Biological Sciences - St. John's University

AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE

Reporting School/College: St. John’s College

Program Reviewed: Biological Sciences MS Q

Date Submitted to Department/Division Chair: September, 2015

Overview and Program Review Summary: Please summarize this program’s mission and its relationship to the vision and mission of St. John’s University, and the program’s School/College. Identify similar programs regionally and nationally and distinguish this program from them. In addition, summarize your findings as they relate to (1) program quality, (2) market growth potential, and (3) student learning. Also, summarize any significant changes, achievements

(by faculty and students and the program itself), and plans for the future. Finally, based on the information gleaned from the data in the self-study, give an overall rating of the program’s Enrollment/Market Potential by categorizing it as one of the following: (1) Enhance; (2) Maintain; (3) Reduce support, Phase out, Consolidate, or Discontinue.

(Suggested limit 1 page)

The Department of Biological Sciences (DBS) offers the M.S. degree in Biology. This program is closely intertwined with both our Ph.D. and BS programs. Students in the MS and PhD programs take the same classroom courses (the programs differ in laboratory training) and thus supporting the MS program does not require any additional resources. The M.S. degree program is closely related to the success of the BS program in Biology since graduate students in the M.S. program serve as teaching assistants in the undergraduate laboratories and also help supervise BS students in research laboratories. Thus, the success of our undergraduate program is dependent on the quality of the students we attract to the graduate programs in the Department. The

DBS also provides about 50% courses for the M.S. Program in Biotechnology.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics projected 20% or more increase in employment opportunities for biologists between 2010 and 2020. Many of these opportunities will be at the MS level. The dense concentration of pharmaceutical, cosmetic, and biotech industries in the New York metropolitan area constitute a substantial employment market for our M.S. students. There is little doubt that a market for well-trained biologists at the

MS level will continue to grow in the NYC area. However, limitations in research space and number of faculty with active research program make the Department’s MS program increasingly vulnerable to local competition from peer institutions. Limitations in faculty and research space limit the course offerings, research opportunities, and the level of training available to our MS students. These problems are compounded by the relatively low academic reputation of St. John’s University.

Consistent with the St. John’s College and University strategic plans, our Biology MS program stresses excellence in education and high quality preparation for continuing one’s education or entering the workforce.

Recommendation: Enhance

Self-Study Template 1

LAS_BIO_BIO.SCI_MS_Q

STANDARD 1. The purpose of the program reflects and supports the strategic vision and mission of St. John’s

University, and the program’s School/College.

1a. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the Catholic, Vincentian, and metropolitan identity of St. John’s University? www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission .

(Suggested limit 1/3 page)

Pope Francis noted, “scientific advancements can be used for the benefit of people”. Improving people’s lives and environment requires the understanding and application of the basic scientific principles governing bodies, minds, and ecosystems. The MS program in Biological Sciences seeks to train students in the life sciences through a combination of didactic courses and hands-on experiences in research laboratories. Nearly all of the didactic coursework pursued by our MS students is focused on biomedical field, and many of our students will pursue careers in which they advance our knowledge of human health and well being. This is in accordance with the SJU mission to improve people’s lives. Our goal is to provide our students with the best possible education and training, so that they are competitive and successful in their careers after completing our MS program.

We make use of the vast scientific resources of the New York metropolitan area, and increasingly seek to develop collaborative relationships with New York institutions and facilities that will help our students to develop as competent scientists and achieve their research goals.

1b. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the University’s vision. www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission/vision-statement . (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

The MS program in Biology stresses excellence in education and training and high quality preparation for continuing one’s education or entering the workforce. The presence of highly qualified faculty and doctoral students creates intellectually stimulating environment that also contributes to the quality of our MS program.

1c. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the vision and mission of the program’s School/College? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

Student engagement is a major focus of the DBS. For M.S. students, the engagement takes the form of strong encouragement to conduct biological research in one of the faculty-run research laboratories in the Department.

Further, the Department sponsors research seminars by visiting scientists where our students are exposed to the ideas of other research scientists and to network in preparation for taking the next step in their careers. We also conduct a weekly Data club presented by our PhD and MS students where, under informal conditions, students gain experience in presenting their research results.

Standard 1. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)



STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.

2a. Undergraduate SAT and High School Average

2b. Undergraduate 1 st Year Retention Rate

2c. Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate

2d. Graduate Standardized Test Scores

Program

2005 2006

Fall

2007 2008

460/725 449/653 435/588 437/690

2009

School/College

Average Rate 481/561 494/569 465/551 501/588 472/577

Regional

Comparison N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

See below

National

Comparison

The National Overall Average for verbal is 150.6 and a quantitative of 151.9, based on those tested between August 1,

2011 and April 30, 2013.

New Graduate Students GRE Verbal

Mean Scores

BIO MS old new

Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013

Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score

443 480 620

155 150



New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative

Mean Scores


Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score

BIO MS old new

683 673 720

152 158

As of August 1, 2011, ETS revised the GRE General Test with a new scoring scale. Prior to 8/1/11 on a scale of 200-

800(old) and after 8/1/11 on a scale of 130-170(new)

New Graduate Students GRE Verbal

Mean Scores

Graduate School Arts &

Sci old new

Fall 2010

Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score

New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative

Mean Scores

491

Fall 2011

500

Fall 2012

497

154

Fall 2013

532

153


Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score

Graduate School Arts &

Sci old new

585 566 593 604

149 150

As of August 1, 2011, ETS revised the GRE General Test with a new scoring scale. Prior to 8/1/11 on a scale of 200-

800(old) and after 8/1/11 on a scale of 130-170(new)



GRE

General test percentage distribution of scores within intended graduate major field that is based on the performance of seniors and non-enrolled college graduates who were tested on the verbal and quantitative examination.

Intended Graduate Major

Biological and Biomedical

Sciences*

Test-Takers

38,183

Health and Medical Sciences* 54,995

Mean Score (Verbal)

153

150

Mean Score (Quantitative)

153

149

* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.

Comments: Refer to Charts 2a – 2d in your response. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

2e. Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions.


Accepted MS graduate students in biology have a comparable verbal GRE score as the average university/college graduate students. However, biology MS graduate students have a slightly better quantitative

GRE score than the average graduate student college and university wide.

Comparison of our program with other institutions was hampered by the scarcity of public data from specific universities to compare with. Since 2004 DBS offers a “combined” BS/MS program for highly qualified undergraduate students. This BS/MS program can be completed within 5 yrs. This is similar to Biology BS/MS program at Boston University (an aspirational institution) and Fordham University (peer institution).

2f. If applicable, describe the program’s student performance over the past five years on licensure or professional certification exams relative to regional and national standards. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)

N.A. Biology MS students do not take any licensure or professional certification exams.



2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.

Fall

Number of Students

Majors

Minors

Total

2005

15

15

2006

17

17

2007

14

14

2008

11

11

2009

MAJORS BIO MS


Majors

14

2h. Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.

Majors

12

Majors

15

Majors

14

12

12

Degrees

Granted

MS

04/05

0

05/06

8

Academic Year

06/07

7

07/08

4

08/09

7

SJC-GR BIO Biology MS

10/11

Degrees

Conferred

9

11/12

Degrees

Conferred

3

12/13

Degrees

Conferred

12

Below is comparison degrees conferred data for local and national institutions based on data retrieved from the IPEDS website. This is based on the Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) Code of 26- Biological and Biomedical Sciences.



2009-

2010

2010-

2011

Master's

510

2011-

2012

544 Local 1 414

National 10,725 11,327 12,415

1 Local institution include: Adelphi University, Columbia University, CUNY Queens College, Fordham University,

Hofstra University, Iona College, C.W. Post University, Manhattan College, New York University, Pace University,

Seton Hall University, Stony Brook University, and Wagner College.

For more information please visit: http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/Default.aspx

Comments : Based on the data in 2g and 2h, how do these trends compare to institutional, regional and national patterns? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

Our MS program has graduated approximately 7 master students per year between 2006 and 2013. This rate has been constant since about 2005. In contrast, the rate of graduation locally and nationally increased slightly, 20% locally and 16% nationally, between 2010 and 2012.

Approximately 50% of accepted/enrolled graduate students successfully graduate with the MS degree in our program. There is definitively room for improvement to increase the MS graduation rate.

Time of graduation for a MS degree in biology nationwide is ca 2-3.5 years, depending on the research requirement. From those students who graduate in our program, sixty-five percent graduate within 3 years.

Thus, the time to graduation in our program corresponds to the national average.

2i. What mechanisms are in place to monitor students’ progress toward degree? And, to what extent is there a collaborative effort to provide quality advising and support services to students? (Suggested limit 1/4 page)

All MS students are advised by the Graduate Director or the Graduate Dean of the program in terms of the course work. For the MS thesis, the mentor is the primary advisor of the student. The mentor, in collaboration with the thesis committee members ensures that the graduate student is progressing towards the successful defense of the MS thesis. In addition, all faculty members teaching graduate classes have office hours during which graduate students can seek help/advice.

2j. If available, provide information on the success of graduates in this program as it relates to employment or attending graduate school. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)



2k. Please comment on the students’ competencies in the program. Support your response using data provided below and any other data available. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

Biology MS students graduated with a cumulative GPA slightly lower than MS students of St John’s College or campus wide. This is not an unusual trend due to the nature of the topic of study; sciences are recognized to be more difficult than non science disciplines.

Standard 2. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)

Financial support: fellowship of our MS students was increased from $8,000 to $12,000 per year in the last 3-4 years, which has helped to attract better MS students. However, the number of fellowships available is far from sufficient to support all MS students accepted in the program. The program certainly looses highly qualified MS candidates due to the lack of financial support.

Diversity of our Biology MS students: over the last 5 yrs, the average non-resident doctoral student ratio is 60-

65% of the total MS student body.



STANDARD 3. The program engages in ongoing systematic planning that is aligned with the University and

School/College planning, direction, and priorities.

3a. How does your program’s strategic goal/objectives link to your School/College plan and the University’s strategic plan? http://www.stjohns.edu/about/leadership/strategic-planning

The College’s “Strategic Direction” as defined in the document linked to above, emphasizes its role in teaching the university core, creating new programs of study, improving retention and graduation rates, and increasing enrolments.

University Core: Graduate Programs are by definition specialized. There is no University-wide core curriculum for graduate programs. However, all biology M.S. students are required to study a core curriculum consisting of three courses: Core A, Biochemistry; Core B, Molecular Biology; Core C, Cell Biology. Instructors who are experts in their respective fields, using current graduate level texts and research papers from the current scientific literature, teach all three. Additional coursework is taken from a selection of courses that focus on the areas of research strength in the Department, i.e. Cell/Molecular Biology and Biochemistry. The graduate program in Biology provides the foundation for several other academic and professional programs including the combined B.S./M.S. degree and the M.S. in Biotechnology.

New Programs of Study: In addition to the M.S. program in Biological Sciences, the department participates, in the interdisciplinary Biotechnology M.S. program. Recognizing the growing importance of computation in biology, the department instituted a bioinformatics course in 2008.

Improving Retention and Graduation Rates: The retention and graduation rates have remained fairly constant over the past few years, although the small size of the program renders the figures statistically insignificant.

About 80% of our M.S. students pass the M.S. Comprehensive Examination (required for graduation) within the two tries they are allowed on the exam.

3b. What is the evidence of monitoring the external and internal environments, specifically what are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing the program? How were they identified? What actions have been taken in response to these findings? What characteristics of the program suggest a competitive edge against other programs regionally and nationally?

Opportunities: Occupations requiring extensive knowledge of biology continue to rank among the fastest growing in the country. The high density of pharmaceutical, cosmetic, and biotech companies in the greater NY area provide a strong demand for M.S.-level scientists with strong skills in the biological sciences. Since occupations requiring biological training are already among the fastest growing in the nation, the NY area demand for M.S. level technicians could be even greater than the 14-62% increases in employment projected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for a sampling of those occupations:

Fastest growing occupations and occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment by level of education and training projected.

Action in Response to these opportunities: The Department of Biological Sciences faculty has been significantly reduced. Despite the strong evidence that research experience is the key to future employment of biologists, no research labs have been renovated in the department since 2009; quality lab space that can be offered to new hires is extremely limited.



Threats (internal and external):

Limitations in research space and faculty make the Department’s M.S. program increasingly vulnerable to local competition from peer institutions. All of these weaknesses are connected to each other. Limitations in faculty and research space limit the course offerings and research opportunities available to our graduate students. The loss of 11 full-time faculty members to the two recent VSOs and to administrative positions has reduced the number of full-time tenure track faculty to 12. This is particularly hard on graduate programs, since adjuncts competent to teach highly specialized graduate courses are very difficult to recruit. The number of full-time faculty in DBS is 2/3 of what it was 10 years ago, when enrolment in

Department programs (undergraduate and graduate degree majors combined) was 20% lower.

Competitive Edge: The faculty of the DBS are extraordinarily well trained and motivated to work with our students at the frontiers of science.

3c. What is the current and future market demand for the program? Support your response using the data provided below or any other internal or external sources to justify your response.

The BLS’ projected increase in employment opportunities for biologists, many of which will be at the M.S. level, are detailed above, roughly 20% or more increase between 2010 and 2020. The dense concentration of pharmaceutical, cosmetic, and biotech industries in the New York metropolitan area constitute a substantial employment market for our M.S. students. There is little doubt that a market for well-trained biologists will continue to grow in the NYC area. This is attested to by the growth in the number of students matriculating as biology majors, even as overall enrolment at the University has declined and the resources available for training them here have been significantly cut.

Fastest growing occupations and occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment by level of education and training projected.

Fastest Growing Occupations

Change, 2010-20

Percent

31%

Numeric

7,700

62% 9,700

14% 10,900

Occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment

Biological Technicians

Change, 2010-20

Percent Numeric

14% 10,900 Biochemist and Biophysicists

Biomedical Engineers

Biological Technicians



Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)

Grow much faster than average – Increase 21% or more

Percent

Changes, 2010-20

Numeric

Biomedical Engineers

Biochemist and Biophysicists

Grow much faster than average – Increase 7 to 14.9%

62%

31%

9,700

7,700

Percent

Changes, 2010-20

Numeric

Biological Technicians 14% 10,900

*For more information please visit: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.toc.htm

Standard 3. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)

The 21 st

Century has been often referred to as the “Century of Biology”. The increase in students studying biology demonstrates that students share this belief. Major problems facing the world, including global climate change, aging populations, and newly emerging infectious diseases (ebola, enterovirus, flu pandemics) all have strong biological bases and will require millions of newly trained ecologists, biomedical technicians, researchers, and healthcare providers. Certainly, healing the planet and sparing it from disease qualify as

Vincentian Mission, given that the poor will be disproportionately affected by climate change and new emerging diseases.

STANDARD 4. The program provides a high quality curriculum that emphasizes and assesses student learning and

engagement.

4a. Please indicate how the program curriculum is in alignment with the following three items:

(Suggested limit 1/2 page for each of the three categories below)

1.

Standards within the discipline

All M.S. students are required to study a core curriculum consisting of three courses: Core A, Biochemistry;

Core B, Molecular Biology; Core C, Cell Biology. All three are taught by instructors who are experts in their respective fields, using current graduate level texts. Additional coursework is taken from a selection of courses that focus on the areas of research strength in the Department, i.e. Cell/Molecular Biology and Biochemistry. It should be noted that the graduate program in Biology provides the foundation for several other academic and professional programs including the combined B.S./M.S. degree and the M.S. in Biotechnology.

2.

Curriculum integrity, coherence, academic internships, teaching excellence, teaching vibrancy, and study abroad experiences.



Graduate training in the sciences is primarily a hands-on experience. The courses that a student takes occupy only a small part of that student’s time – he/she belongs in the laboratory learning how to think and function like a scientist. Thus, many of the important aspects of Mission and Globalization are out of reach for this population of students. On the other hand, graduate students are (or should be) completely engaged in the research and scholarship enterprise of the Department. Additionally, many students interact with researchers from across the globe through email contact or at annual society meetings. In a less formal venue, we hold Data

Club weekly. In this informal setting (pizza and soda) students and faculty discuss current research results in a non-threatening environment that encourages students of every level to participate.

Thanks to a very generous gift from Drs. Haldar, who were long time members of the Biology faculty, the department has set up the Haldar Publication Award, which each year honors graduate students who have published a paper.

3.

The University Core competencies

The University core competencies (critical thinking, information literacy, oral and writing skills and quantitative reasoning) are a virtual description of an outstanding scientist, and our coursework and mentoring is dedicated to developing these very skills in our graduate students. All of our students will take at least one

(and possibly more) 700 level course. Courses at this level are essentially literature courses in which the students read current literature, present papers to the class, analyze experiment and design next-steps.

Simultaneously, most students are working in research laboratories where mentors are dedicated to developing these competencies in their mentees.

4b. The syllabi for the courses within this program incorporate the suggested elements of a syllabus – an example of which can be found at the following St. John’s University Center for Teaching and Learning link. (Suggested limit 1/3

page) http://stjohns.campusguides.com/content.php?pid=71651&sid=984766

The syllabi for the courses in the MS and Ph.D. programs were updated in the fall of 2014 and contain the suggested elements of a syllabus. These syllabi are all uploaded to the syllabus drive and follow a similar format. They have the following sections: Title page with St. John’s letterhead, Prerequisites, Corequisites,

Course Goals and Learning Outcomes, Format and Procedures, Course requirements, Units of Instruction,

Bibliography, and New York State Education Department requirement.

4c. Describe the assessment model currently in place for the program and indicate the extent to which disciplinary and core knowledge, competence, and values are met, as well as findings and action plans for improvement. For reference, WeaveOnline – https://app.weaveonline.com//login.aspx

; Digication – https://stjohns.digication.com


The Department has established three goals that include a total of 9 measurable objectives in this review cycle.

We assess knowledge of foundational principles through the comprehensive examination that all M.S. students must take. The examination is designed to include concepts from the key departmental areas of biochemistry, cell biology and molecular biology.

Our goal is that at least 80% of students pass the MS comprehensive examination, a goal that we have achieved this year. One problem is that we are working with only a small number of students, so that there can be



relatively wide year-to-year swings in the pass rate. Accordingly, we will focus on the passing rate attained over a number of years as we accumulate more data.

The second and third areas of interest involve the process of science from design of experiments to presenting the results. For M.S. students this is assessed on a rubric completed by the student’s research mentor.

While we have had a number of students score poorly in this respect (they left the program subsequently), overall more than 80% of students receive acceptable evaluations in this important realm.

4d. What, if any, external validations, e.g. specialized accreditations, external awards, other validations of quality has the program received? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

Since 2009, the faculty of the Department of Biological Sciences has been awarded 9 NIH awards totaling nearly 3.29 million dollars; 2 NSF awards totaling $775,000; a Norwegian Research Council award totaling

$940,000; and 2 Western Norway Health Authority Awards totaling $930,000. These awards show how active and successful our faculty members are in research. Since 2009, our faculty have been authors on roughly 100 journal articles and book chapters.

We have had one faculty member elected as a Fellow to the American Association for the Advancement of

Science (AAAS) in 2014. A second faculty member received an Outstanding Researcher Award from the

Northeastern Weed Science Society in 2013.

Standard 4. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)



STANDARD 5. The program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals.

5a. Below you will find the number of students enrolled as majors and minors in the program. Please complete the table by adding the number of full-time faculty assigned to the program. Then calculate the student to full-time faculty ratio.

Fall 2005

# Majors/

FT Faculty


FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total

Majors

Minors

4 11 15

0

4 13 17

0

1 13 14

0

1 10 11

0

6 6 12

0

MAJORS

Majors

& Minors

Combined 4 11 15 4 13 17 1 13 14 1 10 11 6 6 12

# of FTE

Students

(Majors &

Minors) 4.00 3.67 7.67 4.00 4.33 8.33 1.00 4.33 5.33 1.00 3.33 4.33 6.00 2.00 8.00

# of FTE

Faculty assigned to the program

FTE

Student/

FTE

Faculty

Ratio

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

F

Majors

Fall 2010

P Total F

Fall 2011

P Total F

Fall 2012

P Total F

Fall 2013

P Total

Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors

11 3 14 10 2 12 10 5 15 12 2 14



Total FTE MAJORS

F

Fall 2010

P Total F

Fall 2011

P Total F

Fall 2012

P Total F

Fall 2013

P Total

FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE

11 1 12 10 0.667 10.667 10 1.667 11.667 12 0.667 12.667

Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013

# of FTE faculty assigned to the program

FTE Student/FTE Faculty Ratio

Important Notes:

FTE Students = Number of FT Students + (number of PT Students/3)

FTE Faculty = Number of FT Faculty + (number of PT Faculty/3)

This methodology is used by STJ for all external reporting.

5b. Below you will find the credit hours the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty

(including administrators) and the total credit hours consumed by non-majors.

Credit Hours Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009

Taught # % # % # % # % # %

3420 55% 3279 50% 3515 58% 3268 61% 3458 62%

FT Faculty

PT Faculty

Total

2849 45% 3215 50% 2585 42% 2125 39% 2163 38%

6269 100% 6494 100% 6100 100% 5393 100% 5621 100%

% consumed by Non-Majors 63% 59% 59% 53% 52%

Fall 2005 – Fall 2007 includes Scientific Inquiry courses.



Credit Hrs

Taught Fall 2010 Fall 2011

F-T Faculty

P-T Faculty

(inc Admin)

Total 5,938 100% 6,370 100% 6,005 100% 6,295 100%

% Consumed by Non-

Majors 3,039 51.2% 3,416 53.6% 2,883 48.0% 2,999 47.6%

5c. Below you will find the number of courses the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty (including administrators).

Courses Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009

Taught # % # % # % # % # %

46 58% 54 68% 41 66% 43 64%

FT Faculty

PT Faculty

48

34

59%

41% 34 43% 26 33% 21 34% 24 36%

100% 62 100% 67 100% Total 82 100% 80 100%

Fall 2005 – Fall 2007 includes Scientific Inquiry courses.

80

Fall 2012 Fall 2013

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

3,423 57.6% 3,596 56.5% 3,847 64.1% 4,351 69.1%

2,515 42.4% 2,774 43.5% 2,158 35.9% 1,944 30.9%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%



Courses

Taught

F-T Faculty

P-T Faculty

(inc Admin)


Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

44 65.7% 56 57.7% 42 58.3% 45 62.5%

23 34.3% 41 42.3% 30 41.7% 27 37.5%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Total 67 100% 97 100% 72 100% 72 100%

5d. What is the representative nature of faculty in terms of demographics, tenure and diversity? (See departmental information on next page). How well does this support the program? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

The department has undergone very significant personnel changes within the last 4 years. In the 2010 VSO, we have lost 4 faculty members and in the 2014 VSO, we have lost 5 faculty members. In addition, 2 faculty members became administrators since 2010. During the same time, we were able to hire only 5 faculty members. At the present time (Fall 2015), the Department has 7 tenured, 4 tenure-track, and 1 contract faculty members. Thus, the department is 64% tenured. We are 62% white, 38% Asian, and 73% male. Our faculty represents a wide variety of geographic origins, coming from across the United States, Europe, and Asia.

The department currently has no black or Hispanic faculty. We hope to remedy this situation by hiring members of minority groups as the positions become available. However, we realize that competition for highly qualified minority scientists is fierce and many other departments have the same goal. The Department would also like to increase the number of female faculty members. The recruitment of highly qualified faculty members is aided by the fact that we have a doctoral program. On the other hand, the limited availability of laboratory space and very modest start-up package make the recruitment more challenging.



Departmental Data

Gender

Male

Female

Total

#

FT

%

2005

#

PT

%

Total

#

FT

%

2006

#

PT

%

Total

#

FT

%

2007

#

PT

%

Total

#

FT

%

2008

#

PT

%

Total

#

FT

%

2009

#

PT

%

Total

10 63% 11 69% 21 10 63% 9 50% 19 10 59% 6 50% 16 10 63% 9 60% 19 10 59% 10 59% 20

6 38% 5 31% 11 6 38% 9 50% 15 7 41% 6 50% 13 6 38% 6 40% 12 7 41% 7 41% 14

16 100% 16 100% 32 16 100% 18 100% 34 17 100% 12 100% 29 16 100% 15 100% 31 17 100% 17 100% 34

Ethnicity

Black

Hispanic

Asian

White

Unknown

Total

Tenure Status

Tenured 13 81%

Tenure-Track 2 13%

Not Applicable 1 6%

Total 16 100%

1

0

0 0% 0 0%

0 0% 0 0%

13 13 81%

2

1

16

2

1

13%

6%

16 100%

0

0

13 13 76%

2

1

16

0 0% 0 0%

0 0% 0 0%

3

1

18%

6%

17 100%

0

0

3

1

17

0 0% 1 7%

0 0% 0 0%

13 13 81%

0

3

0%

19%

16 100%

1

0

13

3

0

16

0 0% 0 0%

0 0% 0 0%

15

2

0

88%

12%

0%

17 100%


0

0

16 100% 16 100% 32 16 100% 18 100% 34 17 100% 12 100% 29 16 100% 15 100% 31 17 100% 17 100% 34

0 0% 1 6%

0 0% 0 0%

3 19% 3 19% 6 3 19% 8 44% 11 3 18% 1 8% 4 3 19% 6 40% 9 4 24% 8 47% 12

13 81% 11 69% 24 13 81% 10 56% 23 14 82% 8 67% 22 13 81% 8 53% 21 13 76% 9 53% 22

0 0% 1 6% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 3 25% 3 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 0 0% 0

15

2

0

17


Gender

Male

Female

Total

Ethnicity

Black

Hispanic

Asian

Native American

White

2 or More Races

Native

Hawaiian/Pacific

Islander

Unknown

Total

Tenure Status

Tenured

Tenure-Track

Not Applicable

Total

#

9

6

15

FT

2010

PT

# % %

60% 11 61%

40% 7 39%

18

2

0%

0%

13%

0%

1

1

10

6%

6%

56%

0%

13 87% 6 33%

Total

20

13

33

1

12

0

19

1

FT

#

2011

PT

% # %

10 71% 10 48%

4 29% 11 52%

14 21

0% 0%

0% 0%

2 14% 14 67%

0% 0%

12 86% 7 33%

Total

20

15

35

0

16

0

19

0

FT

2012

PT

# % # %

11 73% 10 53%

4 27% 9 47%

15 19

3

0%

0%

20%

0%

12 80%

1

11

7

0%

5%

58%

0%

37%

Total

21

13

34

1

14

0

19

0

FT

#

2013

PT

% # %

12 75%

4 25%

8

11

42%

58%

16 19

4

0%

0%

25%

0%

12 75%

1

9

0

7

0

2 11%

5%

47%

0%

37%

0%

Total

20

15

35

1

13

0

19

0

2

15

0%

12 80%

2 13%

1

15

7%

18

0% 0

33

12

2

1

15

14

11 79%

2 14%

1

14

7%

0%

21

0% 0

35

11

2

1

14

15

12 80%

2 13%

1

15

7%

0%

19

0% 0

34

12

2

1

15

16

13 81%

2 13%

1

16

6%

0%

0

0

19

0%

0%

0

0

35

13

2

1

16



5e. What evidence exists that the program’s faculty have engaged in research and scholarship on teaching and/or learning in the program’s field of study? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

Most of the program faculty attend annual scientific meetings in their discipline and specifically attend the sessions on pedagogy at those annual meetings. The workshops sponsored by St. John’s Center for Teaching and Learning are also well-attended by the program faculty. Faculty have participated in university workshops on Blackboard, Campus Guides, podcasting, and Ped1, the distance learning course.



Drs Chris Bazinet and Anne Dranginis were named National Academies Education Fellows in the Life

Sciences in 2012 after spending one week at Yale University at an intensive workshop in teaching methods in Biology sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, the National

Research Council and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Drs Bazinet and Dranginis shared their experiences by producing a seminar at St. John’s Center for Teaching and Learning for the benefit of the university community.



In 2013, Dr. Vancura attended 3-day conference sponsored by the Association of American Colleges and

Universities (AACU) “Transforming STEM Education: Inquiry, Innovation, Inclusion, and Evidence.



Dr. Schramm attended several national conferences on the subject of assessment in higher education, sponsored by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU), the Middle States

Commission on Higher Education, and the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

(ASBMB).

5f. What initiatives have been taken in the past five years to promote faculty development in support of the program? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

The Department believes that faculty development occurs in 3 stages: (i) hiring the best faculty, (ii) mentoring the new faculty, and (iii) supporting faculty and providing opportunities for professional growth.

• The Department has hired 5 tenure-track faculty within the last 4 years. These new faculty members already became effective classroom instructors and engage students in their laboratories. Two of these faculty already secured a significant extramural funding.

• The most important aspect of faculty development for science faculty is laboratory research, which has been supported in terms of funds and time by the University and the Department. The Department established a new program that provides incentives for faculty to teach well and to publish: an additional distribution of departmental funds is given to faculty who (i) receive high student evaluation of their courses, and (ii) publish original papers.

• Senior faculty members mentor new hires. Dr. Vancurova mentors Dr. Yu, who was hired in 2012. In 2014,

Dr. Yu obtained his first NIH grant.

• The program has rescheduled departmental seminars to encourage attendance by faculty as well as students.

These weekly seminars are given by noted research scientists from another institution, who typically spend part of the day visiting individual faculty in their offices and laboratories before or after the seminar. These visits are rich sources of information and collaboration for faculty.

• The program also sponsors a weekly Data Club at which graduate students take turns presenting their research data, which is discussed by members of the program.

• Scientific equipment has been obtained for use by faculty of the entire program and housed in shared facilities set up and maintained by the program. These are major pieces of equipment that are ordinarily too expensive for an individual laboratory, and are suitable for shared use. They include scintillation counter, Typhoon imager,



and a real time PCR instrument, which were all purchased with funds from the university’s Science Advisory

Committee.

5g. The table below shows the amount of external funding received by the department. If available, please provide the dollar amount of externally funded research for full-time faculty supporting the program under review. (Program dollar amounts are available through departmental records.)

External

Funding 04/05

$ Amount

Program

05/06

Fiscal Year

06/07 07/08 08/09

$ Amount

Department

1,224,543 1,153,444 732,355 269,960 352,950

External

Funding 09/10

$ Amount

Program

Fiscal Year

10/11 11/12 12/13

$ Amount

Department 572,250 - 793,607 1,521,924

The external funding is primarily from NIH (National Institutes of Health) and NSF (National Science

Foundation) to support research of the program faculty. After a steady decline since 2004/2005 until

2010/2011, the Department, despite being severely understaffed, was able to reverse the trend and achieve the highest level of external funding in 2012/2013. The Department considers the external funding to be extremely important, because it provides engagement opportunities for our students and contributes to the academic reputation of the entire University.



5h. Please comment on the table below that shows trends in overall course evaluation and instructional vibrancy for your program (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)

Biological

Sciences (Q)

Saint John’s

College

Overall Evaluation (Spring)

2011 2012 2013

3.82 4.22 4.35

4.23 4.26 4.19

Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)

2011 2012 2013

4.03 4.59 4.35

4.37 4.40 4.40

Total Graduate 4.14 4.16 4.30 4.37 4.39 4.52

Note: Institutional Vibrancy is the average of the first 14 questions on the course evaluation, with questions pertaining to course organization, communication, faculty-student interaction, and assignments/grading. All course evaluation questions range from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).

The overall course evaluations and instructional vibrancy in Biological Sciences are quite comparable to the values for St. John’s College and University. The year-to-year variation is probably due to the relatively small number of graduate classes in Biology.

5i. What percentage of full time faculty assigned to this program have terminal degrees or industry certifications renewed within the past 2 years? Comment. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

100% of full time faculty assigned to the program have terminal degree (PhD).

Standard 5. Comments: Indicate to what extent the program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals. Include references from 5a – 5i. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The number of faculty at the level required for training MS students is low. DBS has no space for new research-level faculty and space to accommodate new research efforts and shared equipment is extremely limited, and the Department has not had enough hires to make up for faculty lost to retirement even as undergraduate enrolment of Biology majors has increased. The physical state of St. Albert’s Hall is challenging, with gross overheating/air conditioning in some areas and none in others, insufficient electrical service, particularly in some labs that have not been renovated since St. Albert Hall was built in the 1950s, insufficient central instrumentation spaces and technical support for instrumentation.


STANDARD 6. The program has adequate resources to meet its goals and objectives. And, it is cost-effective.



6a. Narrative/Supportive Technological Environment - Comment on classrooms and labs meeting industry-standards for quality and availability of hardware, software, and peripherals; library space, holdings and services; science laboratories, TV studios, art/computer graphic labs; etc. (Suggested limit 1 page)

Our MS program has two major challenges: number of faculty members with competitive active research programs and the amount of available research laboratory space. We need more faculty with adequate research space who can accept MS students for research projects. Space to accommodate new faculty members and shared equipment is extremely limited, which undermines the MS program, scholarship and publication output of MS students and faculty, extramural funding, and engagement of undergraduate students. In addition to taking didactic courses and being involved in faculty research, our MS students teach undergraduate laboratories and thus have a direct impact on the quality of service we can provide top our undergraduate students.

6b. Narrative/ Supportive Physical Environment - Comment on level of faculty and student satisfaction with HVAC; faculty and student satisfaction with classroom lighting, crowdedness, and acoustics; flexible teaching environments, and faculty offices, etc.. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The physical state of St. Albert’s Hall is extremely poor: insufficient temperature control in most rooms, unreliable electrical service (voltage fluctuations), frequent leaks from old pipes, etc. St. Albert’s Hall is one of the oldest buildings on campus (built in 1950s or 1960s); this sharply contrasts with most other colleges and universities, where the science buildings are typically the most recently built.

6c. To what extent has the University funded major capital projects, e.g., renovations, which are linked directly to the program during the past five years? (Bulleted list)



None

6d. If external data that describes the cost effectiveness of the program has been provided by your School/College

Dean, please comment on the program’s cost-effectiveness. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The Total Revenue of the MS Program is $166,178, the Direct Expenses are $186,854 and the corresponding

Contribution Margin #1 is negative $20,676.

The MS program is closely intertwined with the BS and MS programs. We would not be able to staff our undergraduate laboratory classes without our MS and PhD students and consequently we would have to decrease enrollment in our BS program. In addition, our MS students take the same courses as our PhD students; we do not offer any courses that are only for MS students. Thus, cost effectivenes of all our programs

(BS, MS, PhD) combined provides a better information about financial effectiveness of DBS.

The cost effectiveness of all 3 programs in DBS (BS, MS, PhD): The Total Revenue is $16,085,901, the

Direct Expenses are $6,639,790, and the corresponding Contribution Margin #1 is 9,446,111.




STANDARD 7. Effective actions have been taken based on the findings of the last program review and plans have

been initiated for the future.

Comments: (Suggested limit 1page)

We will stay focused on maintaining a high level of teaching, scholarship, research and external funding.

We will hire and give tenure to highly qualified faculty who, in addition to teaching, will publish, obtain and maintain extramural funding, engage students in research in their laboratories, and become outstanding mentors to our MS students. We will continue to encourage, promote, and support faculty research that involves our MS students.

To increase the enrollment in our MS program and its financial viability, during the past several years we have started accepting students who are not supported by graduate assistantships and pay tuition. We plan to continue with this strategy. In addition, we have started developing and offering courses that make our MS program more appealing to students who plan to seek employment in a business setting, particularly in the biological/biotechnological/biomedical industries (for example BIO 700: Business in the Biological Sciences).

DBS also supports and offers many courses taken by students in the MS Program in Biological and

Pharmaceutical Biotechnology. This program has been successful in recruiting a number of additional students who take our graduate courses. This is particularly relevant since, as a Professional Masters Program it directly prepares students for employment, and indeed, has been highly successful in doing so. There appears to be a high demand for students trained in this field.



Biological Sciences - St. John's University

Related documents

Products

Support

Biological Sciences - St. John's University

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib