Chapter 9 zooms in on the “group logic” that makes a higher education institution run—its administrative units, committees, clubs and organizations, stakeholder and demographic groups, and even external peer/comparison groups. It shows readers how to model these structures in the Sentient Knowledge Map (SKM) using clear schemas, so roles, responsibilities, and scope of impact are visible—not assumed. Along the way, the chapter demonstrates how to propose and test alternative administrative and committee structures (especially using backward design), integrate units and committees into an institutional model, and track changes over time with a practical change-management tagging approach. Because higher education is a service enterprise, the chapter also emphasizes mapping who each group serves and how decisions and structures affect different populations. The result is a more transparent, discussable blueprint of how the institution is organized—one that supports stakeholder input before changes become permanent, and lets leaders learn from other institutions through shared resources in the SKM library.

• Explain the distinct types of groups that are an important part of a higher education institution (HEI).
• Create schemas for the various groups needed to run a HEI effectively.
• Construct a proposed administrative structure for a HEI.
• Usefully integrate an organizational unit into an institutional model.
• Effectively implement a group change management tracking process.
• Usefully integrate committees into an institutional model.
• Explain the types of roles and scope of impact that committees can have within a HEI.
• Construct a proposed committee structure for a HEI.
• Usefully integrate demographic groups into an institutional model.
• Construct a proposed demographic group structure for a HEI.

Chapter 10 focuses on the most important “metrics” in higher education: the ones that measure student learning. It explains why clear learning goals and measurable learning outcomes are essential for defining what students should know and be able to do at each degree level, and how to write strong Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) using the appropriate level of Bloom’s Taxonomy. The chapter also introduces established frameworks like the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) and the Tuning initiatives as useful guides for setting outcomes across credentials and programs, and clarifies key distinctions—curriculum vs. co-curriculum vs. extra-curriculum, general vs. liberal education, and why Honors outcomes should be meaningfully different. Readers learn how institutional, college, and departmental goals cascade into programs, how Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs) progressively build toward PLOs (often aligned with course level), and how outcomes can be mapped to design coherent sequences, prerequisites, and shared courses that support majors, Gen Ed, and Honors. The result is a practical approach to building curriculum maps and designing credentials that are intentionally structured for maximum student learning.

• Compose program learning outcomes (PLO) based on the Bloom’s Taxonomy level that is most appropriate for the credential/degree.
• Guide the development of learning goals and outcomes for the entire curriculum of the institution.
• Explain what the Degree Qualification Profile (DQP) and the Tuning initiatives are, and how they might aid an institution in setting learning outcomes for various degree levels and programs.
• Explain the difference between the curriculum, the co-curriculum, and the extra-curriculum.
• Explain the difference between general and liberal education.
• Explain why and how Honor’s PLOs should differ from outcomes within traditional programs.
• Discuss the potential sources of information on which PLOs could be based.
• Explain how institutional, college, and departmental learning goals are incorporated into programs.
• Explain the relationship between program and course learning outcomes (CLOs), between the level of a course (100,200, etc.) and Bloom’s level, and how CLOs progressively develop toward achievement of the program outcome.
• Explain how CLOs can be aggregated to form courses with appropriate co- and pre-requisites.
• Explain how a course might support learning outcomes from multiple programs such as the major, Gen. Ed., and Honors.
• Create a curriculum map for a credential.

Chapter 11 tackles a part of institutional complexity that students feel immediately and campuses struggle to manage quietly in the background: how courses are planned, revised, scheduled, and clearly communicated through the many moving parts of course sections. It shows how to integrate courses and sections into an institutional model (including a practical change-management tracking process) so decisions about redesign, approvals, and implementation don’t disappear into email threads and committee minutes. Readers learn how Sentient Knowledge Map tools can support planning for course delivery periodicity, flag special-purpose or program-authorized courses, and document special relationships between courses (such as linked sequences or shared requirements). The chapter also emphasizes how sections add another layer of variability—capturing delivery modes and term lengths, instructor-specific pedagogical and assessment approaches, and skill-focused course designations—so stakeholders can understand what is being offered, why it is offered that way, and how changes ripple across programs and schedules.

• Usefully integrate courses and sections into an institutional model.
• Effectively implement a course change management tracking process.
• Use the SKM tools to plan course delivery periodicity.
• Track special purpose, program authorized, and courses with special relationships to other courses.
• Designate and track special skill-based courses.
• Designate and track delivery modes, term lengths, pedagogical and assessment methodologies within sections.

Chapter 12 focuses on managing a university’s curricular “portfolio” as a living system—one that must evolve intentionally without outpacing faculty capacity or institutional resources. It shows how to quantify the breadth and depth of program offerings, compare the size of the curriculum to what the faculty body can realistically deliver, and build an evidence-based plan for curricular evolution that includes a clear pipeline of programs at different stages (idea, development, launch, growth, and phase-out). The chapter also introduces practical ways to analyze program markets and align resource allocation with real timing—funding new program ramp-up while responsibly sunsetting programs that no longer fit demand or mission. Finally, it addresses the outcomes that matter most to students and institutions alike: improving student throughput, reducing time to degree, and strengthening graduation rates by designing programs that are both academically coherent and operationally sustainable.

• Quantify breadth and depth of program offerings.
• Appraise the size of the curriculum against the instructional capacity of the faculty body.
• Compose a plan for the evolution of the curriculum and develop a pipeline of programs in various stages of development.
• Analyze markets for programs.
• Plan resource allocation for program development in synchrony with program phase out and new program ramp up.
• Discuss how student throughput and graduation rates can be improved in academic programs.

Chapter 13 takes on a surprisingly common problem in higher education: teaching space is often assigned by habit, politics, or legacy schedules—not by what instructors and students actually need. This chapter shows how to integrate rooms into an institutional model using clear schemas that describe each space and its component systems, so facilities information becomes searchable, shareable, and decision-ready. Readers learn which instructional features matter most for effective teaching and learning (from layout and sightlines to technology, acoustics, and accessibility), and how to build a practical database that helps match faculty needs to the classrooms that best support their methods. The chapter also introduces a space change-management tracking process and explains how classifying spaces by purpose can reveal patterns in allocation—creating the data foundation for more transparent, defensible decisions and better use of instructional facilities across campus.

• Create multiple schemas to define rooms and their component systems.
• Describe the features of instructional facilities that are critical to good teaching and learning, and create a database to share this information.
• Create a system that will help align faculty with the classrooms that best support their instructional needs.
• Effectively implement a space change management tracking process.
• Describe how spaces can be classified based on their purpose, and use the data to plan allocation of space.

Chapter 14 builds a practical, end-to-end approach to optimizing enrollment by treating it as a measurable system—from first expression of interest all the way to graduation. It identifies the key factors that influence enrollment at a higher education institution and defines the core metrics leaders need to monitor those factors over time. The chapter then shows how to translate metrics into clear responsibilities for Enrollment Management (EM) and other campus groups (including academic departments), so accountability is shared and aligned with outcomes. It also introduces a demographic-group schema for tracking student populations that matter to recruitment, retention, and re-engagement—including students who have stopped out or left—and discusses how different populations should be approached. Because changing majors can carry real costs for both students and institutions, the chapter explains its impacts and offers strategies to reduce disruption and keep students progressing. Finally, it explores internal agreements and external partnerships—both within and between institutions—that can strengthen pathways, increase enrollments, and support student success.

• Explain the factors that affect enrollment numbers at a higher education institution (HEI).
• Define the important enrollment metrics for an institution.
• Discuss the demographic groups of students who have left the institution and the treatment of each.
• Use enrollment metrics to formulate responsibilities for the Enrollment Management group.
• Explain the impact that a change of major has on a student and on the institution.
• Define strategies that can reduce the impact of a change of major.
• Create internal agreements that can increase enrollments.
• Create partnerships with HEI’s that can increase enrollments.

Chapter 15 focuses on making institutional work run smarter: increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of processes and services by streamlining them and clearly communicating what they are, who provides them, and who depends on them. Readers learn how to create basic process flow diagrams, optimize processes using lean/CQI thinking, classify and integrate both processes and services into an institutional model, and implement practical change-management tracking for continuous improvement. The chapter recognizes that while many processes are simple and don’t merit documentation, others are complex, cross multiple organizational units, and often evolve over time—making them prime candidates for clearer mapping, ownership, and refinement. It also emphasizes that institutions can’t improve (or even reliably deliver) what they haven’t fully defined: services should be thoroughly documented, linked to providers and consumers, assigned to accountable roles, evaluated for quality, and compared to a service inventory to reveal gaps—along with clarifying how services are triggered and the different kinds of service providers involved.Many of the book’s chapters have a companion video which can be viewed for free on the Higher Education Leadership Learning Online Community web site. Visit the site to see the complete and evolving list.

• Create a basic process flow diagram.
• Discuss how processes can be optimized.
• Usefully integrate processes into an institutional model.
• Create a schema for classifying processes.
• Effectively implement a process change management tracking process.
• Usefully integrate a service into an institutional model.
• Create a schema for classifying services.
• Discuss all the aspects of a service that should be documented.
• Effectively implement a service change management tracking process.
• Define the diverse ways in which service provision can be triggered.
• Define the distinct types of service provider.

Chapter 16 highlights the SKM’s “multi-tool” features—practical utilities that make an institutional model more actionable, searchable, and management-ready. Readers learn how to embed events, due dates, and milestones (including key points in the academic calendar) directly into the SKM using TheBrain’s timeline, and how to tie any model component to those time-based commitments. The chapter also covers assigning locations to items, applying periods, durations, ranges, and target timeframes, and defining the scope of impact so leaders can quickly see what matters, where, and when. It introduces a Balanced Scorecard schema to support the disciplined selection of metrics and objectives, along with tools for tracing mandates back to their source. Finally, it shows how tags, filters, flags, bookmarks, warnings, and housekeeping labels turn the SKM into a navigable, maintainable working environment—helping institutions surface what they need, spot concerns early, and keep the model clean as it grows.

• Incorporate events, due dates, etc., into the Sentient Knowledge Map (SKM).
• Tie any component of an institutional model to an event.
• Assign a location to any item in the SKM.
• Identify important milestones in the academic calendar.
• Apply periods, durations, and target timeframes to items in the SKM.
• Define the scope of impact of an item in the SKM.
• Apply the Balanced Scorecard leveling approach to selection of metrics, creation of objectives, etc.
• Identify the source of a mandate for any item in the SKM.
• Use selection and filtering tags to identify items of interest within the SKM.
• Add special user messages, such as warnings to an item in the SKM.