculture, science, and engineering with a commitment to excellence in a comprehensive range of academic disciplines, North Carolina State University provides leadership for intellectual, cultural, social, economic, and technological development within the state, the nation, and the world.”
The new proposed mission statement reads: “As a comprehensive, research-extensive university with strengths in science and technology, North Carolina State University is dedicated to excellent teaching, the creation and application of knowledge, and engagement with public and private partners. Our integrated approach to problem solving transforms lives and provides leadership for social, economic, and technological development within the state, the nation, and the world.“
We have continually heard Chancellor Woodson refer to his changes to certain programs of our University as historically realigning the school with its traditional values at almost every student success forum he has held. Administrators assured the student body, while the statement may be changing, the core values will remain the same. However, in contrast to the current mission statement, the proposed revision does not mention N.C. State’s founding strength as an agricultural institution. Woodson, along with his Strategic Planning Committee, appears so focused on the benefits and publicity which comes from the more technological majors, they are changing these core values.
As the potential mission statement explains the strengths of the University, it conveniently leaves out the historical significance of being a land-grant University. It also cuts out the inclusion of our “commitment to excellence in a comprehensive range of academic disciplines.” These missing points create a more vague meaning for N.C. State, which provide opportunities for the chancellor and other administrators to use it to justify actions, like cutting programs not in the implied definitions of science and technology.
The mission statement is the leading purpose of N.C. State University. With it administrators are able to justify any actions they take as lining up with the University mission statement. It also allows us to hold administrators accountable for going against the mission statement. Statement revisions should not be taken lightly; administrators should work with students to include what they believe it should say. Administrators should not use this opportunity to improve our University to justify their previous mistakes to balance out the budget, but rather approach it as a chance to get back on track.
Many administrators dealing with these revisions say the revisions have not even been passed yet and the discussion of this topic is “putting the cart before the horse;” however, this is the exact opposite. Since these revisions are still up for review we have the opportunity to voice how we feel about the changes done to the statement, as well as what we would like to see in it. This would call for administrators to actually listen to the students and keep their word on sticking to their beloved historical realignment.