NEWS ANALYSIS : Too Ambitious, or Not Enough? Experts Vary : Criticism: A goal of moving the school from the top 80 to the top 50 research institutions is greeted with both applause and skepticism by education insiders.

After months of discussion, anxiety and anticipation, the moment finally arrived Friday for those awaiting a statement from UC Irvine Chancellor Laurel L. Wilkening about her vision for the still-young university.

But those expecting a bombshell from the chancellor were likely to have been disappointed. Even Wilkening said her long-awaited statement, contained in a campus newspaper released to the university community, was in the end neither radical nor revolutionary.

In fact, one criticism of her plan to push the 29-year-old school into the ranks of the top 50 research universities nationwide by the year 2000 might simply be that “this is what UCI is supposed to be doing,” she said--that, in essence, the plan, released after so much ferment on campus, might strike some as not dramatic enough.

Nonetheless, Wilkening’s articulation of her goals for the university--specifically her aim of propelling it from the top 80 to the top 50 research institutions nationwide within a six-year period--was greeted with both applause and skepticism by higher education experts outside the university and faculty and staff members within it.

“This kind of progress usually occurs over a period of decades and any realistic board or administration ought to be focusing on a little longer period of time,” said Cornelius Pings, president of the Assn. of American Universities.

To achieve her goal in a time of economic crisis for universities throughout the state, UCI must attract increased funding from outside sources, particularly federal grants and private institutions, Wilkening said. She recommended cutting only one academic unit, the program in comparative culture, despite earlier recommendations from university committees that other departments also be discontinued.

Many of those interviewed lauded the chancellor’s decision to set such a specific target, even as they--and she--acknowledged that there was an element of risk involved in the possibility of failing to meet it by the deadline.

“We don’t very often see explicit targets like that, at least not publicly announced,” said David Merkowitz, a spokesman for the American Council on Education in Washington D.C. “But sometimes it can galvanize an institution.”

The goal is ambitious, but achievable, said Wilkening, who noted that she opted not to strive for membership in the top 30, but chose a goal she considered realistic.

She listed several universities now ranked higher than UCI in such areas as the numbers of Ph.D.s they produce and their expenditures on research and development. These included state universities in Indiana, Utah, Nebraska and Missouri, she said.

“I think these are institutions we have reasons to pass up,” she said. Not only are they older universities with the baggage of programs that may be out of step with current research funding, their locations are not as pleasant as UCI’s, she said. “Our location in Orange County is a great benefit to us.”

Wilkening pointed to a technology conference held Friday morning at UCI as an example of the university’s outreach to private businesses in the Southern California area. The conference, organized by the Life Science Industry Council, a cooperative effort of the university and local biomedical companies, was meant to introduce about 40 of UCI’s premiere researchers to local business people.

“We’re raising the priority of the highest-quality research,” said Dr. Michael E. Selsted, a UCI pathology professor and top researcher at the conference. “One of the reasons to do that, for the purpose of our students, is that the successful research university attracts community support. We’re going to have to become more dependent on community support.

“Orange County’s been waiting for UCI to declare itself a first-class university. Everyone wants to be associated with a winner. And there’s no question we can be.”

But others were less laudatory, with one senior faculty member calling the attempt to push UCI into the top 50 research universities “a pretty weak goal, frankly.”

“We’ve been in and out of the top 50 for the last 15 years,” the professor said. “My view is that she should have said we should move into the top 25 and then be disappointed if we didn’t get into the top 35. That would have been a lot more inspirational.”

But even the stated goal is too ambitious, in the view of others.

Pings, whose elite, membership organization includes 59 of the nation’s top research universities, said it is unrealistic to expect UCI to progress so far so fast.

“I think this is a realistic objective and could be attained over the passage of time and probably will be, but not in 63 months,” said Pings, the former provost of USC. That said, however, he described UCI as a “very good, major research university right now” but one that is not yet a member of his organization. Among the other University of California campuses, only UCLA, UC Berkeley and UC San Diego are included.

In both the document and her comments, Wilkening highlighted specific areas that the university should expand and emphasize in its effort to garner increased federal and private funding. These include the biomedical and health sciences, information and computer services and education--the latter a department that one panel last spring had recommended for closure.

Several of those interviewed praised the chancellor’s areas of emphasis, saying they represented logical and in some cases, prescient, choices.

Bob Topor, a consultant in marketing and strategic planning to universities and colleges, said he was particularly impressed with Wilkening’s decision not only to retain the education department but to try to turn it into a source of increased funding and emphasis for the university.

“I believe that education generally is going to be the next significant item for our national government, after healthcare,” Topor said. “That’s a very significant move and a very smart one. Generally, the areas she has chosen to emphasize reflect some very careful thinking.”