SELF-STUDY REPORT
FOR
THE MIDDLE STATES COMMISSION ON
HIGHER EDUCATION
January 2009
BLOOMSBURG UNIVERSITY
BLOOMSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania is committed to affirmative action by way of providing
equal educational and employment opportunities for all persons without regard to race, religion,
gender, age, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or veteran status.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certification Statement
Executive Summary
Self-Study Steering Committee
Working Groups Membership
Chapter 1 - Bloomsburg University: An Institutional Overview
Chapter 2 – Mission, Goals and Objectives
Chapter 3 - Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal, and
Institutional Resources
ii
iii-viii
ix
x-xii
1
2-7
8-23
Chapter 4 - Leadership and Governance, Administration, Integrity, and Faculty
24-35
Chapter 5 - Institutional Assessment and Assessment of Student Learning
36-56
Chapter 6 - Student Admissions and Retention, Student Support Services, and
Related Educational Activities
57-75
Chapter 7 - Educational Offerings and General Education
76-91
Chapter 8 – Conclusion
92-94
ii
Bloomsburg University
Middle States Self-Study
Executive Summary
Introduction
Bloomsburg University, the largest university in Northeastern Pennsylvania, is one of the 14
public universities that comprise the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE).
In concert with the basic mission of the PASSHE system, the University strives to provide an
affordable quality educational experience to the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
The University, which is grounded in a proud history of preparing K-12 teachers for employment
in Pennsylvania schools, has grown into a comprehensive Masters I educational institution that
offers 57 undergraduate and 18 graduate programs of study. This includes the University’s first
doctoral program which began awarding degrees in May 2006. At the beginning of the 2008-09
academic year, total enrollment consisted of 8,081 undergraduate and 774 graduate students.
Since the last decennial review in 1999, the University has experienced a sustained period of
growth and renewal. Bloomsburg University enters the Middle States reaccreditation process
during a period when it is receiving record numbers of student applications; experiencing
excellent retention and graduation rates; is supported by a highly qualified faculty, staff, and
administration; and is financially sound.
Mission, Goals, and Objectives
As part of a branding project that took place in 2007, an external agency interviewed and
surveyed a broad cross section of the University’s constituencies to determine perceptions of
Bloomsburg University. The research identified several “key drivers” of the University’s
perceived identity. They included the bond between the teachers and students, quality of campus
life, accessibility of the educational experience to the citizens of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, the opportunity for graduates to achieve the “American Dream,” and that the
University has a reputation of academic excellence. The findings affirmed that the University is
perceived by its constituencies as fulfilling the key goals stated in its mission.
When several key leaders within the University community were asked to articulate the
institution’s mission, certain fundamental concepts repeatedly emerged. Most expressed the
belief that the University exists to educate citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This
means that the University must provide broad access to an affordable education for the citizens
of the Commonwealth. It also means that the University is responsible for developing and
maintaining high quality academic programs that prepare graduates for meaningful employment
or post graduate studies, as well as to function effectively in an increasingly global society.
There was also consensus among the University leaders that the mission statement is a dated
document that needs to be reviewed to ensure that it reflects the direction that the various
constituencies see the school heading in the future. This self-study’s first recommendation is
iii
that a comprehensive review of the Bloomsburg University Mission Statement should be
undertaken as part of the next planning cycle.
Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal, and Institutional Resources
The University is able to remain a financially strong institution because it conducts extensive
annual planning and budgeting activities. At the beginning of each academic year the budget
office prepares a Planning and Resource Allocation Process manual. That manual is a
comprehensive guide that details the University’s strategic planning process, complete with a
detailed multi-year timeline. The audited financial statements show that this emphasis on
planning has enabled the University to consistently generate an annual increase in net assets.
In addition, the University is able to adequately support its computer, classroom, and network
technological needs through the use of Academic Enhancement and Technology Fees. This
support includes scientific equipment, the University TV/Radio station, performance arts
facilities, and department specific software. All of the academic technology systems or devices
are also part of a formal life cycle replacement plan.
The University consistently ranks near the top of the 14 PASSHE institutions on several
measures that are key to maintaining an economically viable institution. In 2007 PASSHE
contracted with a consulting firm to benchmark facilities-related issues at all 14 PASSHE
universities. The study found that Bloomsburg University’s physical resources compare
favorably to those of the other institutions and that the financial commitment to facilities
maintenance is adequate and producing positive results. The study also confirmed that the
University has a relatively small amount of building space for the size of the campus population.
However, for the period from 2003 to 2007, the University had the second largest total
investment in facilities among PASSHE institutions as measured by funds expended per gross
square foot.
The study found that an area that needs to be watched is the annual stewardship investment the
University makes in renovations other than large capital projects or daily maintenance. This
self-study recommends that a percentage of the annual budget should be assigned for minor
renovations of academic and general purpose facilities.
Private contributions have become a vital source of funding for the University. To aid in this
effort, the Bloomsburg University Foundation, Inc., an independent 501(c) (3) corporation, has
been established to raise and distribute private philanthropic funds on behalf of the University.
At the end of the 07-08 fiscal year, the Foundation’s assets totaled $14.3 million. Approximately
80 percent of the assets are permanently restricted.
The University also has an Office of Development. Organizationally, this office is located
within the University and is not part of the Foundation. This self-study recommends that a clear
organizational structure needs to be defined between the Bloomsburg University Foundation and
the Development Office.
iv
In addition, the Husky Research Corporation, a non-profit organization established in 2003,
assists in the acquisition of grants and contracts to support educational and research activities
approved by the University. It also serves as a fiscal agent for grants and contracts that require
more administrative flexibility than can be provided by the University. To date, the Corporation
has negotiated over $1,200,000 in grants and contracts for the University.
Leadership and Governance, Administration, Integrity, and Faculty
The University President is the chief executive officer. His direct subordinate is the Provost and
Vice President for Academic Affairs who is the chief academic officer at the institution. In
addition, a series of vice presidents, deans, and other administrative officers are responsible for
daily operations. As an institution that practices participatory governance, the University also
has several standing committees that report to and advise the institution’s executive management
team.
With the exception of management, all employees at the University are covered under various
collective bargaining agreements. Virtually every aspect of the employees’ and employer’s
rights and obligations are clearly defined within the various union contracts and there are formal
and informal processes for resolution of any contractual differences that may arise.
The University’s greatest asset is its personnel. Most of the men and women who work at the
University, regardless of their positions or job descriptions, are proud to be part of the
institution’s staff. Worker pride is apparent throughout the campus. The evidence of this pride
ranges from how well the staff maintain the buildings and grounds to the quality of service that
students, parents and other visitors receive when they interact with University personnel.
The University has worked hard to increase the number of women and historically underrepresented individuals entering the campus workforce. The number of women has grown to just
under 50 percent of the total staff and, because of an aggressive recruiting program, hiring of
historically underrepresented individuals has begun to show a marked increase.
Over the last decade, there has also been a dramatic shift in the composition of the faculty. A
significant increase in the number of women hired in recent years has enabled the University to
develop a more gender equitable faculty. The steady replacement of retiring faculty has also
dramatically increased the number of faculty who have terminal degrees. By fall 2008,
approximately 90 percent of the tenured/tenure track faculty possessed terminal degrees.
The University is committed to maintaining an environment in which the individual rights of
every member of the academic community are protected. It is also committed to ensuring that all
members of the institution behave in an ethical manner at all times. The institution has several
policies to protect the rights of students, faculty, staff and administrators. All of the policies
contain procedures to ensure that fair and impartial processes exist for identifying and resolving
any breaches in moral and ethical conduct that may occur within the University community.
This includes moral and ethical breaches that may occur during the conduct of research.
v
Institutional Assessment and Assessment of Student Learning
The University is guided by its five year plan, Vision 2010, approved by the Council of Trustees
in November, 2005. Seven critical areas were identified for inclusion in the strategic plan:
academic program directions; teaching and learning (including technology); student growth and
development; enrollment planning; civil and inclusive community; the University as a state and
regional resource; and optimization of fiscal resources, including fund raising.
The coordination of institutional assessment and strategic planning is assigned to the Office of
Academic Affairs. However, the Office of Institutional Research, which reports to the Office of
Academic Affairs, serves as the primary repository of institutional data. It is responsible for the
collection, analysis and distribution of much of the data used in administrative planning and
decision-making.
The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs is currently responsible for coordinating
the assessment of student learning at the University. He is assisted by the Associate Dean of
Liberal Arts who coordinates most of the university-wide surveys and tests that are conducted as
part of the University’s assessment program.
In accordance with PASSHE policy, each academic and student life program must undergo a
review on a five year cycle. This review requires an external consultant. Reports of these
reviews are made to the Office of the Chancellor and the University Council of Trustees. In
addition, approximately 80 percent of the academic programs at the University are currently
accredited with various national/international accreditation bodies. Most of the accrediting
bodies require demonstration of assessment of student learning as part of the accreditation
process.
Because the University has an inefficient support mechanism for its assessment activities, this
self-study recommends that the University should create an Office of Outcomes Assessment and
an elected Outcomes Assessment Committee.
Student Admissions and Retention, Student Support Services, and Related Educational
Activities
The University has been working diligently to increase the enrollment of historically underrepresented individuals. The percentage of underrepresented students in the undergraduate
student body has almost doubled since 2000 and enhancing minority enrollment continues to be a
priority for the University.
Overall, the University has been able to achieve its enrollment goal of gradual sustained growth
throughout the entire period under review. At the same time, the number of students graduating
each year has remained fairly stable at approximately nineteen percent of total enrollment. This
stability in the growth of the student body has a profound positive impact upon the University’s
ability to be proactive in its strategic planning and operational decision making.
vi
However, PASSHE has projected that the number of Pennsylvania high school graduates will
peak in 2009 and then gradually decline for the foreseeable future. Because the bulk of the
current undergraduate student body is composed of students who matriculate into the institution
directly from high school, the University has developed a number of initiatives to increase
enrollment of non-traditional, minority, transfer, and graduate students. These efforts are clearly
articulated in the University’s strategic enrollment management plan.
The University’s efforts to increase the number of transfer and underrepresented students have
already experienced varying levels of success. However, despite several initiatives designed to
increase total graduate enrollment levels, including the creation of a doctorate of Audiology
program, the University’s graduate programs have experienced enrollment declines in recent
years.
As part of the University’s student retention efforts, the institution has created a coordinated
student services center, the Warren Student Services Center, which is centrally located in the
middle of the lower campus. Most of the academic support services available to the student
body are housed in this one facility, which allows for easy referral and coordination of services
for students requiring assistance.
The University has also developed several initiatives that are intended to help students to succeed
at the institution. The combination of these initiatives is referred to as “The Freshman Year
Experience.” A key component of the experience is the one credit University Seminar Course.
This course is designed to introduce first semester freshmen to the tools they need to flourish at
the University.
Even though student retention is one of the primary goals of the University’s Strategic Plan, little
data is collected about students who withdraw from the institution. This self-study recommends
that a formal process for withdrawal from the University should be instituted that includes
notification of the student’s advisor and department chair, a counseling session with an advisor,
and an exit interview with a designated administrator.
Educational Offerings and General Education
As a comprehensive masters institution, the University has 32 academic departments that
currently offer 99 undergraduate degrees/tracks, 45 undergraduate minors, 5 undergraduate
concentrations, 17 graduate programs leading to a master’s degree, a doctorate in Audiology, as
well as 2 supervisory certificate programs for professional educators. All of the programs are
consistent with the University’s overall mission as a four-year, public institution, and support the
mission of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education.
The University has several processes in place to aid both current and prospective students in
understanding the specific course requirements of all undergraduate and graduate programs. The
University Catalog, which is available electronically, provides complete course requirements,
course sequence sheets, and curriculum worksheets for each major, as well as descriptions for all
courses currently being offered. In addition, each department has developed a Graduation
Requirements Sheet for use by its majors and faculty advisors.
vii
The University’s general education requirements have remained basically unchanged since they
were reviewed approximately 20 years ago. As the result of recommendations received from
several committees assigned to review general education, in November 2007, the Provost and
Vice President for Academic Affairs created the General Education Task Force. The Task Force
was charged with developing an ongoing review process for the university’s general education
program and to engage the entire university community in the development of this process. The
General Education Task Force is expected to deliver its recommendations to the Bloomsburg
University Curriculum Committee by May 2010.
Conclusion
Through coordinated planning and assessment activities, the University remains academically
strong. This has enabled the University to sustain growth in enrollment while simultaneously
increasing the academic quality of the student body and increasing the percentage of students
who have historically been underrepresented.
The expanded enrollment levels have translated into increased tuition and state appropriation
revenues. Those additional revenues have been used to complete several capital projects and to
hire and retain highly qualified faculty and staff.
Maintaining desired enrollment levels in the face of declining numbers of high school graduates
after 2009 is one of the greatest challenges facing the University in the next decade.
Accordingly, the University has developed a comprehensive enrollment management plan to
ensure that total enrollment at the institution remains strong for the foreseeable future.
However, the current economic recession has resulted in a significant decline in anticipated state
funding for the 2009-2010 academic year. Accordingly, the University has decided to increase
total freshman enrollment by approximately 10 percent for the 2009-2010 academic year. The
resulting increase in tuition and fees should be sufficient to enable the University to acquire the
additional resources needed to service the expanded student body and to remain financially
stable during the current economic recession.
This self-study has given Bloomsburg University an opportunity to conduct a critical self
evaluation. The results have reaffirmed that the University is strong academically and fiscally,
and that it continues to fulfill its mission to provide the citizens of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania with a quality education at an affordable cost.
viii
SELF-STUDY STEERING COMMITTEE
Richard Baker (Chair)
Steven Ekema Agbaw
Michael Coffta
Laura Davis
Eileen Evert
Robert Gates
Christopher Keller
Jonathan Lincoln
Dianne Mark
Lynda Michaels
Swapan Mookerjee
John Riley
Emeric Schultz
Karen Slusser
Lisa Stallbaumer
Claudia Thrush
Andrew Wislock
Donald Young
Professor and Chair, Department of Accounting
Professor, Department of English and Director,
Frederick Douglass Institute
Associate Professor, Business Reference Librarian
Associate Professor, Department of Finance and
Legal Studies
Director of Annual Giving, Development Center
Professor and Chair, Department of Education
Studies and Secondary Education
Director, Admissions
Assistant Vice President, Dean of Undergraduate
Education, Academic Affairs
Dean, College of Professional Studies
Director, Alumni Affairs
Professor and Chair, Exercise Science and Athletics
Professor, Department of Mathematics, Computer
Science, and Statistics
Professor, Department of Chemistry and Director,
University Honors Program
Director, Office of Institutional Research
Associate Professor, Department of History
Director, Finance and Business Services
Student
Director, Student Standards and Off Campus Housing
ix
WORKING GROUPS MEMBERSHIP
Mission, Goals, and Objectives
John Riley (Chair)
Eileen Evert
Lynda Michaels
Lisa Stallbaumer
Andrew Wislock
Professor, Department of Mathematics, Computer Science,
and Statistics
Director of Annual Giving, Development Center
Director, Alumni Affairs
Associate Professor, Department of History
Student
Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal, and Institutional Resources
Christine M. Alichnie (Co-Chair) Professor and Chair, Nursing, Director, School of Health
Science.
Barbara L. Stiner (Co-Chair)
Director, Budget Office
Phillip Amarante
Payroll Manager, Human Resources and Labor Relations.
William E. Bealing, Jr.
Professor, Accounting
John E. Bodenman
Professor, Geography and Geosciences
Traci Boehret
Student
Peter Bohling
Professor, Economics
Dave Celli
Manager, Technology Support Services
Eileen Evert
Director of Annual Giving, Development Center
Marlyse Heaps
Executive Assistant to the Provost
Maria Silva Kuhn
Assistant Professor, Coordinator Library Acquisitions and
Collections
Danielle Lomasson
Student
Eric Milner
Assistant Vice President of Administration
Claudia Thrush
Director, Finance and Business Services
Mary Vezendy
Executive Assistant, Administration and Finance
x
Leadership and Governance, Administration, Integrity, and Faculty
Nancy E. Coulmas (Co-Chair)
Jonathan Lincoln (Co-Chair)
Richard M. Angelo
Mona Bartholomew
Mary Gardner
Robert Gates
David A. Hill
Julie Kontos
Scott C. Lowe
Robert P. Marande
James F. Matta
John H. Riley
Professor, Accounting
Assistant Vice President, Dean of Undergraduate Education,
Academic Affairs
Professor and Chair, Audiology and Speech Pathology and
Director, Clinical Services
Executive Secretary for Vice President for University and
Student Affairs
Assistant Professor, Exercise Science and Athletics, and
Athletic Director
Professor and Chair, Education Studies and Secondary
Education
Comptroller, Community Activities
Professor, Psychology
Professor and Chair, Philosophy
Dean, College of Science and Technology
Assistant Vice President, Dean of Graduate Studies and
Research
Professor, Mathematics, Computer Science, and Statistics
Institutional Assessment and Assessment of Student Learning
Lisa Stallbaumer (Chair)
Maryann Cegielsky
Michael Coffta
Laura Davis
Curt Jones
Tom Kresch
Jeff C. Long
Joneen Lowman
Dianne Mark
David Martin
Megumi Omori
Cindy Venn
Irvin Wright
Associate Professor, History
Assistant Professor, Nursing
Associate Professor, Business Reference Librarian
Associate Professor, Finance and Legal Studies
Professor, Mathematics, Computer Science, and Statistics
Student
Assistant Vice President Student Life
Assistant Professor, Audiology and Speech Pathology
Dean, College of Professional Studies
Dean, College of Business
Assistant Professor, Sociology, Social Work and Criminal
Justice
Associate Professor, Geography and Geosciences
Professor, Assistant to the Provost & Vice President for
Academic Affairs For Diversity Initiatives, Director, ACT
101/EOP and Chair, Developmental Instruction
xi
Student Admissions and Retention, Student Support Services, and Related Educational
Activities
Christopher J. Keller (Chair)
Steven Ekema Agbaw
M. Theresa Bloskey
Nawal Bonomo
Veronica C. Breisch
Debra Chamberlain
Meredith Grimsley
Sheila Hartung
Kathleen Heitzman
James K. Krause
William Neese
James C. Pomfret
Essie Reed
Susan Sarver
Stephanie Schlitz
Debbie Stolz
Andrew Wislock
Donald W. Young
Director, Admissions and Records
Professor, English, Director, Frederick Douglass Institute
Director, TRiO Student Support Services
Administrative Assistant, College of Liberal Arts
Clerk Stenographer, Accounting Department, President,
AFSCME Staff Members
Secretary, Living and Learning Community Center
Associate Professor, Art and Art History
Assistant Professor, Nursing
Associate Athletics Director
Associate Professor and Chair, Exceptionality Programs
Professor, Marketing
Professor and Chair, Mathematics, Computer Science, and
Statistics
Student
Administrative Assistant, Office of the Registrar
Assistant Professor, English
Administrative Assistant, Office of Diversity and Retention
Student
Director, Student Standards and Off Campus Housing
Educational Offerings and General Education
Emeric Schultz (Chair)
Shaheen Awan
Carol G. Barnett
Betina Entzminger
Heather Feldhaus
Richard J. Ganahl
Joseph Kissell
Joann M. Kreisher
Patricia J. Lenhart
Lynda Michaels
Swapan Mookerjee
Michael K. Shepard
A. Blair Staley
Philip Tucker
Professor, Chemistry, Director, University Honors Program
Professor, Audiology and Speech Pathology
Director, Career Development Center
Associate Professor, English
Assistant Professor, Sociology, Social Work and Criminal
Justice
Professor, Mass Communications
Registrar
Clerk Typist, Economics Department
Academic Advisement Center
Director of Alumni Affairs
Professor and Chair, Exercise Science and Athletics
Professor, Geography and Geosciences
Professor, Accounting
Associate Professor, Exceptionality Programs
xii
CHAPTER ONE
BLOOMSBURG UNIVERSITY: AN INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW
Bloomsburg University, the largest university in Northeastern Pennsylvania, is one of the 14
public universities that comprise the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE).
In concert with the basic mission of the PASSHE system, the University strives to provide an
affordable quality educational experience to the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Originally founded as the Bloomsburg Literary Institute in 1839, the University has steadily
grown into an educational and cultural center within the region. At the beginning of the 2008-09
academic year, total enrollment consisted of 8,081 undergraduate and 774 graduate students.
The institution is equally proud that its over 56,000 living alumni are leaders in education,
commerce, science, health care, the arts, and government.
The University, which is grounded in a proud history of preparing K-12 teachers for employment
in Pennsylvania schools, has grown into a comprehensive educational institution that offers 57
undergraduate and 18 graduate programs of study. This includes the University’s first doctoral
program which began awarding an Au.D. degree in May 2006. All of the educational programs
are currently housed in one of four colleges: Business, Liberal Arts, Professional Studies, and
Science and Technology.
The University’s organizational structure also includes three vice presidential areas: Academic
Affairs, University and Student Affairs, and Administration and Finance. The University’s
fundraising and research endeavors receive additional support from the Bloomsburg University
Foundation and the Husky Research Corporation, respectively.
Since the last decennial review in 1999, the University has experienced a sustained period of
growth and renewal. Bloomsburg University enters the Middle States reaccreditation process
during a period when it is receiving record numbers of student applications, experiencing
excellent retention and graduation rates, is supported by a highly qualified faculty, staff, and
administration, and is financially sound.
Bloomsburg University, a Master’s I institution that has been an accredited member of the
Middle States Association since 1950, recognizes that this self-study provides an opportunity to
document the practices that have enabled it to become a recognized educational leader in
Pennsylvania. This review also gives the University a chance to reflect upon its current practices
and to develop strategies that will further enhance the institution’s performance over the next
decade.
CHAPTER TWO
MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Standard 1
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statement regarding the standard discussed
in this chapter is:
Standard 1: Mission and Goals
The institution’s mission clearly defines its purpose within the context of higher
education and indicates who the institution serves and what it intends to
accomplish. The institution’s stated goals, consistent with the aspirations and
expectations of higher education, clearly specify how the institution will fulfill its
mission. The mission and goals are developed and recognized by the institution
with the participation of its members and its governing body and are utilized to
develop and shape its programs and practices and to evaluate its effectiveness.
Methodology
In order to determine the university’s status relative to Standard 1, a five member working group
was assigned to review the University Mission. The review included examination of
Bloomsburg University’s Mission Statement, the Pennsylvania State System of Higher
Education (PASSHE) mission statement [Exhibit 1], the mission statements of the other
PASSHE universities as well as other peer institutions, a variety of University planning and
administrative documents, the branding survey completed in August 2007 by Creosote Affects
[Exhibit 2], and portions of a survey of faculty, staff, and administrators administered as part of
the self-study process [Exhibit 3].
The University’s Mission Statement
Bloomsburg University, as one of 14 institutions in the State System of Higher
Education of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, embraces the general mission
of the system to assure excellence in higher education at an affordable cost. The
campus is accessible and attractive, located in the Town of Bloomsburg near the
Susquehanna River and Interstate 80.
Bloomsburg is a coeducational institution serving students of diverse backgrounds
from Pennsylvania, its surrounding states, and foreign countries. To its
community and region, the university is an artistic and educational resource that
serves a broad range of community needs in education, health care, businessrelated services, library resources, and cultural activities. It offers undergraduate
programs as well as graduate programs in select areas of strength. There is an
emphasis on a strong liberal arts preparation. The university is committed to a
2
program of affirmative action in order to provide equal educational opportunity to
all persons.
It is a goal of the university to integrate academic programs, cultural activities,
and interpersonal relations to promote intellectual growth and social responsibility
among students. The university seeks to extend the academic environment from
the classroom into other student activities. It strives to foster openness in
communication and involvement in decision-making through a particular
governance structure. In this atmosphere, faculty, administration, staff, and
students attain a genuine respect for one another, a concern for the enrichment of
their experience, and the achievement of their common purpose. The university
community is committed to the principles of personal and academic freedom
within the framework of ethical responsibilities.
By emphasizing the assimilation, synthesis, and integration of information, it is a
goal of the university to develop in its students the characteristics of mental
resourcefulness and responsible self-expression as well as the abilities to think
critically, clarify values, and demonstrate problem-solving skills. While
maintaining programs for which Bloomsburg has been traditionally recognized,
such as those in business and education, the university has identified strategic
directions that include programs in health-related fields; programs that promote
student-faculty interaction in teaching, learning, and research; programs that
emphasize regional, national, international, and environmental concerns; and
programs that incorporate the application of technology into instruction.
(Approved by State System Board of Governors, July 1987)
Analysis
The University’s mission statement is closely aligned with the PASSHE Mission Statement
[Exhibit 1]. The PASSHE mission includes phrases such as “stimulating intellectual growth,”
“citizenship, global awareness, and social responsibility,” and “promoting diversity” which
approximate key statements within the University’s Mission Statement and Strategic Plans.
Many of these same goals were also found in the mission statements of the other PASSHE
system universities and various non system institutions that the University has identified as peer
institutions [Exhibit 4].
The University’s mission statement defines the goals that currently drive the university’s
planning processes. Information contained in subsequent chapters of this document will clearly
demonstrate that the University’s deployment of human and fiscal resources is consistent with its
mission and goals.
Each academic department within the University is also required to have a mission statement.
Their statements are reviewed and updated as part of their mandatory five year reviews. During
the review process, each department’s mission statement is examined to ensure that it reflects the
overall mission of the University.
3
The University’s planning process is driven by the University-wide Strategic Plan. The final
operational strategic plan is a compendium of plans prepared by each academic and
administrative department within the university. All individual strategic plans are prepared in a
standardized spreadsheet format which requires each department to develop annual objectives
and strategies in compliance with the goals that appear in the University-wide Strategic Plan.
Each year, as part of the strategic planning process, both the University and departmental
strategic goals are reviewed and, when justified, revised.
The 2008-09 Strategic Plan [Exhibit 5] identifies the University’s goals for the academic year as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Develop and refine academic programs, general education, and other experiences to meet
the needs of our commonwealth, nation, and global society.
Provide instructional experiences that produce optimum student achievement.
Offer co-curricular programs that enhance living and learning and support the academic
mission.
Attract and enroll undergraduate and graduate students who have the potential to succeed
in their area of study and contribute to society upon graduation.
Attract a diverse population of faculty, staff and students, and provide a campus climate
that promotes diversity, equity, and civility for all.
Increase the retention/graduation rate of historically underrepresented students to
PASSHE performance targets.
Provide economic and cultural resources to the state and the region.
Ensure that University resources are used effectively and efficiently.
Regularly assess and evaluate institutional effectiveness.
Implement the campus facilities plan.
Creosote Affects submitted a Branding Project Summary to the University in August 2007
[Exhibit 2]. The project, conducted by an external agency (Creosote), interviewed and surveyed
a broad cross section of the University’s constituencies to determine their perceptions of
Bloomsburg University. Their research identified several “key drivers” of the University’s
perceived identity. They included the bond between the teachers and students, quality of campus
life, accessibility of the educational experience to the citizens of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, the opportunity for its graduates to achieve the “American Dream,” and that the
University has a reputation of academic excellence. Their findings affirmed that the University
is perceived by its constituencies as fulfilling the key goals stated in its mission.
As part of the self-assessment process, an electronic questionnaire was sent to every faculty
member, staff member, and administrator via university email. A total of 302 individuals,
approximately 25 percent of the individuals contacted, submitted usable responses [Exhibit 3].
A review of the responses to questions regarding the University’s mission produced several
informative results.
4
Selected Mission Statement Questions
Yes
Q-7. Have you read the mission statement?
Q-8. Does the mission statement give a clear
description of the University’s purpose?
Q-12. Do the local community leaders and
residents understand the University’s mission?
No
93%
7%
No
Opinion
na
68%
20%
12%
16%
50%
34%
It is noteworthy that, in the electronic survey instrument, there was a link provided to the
University web page so that the respondents could review the mission if they wished. With that
caveat, the survey responses clearly indicate that most of the respondents were familiar with the
University’s mission.
The survey responses also indicated that there is a perception that members of the local
community do not understand the University’s mission. This is not surprising given that the
majority of the local community members are not directly involved with the academic and
related programs offered by the University.
As part of the assessment process, several key leaders within the University community were
interviewed. They were:
Name
Dr. Jessica Kozloff
Dr. Richard Rugen
Ms. Veronica Breisch
Dr. Stephen Kokoska
Dr. James Mackin
Dr. H. Preston Herring
Ms. Gretchen Osterman
Ms. Virginia Rinkus
Mr. Robert J. Gibble, ‘68
Mr. James Hollister, ‘78
Dr. David Soltz
Mr. Christopher Keller
Title
University President (since retired)
Vice President of Administration
and Finance
President, AFSCME local
President, APSCUF local
Provost and Vice President for
Academic Affairs
Vice President of Student and
University Affairs
President, SCUPA local
Human Resources Director
Chair, Bloomsburg University
Council of Trustees and Alumnus
Assistant Vice President of
University Relations and Alumnus
University President (current)
Director of Admissions
Interview Date
12/20/2007
3/6/2008
3/6/2008
3/11/2008
3/11/2008
3/12/2008
3/14/2008
3/25/2008
3/26/2008
3/26/2008
3/27/2008
3/27/2008
When these individuals were asked to articulate the University’s mission, certain key concepts
repeatedly emerged. Most expressed the belief that the University exists to educate citizens of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This means that the University must provide access to
affordable education to the broadest possible population within the Commonwealth. It also
5
means that the University is responsible for developing and maintaining high quality academic
programs that prepare the University’s graduates for meaningful employment or post graduate
studies, as well as to function effectively in an increasingly global society.
There was also consensus among the University leaders that the mission statement is a dated
document that needs to be reviewed to ensure that it reflects the direction that the various
constituencies see the school heading in the future. This included consensus that the mission
statement should be more concise.
The greatest concern expressed during the interviews was that fulfillment of the University’s
Mission is constrained by factors over which the institution has little or no control. Once the
University establishes its enrollment targets, the institution’s primary general revenue streams
become driven by forces outside of the administration’s control. Tuition is set by the PASSHE
Board of Governors and the State Legislature establishes the annual state appropriation.
On the expense side of the ledger, approximately 78 percent of the University’s current expenses
are for salaries and fringe benefits which result from collective bargaining unit contracts
negotiated at the statewide level. The vast majority of the remaining expenses involve such basic
expense lines as supplies and utilities which are quasi fixed in nature. The individuals
interviewed repeatedly pointed out that the University does set aside a pool of funds each year to
fund new initiatives and programs. The bulk of this funding requires submission of individual
departmental Action Plan requests [Exhibit 6] that are tied to each department’s strategic plan.
Those plans are then reviewed and ranked, first within the appropriate college, and then by the
Planning and Budget Committee.
Recommendation
All of the individuals interviewed agreed that the Mission Statement is pivotal to the current
planning and future success of the University.
Recommendation 1: A comprehensive review of the Bloomsburg University
Mission Statement should be undertaken as part of the next planning cycle.
Justification
•
•
•
•
The mission has existed in its current format, without undergoing a review, through a
period of time when the University has changed in a number of important ways.
The mission should be concise and a key component of the University’s literature.
The mission should focus on what the University intends to achieve, its purpose for
existing.
The mission needs to be a statement that the students, faculty, staff, administrators, and
other constituents can identify with.
6
Process
Review of the mission needs to take place via a process that involves the entire campus
community. The results of question number 11 of the self-study questionnaire [Exhibit 3] clearly
indicate that the respondents feel that the entire campus community is responsible for review of
the mission statement. However, in order for the process to be effective, it needs to be driven by
the President and senior administration so that there is no ambiguity about the importance of, or
support for, a review of the mission.
Fortunately, all academic departments within the University, as well as each college, have
concise mission statements. These statements reflect how various groups of faculty and
administrators currently interpret the University’s mission. In addition, the Branding Project
prepared by Creosote Affects in 2007 [Exhibit 2] provides an extensive external review of what
the University’s stakeholders believe are the institution’s key attributes. These documents
provide an excellent starting point for a comprehensive review of the University’s mission.
In addition, the University needs to conduct a detailed SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats) analysis and the results need to be incorporated into the review of the
mission statement, as well as the next round of strategic planning. This includes dissemination
of the results of the SWOT analysis to the entire University community to help facilitate creation
of a mission statement that can lead the institution into the next decade.
7
CHAPTER THREE
PLANNING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW,
AND INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES
Standards 2 & 3
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statements regarding the standards
discussed in this chapter are:
Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal
An institution conducts ongoing planning and resource allocation based on its
mission and goals, develops objectives to achieve them, and utilizes the results of
its assessment activities for institutional renewal. Implementation and subsequent
evaluation of the success of the strategic plan and resource allocation support the
development and change necessary to improve and to maintain institutional
quality.
Standard 3: Institutional Resources
The human, financial, technical, facilities, and other resources necessary to
achieve an institution’s mission and goals are available and accessible. In the
context of the institution’s mission, the effective and efficient uses of the
institution’s resources are analyzed as part of ongoing outcomes assessment.
Methodology
A fifteen member working group was assigned to review planning, resource allocation,
institutional renewal, and institutional resources. The review included examination of the
University’s budgets, financial statements, strategic planning documents, performance measures,
and the activities of the Bloomsburg University Foundation.
Analysis
Bloomsburg University is able to remain a financially strong institution because it conducts
extensive annual planning and budgeting activities. At the beginning of each academic year, the
budget office prepares a Planning and Resource Allocation Process manual [Exhibit 7]. That
manual is a comprehensive guide that details the University’s strategic planning process,
complete with a detailed multi-year timeline. The various components of the University’s
planning and assessment process are presented in this and subsequent chapters.
The University has a history of being fiscally responsible. The audited financial statements show
that the University has been able to consistently generate an annual increase in net assets. The
table on the following page provides some key financial data from the last several audited
financial statements.
8
Key Financial Data, Year Ended June 30 (in thousands)
Total Assets
Total Liabilities
Total Net Assets
Increase in Net Assets
Increase/(Decrease) in Cash
2002
$135,910
74,071
61,839
3,090
$ 4,286
2003
$114,897
85,030
29,867
2,858
$ 11,716
2004
$121,213
88,603
32,610
2,743
$ 1,517
2005
$139,189
98,813
40,376
7,766
$ 7,628
2006
$149,949
101,353
48,596
8,220
$ 2,877
2007
$159,769
105,845
53,924
5,328
$
47
2008
$167,637
111,695
55,942
2,018
$(5,578)
Source: Exhibit 8 - Bloomsburg University Annual Audited Financial Statements.
Notes: In 2003 there was a $34,829,515 restatement of net assets to exclude capital assets held in
the name of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
In 2007 and 2008, the University expended cash to fund several capital projects including
advancing $3,054,927 for construction of student housing which will be repaid from the
proceeds of a July 17, 2008 bond issue.
The Budget
The following table presents a portion of the summary worksheet for the FY 2009/10 initial
budget submitted to PASSHE.
Board of Governors Budget Request Summary – Bloomsburg University
Educational & General Budget
Percent
Revenue/Sources
FY 2007/08
FY 2008/09
Change
FY 2009/10
Tuition
$ 52,871,726
$ 56,211,524
6.3% $ 57,214,403
Fees
8,158,802
8,673,482
6.3%
8,791,024
State Appropriation
36,887,655
37,833,414
2.6%
37,833,414
All Other Revenue
6,717,380
6,485,869
-3.4%
6,485,869
Use of Carry forward Fund Balance
0
2,897,508
n/a
0
Total Revenue/Sources
$104,635,563
$112,101,797
7.1% $110,324,710
Expenditures and Transfers
Compensation Summary:
Salaries & Wages
$ 57,781,042
$ 61,212,856
5.9% $ 64,069,405
Benefits
20,269,793
25,586,058
26.2%
27,504,737
Subtotal, Compensation
78,050,835
86,798,914
11.2%
91,574,142
Services & Supplies
19,597,877
20,792,255
6.1%
21,535,318
Capital Expenditures
1,821,552
1,944,085
6.7%
2,028,891
Transfers
5,165,299
2,566,543
-50.3%
2,540,471
Total Expenditures and Transfers
104,635,563
112,101,797
7.1%
117,678,822
Revenue/Sources less
Expenditures/Transfers
$
0
$
0
($7,354,112)
Percent
Change
1.8%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
-100.0%
-1.6%
4.7%
7.5%
5.5%
3.6%
4.4%
-1.0%
5.0%
Source: Exhibit 9 – Bloomsburg University, FY 2009/10 Budget Report (BUDRPT).
Each fiscal year the University is required to prepare a detailed budget for PASSHE. That
budget includes actual activity for the preceding year, budgeted activity for the current year, and
a tentative budget for the following year. The tentative budget can not be finalized until after the
Commonwealth’s annual budget is passed by the State Legislature and the Pennsylvania State
9
System of Higher Education (PASSHE) Board of Governors subsequently sets tuition rates for
the new academic year. Both of these actions routinely occur right at the beginning of the new
fiscal year.
The University’s planning and budgeting processes are fundamentally linked to those of
PASSHE. For example, both the annual tuition rates and the allocation of the annual state
appropriation from PASSHE are established at the system level. This means that the basis for
the University’s two major revenue streams is outside of the institution’s direct control.
However, since both of these funding streams are tied to enrollment, the University’s basic
means of influencing its primary revenues is through controlling enrollment levels. Thus,
enrollment management has become a significant component of all institutional planning
processes. The University’s enrollment management plan is discussed in greater detail in
subsequent chapters.
Historically, the University has been able to balance most annual budgets without the use of its
carry forward fund balance. However, as seen in the table above, a significant amount of carry
forward funds ($2.9 million) were needed to balance the fiscal year 2008/09 budget.
Furthermore, on October 23, 2008, at the request of the Governor of Pennsylvania, the PASSHE
Board of Governors agreed to retroactively set aside approximately $22 million from this year’s
state appropriation to help fund a potential deficit in the state budget caused by the current
economic crisis. This amount represents 4.25 percent of the fiscal year 2008/09 PASSHE state
appropriation. For the University, the potential decrease in its share of the state appropriation
would be approximately $1.6 million. Fortunately, a plan to cover this potential shortfall has
already been implemented by the University.
For fiscal year 2009/10, the University is currently projecting a $7.4 million deficit. Although
this deficit will be reduced after the 2009/10 tuition and appropriation increases are approved, it
is one of the largest projected deficits in University history. Therefore, the University has
elected to increase fall freshman enrollment by 10 percent to ensure that sufficient tuition and fee
revenue is generated to offset the projected deficit. It is also critical that a consistent and detailed
review of expenditures, particularly salaries and benefits, continues to occur as the University
strives to operate more efficiently while simultaneously maintaining the quality of its educational
programs.
The planning and budgeting process utilized by the University is summarized in PRP 2220 –
Planning and Resource Allocation Process [Exhibit 10].
Performance Funding
The PASSHE Board of Governors also established a performance funding program in July 2000
to reward state system universities for demonstrated success and continued improvement in
several key areas. The performance funding matrix is a subset of the accountability matrix that
is part of the System Accountability Plan (SAP) [Exhibit 11]. Most of the performance measures
also contain several detailed sub-measures.
10
The following table lists the current SAP performance measures and identifies the measures used
to compute the University’s performance funding.
System Accountability Performance Measures
Quantitative
Degrees Awarded *
Diversity of Entering Class
Second Year Persistence *
Enrollment Diversity
Accreditation
Employee Diversity *
Graduation Rate*
Degree Programs with Few Graduates
Faculty Productivity *
Personnel Ratio *
Distance Education
Private Support
PRAXIS Aggregate Passing Rate
Instructional Cost *
Internships
Faculty Terminal Degrees *
New PA Community College Transfers
Qualitative
Academic Quality
Economic Development
Student Achievement and Success
Resource Stewardship and Utilization
High Need Academic Programs
* Measures used by PASSHE to compute performance funding.
For the 2008-2009 academic year, total available performance funding amounted to 8 percent of
the PASSHE base state funding allocation, or 39.9 million dollars. The University’s annual
performance funding is based upon how well the institution meets its performance funding goals
during the preceding academic year, as well as how well the other PASSHE schools perform.
Performing well in a specific category may not result in increased funding if several other
institutions also do well. Also, performance funding is a zero sum game. If one institution
receives more than their base 8 percent, another institution receives less.
The following table lists the University’s performance ranking on several of the SAP submeasures for the 2007-2008 academic year. (The cohort is the 14 PASSHE Universities.)
SAP Sub-measures Performance 2007-2008
Ranked In The Top Five
Ranked In The Bottom Seven
Sub-measure
Rank
Sub-measure
Four Year Graduation – Overall
2
Faculty who are Minority
Six Year Graduation – Black
2
Compensation/Total Expenditures
Retention Rate – Black
3
Undergraduate Cost per FTE Student
Degree to Enrollment Ratio – Masters
4
Eligible Programs Accredited
Retention Rate – Overall
4
New Community College Students
Four Year Graduation – Hispanic
4
Non-Faculty who are Minority
Six Year Graduation – Overall
4
Four Year Graduation-Black
New Students who are Hispanic
4
Students in Distance Education Courses
Masters Cost per FTE Student
4
Executives who are Female
Credits per FTE Instructional Faculty
5
Non-faculty who are Female
Private Funds Raised
5
PRAXIS Aggregate Passing Rate
Faculty with Terminal Degrees
5
Executives who are Minority
Faculty who are Female
Rank
8
8
8
9
9
10
11
11
11
13
14
14
14
Source: Exhibit 11 – Bloomsburg University Accountability Measures Presentation, 2007-2008
Accountability Measures.
11
Most of the SAP performance measures are broken down into sub-measures. This means that an
institution can score well on part of a measure while not meeting minimal expectations in
another part of the same measure.
The University ranks near the top of the 14 PASSHE institutions on several measures that are
key to maintaining an economically viable institution that is able to attract new students.
However, it is not as effective in attracting female and other historically underrepresented
categories of faculty, staff, and administrators. In response to these findings, the University has
developed an aggressive approach toward recruiting women and other minorities. All new
employee searches target advertisements in minority publications and senior managers
participate in regional and national minority recruitment fairs.
In some sub-measures the University is actually doing very well, but the competition is intense.
As an example, approximately 80 percent of all eligible programs at the University are currently
accredited and many of the remaining 20 percent are nearing accreditation. However, the
institution only ranks 9th overall within the system.
Although increasing the University’s share of performance funding each year is not entirely
within the University’s control, both the financial and intrinsic values derived from doing so
necessitates that the SAP goals be considered whenever planning takes place. Performing well
on the SAP goals not only brings several million dollars into the University each year, it also
demonstrates to both internal and external constituents that the institution is achieving the key
goals established by PASSHE. This is particularly important because the goals are also
consistent with the University’s mission and strategic plan.
The following table shows the difference between the actual SAP funding received by the
University and the amount of funding it would have received (percentage of base allocation) had
there been no performance funding program.
SAP Funding
received
Percentage base
allocation
Difference
2002-03
$428,606
Bloomsburg University Performance Funding
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
$1,190,156 $2,193,492 $2,678,082 $3,295,231
2007-08
$2,827,199
2008-09
$3,151,078
667,866
956,173
1,664,889
2,429,138
2,917,313
2,988,921
3,065,054
($239,260)
$233,983
$528,603
$248,944
$377,918
($161,722)
$86,024
The data shows that the University has done well under the performance funding model. In most
years, the University has received more funds under SAP than it would have received without the
program.
Technological Resources
The University is able to adequately support its computer, classroom, and network technological
needs through the use of Academic Enhancement and Technology Fees. This support includes
items such as scientific equipment, the University TV/Radio station, performance arts facilities,
and department specific software.
12
Organizational Structure
The Assistant Vice President of Technology and Library Services, the executive in charge of the
Office of Technology and the Library, reports to the Provost and Vice President of Academic
Affairs. As a member of Dean’s Council and the President’s Advisory Council, he collaborates
with senior academic and administrative leaders in the development and implementation of both
institutional and information technology related strategic plans. All academic technology plans
and expenditures, including those funded with technology fee revenues, are reviewed and
approved through the Dean’s Council. Actual technology fee purchase requests are processed
through the Office of Technology and are tracked against the approved technology plan.
The Office of Technology is composed of five functional units:
•
•
•
•
•
Technological Support Services - responsible for administrative, academic staff, and
faculty computers; classroom and laboratory technology; helpdesk; faculty and staff
technology training; and instructional design services.
Network Systems - responsible for all network servers, systems, and services.
Applications Development and Operations - responsible for all applications development
and customization, mainframe operations and services, and a helpdesk and training
services for implementation of the PASSHE shared administrative system.
Telecommunications - responsible for all telephone switching devices and services, and
the physical infrastructure for both data and telephone connectivity (wired and wireless).
Performing Arts Facility - responsible for physical and technical maintenance,
scheduling/ticketing services for the two large performance spaces/classrooms, and the
radio/television/cable systems, facilities, and equipment.
The Assistant Vice President of Technology and Library Services is also a member of the
PASSHE Chief Information and Technology Officers committee. That group meets monthly to
coordinate system-wide technology planning initiatives and collaborative purchases.
Technology Plan
The 2006 Technology Plan [Exhibit 12] consists of eleven goals focusing on users, their
interaction with technology, and their participation in technology-related decision making.
Because of the major role technology plays across the University, it is directly linked to the
budgeting process. Annual line item funding has been earmarked at appropriate levels for the
regular replacement of faculty and staff computers, network infrastructure components,
classroom presentation systems, and other items that require regular replacement. This process
has led to a more equitable and predictable allocation of resources among all constituencies,
higher levels of satisfaction among users, improved performance of all critical systems, reduced
maintenance requests or down time, simplified planning and budgeting processes, and more
competitive pricing from vendors. This funding commitment underscores the institution’s
understanding of the key role technology plays in teaching, learning and research endeavors.
The University has two major funding sources for technology, Academic Enhancement Fees, and
Technology Fees. Academic Enhancement Fees, which were instituted in 1989, support
13
personnel, equipment, and related materials purchases that promote curricular programs and
services. Set annually by the Bloomsburg University Council of Trustees, the fee is used to
enhance the technical and the living/learning experiences for students, faculty and staff. The
current fee is $267.75 per semester for full time students and is prorated for part time students.
A technology fee was established by the PASSHE Board of Governors in 2003 to provide direct
support to the technology infrastructure on the system’s campuses. The University’s campus
network, student laboratories, classroom presentation systems, and other technologies used by
faculty and students are supported by this fee. PASSHE established the 2008-2009 technology
fee at $90.50 per semester for full time state residents and $136.50 for non-resident students.
The table below displays the annual University revenue generated from these fees since 2002.
Academic
Enhancement Fee
Technology Fee
Total
Annual Revenue Generated by Academic and Technology Fees
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
$2,792,972 $3,466,345 $3,824,595 $3,961,055 $4,311,817
2006-07
$4,499,822
2007-08
$4,661,870
N/A
$2,792,972
$1,158,682
$5,658,504
1,600,262
$6,262,132
$ 803,804
$4,270,149
$ 880,245
$4,704,840
$ 885,429
$4,846,484
$1,133,912
$5,445,729
Source: Exhibit 13 - Bloomsburg University Annual Financial Report (FINRPT)
The fees have allowed the University to continuously improve its technology infrastructure. For
example, wireless internet access has been made available in all academic buildings and modern
presentation systems have been installed in all appropriate classrooms.
The University Technology Plan is reviewed each year by the Dean’s Council, the University
wide technology committee, and the individual college level technology committees. Once
every five years the Office of Technology, as part of its self-review, does a thorough assessment
of the progress made toward attaining the Technology Plan’s goals and objectives. At
approximately the same interval, the overall technology plan undergoes a complete review and
revision.
Technology
Library
The Harvey A. Andruss Library has the largest number of public computers of any academic
building on campus, approximately 240. Of that total, 38 are dedicated to instructional use, 10
are dedicated to specialized academic software, 14 are restricted for searching the library catalog
and other University web sites, 2 are CD-Rom networked computers, and the rest are for general
purpose use. In addition, local community members who apply for a free “Pennsylvania
Resident Borrower’s Card” have access to the Library’s resources.
The Library provides access to extensive electronic resources including approximately 135
electronic databases, approximately 46,000 electronic periodicals, and a growing digital
collection that is unique to the University and local community. To facilitate research, the
Library has implemented an OpenURL link resolver (Article Linker), a federated search program
(Discovery Search), and a bibliographic management program (RefWorks). In addition, the
14
Library offers an online interlibrary loan system, a course reserve system for electronic
documents, and online reference help. Most of the electronic resources are also available offcampus, via the internet, to authorized users.
In addition to having approximately 482 thousand print holdings, the Library has 2.1 million
micro-text documents, over 13 thousand electronic items, and subscribes to over 30 newspapers
and 1,700 periodicals. To support the large collection of non-print holdings, the Library
maintains a variety of mechanical and electronic reading and playback devices.
Classrooms and Laboratories
In addition to those in the Library, there are 1237 computers in laboratories, classrooms, and
other specialized learning spaces on campus. The technology fee funded 301 of the computers;
the academic enhancement fee funded the remaining 936.
Faculty/Staff Computers
There are a total of 1140 computers assigned to faculty and staff. They are funded through
academic enhancement fees and replaced on a staggered 4 year life cycle.
Classroom Presentation Systems
There are currently 136 classrooms or laboratories on campus that are equipped with
presentation systems. There are an additional 28 classrooms that contain no presentation systems
because they have constricting physical characteristics such as: size, sight lines, ceiling height, or
permanent furniture configurations. Although there are no formal specifications for the
classroom presentation systems there is considerable standardization of design and functionality.
Servers
The University currently maintains 68 servers. There are 34 servers dedicated to academic uses,
22 to administrative functions, and 12 that serve a combined role.
Scientific Equipment
The original cost of existing scientific equipment is approximately $2,500,000. The vast
majority of all new scientific equipment purchases are currently funded through Student
Academic Enhancement Fees. The College of Science and Technology receives approximately
$230,000 of those funds annually, which is shared by six departments. As a result, each
department can acquire only one or two pieces of new equipment a year. Faculty members who
desire specialized equipment to conduct research are encouraged to seek funding from external
sources through grants and donations.
15
Life Cycle Replacement
All academic technology systems or devices are part of a formal life cycle replacement plan.
Administrative systems or devices are also on a formal replacement plan. The following table
outlines the life cycle replacement plan.
Bloomsburg University Life Cycle Replacement Plan
The Academic life cycle plan includes
1.
Faculty computers-four year cycle
2.
Staff computers-four year cycle
3.
General, library and departmental classroom or
lab computers
4.
Classroom Presentation Systems-three or four
year cycle
5.
Software licensing-renewal date
6.
Scientific and other laboratory equipment
The Administrative life cycle plan
1.
Staff computers
includes
2.
Mainframe computer-eight year cycle
3.
Software licensing-renewal date
The Network and Infrastructure plan
1.
Staff computers
includes
2.
All Servers
3.
Routers, switches and other edge devices
4.
Wireless access points
5.
Software licensing-renewal date
Source: Exhibit 14 - Bloomsburg University Office of Technology Self-Review 2008.
Note: During the 2007-08 academic year the life cycle replacement plan was updated to include
all assets of the University.
Physical Resources
In the 1990’s PASSHE developed a comprehensive program to define institutional space
requirements at the 14 state-owned universities. That program currently requires each university
to prepare an annual space utilization report, as well as statistics to evaluate current space needs.
Based on the data submitted, guideline facilities space requirements are calculated utilizing
formulas derived from space utilization categories in the U.S Department of Education’s
Postsecondary Education Facilities Inventory and Classification Manual. The table on the
following page compares the University’s current inventory of physical space with the PSAAHE
calculated guideline.
The table shows a current need for additional facilities space in several categories. This
problem is being addressed through facilities planning efforts both in the University Facilities
Master Plan [Exhibit 16] and in the State of Pennsylvania Commonwealth Capital Project Plan.
The Facilities Master Plan presents a vision for facilities expansion that addresses several of the
space shortfalls. That vision is being implemented through the capital project planning process
which is monitored by the Space and Facilities Sub-committee of the Planning and Budget
Committee.
16
Educational and General Facilities Space Requirements Review
Type of Space
Current Space
Space Guideline
(square feet)
(square feet)
Unclassified
6,105
0
Classroom
78,593
98,016
Teaching Laboratory
100,576
130,800
Research/Non Class Laboratory
17,123
17,160
Office/Conference Room
181,745
174,744
Study
73,600
104,834
Athletic or Physical Education
41,961
89, 066
Athletic Spectator Seating
7,123
7,123
Athletic/Physical Education Service
20,167
46,066
Media Production
7,719
8,011
Clinic
4,823
3,204
Animal Quarter
1,050
1,602
Greenhouse
2,261
4,006
Assembly
31,109
61,416
Exhibition
8,517
8,486
Day Care
3,879
3,879
Lounge/Merchandising
7,189
9,535
Meeting Room
8,815
8,011
Support
66,690
82,994
Utility Production
26,657
26,657
Health Care
1,854
17,033
House
7,299
5,000
Total Education and General
704,855
907,643
Excess/Shortfall
(square feet)
6,105
-19,423
-30,224
-37
7,001
-31,234
-47,105
0
-25,899
-292
1,619
-552
-1,745
-30,307
31
0
-2,346
804
-16,304
0
-15,179
2,299
-202,788
Auxiliary Facilities Space Requirement Review
Office/Conference Room
3,488
3,488
Study
510
510
Food Facility
50,032
80,874
Lounge/Merchandising and Service
17,957
17,957
Recreation
68,554
63,313
Meeting Rooms
2,508
2,508
Residential Facilities
467,707
613,125
Student Union
49,623
80,110
Total Auxiliary Facilities
660,379
861,885
0
0
-30,842
0
5,241
0
-145,418
-30,487
-201,506
Source: Exhibit 15 – PASSHE, Bloomsburg University Space Guideline Fiscal Year 2008-2009.
Solving the shortage of classroom, student housing, and faculty space is an ongoing priority at
the University. Several projects have been completed during the last five years to help address
space deficiencies. For example, facilities containing primarily teaching and research
laboratories were added to the Hartline Science Center; a classroom addition was completed for
the McCormick Center for Human Services; and administrative space was converted to academic
space in Ben Franklin Hall.
Additional efforts to address space shortfalls are on-going. A project to renovate and expand the
Haas Center for the Arts is expected to be completed in January 2009. A project to renovate the
17
Nelson Field House has recently received funding. This project will alleviate some of the need
for additional space for exercise science and athletics. Likewise, a project is expected to be
funded in 2009-10 that will add classroom and laboratory space to the Sutliff Hall classroom
building.
The Commonwealth funds renovation of existing structures at the University and partially funds
certain new construction projects through the Commonwealth Capital Project Program. The
following table shows the projects funded by that program since 2000.
Commonwealth Capital Project Program Funding
Project Title
Funding Year
Commonwealth Funding
Hartline Science Center Addition
2000-01
$6,806,000
Navy Hall Renovation
2001-02
$4,350,000
Ben Franklin Renovation
2003-04
$7,520,000
McCormick Classroom Addition
2004-05
$2,725,000
Hass Renovation
2005-06
$5,920,000
Bakeless Renovation
2006-07
$5,000,000
Nelson Field House Renovation
2007-08
$15,500,000
A housing market study completed in 2006 by the firm Anderson Strickler, LLC [Exhibit 17]
found that University residence hall usage in fall 2005 was at 109 percent of recommended
capacity and that there was an unmet need for on-campus student housing of between 385 and
761 beds. In response to this report, a project to construct an additional apartment complex on
the upper campus with 544 new student beds was developed and construction is expected to be
completed in August 2009.
Sightline Benchmarks
In 2007 PASSHE contracted with the firm, Sightlines, to benchmark facilities related issues at all
14 PASSHE universities [Exhibit 18]. The study found that the University’s physical resources
compare favorably to the other institutions and that the financial commitment to facilities
maintenance is strong and producing good results.
The Sightlines study also confirmed that the University has a relatively small amount of building
space for the size of the campus population. The University has the third highest number of
users per gross square footage of building space for all PASSHE universities. Consequently its
facilities are used at a higher rate than the other institutions. Despite that higher usage rate, the
Sightlines study indicated that the University’s facilities are in good condition.
The Sightlines study inspected all PASSHE campuses and scored the campuses for building
maintenance, custodial, and grounds maintenance. The University had the second highest
combined maintenance score of all PASSHE institutions. A contributing factor to that score is
the investment the University makes in supporting the daily maintenance needs of the facilities.
The Sightlines study found that the University ranked fourth in the system for both maintenance
expenditures per square foot of space, and available staff for custodial duties, daily maintenance
and grounds maintenance.
18
Another contributing factor to the quality of the facilities is the investment that is being made in
one-time capital projects. For the period from 2003 to 2007, the University had the second
largest total investment in facilities among PASSHE institutions as measured by funds expended
per gross square foot. The vast majority of that spending was on one-time capital improvement
projects
The following table summarizes the University’s major capital projects completed since 2002.
Completed Capital Projects Over $500,000
Funding Source
Total Capitalized
Costs – Completed
Projects
Project Description
Auxiliary
E&G
E&G
Appropriation
Replace Roofs at SC,SRH,& MRH
Tri-Level Repair Phase II
Carver Tower Repair
Buckalew Renovations
Bond
Bond
$
Date
Completed
762,529.28
1,250,933.97
672,168.74
556,351.22
Sep-03
Oct-03
Jan-04
Apr-04
Sprinkler III (bond)
1,715,445.69
Jun-04
Sprinkler II (bond)
1,228,292.14
Jun-04
Auxiliary
SC - Design for Lower Level
522,422.86
Jun-04
Bond/Auxiliary
Monty's Renovation
4,770,617.36
Aug-04
AFRP
Bond
E&G / Parking
Hartline Renovation (AFRP)
Hartline Renovation
Upper Campus Warehouse Parking
3,158,918.94
801,105.70
838,664.28
Jun-05
Jun-05
Jan-06
Bond/E&G
Tennis Court Construction
1,878,599.57
Apr-06
Key '93
Auxiliary
Bakeless HVAC (Arch./Eng. Fees)
7 Hall Entrance/ADA Up-Grades
1,136,294.38
2,378,284.18
May-06
Jul-06
Bond/E&G
Convert Tennis Courts to Parking
Bond/Auxiliary
988,989.77
Jul-06
Student Recreation Center Expansion
4,069,535.84
Aug-06
E&G
E&G
E&G
Auxiliary
Artificial Turf Field
McCormick Addition-Site work
Ben Franklin/Navy Plaza
North Residence Hall Bathroom Renovation
1,559,798.22
687,670.93
1,316,220.09
530,386.28
Aug-06
Oct-06
Dec-06
Apr-07
E&G/Aux/Aramark
Student Services Center Renovation
2,406,833.67
Aug-07
E&G
E&G
E&G
E&G
Academic Quad
McCormick Classroom Addition
Ben Franklin Conversion
Magee Center Renovation - Flood Damage
2,654,974.58
2,838,536.71
525,998.96
1,018,897.84
Oct-07
Nov-07
Dec-07
Feb-08
Total Completed Capitalized Projects over $500,000
Funding Source
E&G
Auxiliary
Auxiliary
Bond
$40,268,471.20
Total Assets Under
Construction – 2008
Project Description
Redman Stadium Renovation
Montour Bathroom Renovations
MPA Central A/C & Heating
Upper Campus Apt. Complex
$ 2,800,854.20
1,206,215.45
1,063,264.02
4,946,456.66
Total Assets Under Construction Projects over $500,000
$10,016,790.33
19
Funding Allocation (if any)
Bond - $1,663,173.01, Aux
- $52,272.68
Bond - $1,124,961.62, Aux
- $103,330.52
Bond - $4,028,842.64, Aux
- $741,774.72
Bond - $1.508.530.25,
E&G - $370,069.32
Bond - $825,152.40, E&G
- $163,837.37
Bond - $3,585,785.50, Aux
- $483,750.34
E&G - $833,970.04, Aux $1,451,793.87, Aramark $121,069.76
The results of the Sightlines comparative study were not all positive. An area that needs
attention is the annual stewardship investment the University makes in renovations other than
large capital projects or daily maintenance. The intent of this funding area is to ensure that
facilities, especially those recently renovated, stay at an acceptable maintenance level. The
University is currently funding those needs at a rate well below the PASSHE average.
A contributing factor to the relatively low annual stewardship funding is the absence of annual
budgeting for education and general facilities maintenance. While auxiliary facilities are
required to annually budget 2.25 percent of a building’s value for the upkeep of the facility, there
is no corresponding budgeting process for education and general facilities. Traditionally,
funding for maintaining these facilities has come from the annual transfer of excess funds into
the university’s plant fund. This process is unreliable and does not address the continual need
for facilities stewardship.
Philanthropic Resources
The Bloomsburg University Foundation
The Bloomsburg University Foundation, Inc. is an independent 501(c) (3) corporation
established to raise and distribute private philanthropic funds on behalf of Bloomsburg
University. The Foundation determines its funding priorities based on direction from the
University. The University has entered into an agreement to contribute $200,000 annually to the
Foundation to help fund its operating expenses and to provide other non-reimbursed staff and
logistical support. That agreement ends June 30, 2009.
The Foundation’s fundraising efforts are driven by the University’s mission, strategic plan, and
capital campaign priorities. Priority is always given to soliciting unrestricted gifts which can be
utilized as needed by the University. If the donor wishes to support a more narrow area of
interest, such as a department or specific program, the staff will encourage options that are based
on the university’s strategic plan and other priorities that have been established by the
University’s Trustees, the President and senior administrators.
The Executive Director of the Foundation meets with the President and senior administrators
annually to determine the allocation of available unrestricted funds. Some programs, such as
Margin of Excellence and the Alumni programs, represent on-going commitments, while other
activities may be targeted differently each year depending on the University’s current priorities.
For all restricted funds, the primary objective is to ensure that the funds are used according to the
donor’s wishes. Accordingly, the Foundation has an Audit and Corporate Oversight Committee
which monitors all fiscal activities of the organization.
Management of the Foundation’s assets is in accordance with sound business practices and
involves guidance from professional fund managers. Because the Foundation seeks to be
supportive of the University indefinitely, all investment strategies are designed to ensure the long
term fiscal health of its endowments. In addition, investments are designed to be supportive of
20
the University’s short and long-term educational goals. This includes conducting periodic
reviews of spending policies and portfolio allocations to adjust for prevailing financial market
conditions.
The Foundation’s spending policies are based on the change in market value of the endowed
accounts, including scholarships, during the previous fiscal year. A percentage of the increase is
made available to fund specific programs and activities in any given year. The policy is designed
to utilize income generated from the endowed funds while protecting and growing the endowed
principal. For fiscal year 07-08, the spending policy was set at 4 percent of fund balance.
The Foundation’s annual payments to the University are presented in the following table.
Foundation Annual Support To The University
FY 03-04
FY 04-05
FY 05-06
Program Support – Scholarships
$ 455,522 $ 397,387 $ 444,474
Program Support – Academics/Library
155,296
182,976
273,872
Program Support – Administrative/Other
147,507
145,299
171,798
Program Support – Alumni Programs
165,352
150,025
141,594
Program Support – Athletics
125,851
56,334
121,314
Program Support – Development Program
151,556
294,356
244,655
Total University Support
$1,201,084 $1,226,377 $1,397,707
FY 06-07
$ 545,805
289,740
412,228
165,401
64,513
277,601
$1,755,288
FY 07-08
$ 602,270
143,065
250,417
160,052
30,849
418,731
$1,605,384
At the end of the 07-08 fiscal year, the Foundation’s assets totaled $14.3 million [Exhibit 8].
Approximately 80 percent of the assets are permanently restricted.
Office of Development
Although the Foundation is active in fundraising, the University also has an Office of
Development. This office is housed within the University, and is not part of the Foundation.
Many of the annual scholarship and general fundraising activities are conducted by this office.
All funds generated by the office are deposited with, and managed by, the Foundation.
The University’s combined philanthropic efforts are presented in the following table.
Bloomsburg University Philanthropic Income
FY 03-04
FY 04-05
FY 05-06
Development Office and Foundation
$ 888,939 $1,902,219 $1,772,711
Other Contributions
1,568,297
1,671,420
1,886,055
Total Philanthropic Income
$2,457,236 $3,573,639 $3,658,766
FY 06-07
$1,833,338
2,223,044
$4,056,382
FY 07-08
$1,877,519
2,736,681
$4,614,200
As the table above indicates, the University’s efforts to secure philanthropic income have
enjoyed moderate success over the past several years. For instance, during the 07-08 fiscal year
the number of individual donors increase by 19 percent and the annual fund raising drive
generated approximately $775,000.
21
The primary sources of the University’s philanthropic income are:
Development Office and Bloomsburg
University Foundation Contributions
•
•
•
•
•
Other University Contributions
Annual Fund Programs
Personal Contacts
Estate Gifts
In-kind Donations
Other
•
•
•
•
Scholarships
Grants – excluding state and federal
Athletic Camp Proceeds
Other
The Husky Research Corporation
The Husky Research Corporation, Inc. is a non-profit organization that began operations in 2003.
It was established to support the educational and research activities of the University.
The Corporation submits grant proposals on behalf of, and with the approval of, Bloomsburg
University and serves as a fiscal agent for grants and contracts that require more administrative
flexibility than can be provided by the University. The Corporation also administers contracts
that support the clinical activities of the University’s health education programs such as the
Speech and Hearing Clinic. These clinics provide students with an essential clinical experience
and operate as low cost health resources for the local community. These activities are structured
to be not-for-profit but fees are charged to cover the costs of operations.
The Corporation does not engage in fundraising activities. Funds received by the Corporation
are generated by grants and contracts that support the educational and research mission of the
University. To date, the Corporation has negotiated over $1,200,000 in grants and contracts for
the University.
Recommendations
Recommendation 2: A clear organizational structure needs to be defined
between the Bloomsburg University Foundation and the University Office of
Development.
Justification
•
•
The organization chart needs to depict clear lines of communication between the two
entities.
The roles and responsibilities of the Foundation Executive Director and the Foundation
Staff relative to the Assistant Vice-President of University Relations and the
Development Staff need to be clearly defined.
22
Process
The current organizational structure does not define clear communication links between the
Office of Development and the Foundation. This creates confusion regarding fund raising
responsibilities within the two groups and potential contributors often receive conflicting
responses to inquiries.
The current organizational structure does not represent the norm for universities in the
Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. This structure was adopted three years ago and
needs to be reviewed and compared to other organizational structures in use at other universities
to determine if improvements can be made.
Recommendation 3: A percentage of the annual budget should be assigned for
the upkeep of academic and general purpose facilities.
Justification
•
•
There is no current line item in the budget for upkeep of academic and general purpose
buildings at the University.
Funding for upkeep of these facilities is uncertain, relying primarily on the generation of
annual operating surpluses that can be transferred to the plant fund.
Process
The current funding process does not identify a clear level of annual funding for the maintenance
of academic and general purpose facilities. Historically, the University has been able to generate
sufficient surpluses to fund virtually all of the capital renovations and additions in its facilities
master plan as well as to fund needed capital repairs. However, this level of fiscal strength can
not be guaranteed to continue indefinitely.
The University needs to include a line item in the annual general fund budget for academic and
general purpose facilities maintenance. The amount of annual funding could be set as a
percentage of the total value of the academic and general purpose facilities, similar to what is
currently being done with the auxiliary facilities.
23
CHAPTER FOUR
LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE, ADMINISTRATION,
INTEGRITY, AND FACULTY
Standards 4, 5, 6, & 10
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statements regarding the standards
discussed in this chapter are:
Standard 4: Leadership and Governance
The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional
constituencies in policy development and decision-making. The governance
structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure
institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and resource
development, consistent with the mission of the institution.
Standard 5: Administration
The institution’s administrative structure and services facilitate learning and
research/scholarship, foster quality improvement, and support the institution’s
organization and governance.
Standard 6: Integrity
In the conduct of its programs and activities involving the public and the
constituencies it serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to ethical
standards and its own stated policies, providing support for academic and
intellectual freedom.
Standard 10: Faculty
The institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are devised,
developed, monitored, and supported by qualified professionals.
Methodology
A twelve member working group was assigned to review the University’s leadership and
governance, administration, integrity, and faculty. The review included examination of the
University’s governance documents, union contracts, employee statistics, and selected policies
and procedures.
24
Analysis
Bloomsburg University is one of fourteen universities that comprise the Pennsylvania State
System of Higher Education (PASSHE). The system is governed by a 20 member Board of
Governors. The board appoints the individual presidents of the 14 PASSHE universities.
Each system university has its own Council of Trustees. The Bloomsburg University Council of
Trustees is composed of ten community and business leaders and one student representative. All
of the members are appointed by the Governor. The Chancellor of PASSHE also serves as an
ex-officio member of the Council. It is the Council’s responsibility to carry out the policies of
the PASSHE Board of Governors and work with the University’s President to resolve local
issues as they arise.
University Governance
The philosophy behind the University’s governance structure can be summarized from the first
paragraph of the preface to the Bloomsburg University Forum document [Exhibit 19].
The governance structure at Bloomsburg University is founded on the principle
that academic concerns, guided by a curriculum developed by the faculty, are the
basis of our institution and that the student is the focus of the resulting educational
program. This governance model acknowledges our strengths and traditions and
our collective bargaining agreements. We recognize the propriety interests,
rights, and responsibilities of the various university constituencies. Foremost, we
are sensitive to the value of open communication in our university community.
The University President is the chief executive officer. His direct subordinate is the Provost and
Vice President for Academic Affairs who is the chief academic officer at the institution. In
addition, the University’s Organization Chart [Exhibit 20] depicts a series of vice presidents,
deans, and other administrative officers who are responsible for daily operations. Various
members of the management team also serve on the three advisory groups to senior management.
The three groups are; Executive Staff, Dean’s Council, and President’s Advisory Council
[Exhibit 21].
University Committees
As an institution that practices participatory governance, the University has several standing
committees that report to and advise the institution’s executive management team. The primary
standing committees are:
•
•
•
•
•
The Forum
Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee
Planning and Budget Committee
Student Life Committee
General Administration Committee
25
Forum
The Forum is composed of 70 members representing the faculty, students, staff, and
administration [Exhibit 19]. The function of the Forum is to: review and discuss present and
proposed university policies, procedures, and issues; raise concerns; indicate degrees of
consensus or otherwise; and facilitate communication and disseminate information. No new
policy can go into effect without a formal review by the Forum except for academic policies
passed by the Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee (BUCC) or the Planning and
Budget Committee. The Forum is not an amending body but it may recommend policy changes
before implementation.
All chairs of the other institution-wide standing committees provide informational reports at each
session of the Forum and, if appropriate, present proposed policy changes for review.
The Forum meets at least twice a semester and all meetings are open to the public. All faculty,
staff, managers, and students are encouraged to attend the meetings, participate in discussions,
bring up issues during open forum, and participate in straw votes.
At the October 10, 2007 meeting, the Chair of the Forum led a discussion of the role of the
Forum in University governance [Exhibit 22]. Although some members thought the Forum
lacked authority because it was only a recommending body, many delegates felt that concerns
raised during the meetings were heard and taken seriously. The discussion generated requests
for fewer data-intensive reports, more representatives from the senior faculty within each
academic department, and fewer meetings.
Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee (BUCC)
The BUCC is composed of 14 voting members, 10 faculty members chosen via faculty election,
and 1 faculty representative from each of the four college curriculum committees [Exhibit 23].
In addition, there are 2 undergraduate students, 1 graduate student, the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs, and the president’s designee, all of whom serve as ex-officio
members.
The BUCC is responsible for acting upon curricular proposals at the institution-wide level. It
also serves as a coordinating committee for curricular proposals emanating from all components
of the academic community, and serves as a faculty advisory committee to the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs on recommendations for improving the curriculum at the
University. The committee’s formal recommendations are forwarded to the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs for review and implementation. Curricular proposals that
involve establishment of new programs and/or degrees must ultimately be approved by the
Bloomsburg University Council of Trustees (PRP 3200 – Program Approval) [Exhibit 24] and
the PASSHE Board of Governors.
All BUCC meetings are open to the entire campus community. Each semester, the committee
also schedules a special meeting devoted strictly to the discussion of curricular concerns that are
initiated by members of the University community.
26
Planning and Budget Committee
The Planning and Budget Committee is composed of 19 members representing faculty, staff,
students, the various collective bargaining units, and administrators [Exhibit 25]. The committee
is co-chaired by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and the local APSCUF
(faculty) union president.
The committee operates with the philosophy that the academic priorities of the University shall
determine facilities planning, financial planning, and other administrative processes.
Accordingly, the committee places its emphasis on the strategic elements of planning and
budgeting, focusing primarily on the basic mission of the University, the clientele to be served
by the University, the major goals and objectives to be pursued, specific programmatic priorities
of the University, and the means by which the University seeks to differentiate itself from other
institutions.
The Planning and Budget Committee has three standing sub-committees; the Budget
Subcommittee, the Enrollment Management Steering Committee, and the Space and Facilities
Subcommittee.
Student Life Committee
The Student Life Committee is composed of 18 voting members and the Vice President for
University and Student Affairs, who serves as an ex-officio non-voting member [Exhibit 26].
The committee is made up of 7 student members, 4 faculty members, and 7 student life
professionals. The purpose of the committee is to develop and review policies and advise the
Vice President for University and Student Affairs on student life issues.
General Administration Committee
The General Administration Committee is composed of 12 voting members and the Vice
President for Administration and Finance, who serves as an ex-officio non-voting member
[Exhibit 27]. The committee is composed of 5 faculty members, 2 undergraduate students, 2
staff members, and 3 administrators. The purpose of the committee is to initiate, review, and
recommend administrative policies and procedures derived from all components of the
University and/or referred by the Vice President for Administration and Finance.
Faculty representation on all standing committees is determined by university-wide elections
held at the beginning of each academic year. The by-laws of all standing committees are written
to ensure that the broadest possible faculty representation is attained within the constraints of
each committee’s overall size. Committee members representing other constituencies on campus
are either elected or appointed based on the specific committee’s by-laws.
The standing committees discussed previously, along with numerous task forces, subcommittees, and temporary committees, several of which have been referred to throughout this
report, allow for broad representation of all campus constituencies in the decision making
process on campus. Virtually every administrative decision of any consequence that is made at
27
the University is vetted by one or more committees and a formal recommendation is submitted to
the administrator responsible for making the decision. However, authority for final decisions
resides within the administration.
Collective Bargaining Agreements
With the exception of management, all employees at the University are covered under a
collective bargaining agreement [Exhibit 28]. The following unions are represented on campus:
•
•
•
•
•
AFSCME – American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
APSCUF – Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Faculties
OPEIU – Office of Professional Employees International Union Healthcare Pennsylvania
SCUPA – State College and University Professional Association
SPFPA – Security, Police, and Fire Professionals of America
Virtually every aspect of the employees’ and employer’s rights and obligations are clearly
defined within the various union contracts and there are formal and informal processes for
resolution of any contractual disputes that may arise. The processes range from meetings
between union representatives and senior administrators where concerns are discussed
informally, to formal grievance processes that may ultimately be resolved via arbitration.
For example, the APSCUF contract defines the terms and conditions of most interactions that
occur between the faculty and the administration, including faculty reviews, tenure and
promotion, and searches for new faculty. The terms of the contract also apply to all part-time
and adjunct faculty. In addition, APSCUF negotiates a separate contract on behalf of the
coaching staff.
Senior Management
The University President, Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans, and managers are not covered by a
collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, PASSHE has developed a series of policies that
identify the rights and responsibilities of these individuals. The main policies [Exhibit 29] are:
•
•
•
Policy 1984-14-A: Terms and Conditions of Employment of Senior Policy Executives
Policy 2002-02: Duties and Responsibilities of Presidents
Policy 2002-03: Evaluating Presidents
In addition to these policies, Policy 1983-01-A: Merit Principles [Exhibit 30] establishes general
personnel policies for all permanent employees who are not specifically covered by a collective
bargaining agreement or are excluded by the policy or a side letter of exemption. These
employees must also receive an annual performance evaluation in compliance with Policy 198507-A: Management Performance and Reward Program [Exhibit 31]. As part of that review each
manager must submit an updated list of professional goals and objectives [Exhibit 32].
Collectively, these policies define the terms of employment for senior management at the
University.
28
Personnel
The University’s greatest asset is its personnel. Most of the men and women who work at the
University, regardless of their positions or job descriptions, are proud to be part of the
institution’s staff. Because of the University’s excellent compensation and benefits packages it
is one of the most desirable organizations to work for in the region. Accordingly, the University
attracts excellent faculty and staff. Turnover, when it occurs, is most often due to retirement.
Worker pride is apparent throughout the campus. The evidence of this pride ranges from how
well the staff maintain the buildings and grounds to the quality of service that students, parents,
and other visitors receive when they interact with University personnel.
The following table provides basic demographic information about the full-time workforce at the
University.
Gender
Men
Women
Total Employees
Employment Category
Exec./Admin./Manager
Faculty
Other Professional
Clerical/Secretarial
All other support staff
Total
Racial Category
Black, non-Hispanic
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
Native Americans
White, non-Hispanic
Total
2000
458
405
863
Full-Time Employees, Fall Semester
2001
2002
2003
2004
470
461
454
460
402
413
415
421
872
874
869
881
2005
461
422
883
2006
461
442
903
2007
471
461
932
36
381
116
124
206
863
36
386
119
125
206
872
34
377
123
134
206
874
36
378
128
135
192
869
32
379
130
142
198
881
33
383
125
142
200
883
32
395
126
149
201
903
33
408
141
149
201
932
30
25
11
2
795
863
30
27
10
2
803
872
30
29
10
1
804
874
32
32
11
0
794
869
28
30
10
0
813
881
32
31
11
1
808
883
33
32
11
2
825
903
40
33
11
3
845
932
Sources: Exhibit 33 - Bloomsburg University, Office of Institutional Research, Faculty/Staff Data,
Full-Time Employees, Fall Semesters 1998 through 2007.
Overall, there has been an 8 percent growth in the number of employees since 2000. The largest
rates of growth have been in the other professional and clerical/secretarial categories. Most of
the growth in those areas has occurred in positions that provide direct services to students. The
faculty also grew 7 percent since 2000 while the number of senior administrators declined 9
percent as a result of a series of structural reorganizations. The decisions regarding increases in
faculty positions are made through a formal planning and assessment process described in
Exhibit 34.
The growth in personnel has been dictated by the increase in the size of the student body.
However, despite the increase in the size of the physical plant, there has been a decline in the
number of support staff in the skilled craft and technical areas.
29
The University has worked hard to increase the number of women and historically underrepresented classes of individuals entering the campus workforce. The number of women has
grown to just under 50 percent of the total staff and, because of an aggressive recruiting program,
hiring of other historically underrepresented classes of individuals has begun to show a marked
increase.
Seasonal employees are hired when there is a short term need for additional personnel.
However, the vast majority of the workforce is full-time employees who have worked for the
institution for several years. The University is able to maintain a stable workforce because it has
experienced growing enrollment levels and is in a strong financial position.
The following table shows the ratio of students to faculty and to all remaining staff.
Student to Faculty/Staff Ratios
Ratio
Students to Faculty
Students to staff
2000
19.0
13.8
2001
19.5
14.7
2002
20.0
14.4
2003
21.0
14.7
2004
21.0
14.4
2005
21.0
14.8
2006
21.0
14.9
2007
20.0
14.7
As the table above indicates, the ratio of students to both the faculty and the remaining staff grew
slightly through 2003. However, at that point, the ratios stabilized and have recently begun to
decline as the University has hired additional faculty and staff to service the annual increase in
enrollment.
Most of the permanent employees have worked at the University for several years. The
following table summarizes employee service.
Length of Service
Percent of Employees
Permanent Employees – Length of Service
0-5
6-15
16-25
26-30
34.9%
34.5%
22.9%
5.5%
31-35
1.7%
36 Plus
.5%
The fact that the University has such a stable workforce creates a sense of community not just for
the workforce but also for the students and alumni. Many alumni are pleasantly surprised when
they return to campus and see faculty and staff who befriended them when they were students.
Faculty
The University has a strong and vibrant faculty who are dedicated to the University and its
students. Most faculty are initially attracted to the University because of the strong
compensation and benefits package they receive. However, they choose to stay because of the
sense of collegiality and community they experience on campus, combined with a local
community that provides an excellent environment in which to raise their families.
30
The following table shows the composition of the faculty by rank and gender.
Total Faculty
Men
Women
Total
No.
236
172
408
%
58%
42%
100%
Full-Time Faculty - Fall Semester 2007
Professors
Associate
Assistant
Professors
Professors
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
92
73%
64
60%
70
49%
34
27%
43
40%
71
51%
126
100%
107
100%
141
100%
Instructors
No.
10
24
34
%
29%
71%
100%
Sources: Exhibit 35 - Bloomsburg University, Office of Institutional Research, Faculty/Staff Data,
Full-Time Faculty, Fall Semesters 1998 through 2007.
The University has undergone a dramatic shift in the composition of its faculty over the last
decade. Many of the faculty who were hired during the University’s period of rapid expansion in
the 1970’s have retired. As demonstrated by the increased percentage of women in the entry
level academic ranks, the University has been able to use the retirements to develop a more
gender equitable faculty. Since many of the retiring faculty did not possess doctorates, it has
also allowed the University to dramatically increase the number of faculty who have terminal
degrees. By fall 2008 approximately 90 percent of the tenured/tenure track faculty possessed
terminal degrees.
The following table shows the tenure status of the full-time faculty.
Tenured
Men
Women
Total
Tenure-Track
Men
Women
Total
Non Tenure-Track
Men
Women
Total
2000
178
99
277
Full-Time Faculty
2001
2002
2003
178
173
163
96
94
89
274
267
252
2004
160
89
249
2005
155
85
240
2006
157
88
245
2007
157
93
250
41
32
73
44
33
77
43
38
81
50
46
96
48
45
93
53
46
99
58
53
111
68
61
129
14
17
31
20
15
35
13
16
29
15
15
30
22
15
37
19
25
44
21
18
39
11
18
29
Sources: Exhibit 35 - Bloomsburg University, Office of Institutional Research, Faculty/Staff Data,
Full-Time Faculty, Fall Semesters 1998 through 2007.
The number of tenured faculty has declined due to retirements with a resultant increase in the
number of newly hired tenure-track faculty. A temporary increase in non tenure-track faculty
occurred while those new faculty searches were being conducted but returned to normal levels in
2007. The non tenure-track faculty are normally employed on an as-needed basis to fill faculty
vacancies caused by retirements, sabbaticals, illness, and other approved extended faculty
absences.
31
The following table displays the ethnic composition of the faculty.
Racial Category
Black, non-Hispanic
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
Native American
White, non-Hispanic
Total
2000
14
21
7
1
338
381
2001
13
23
6
1
343
386
Full-Time Faculty
2002
2003
12
13
25
28
7
8
0
0
333
329
377
378
2004
13
25
7
0
334
379
2005
14
25
8
1
335
383
2006
14
28
8
2
343
395
2007
19
29
8
2
350
408
Sources: Exhibit 33 - Bloomsburg University, Office of Institutional Research, Faculty/Staff Data,
Full-Time Employees, Fall Semesters 1998 through 2007.
As can be seen in the table above, the overall number of historically underrepresented faculty has
begun to rise and it is anticipated that this trend will continue into the future. The University has
undertaken an aggressive recruitment campaign involving advertising in minority publications,
attending minority faculty recruitment fairs, and making direct contacts with doctoral programs
that historically graduate a significant number of minority students.
Professional Development
The University’s requirements for faculty tenure and promotion are communicated to new
faculty several times during their probationary period [Exhibit 36]. As part of the process, the
Teaching and Learning Enhancement Center, the Instructional Media Design Center, and the
Office of Research and Sponsored Programs make available professional development support to
all faculty members. Their support services are summarized in Exhibit 37.
Ethical Practices
The Bloomsburg University Harassment and Discrimination Policy, PRP 6814 [Exhibit 38],
states that:
Central to the mission of Bloomsburg University is the establishment and
maintenance of an environment in which the dignity and worth of all individuals
within the institution community are respected. Therefore, it is the responsibility
of each person on campus to respect the personal dignity of others and to
demonstrate a basic spirit that precludes harassment and discrimination.
The University is committed to maintaining an environment in which the individual rights of
every member of the academic community are protected. It is also committed to ensuring that all
members of the institution behave in an ethical manner at all times. To ensure that these twin
goals are met, the University has established several policies, rules and procedures (PRP). The
most relevant policies [Exhibit 39] are:
•
•
PRP 2060 – Americans with Disabilities Grievances
PRP 3407 – Student Responsibilities
32
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PRP 3512 – Academic Integrity Policy
PRP 3592 – Academic Grievance Procedure
PRP 3990 – Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Human Subjects Research
PRP 4020 – Student Harassment Policy and Procedure
PRP 4650 – Hazing Policy
PRP 4802 – Code of Conduct
PRP 4805 – Drug Policy
PRP 4810 – Alcoholic Beverage Policy
PRP 4842 – Campus Judicial Policy
PRP 4862 – Student Non-Academic Grievance Policy
PRP 6814 – Harassment and Discrimination Policy
PRP 6820 – Research Misconduct
All of these policies contain procedures to ensure that fair and impartial processes exist for
identifying and resolving any breaches in moral and ethical conduct that may occur within the
University community, including moral and ethical breaches that may occur during the conduct
of research. The rules governing ownership of all intellectual property created by the faculty are
covered separately by Article 39 of the APSCUF collective bargaining agreement [Exhibit 40].
All of the policies listed above provide formal procedures to expeditiously resolve any
grievances that may be filed while simultaneously protecting the rights of all parties. All
University policies, rules, and procedures can be viewed on the University’s web site at
http://www.bloomu.edu/policies/.
In addition, all employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement have a broad range of
protections and obligations which have been negotiated as part of their union contract.
Student Grievances
PRP 3592 Academic Grievance Procedure [Exhibit 41] provides students with a mechanism to
file complaints of alleged academic injustice(s) relating to grades and/or professional
responsibilities as related to academic policies found in the University’s Policies, Rules, and
Procedures (PRPs), and the Pilot (student handbook). Although the process is not a disciplinary
hearing, the findings may lead to a disciplinary investigation or action under another University
policy.
The policy requires the student to make a good faith effort to resolve the issue with the
instructor, department chair, or appropriate dean prior to filing a formal grievance. As the
following table indicates, only a small number of formal grievances are filed each academic year.
Academic Year
Academic Grievances
Academic Grievances Filed Against Faculty Under PRP 3592
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2
1
6
4
3
5
33
2006
6
2007
7
Violation of Code of Conduct
Approximately 55 percent of student violations of the University Code of Conduct are for
alcohol. Many of the other violations occur because the student is under the influence of alcohol
at the time of the incident. This is in spite of an aggressive campus-wide alcohol awareness
program that begins with freshman orientation in June and continues throughout the academic
year. The following tables summarize student conduct incidents and sanctions for the past three
academic years.
Violation Type
Alcohol
Furnishing Alcohol
Drugs
Drugs – Selling/Trafficking
Academic Integrity
Classroom Behavior
Disorderly Conduct
Firearms/Weapons
Laws (Other)
Miscellaneous
Town Code - Disorderly Gatherings
Town Code - Disruptive Conduct
Town Code - Excessive Noise
Town Code - Fire Code
Town Code - Rubbish on Property
Totals
On-campus Incidents
Off-campus Incidents
Totals
Sanction
Alcohol & Drug Probation Level I
Alcohol & Drug Probation Level II
Disciplinary Probation
Written Warning
Disciplinary Warning
Verbal Warning
Resolved w/o Sanction
Suspension
Deferred Suspension
Not Guilty
Open Discipline
Awaiting Court Hearing
Awaiting Court Appeal
Student Withdrawn/Graduated
Charges Withdrawn
Totals
Student Conduct Incidents
Resolved
Unresolved
06-07
07-08
05-06
06-07
07-08
381
454
68
104
116
0
6
3
3
2
37
36
6
10
8
0
2
2
2
8
19
19
5
6
5
1
2
0
0
0
63
82
33
39
31
7
4
1
2
0
31
112
28
76
37
74
64
17
13
14
0
3
0
0
1
1
35
1
0
4
4
5
0
5
1
2
0
0
2
0
3
0
21
0
0
623
824
185
262
227
05-06
504
8
37
2
18
3
135
18
65
64
0
12
2
3
40
911
Total
06-07
485
3
47
2
25
1
102
9
107
87
0
1
9
4
3
885
07-08
570
8
44
10
24
2
113
4
149
78
4
39
6
0
0
1051
83
144
227
493
418
911
412
473
885
557
494
1051
Student Conduct Sanctions
On-Campus Incident
Off-Campus Incident
05-06
06-07
07-08
05-06
06-07
07-08
204
181
206
145
135
189
40
17
20
40
28
13
30
39
27
10
13
19
45
55
112
62
34
64
42
30
28
13
28
28
6
2
2
4
0
3
22
24
55
3
9
11
3
3
8
15
0
11
8
1
3
6
10
8
23
10
13
5
4
4
20
11
25
30
22
28
2
1
10
34
93
38
6
0
0
1
5
4
36
32
48
38
84
74
6
6
0
12
8
0
493
412
557
418
473
494
05-06
349
80
40
107
55
10
25
18
14
28
50
36
7
74
18
911
Total
06-07
316
45
52
89
58
2
33
3
11
14
33
94
5
116
14
885
07-08
395
33
46
176
56
5
66
19
11
17
53
48
4
122
0
1051
05-06
436
5
31
0
13
3
102
17
37
47
0
11
2
3
19
726
423
303
726
362
261
623
474
350
824
70
115
185
50
212
262
Source: Exhibit 42 – Bloomsburg University, Student Conduct Incidents and Sanctions.
34
Most minor first time offenses result in some form of warning. Most first time alcohol/drug
offenses and other second time offenses result in some form of probation. Chronic offenders and
individuals who commit severe offenses often receive suspension/expulsion or decide to
withdraw from the University in order to avoid being sanctioned.
35
CHAPTER FIVE
INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF
STUDENT LEARNING
Standards 7 & 14
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statements regarding the standards
discussed in this chapter are:
Standard 7: Institutional Assessment
The institution has developed and implemented an assessment process that
evaluates its overall effectiveness in achieving its mission and goals and its
compliance with accreditation standards.
Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning
Assessment of student learning demonstrates that, at graduation, or other
appropriate points, the institution’s students have knowledge, skills, and
competencies consistent with institutional and appropriate higher education goals.
Methodology
A thirteen member working group was assigned to review institutional assessment and
assessment of student learning. The review included examination of key University
planning documents, departmental mission statements, outcome assessment files, course
syllabi, interviews with key administrators, and surveys administered to faculty, staff and
administrators.
Analysis
The University is committed to a culture of institutional assessment on campus. The institution’s
goals are clearly articulated and processes to achieve those goals have been documented. The
results are assessed annually to ensure that the planning process is: useful; cost-effective;
accurate and truthful; and organized, systematized and sustained.
Although less evolved than institutional assessment, assessment of student learning has become a
part of the culture of the academic departments and the library during the last decade. Most of
the recent changes to the academic program at the University can be traced to recommendations
resulting from student assessment activities.
36
Strategic Planning and Assessment Cycle
The University follows a prescribed planning and assessment process. The key elements of the
process are:
•
June: The University’s SAP results for the academic year just ended are submitted to the
Office of the Chancellor at PASSHE.
•
August: The University’s Strategic Plan and SAP results for the year just ended are
reviewed by the President’s Advisory Council and the Council of Trustees.
•
September: The SAP and University Strategic Plan results are reported to the University
Forum and the Planning and Budget Committee. The results are placed on the university
web-site. Final budget decisions for the current academic year are reported to the
Planning and Budget Committee.
•
October: The vice presidents’ “responses to the Five-Year Reviews” are presented to the
Planning and Budget Committee and the President’s Advisory Council.
•
November: Evaluations of unit strategic plans for the next academic year are made by the
Planning and Budget Committee.
•
April: Individual Departmental Action Plans for new expenditures are presented to the
Planning and Budget Committee. The action plans are then prioritized and recommended
to the president.
Guided by the Vision 2010 statement [Exhibit 43] and the various long range planning
documents compiled by the University, each year, members of the senior management review
the goals and objectives included in the strategic plan. Then, each academic and administrative
department is responsible for reviewing their plan to accomplish the goals and objectives that fall
within its area of responsibility.
System Accountability Plan
As part of the State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), the University is required to
annually report on The System Accountability Plan (SAP). The details of this process, as
well as the University’s performance results, are discussed in Chapter Three.
University Strategic Plan
The University is guided by its five year strategic plan, Vision 2010 [Exhibit 43],
approved by the Council of Trustees in November, 2005. The plan identifies seven
critical areas that need to be addressed: academic program directions; teaching and
learning (including technology); student growth and development; enrollment planning;
civil and inclusive community; the University as a state and regional resource; and
optimization of fiscal resources, including fund raising. The strategic planning process
37
has also identified several specific goals under each critical area. Each of those goals
has a number of objectives which contain approved implementation strategies and
defined outcomes. The university’s goals are linked to, but are not limited to, the
PASSHE Accountability Plan.
Unit Strategic Plans
Each vice presidential area has an annual unit outcomes assessment plan which stems
from the University Strategic Plan. This includes individual departmental assessment
plans. All plans include the identification of data and other information that is routinely
needed for planning at all levels.
The individual departmental strategic plans contain the specific goals and objectives to be
accomplished, anticipated outcomes for students and the University, measurement methods and
evaluation criteria to be employed, strategic indicators, learning outcomes, assessment methods,
assessment plans, and action plans detailing funding required. The assessment plans created by
the individual departments are subsequently reviewed at the dean/vice president level.
Requests for additional resources to accomplish specific departmental goals are identified in the
departmental strategic plans as Action Plans. Each request must be linked to the Unit and
University strategic plans. During the budgeting process, those Action Plans compose a separate
supplemental expense item and are funded to the extent possible.
Other Plans
Several other plans support the mission and goals of the University. They include the
Technology Plan, the Facilities Master Plan, and the Enrollment Management Plan.
Technology Plan
The Technology Plan was initially written in 1994 and has been updated twice since then. The
first two plans resulted in creation of a four-year replacement cycle for academic computer
equipment on campus, development of a reliable network backbone, and development of a
wireless system across the campus.
The current (2006) version of the plan [Exhibit 12] was drafted by a campus-wide technology
committee, reviewed by the President’s Advisory Council, presented to the University Forum,
and disseminated to the campus community. It concentrates on enhancing user convenience and
the infusion of technology into the classroom. The plan includes the development of strategies to
furnish end users with both the training and support necessary to effectively utilize available
University technology.
Facilities Master Plan
The original Facilities Master Plan [Exhibit 16] was created in 1999 in response to the need to
have a coordinated plan for the use and expansion of the University’s physical plant. Since then
38
the plan has been continuously reviewed and updated by the Space and Facilities Sub-committee
of the Planning and Budget Committee. The primary goals of the plan have been the effective
use of available plant assets, building renovation and new construction, and the “greening” of the
campus. Specific projects completed since 1999 are discussed in Chapter Three.
Enrollment Management Plan
The first Enrollment Management Plan was created in 1987 to ensure that the University would
experience sustained enrollment levels for the foreseeable future. An Enrollment Management
Steering Committee (EMSC) meets routinely to review and update the plan. With the
anticipated decline in eligible high school graduates within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
after 2009, the work of the Steering Committee has been elevated to a prominent roll in the
University’s planning processes.
The EMSC, which reports to the Planning and Budget Committee, is divided into four
subcommittees: the Data Collection and Analysis Subcommittee, which is charged with
collecting and analyzing data relevant to the Strategic Enrollment Management Plan, including
data related to the University’s enrollment goals, objectives, and benchmarks; the Recruitment
Strategies Subcommittee, which is charged with identifying and monitoring recruitment
strategies necessary to meet the University’s enrollment goals, objectives, and benchmarks; the
Retention Strategies Subcommittee, which is charged with identifying and monitoring student
retention strategies; and the Coordinating Subcommittee, which serves as the conduit to facilitate
communication between the subcommittees and oversees the process of review and modification
of the Plan. The current Enrollment Management Plan covers 2006-2011 [Exhibit 44] and is
discussed in detail in Chapter Six.
The table on the following page summarizes the University’s major institutional assessment
plans.
Office of Institutional Research
The Office of Institutional Research serves as the primary repository of institutional data. It is
responsible for the collection, analysis, and distribution of much of the data used in
administrative planning and decision-making.
The Office of Institutional Research serves as the main clearinghouse for data provided to
PASSHE. In addition to compiling data, the office is responsible for ensuring that all
quantitative information reported to external constituents is both accurate and consistent. The
primary research document created and used by the Office of Institutional Research is the
“Common Data Set” [Exhibit 45]. This is a collection of the data sets normally used by the
University for external reporting purposes and internal decision making. Much of the descriptive
data referenced in this report came from that and related data sets.
39
Assessment Plan
Institutional Assessment Plans
Responsible
Reviews and
Entity
Disseminates Reports
Comments
System Accountability
Performance Measures (SAP)
Bloomsburg
University
PASSHE Board of
Governors
State System mandated performance
metrics that directly affect the total
amount of State funding received by
each university in the State System.
Designed to facilitate continuous
improvement and demonstrate
accountability. SAP data supplied by
the University is audited by
PASSHE.
University Strategic Plan
(Vision 2010)
Vice
Presidents
Council of Trustees,
Advisory Council,
Planning and Budget,
University Forum
Linked to SAP, but not limited by it.
Updated yearly.
Unit Strategic Plans
Vice
Presidents
Council of Trustees,
Advisory Council,
Planning and Budget,
University Forum
Linked to the University Strategic
Plan. Updated yearly.
Technology Plan
Assistant
VicePresident for
Information
Technology
and Library
Services
Advisory Council,
University Forum,
College Technology
Committees
Initial Plan created in 1994, was
updated in 2002 and 2006.
Enrollment Management Plan
Enrollment
Management
Steering
Committee
Planning and Budget,
President’s Advisory
Council
Current 5-year plan created in 2006,
this plan helps Bloomsburg
University meet its own performance
goals and those specified by SAP.
Facilities Master Plan
Space and
Facilities
Committee
Advisory Council,
University Forum,
Planning and Budget
Created in 1999 to provide for
continuous cohesive improvements in
the physical nature of our campus.
The Office of Institutional Research also produces a wide variety of reports and studies that
describe and analyze the University’s students, faculty, academic departments and colleges.
These reports are prepared for groups as diverse as PASSHE, the Council of Trustees, the
President and his Advisory Council, Vice-Presidents, Deans, the Planning and Budget
Committee, the University Forum, and individual departments.
University Outcomes Assessment Committee
The Provost and Vie President for Academic Affairs is responsible for coordinating the
assessment of student learning at the University. The university-wide surveys and tests that are
administered as part of the assessment process are coordinated by the Associate Dean of Liberal
40
Arts, who reports directly to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs on all
assessment matters.
The University Outcomes Assessment Committee (UOAC) was created in May 1999 to assist the
Associate Dean of Liberal Arts. The committee immediately began to look at ways to assess the
general education program which is defined in PRP 3612 – General Education Requirements
[Exhibit 46]. The committee ultimately recommended implementation of the Academic Profile
Test, subsequently renamed the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress Test (MAPP),
which was developed by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). The MAPP test was chosen
because it is cost effective, easy to administer, provides national norm-referenced data, and is
capable of measuring skill levels in reading, writing, mathematics, and critical thinking. The test
includes 108 multiple choice questions divided between the humanities, social sciences, and
natural sciences.
The MAPP test is administered annually to members of the freshman and junior classes. The
results are reported to the Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee (BUCC), the Dean's
Council, the University Forum, and other major stakeholders. Analysis of the 2008 MAPP
results [Exhibit 47] indicates that the University’s freshmen scored below their peer groups in
every category while the juniors scored at the same level or above in every category.
The MAPP results indicate that freshmen enter the University with a lower level of knowledge in
general subjects than students nationally. However, once they complete their general education
core courses, their level of knowledge equals or exceeds all peer cohorts. The scores indicate
that the University’s general education program is effective.
A portion of the 2008 MAPP results appear in the table below. The general education
curriculum is discussed in detail in Chapter Seven.
MAPP Results 2008
Master’s Institutions
Freshmen
Juniors
Humanities
Social Sciences
Natural Sciences
Reading
Writing
Critical Thinking
Using Math Data
Total MAPP Score
113.30
112.10
113.60
116.60
113.30
109.60
112.40
438.90
115.70
114.40
115.90
119.50
115.10
112.10
114.00
447.50
Doctoral I and II
Freshmen
Juniors
Scores
114.70
116.10
113.50
114.80
114.90
116.00
118.10
119.90
114.70
115.30
111.20
112.40
114.10
114.60
445.00
449.10
Bloomsburg University
Freshmen
Juniors
112.59
110.41
112.65
115.08
112.57
108.13
111.81
434.03
117.15
115.24
117.37
120.78
115.41
113.75
115.86
452.48
Source: Exhibit 47 – Bloomsburg University, MAPP Results 2008.
Notes: The source document also contains the results for Associate’s Colleges and Baccalaureate
Level I and II Universities. Their scores were lower than the cohorts listed above.
The total MAPP score is not the sum of the scores of the individual areas tested.
41
In 2005, the University Outcomes Assessment Committee became inactive when the Assessment
and Evaluation Task Force was formed.
Assessment and Evaluation Task Force
The University formed the Assessment and Evaluation Task Force (AETF) to enhance current
assessment activities. Created in August 2005 by the Provost and Vice President of Academic
Affairs, the AETF was charged with developing a comprehensive assessment plan for all
academic programs at Bloomsburg University. The AETF subsequently divided itself into
several working subcommittees. Those subcommittees were: General Education Evaluations,
General Education Goals, Departmental Assessment, and Academic Unit Plan Format.
The Academic Unit Plan Format subcommittee initially contributed to the development of the
template that is currently used to prepare the institution’s unit and department strategic plans.
This group subsequently developed guidelines and a template for departments to follow when
conducting 5-year reviews [Exhibit 48]. The purpose of the template is to create greater
consistency in department 5-year reviews, thus facilitating easier comparison of data. The
guidelines and template will be used for the first time during the 2008-09 academic year.
The Departmental Assessment Subcommittee performed several important tasks. Initially, the
subcommittee examined all of the University’s departmental outcomes assessment plans to
determine what types of measures were actually being used. They concluded that many of the
assessment measures were indirect in nature. They also deduced that many faculty members
were unaware of the large number of direct assessment measures that are currently available.
Armed with this new knowledge, in September 2006 the subcommittee arranged for Dr. Virginia
Anderson, a noted speaker on the subject of conducting effective outcomes assessment activities,
to conduct workshops on how to develop course-embedded direct measures of assessment.
Simultaneously, the subcommittee developed a web site (http://library.bloomu.edu/oa/index.swf)
that provides the University community with links to current assessment literature and related
resources.
The subcommittee also developed a proposal for enhancing assessment activities across the
campus [Exhibit 49]. Their proposal is presented in the form of recommendations at the end of
this chapter.
The two General Education Subcommittees conducted a series of focus groups with the faculty
to determine their perceptions of what the University’s general education curriculum should
include. Their work generated a list of General Education Learning Objectives [Exhibit 50]
which the subcommittee considered necessary to provide a quality general education program at
the University.
The AETF finished its work in March 2008 and has been disbanded. In April 2008, the Provost
and Vice President of Academic Affairs created the General Education Task Force which will
officially review and make recommendations for enhancing general education at the University.
The new task force will build on much of the work already performed by the AETF.
42
The discussion of general education is continued in Chapter Seven.
Assessment of Departments and Faculty
The table on the following page summarizes several assessment activities that occur at regularly
scheduled intervals. Each of these activities is designed to evaluate, on an on-going basis, a
specific segment of the University
Department and Program Strategic Plans
As part of the annual strategic planning process, each department must submit a departmental
strategic plan. Each academic department must include student learning outcomes assessment
plans for all undergraduate and graduate degree programs it supervises. Each departmental
strategic plan also specifies the data and other information that is to be used for assessment of
student learning.
Five Year Review of Departments
In accordance with PASSHE policy, each academic and student life program must undergo a
review on a five year cycle. This review requires an external consultant. Reports of these
reviews are made to the Office of the Chancellor and the University Council of Trustees.
Programs in the Administrative, Finance, and University Relations areas undergo more informal
reviews on the same cycle. The vice presidents or their delegates must prepare written responses
to all departmental reviews conducted in their areas of responsibility.
PASSHE allows any program or department that is currently accredited by a nationally and/or
internationally recognized accrediting body to substitute their reaccreditation activities for the
five year review process.
Faculty Reviews
The collective bargaining agreement between APSCUF and PASSHE requires that each tenure
track and adjunct faculty member must undergo a prescribed annual review. That review
includes: annual peer classroom observations; standardized student evaluations each semester for
all sections taught; and written evaluations from the Departmental Evaluation Committee,
Department Chair, Dean, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. All tenured
faculty must complete the same process once every five years.
MAPP Test
The MAPP test has been administered to a sample of the freshman and junior classes each year
since the 2003-04 academic year. The test is discussed in detail in a previous section of this
chapter.
43
Method
Assessment of Departments and Faculty
Rational
Reviews
Comments
Department &Program
Strategic Plans
Ensure that individual
departments have goals,
objectives, and strategies
(Action Plans) related to
the University’s goals and
objectives.
Deans, Provost, VicePresidents, Planning
and Budget
All departments provide a
yearly report in a university
specified format.
Five Year Review of
Departments
Assures deliberate
attention to the quality of
all academic and nonacademic programs.
Allows for program data to
be used in University
assessment reports. Allows
for the strengths and
weaknesses of individual
programs to be assessed in
a systematic fashion.
Deans, Provost, VicePresidents, Planning
and Budget, PASSHE
Standard Template exists
for five-year Review
reports. Accredited
programs may substitute
their accreditation report
for their five-year reports.
Yearly Reviews of Untenured
Faculty and Five Year Review
of Tenured Faculty
Ensures that faculty meet
university standards for
effective teaching,
continuing scholarly
growth and service to the
university and community
Department
Committee,
Department Chair,
College Dean, Provost
Includes peer observation
reports, student evaluation
summaries, and faculty
vita.
Academic Profile and MAPP
(ETS Provided Assessment
Tools)
Assesses student
proficiency in general
education knowledge
BUCC, University
Forum, Dean’s
Council, Planning and
Budget, Council of
Trustees
Initiated in the 2003-2004
academic year and
administered every year
since then.
National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE)
Measures student
engagement and assesses
how they spend their time
between work, social life
and academic studies.
BUCC, University
Forum, Dean’s
Council, Planning and
Budget, Council of
Trustees
Given in the 2005-2006
academic year and again
in the 2007-2008
academic year.
Student Satisfaction Survey
Measures student opinions
regarding their experiences
at the University
BUCC, University
Forum, Dean’s
Council, Planning and
Budget, Council of
Trustees
Given in the 2006-2007
academic year.
PASSHE Policy 1986-04-A
(amended 1991)
44
National Survey of Student Engagement
The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) is administered to members of the
freshman and senior classes on a biennial basis. The NSSE survey asks students to report the
frequency with which they engage in activities that represent effective educational practices.
Students also record their perceptions of the college environment associated with achievement,
satisfaction and persistence. Then students self-assess their educational and personal growth
since starting college. Finally, students provide information about their background, including
age, gender, race or ethnicity, living situation, educational status, and major field.
The survey gives the University a chance to measure numerous attributes and characteristics of
the student body and benchmark them against students nationally [Exhibit 51]. Several
responses in the 2008 survey were labeled as “statistically” different than the national response
rate. However, large differences were found in only a few areas. Also, the freshmen’s
responses deviated from national response rates four times as often as the seniors did.
Two of the most striking differences were that the University’s seniors spent fewer hours
working off campus each week and they spent less time providing care for dependents living
with them. This means that students at the University generally have more time to engage in
meaningful educational activities than students at other institutions across the nation.
Overall, the NSSE results indicate that the University’s students are essentially the same as
students throughout the nation. This is especially true for seniors.
Student Satisfaction Survey
As part of the University’s commitment to enhancing student performance, a student satisfaction
survey was given electronically to the student body in spring 2007 [Exhibit 52]. The purpose of
the survey was to elicit opinions from students regarding their experiences at the University.
Survey questions were posed in four different areas: Orientation, Advisement and Registration;
Faculty and Instruction; Academic and Student Support Services; and Overall College
Experience.
The survey responses were converted to a five point Likert scale of 1 = very dissatisfied to 5 =
very satisfied. The average total responses for virtually all questions were above 3.0. For most
questions, the freshmen were often the most satisfied group while the seniors often were the least
satisfied. The highest and lowest average response scores recorded were:
Lowest scores
• Getting the courses I need in the appropriate sequence (3.1)
• The scheduling of courses with appropriate frequency (3.2)
• The availability of online courses at Bloomsburg University (2.8)
• Signage in parking lots (2.7)
45
Highest scores
• The overall academic experience at Bloomsburg University (3.8)
• Major preparation for future employment (3.8)
• Development of my critical thinking skills (3.8)
• Development of my communication skills (3.8)
• The number and range of majors offered (3.9)
• The quality of instruction I have received from faculty (3.8)
• Clubs and organizations (3.8)
• The Library’s collection and services (3.9)
• Opportunities to participate in intramural sport programs (3.8)
All of the remaining responses fell in a range between 3.3 and 3.7.
In response to the survey results, all academic programs are now provided with the resources
they need to better meet course demands. The University has also created a task force
specifically charged with facilitating the creation of new online courses.
The survey will be repeated in the future on a biennial basis.
Accredited Programs
Many academic programs at the University are currently accredited with various national/
international accreditation bodies. Most of the accrediting bodies require demonstration of
assessment of student learning as part of the accreditation process. Programs who have achieved
accredited status often serve as campus leaders in developing new assessment techniques. They
also serve as models for other programs wishing to enhance their assessment practices.
Several of the faculty who served on the Middle States Self-Study Assessment and Evaluation
Task Force came from departments with accredited programs. They were chosen because they
had the most extensive background in outcomes assessment. Many of them had attended
conferences and seminars on outcomes assessment as part of their department’s accreditation
activities. This gave them insight into how to conduct effective outcomes assessment.
The list on the following page identifies the University’s accredited programs, types of degrees
conferred, and the accrediting bodies.
46
Accredited Programs - October 31, 2008
Accredited Program
Degree(s)
Accrediting Body
Accounting
BSBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Audiology and Speech Language
MS/AuD
Council on Academic Accreditation in American SpeechPathology
Language-Hearing Association, Council for Exceptional
Children, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher
Education
Business Education
BSEd/MEd National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Business Information Systems
BSBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Chemistry
BA/BS
American Chemical Society
Computer and Information Science
BS
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Computer Science – Mathematics
BS
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Curriculum and Instruction
MEd
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Early Childhood
BSEd/MEd National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Education of the Deaf/Hard of Hearing
MS
Council on the Education of the Deaf,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Electronics Engineering Technology
BS
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Elementary Education
BSEd/MEd National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Exercise Science
BS/MS
American Society of Exercise Physiologists,
Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education
Programs
Finance
BSBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Health Physics
BS
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Management
BSBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Marketing
BSBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Masters of Business Administration
MBA
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
Music
BA
National Association of Schools of Music
Nursing
BSN/MSN
Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education,
Pennsylvania State Board of Nursing
Reading
MEd
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Secondary Education
BSEd
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education,
Pennsylvania Department of Education
Social Work
BSW
Council on Social Work Education
Special Education
BSEd/MS
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
- BSEd only, Pennsylvania Department of Education
Theatre Arts
BA
National Association of Schools of Theatre
Assessment of Student Learning
Each academic department was asked to self-report on the student assessment activities engaged
in since 1999. In addition, individual department strategic plans for the past several years were
reviewed to verify that there were planned assessment activities occurring.
College of Business
All of the departments within the College of Business are accredited by at least one
national/international accrediting body that requires documented student outcomes assessment.
47
The various departments have implemented many program changes based on the results of their
outcomes assessment activities. Some of the most noteworthy changes that have occurred since
1999 include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accounting internship exit interviews indicated that additional computer skills would
have been beneficial. In response to that finding, the Accounting Department added a
required Accounting Information System course for all accounting majors.
Accounting alumni surveys indicated that the graduates wished that they had been
exposed to an electronic bookkeeping system. The Accounting Department has
incorporated an electronic bookkeeping practice set into the Intermediate I accounting
class.
A need for individuals trained in Fraud Examination was identified through interviews
with employers. The Accounting Department has developed and implemented a
Concentration in Fraud Examination.
Alumni surveys indicated that the Business Education and Business Information
Systems Department’s graduates needed additional coursework in several areas. The
Introduction to Business Information Systems, Networking, Systems Security, Project
Management, and Cases in Business Information Systems courses have been added to
the department’s curriculum.
Writing rubrics imbedded in the business core course, Managerial Accounting, indicated
that business majors lacked the requisite business writing skills. The College of
Business responded by creating a new business core course, Business Communications.
Surveys of current students and alumni indicated that a need for individuals trained in
Human Resource Management existed. Therefore, a Concentration in Human Resource
Management has been created by the Management Department.
The following table identifies the various types of assessment activities conducted by the
departments within the College of Business between 1999 and 2008.
College of Business – Assessment Activities
Direct Methods
Department
Accounting
Business
Education /
Business
Information
Systems
Computer
Information
Systems
Finance and
Legal Studies
Management
Marketing
Total Measures
in Place
Embedded
Course
Assessments
1
Portfolio or
Performance
Assessments
Testing
1
Capstone
Projects
Surveys
and
Interviews
Indirect Methods
1
Tracking pregraduation
student data
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
6
1
5
48
1
1
Tracking
postgraduation
student data
1
1
1
3
In 1990, the College of Business also began administering the Educational Testing Services
Major Fields Test in Business to their graduating seniors. The first several sets of results
indicated that student performance in the economics portion of the test was consistently below
the level that the college considered acceptable. Approximately six years ago the College
approached the Economics Department about the test results and worked with their faculty to
identify additional topics that needed to be covered in the basic macro and micro economics
courses. Once the course content was revised, scores on the economics portion of the test rose to
acceptable levels.
College of Liberal Arts
Because the College of Liberal Arts is multidisciplinary in nature, learning assessments
conducted within the college have led to a broad range of corrective actions. Some examples of
these actions include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Student and alumni surveys revealed that Theatre Arts students need more specialized
courses taught by individuals with current work experience in professional theatre. The
Theatre Arts Department has responded to the survey results by regularly offering select
courses that are taught by individuals with current work experience.
Through senior exit interviews, the Political Science Department identified a need for a
discipline-specific writing course and a need for a capstone course. The department has
subsequently implemented a Research and Writing course and is developing a capstone
course for their majors.
The History Department has instituted a program of interviews and surveys at various
stages in their majors’ academic experience in order to identify ways to enhance their
students’ learning experiences.
The Art and Art History Department has been using surveys and course-embedded
measures as a means for identifying ways for students to develop a deeper appreciation of
art. The department has been adjusting course content and presentation accordingly.
Through portfolio assessment, the English Department determined that, for English
majors, writing assignments other than conventional literature essays were weaker than
expected. Consequently, the English Department expanded its variety of upper division
writing courses.
Although exit interviews determined that graduating English majors were pleased with
their program of study, alumni surveys revealed that alums had concerns about the career
advice they had received from their advisors. The English Department has responded by
instituting a fall advising workshop for all new English faculty. Many of the
department’s experienced faculty members also participate in the workshop.
As part of their Research and Writing Course, the Anthropology Department has been
assessing their majors’ writing skills. Their assessment has verified that the students
writing skills are satisfactory.
Exit surveys of Anthropology graduates confirm that they are engaged in learning
experiences outside of the required course content. Graduates reported that they attended
off-campus lectures and did independent reading of the discipline’s research literature.
Through student assessment auditions, the Music Department determined that its nonpiano music majors did not meet the department’s minimum standards for piano
49
proficiency. In response, the department has established an entrance examination to
assess each student’s piano skill level and to assign each student to the appropriate course
of piano study.
The following table identifies the types of assessment activities conducted by departments within
the College of Liberal Arts between 1999 and 2008.
College of Liberal Arts – Assessment Activities
Direct Methods
Department
Anthropology
Art and Art History
Communications
and Theatre Arts
Economics
English
Exercise Science
and Athletics
History
Mass
Communications
Music
Philosophy
Political Science
Psychology
Sociology, Social
Work and Criminal
Justice
Total Measures
Embedded
Course
Assessments
Portfolio or
Performance
Assessments
1
1
1
Testing
Capstone
Projects
1
Surveys
and
Interviews
1
1
Indirect Methods
Tracking
Tracking
prepostgraduation
graduation
student data
student data
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
3
0
1
2
1
5
1
All of the departments within the College of Professional Studies are accredited by at least one
national/international accrediting body that requires documented student outcomes assessment.
Some examples of these assessment activities include:
•
•
1
1
College of Professional Studies
•
1
Depending upon their career interests, students graduating from the Department of
Audiology and Speech Pathology must pass the National Certification Tests in ‘Speech
Pathology, pass the PRAXIS examinations, meet the requirements for the Council on
Academic Accreditation and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Certification, and qualify for state licensure. The department monitors student
performance of these examinations and adjusts course content to ensure that the students
are prepared to successfully complete the exams.
The Nursing Department employs embedded assessment measures to demonstrate to the
Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education that their students are obtaining the
required knowledge base. Based upon their assessment results, the department routinely
makes corrections to their course content.
The various education departments use the PRAXIS examinations as their primary
assessment tool. All education majors must successfully complete the series of PRAXIS
50
4
examinations in order to receive their initial teaching certification. The departments
monitor student performance on the PRAXIS examinations and use the results to identify
and correct any deficiencies in course content.
Students in the Department of Education Studies and Secondary Education must
complete the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s 430 form to gain certification to
student teach. Through analysis of the 430 forms the department determined that
students were not receiving sufficient diverse off-site classroom observations prior to
student teaching. The department developed a checklist to ensure that all students made
several off-site classroom visits to school districts such as Philadelphia and Hazelton
which have diverse student populations.
•
The following table identifies the various types of assessment activities conducted by the
departments within the College of Professional Studies between 1999 and 2008.
College of Professional Studies – Assessment Activities
Direct Methods
Department
Audiology and
Speech Pathology
Early Childhood
and Elementary
Education
Educational
Studies and
Secondary
Education
Exceptionality
Programs
Nursing
Total Measures in
Place
Embedded
Course
Assessments
Portfolio or
Performance
Assessments
1
Testing
1
Capstone
Projects
1
Surveys
and
Interviews
Indirect Methods
Tracking pregraduation
student data
Tracking
postgraduation
student data
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
5
4
3
1
5
College of Science and Technology
All of the programs in the College of Science and Technology that are eligible for professional
accreditation or certification have attained accredited or certified status as of fall 2008. All of
the relevant accrediting/certifying bodies require ongoing student outcomes assessment. These
assessment activities have led to several individual program improvements including:
•
•
•
Since 2003, the Chemistry Department has conducted course-embedded, subjectspecific examinations at the beginning and end of the Introduction to Chemistry,
Chemistry for the Sciences, Fundamentals of Organic Chemistry, and Biochemistry 1
courses. Lecture and laboratory topics in these courses are often modified to reflect
student strengths and weaknesses identified by the beginning of course examination.
In response to feedback obtained from alumni, the Chemistry Department updated
course content to include more public speaking and writing assignments.
Analysis of the chemistry majors’ performance in their first chemistry course indicated
that many were not adequately prepared for the assigned coursework. Thus, since 2005,
51
•
•
•
•
•
the Chemistry Department has used the Chemistry Placement Examination to place
incoming majors in the correct initial chemistry courses. The department has also begun
using the Global Assessment of Logical Thinking (GALT) examination to identify
incoming majors who have difficulties with scientific reasoning.
The Chemistry Department uses questions furnished by the American Chemical Society
to assess students’ progress and command of chemistry fundamentals.
Based on observations of retention data provided by the Office of Institution Research,
the Physics and Engineering Technology Department determined that their majors were
not fully prepared for their initial calculus and physics courses. As a result, in fall 2006,
the department added the introductory course Contemporary Physics to the beginning of
their curriculum.
In response to concerns about student scores on the math portion of the PRAXIS
examination, the Mathematics Department has implemented structured review sessions
for students preparing to take the exam.
To ensure that students master the key principles in their introductory courses, the
Geography and Geosciences Department has initiated “test blueprinting”. Responses to
several test-imbedded key concept questions are routinely analyzed and course
presentations modified when necessary.
The Department of Instructional Technology has developed highly articulated learning
outcomes and assessment measures. Throughout their coursework, majors are informed
of outcomes they are expected to achieve and how they will be evaluated (e.g. rubrics,
client evaluations, etc.).
The following table identifies the various types of assessment activities conducted by
departments within the College of Science and Technology between 1999 and 2008.
College of Science and Technology - Assessment Activities
Direct Methods
Department
Biology and
Allied Health
Sciences
Chemistry
Geography and
Geosciences
Instructional
Technology
Mathematics,
Computer
Science, and
Statistics
Physics and
Engineering
Technology
Total Measures
in Place
Embedded
Course
Assessments
Portfolio or
Performance
Assessments
Testing
1
1
1
Indirect Methods
1
1
Tracking pregraduation
student data
Tracking
postgraduation
student data
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
Capstone
Projects
Surveys
and
Interviews
1
1
1
3
52
3
Library
As a department that is not aligned to any college or program, the Library is responsible for its
own student assessment activities. The Library Outcomes Assessment and Information Literacy
Committee (LOAILC) offers an online interactive tutorial on general library research. Through
this tutorial the Library has discovered general areas of weakness in students’ library research
skills and has revised its course-related library instruction accordingly. As an example, the
committee discovered that students scored poorly on tutorial questions pertaining to using print
indexes, and finding books using the Library of Congress Classification System call numbers.
Librarians now emphasize these points in their library instruction sessions and their interactions
with students at the Reference Desk.
The librarians also identified trends in students’ information literacy needs in the online course,
Introduction to Library Research. This has led to incorporation of different assignments and
learning tools into the course such as the use of blogs, self-assessments, and online “flash cards.”
In 2005, the LOAILC began giving the King’s College Information Literacy Assessment to a
small sample of the graduating seniors to assess their information literacy based on standards
developed by the Association of College and Research Libraries. The seniors scored highest on
Standard 1 (“determine the extent of information needed”) and Standard 2 (“access the needed
information effectively and efficiently”). They scored lowest on Standard 3 (“evaluate
information and its sources critically and incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge
base”) and Standard 4 (“use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose”).
The ultimate goal of the LOAILC is to administer the King’s College assessment instrument
each year to incoming freshmen and graduating seniors in order to obtain better data on the
development of the students’ information literacy skills while at the University. In the fall 2008
semester, the Committee began implementing the process by administering the King’s College
assessment instrument to a large sample of the incoming freshman class. A report on the results
of that assessment was not available at the time this document was written.
A complete report of the Library’s outcomes assessment activities is available in Exhibit 53.
Awareness of Assessment Activities
Members of the campus community normally become aware of institutional assessment activities
during preparation of their department’s strategic plan and through the 5-year review process.
The results of University-wide assessment activities are also routinely presented at campus
assemblages such as the Planning and Budget Committee, University Forum, and Bloomsburg
University Curriculum Committee meetings. After public presentation and discussion, many of
the assessment results are placed on a shared network drive that can be accessed by the entire
campus community.
As part of the development of the University’s self-study, a questionnaire was prepared and
distributed to the campus community (originally discussed in Chapter Two) [Exhibit 3]. Several
53
questions addressed aspects of institutional assessment and assessment of student learning at the
University. The results were mixed.
On the positive side:
• 60% participated in their department’s outcomes assessment plan (Question 19).
• 56% participated in their department’s action plan (Question 19).
• 54% participated in their department’s outcomes assessment data collection (Question
19).
• 48% believe that outcomes assessment has been beneficial in developing departmental
strategic plans (Question 20).
On the negative side:
• 66% did not know if the results of outcomes assessment were used to develop strategic
plans (Question 18).
• 71% did not know if the results of outcomes assessment were used to determine how
resources are allocated (Question 15).
When the responses were broken down between faculty, staff and administrators, it became
apparent that each group had more specific knowledge of the types of planning and assessment
activities that were occurring at their level than elsewhere across campus. For instance, faculty
reported knowing more about planning and assessment at the department level and less about
university-wide strategic planning. “I do not know” was a common response chosen for many of
the planning and assessment questions.
Encouragement of Assessment Efforts
Several key academic administrators (Provost, Deans, and the Assistant Dean of the College of
Liberal Arts) were asked to comment on how they encourage, recognize, and value faculty
assessment of student learning. Most of the administrators reported that they provided some
form of funding to support assessment efforts. The funding varied from supporting assessment
training and purchase of external evaluation instruments to providing departments with
additional discretionary funding to reward their efforts.
Questions 43 and 44 of the self-study survey of faculty, staff, and administrators [Exhibit 3]
indicate that most of the faculty felt that their primary source of recognition and support for their
student assessment activities came from within their own department. This is understandable
given that many faculty assessment activities are centered at the departmental level.
Deficient Assessment Activity
The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) announced on
November 12, 2008 that 22 initial teacher certification programs currently available at the
University have successfully completed the reaccreditation process and have received
reaccreditation through 2011. However, NCATE also notified the institution that the advanced
teacher certification programs (programs leading to master’s degrees and advanced certificates
54
for individuals who already have their first license to teach) do not meet the requirements of
NCATE Standard 4 (Diversity) [Exhibit 55].
The specific deficiencies noted by NCATE under Standard 4 are:
•
•
•
•
•
The unit does not systematically use disaggregated data on candidates’ abilities to address
the needs of learners from diverse populations for program evaluation and improvement.
The unit’s collection of assessment data on candidates’ abilities to address the needs of
learners from diverse populations is limited and varies across programs.
The unit does not ensure that all candidates interact with peers from diverse ethnic and
racial groups.
The unit does not ensure that all candidates interact with P-12 students from diverse
ethnic and racial groups.
The unit does not ensure that all candidates interact with faculty from diverse ethnic and
racial groups.
As a result of these deficiencies, the NCATE accreditation for advanced teacher certification
programs at the University will be terminated at the conclusion of the spring 2009 semester.
Assessment tools are currently being developed to address the deficiencies cited by NCATE. The
assessment activities are being led by the Associate Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, who has
been named the Unit Head for all teacher education programs. Although the University is not
required to apply for reaccreditation until the year 2011, University officials plan to request an
earlier accreditation visit from NCATE.
Review and Recommendations
Just as the University is driven by the overall strategic plan, each administrative and academic
unit is driven by a specific departmental strategic plan. Each of these strategic plans identifies
the goals to be achieved, the methods to be employed, the anticipated outcomes, and how the
results will be assessed.
Accreditation of individual undergraduate and graduate programs is one example of how
strategic planning and assessment combine to demonstrate that the University is fulfilling its
educational mission. At the college and department levels, strategic planning and assessment of
program results are used to enable the unit to acquire or maintain accreditation; at the individual
department and course level, assessment is employed to demonstrate to the accrediting body that
the students are acquiring the level of knowledge necessary to succeed in their chosen field.
Individuals at the University are made aware of assessment activities through their departmental
strategic planning process and 5-year reviews. University-wide assessment information is
presented at many different meetings across campus and is made available electronically on a
shared network drive. Unfortunately, even with all the avenues available, many members of the
campus community reported that they are unaware of the various planning and assessment
activities being conducted at the University.
55
Recommendation 4: Bloomsburg University should create an Office of
Outcomes Assessment
Justification
•
•
•
•
As initially recommended by the Assessment and Evaluation Task Force, there needs to
be a recognized entity responsible for coordinating outcomes assessment activities at the
University.
There needs to be one entity that is readily accessible and able to provide education,
guidance and support to individuals and groups wishing to conduct outcomes assessment
activities.
There needs to be one entity that will review, compile, disseminate, and serve as a
repository for the results of assessment activities on campus.
There needs to be a highly visible champion of outcomes assessment on campus.
Process
The University needs to dedicate the resources necessary to create an Office of Outcomes
Assessment. The office needs to be adequately staffed with a director and additional staff
members trained in conducting outcomes assessment. Those individuals need to have the
resources necessary to conduct regular outcomes assessment training for the faculty and staff.
The office should also work with the faculty to plan and conduct assessment activities at the
department and course level.
Recommendation 5: Bloomsburg University should create an elected
Outcomes Assessment Committee.
Justification
•
•
The committee would provide a link between the Office of Outcomes Assessment and the
faculty, staff and administrators to ensure that their concerns are voiced.
The committee would provide a gauge of acceptance of proposed assessment activities
and help champion the assessment process across campus.
Process
The proposed Outcomes Assessment Committee would be a standing committee that would
consist of representatives from the faculty, staff, and administrators who would be elected to the
committee in accordance with the various collective bargaining agreements in force at the time
of the first election. It would serve as an advisory committee to the proposed Office of
Outcomes Assessment and would be an independent advocate and reviewer of assessment
activities within the University.
56
CHAPTER SIX
STUDENT ADMISSIONS AND RETENTION, STUDENT SUPPORT
SERVICES, AND RELATED EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Standards 8, 9, & 13
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statements regarding the standards
discussed in this chapter are:
Standard 8: Student Admissions and Retention
The institution seeks to admit students whose interests, goals, and abilities are
congruent with its mission and seeks to retain them through the pursuit of the
students’ educational goals.
Standard 9: Student Support Services
The institution provides student support services reasonably necessary to enable
each student to achieve the institution’s goals for students.
Standard 13: Related Educational Activities
The institution’s programs or activities that are characterized by particular
content, focus, location, mode of delivery, or sponsorship meet appropriate
standards.
Methodology
An eighteen-member working group was assigned to review student admissions, retention,
support services, and related educational activities. The review included examination of the
University’s admission statistics and practices, retention policies, graduation rates, current
student support services, and a variety of related services available to students. The review also
examined various special programs designed to recruit, retain and ensure graduation of a variety
of student populations traditionally considered at risk or disadvantaged.
Analysis
As a member of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), Bloomsburg
University is expected to provide access to affordable education to a broad cross section of the
citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Although the University has several programs
in place to attract and retain disadvantaged and/or historically underrepresented students, as well
as students from foreign countries, the vast majority of the student body can be classified as a
traditional population of white 18-21 year olds who are first or second generation college
students.
57
The following enrollment statistics clearly demonstrate that the University has been working
diligently to increase the ethnic diversity of its student body. The percentage of historically
underrepresented students in the undergraduate student body has almost doubled since 2000 and
enhancing minority enrollment continues to be a priority for the University.
Students
Minority
International
Caucasian
Non reporting
Total
2000
5.45%
.67%
93.88%
0%
100%
Total Undergraduate Enrollment By Race – Fall Semester
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
5.37%
6.10%
6.50%
7.52%
8.75%
9.39%
.65%
.52%
.92%
.57%
.75%
.63%
93.98% 91.61% 90.81% 88.61% 86.28% 83.78%
0%
1.77%
1.77%
3.30%
4.22%
6.20%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
2007
10.23%
.72%
80.89%
8.16%
100%
2008
10.65%
.67%
79.40%
9.28%
100%
Source: Exhibit 56 - Bloomsburg University, Total Undergraduate Enrollment By Race.
General enrollment goals, which call for sustained enrollment growth of between .5 and 1
percent annually, are detailed in the University Strategic Plan [Exhibit 5]. More precise
enrollment targets are contained in the University Enrollment Management Plan [Exhibit 44].
This plan is continually reviewed throughout the year by the Enrollment Management
Committee which is composed of faculty, staff, administrators, and students from across the
campus. The committee meets regularly to examine enrollment trends, retention rates, and other
enrollment concerns. They report their findings and recommendations to the Planning and
Budget Committee as well as to the University’s senior administration.
The following enrollment statistics provide an overview of fall semester Full Time Equivalent
(F.T.E.) enrollment and headcount enrollment since 2000. The number of undergraduate degrees
granted during the academic year is also provided for comparative purposes.
Undergraduate
Fall F.T.E.
Fall Headcount
Male
Female
Total Headcount
2000
6,508
Undergraduate Fall Enrollment Statistics
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
6,933
7,004
7,125
7,154
7,357
2006
7,488
2007
7,528
2008
7,648
2,636
4,208
6,844
2,827
4,396
7,223
2,885
4,413
7,298
2,941
4,580
7,521
2,982
4,542
7,524
3,078
4,705
7,783
3,165
4,712
7,877
3,280
4,658
7,938
3,369
4,712
8,081
Degrees Granted
Degrees/Headcount
1,296
18.9%
1,245
17.2%
1,386
19.0%
1,539
20.5%
1,403
18.6%
1,491
19.2%
1,516
19.2%
1,545
19.5%
n/a
n/a
Sources: Exhibit 57 - Bloomsburg University, Official Enrollment Data, Fall Semesters 1999
through 2008.
Exhibit 58 - Bloomsburg University, Degrees Granted 2001-2008.
As the undergraduate enrollment numbers indicate, the University has been able to achieve its
enrollment goal of gradual sustained growth. At the same time, the number of students
graduating each year has remained fairly stable at approximately nineteen percent of total
enrollment. This stability in the growth of the student body has a profound positive impact upon
the University’s ability to be proactive in its strategic planning and operational decision making.
58
The University has also been able to attract a large applicant pool each year. These high
application rates enable the University to be selective in the admission of its traditional student
base. This is accomplished through review of the traditional admissions indicators: high school
grades, class rank, and SAT/ACT scores, as well as through the use of a Predictive GPA (PGPA)
which is computed for each applicant.
The admissions office enters each applicant’s high school GPA, class rank, and standardized test
scores into a data base that contains both this information and the first year university GPA for a
large cross section of Bloomsburg University students. An algorithm, which also considers the
applicant’s intended major, is used to determine a predicted GPA (PGPA) for each potential
student’s freshman year. For most majors, the minimum PGPA considered for admission is 2.30.
The University recognizes that there are extenuating factors that can influence the ability of a
student to succeed in college. Accordingly, applicants who may not meet the PGPA criteria
often have their applications individually reviewed for the presence of alternative positive
indicators such as extra-curricular activities, recommendations, essays or other supporting
documents. A portion of the applicants who do not meet the minimum PGPA requirement, or
who have an identified Math or English deficiency, are invited to participate in a special Summer
Freshman program. Students who successfully complete the program, depending upon
enrollment and student housing demand, are offered the opportunity to begin regular classes in
either the subsequent fall or spring semester.
The following table provides an overview of the admissions statistics, including the average SAT
scores, of the fall semester freshman class.
Fall Freshman Admissions Statistics (Including Summer Freshmen and Act101/EOP Students)
Undergraduate
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Fall Freshmen
Applied
6,281
6,413
6,888
7,274
7,820
8,237
8,943
9,868
Accepted
3,813
5,083
4,722
5,123
4,961
5,570
5,386
6,009
Enrolled
1,426
1,692
1,487
1,671
1,542
1,697
1,644
1,685
Enrolled/Accepts
37.4% 33.3% 31.5% 32.6% 31.1% 30.5% 30.5% 28.0%
Avg. Total SAT Score
Total Enrolled-Note 1
1020
1016
1014
1017
1013
1013
1007
1015
Regular Enrolled
1045
1040
1042
1044
1046
1042
1044
1049
2008
10,840
6,356
1,811
28.5%
1021
1057
Sources: Exhibit 59 - Bloomsburg University, Admissions Statistics By Admissions Category,
Fall Semesters 2000 through 2008.
Exhibit 60 - Bloomsburg University, SAT Average Scores, First-Time Entering
Freshmen by Cohort.
Note 1: The total enrolled SAT scores include the scores of all freshmen admitted in the fall.
The regular enrolled SAT scores excludes students admitted through special needs
and developmental programs.
The data shows that the number of individuals applying for admission to the University since
2000 has increased by 73 percent. However, because the University has made a concerted effort
59
to limit enrollment growth to about 1% per year, the number of students actually matriculating at
the University has increased by only 27 percent since 2000.
It is noteworthy that the yield rate (Enrolled/Accepted) has shown a steady decline from 37.4
percent to 28.5 percent during that same period. One of the key reasons for the decline in the
University’s yield rate is that competing institutions are offering major scholarships. For this
reason, the University has increased its current scholarship fundraising efforts.
In order to remain competitive, the University has invested heavily in its physical plant over the
last ten years. The current Facilities Master Plan [Exhibit 16] calls for the renovation of all
existing student housing and related facilities, as well as construction of several additional
contemporary housing units. The physical plant is discussed in greater detail in Chapter Three.
Enrollment Management Plan
PASSHE has projected that the number of Pennsylvania high school graduates will peak in 2009
and then gradually decline for the foreseeable future [Exhibit 61]. In response to this projection,
the University has developed a number of initiatives to increase enrollment of non-traditional,
historically underrepresented, transfer, and graduate students. These efforts are clearly
articulated in the University’s Strategic Enrollment Management Plan [Exhibit 44].
Transfer Students
The following statistics provide an overview of the number of transfer students enrolling at the
University each year. It is clear from the table that the initiative to attract additional transfer
students has met with only limited success to date. However, the numbers are growing and the
project remains a priority for both PASSHE and the University.
Transfer Students
Enrollment Numbers – Undergraduate Transfer Students
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
468
519
474
504
478
587
2006
554
2007
566
Source: Exhibit 62 – Bloomsburg University, Office of Institutional Research, Enrollment
Management Benchmark Recruitment Data, Benchmark 6.
Enrollment Management Steering Committee
In an effort to formalize enrollment planning the University created the Enrollment Management
Task Force, which was subsequently restructured and renamed the Enrollment Management
Steering Committee in 2006. The committee is composed of representatives from the Office of
Admissions, Residence Life, Financial Aid, Advisement, Office of Institutional Research, the
Registrar’s Office, Alumni Affairs, and faculty from all four colleges. The current enrollment
plan covers 2006-2011.
60
The plan is formulated around three guiding principles:
1. Given the projected decline in the number of students graduating from high school from
2009-2014, the plan includes preemptive actions to maintain or slightly increase the
university’s current level of enrollment and strategies to retain a higher percentage of
students admitted to the university
2. The plan is data driven. It uses historical data compiled by the Office of Institutional
Research on the recruitment and retention of various groups of students to develop
strategies that will enable the university to achieve specific goals, objectives and
benchmarks by 2011.
3. The plan is reviewed and updated on a regular basis.
Enrollment Goals
The University Enrollment Management Plan, updated November 30, 2007 [Exhibit 44],
established several recruitment and retention goals and benchmarks. They are:
Recruitment Goal 1: To maintain enrollment at levels consistent with resource requirements and
constraints.
• Benchmark 1: The FTE enrollment of undergraduate students at the university will grow
to 7,500 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 FTE was 7648.)
• Benchmark 2: The FTE enrollment of graduate students at the university will grow to
700 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 FTE was 456.)
• Benchmark 3: The out-of-state enrollment will grow to 15% of total enrollment by fall
2009. (Fall 2008 total out-of-state enrollment was 12.9%.)
• Benchmark 4: The non-traditional, undergraduate, degree student population of the
university will grow to 650 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 non-traditional enrollment was 424.)
• Benchmark 5: The undergraduate non-degree enrollment will grow to 265 by fall 2011.
(Fall 2008 non-degree enrollment was 241.)
• Benchmark 6: The enrollment of new transfer students will grow to 700 (fall plus spring
admits) by the 2011-2012 academic year. (2007-2008 transfer students were 539.)
Recruitment Goal 2: To increase the diversity of students enrolled at the university.
• Benchmark 1: The total FTE enrollment of underrepresented students at the university
will grow to 1000 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 total underrepresented student enrollment was
851.)
• Benchmark 2: The total FTE international students enrolled at the university will grow to
150 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 FTE international student enrollment was 68.)
Recruitment Goal 3: To increase the number of high achieving students enrolled at the
university.
• Benchmark 1: The average total SAT score of regular-admit students will increase to
1050 by fall 2011. (Fall 2008 regular admit freshman average SAT score was 1057.)
61
Retention Goal 1: To retain a larger percentage of first-time, full-time freshmen to graduation.
• Benchmark 1: Retention of first-time, full-time freshmen to the sophomore year will
reach 85% by fall 2010. (Fall 2007 freshman retention was 80.0%.)
• Benchmark 2: Graduation rates for first-time, full-time freshmen will increase to 65% by
fall 2011. (Fall 2002 freshmen six-year graduation rate was 65.3%.)
Retention Goal 2: To retain a larger percentage of populations that are vulnerable to attrition.
• Benchmark 1: One-year retention of traditionally vulnerable students will increase to
80% by fall 2010. (Fall 2006 freshmen simple average retention was 78.6%.)
• Benchmark 2: The graduation rate of traditionally vulnerable students will increase to
50% by spring 2012. (Fall 2001 freshmen simple average six-year graduation rate was
48.8%.)
As can be seen above, some of the recruiting benchmarks have already been exceeded and others
are nearing attainment. However, some of the other benchmarks are proving to be more difficult
to meet.
Marketing
Marketing of the University to prospective students and their families has become a key
component of the school’s enrollment strategy. For example, the University was one of the first
schools in the state to launch a web site that enabled prospective students to research the school
on line and apply for admissions electronically.
The University Communications Department has had the size of its budget expanded to enhance
advertising in media such as billboards, radio, television, and print. Most of the advertising
materials are developed internally by the University’s own graphic designers and writers. This
has enabled the University to present a focused message that accurately reflects the University’s
mission and goals.
The University is also working with the Bloomsburg University Alumni Association to engage
alumni in informally marketing activities in their home towns. This is a marketing tool that had
been underutilized in the past.
Student Retention
Another major component of the strategic enrollment management plan focuses on student
retention. For the last decade the freshman to sophomore retention rate has remained quite stable
at approximately 80 percent. This is significantly lower than the desired benchmark rate of 85
percent. However, the one-year retention rates for several of the freshmen groups identified as
vulnerable to attrition already approach or exceed their targeted levels. The groups showing the
least progress are Latinos, Act 101/EOP, and Undeclared Freshmen [Exhibit 63].
Six-year graduation rates have hovered about 3 percent below the enrollment management plan’s
benchmark for several years. Fortunately, many of the populations identified as vulnerable to
attrition have already exceeded their benchmark graduation rates. However, graduation rates for
62
Latinos and Act101/EOP students continue to lag well behind their benchmarks. This is due, at
least in part, to the fact that these student populations continue to have low first year retention
rates.
The following statistics provide an overview of the one-year retention and six-year graduation
rates for first-time, full-time freshmen.
First-Time, Full-Time Freshmen One-Year Retention and Six-Year Graduation Rates
One-Year Retention 1999 to 2000 to 2001 to 2002 to 2003 to 2004 to 2005 to 2006 to
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Bloomsburg
82.1%
80.1%
79.2%
80.8%
81.9%
82.2%
79.1%
80.8%
PASSHE Averages
74.5%
75.6%
76.1%
76.2%
76.6%
76.4%
76.6%
76.4%
CSRDE Peers
72.8%
73.6%
73.6%
74.2%
74.6%
74.3%
73.5%
73.6%
Six-Year Graduation 1994 to 1995 to 1996 to 1997 to 1998 to 1999 to 2000 to 2001 to
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Bloomsburg
62.0%
61.2%
61.2%
58.7%
62.0%
62.9%
63.5%
61.5%
PASSHE Averages
51.3%
52.4%
52.1%
53.4%
52.7%
53.4%
54.2%
54.9%
CSRDE Peers
42.5%
43.1%
43.8%
45.7%
46.6%
46.2%
47.0%
46.8%
2007 to
2008
80.0%
n/a
n/a
2002 to
2008
65.3%
n/a
n/a
Source: Exhibit 64 - Bloomsburg University, Second-Year Persistence Rates and Six-Year
Graduation Rates.
Note: CSRDE Peers – Moderately Selective Institutions from the Consortium for Student
Retention Data Exchange (SAT Composite Scores from 990-1044)
Developmental Programs
The University has been very proactive in its efforts to ensure that students who are admitted
have the best chance possible to graduate. Retention efforts begin during the admissions process
when all incoming freshmen are prescreened by the Admissions Office for placement in
developmental programs as outlined in the University policy, PRP 3360, Placement Testing for
Developmental Courses [Exhibit 65].
All admitted students whose SAT verbal and/or math score(s) fall below a designated cut-off
(480 verbal, 450 math) or whose predicted GPA (PGPA) is below 2.3 are required to take a
writing and/or math placement test(s). The writing test consists of the Nelson Denny Reading
and Vocabulary Test, as well as a separate writing sample. The math test consists of two
sections: elementary algebra skills, and intermediate algebra skills.
The test scores are reported to the Department of Developmental Instruction (DDI) and the
Assistant Vice President of Academic Affairs/Dean of Undergraduate Education. Students
identified as being in need of remedial assistance are placed in the appropriate developmental
course(s) by DDI during their first year of coursework at the University. Developmental
Instruction staff also place holds on the students’ records to prevent them from scheduling
regular courses in disciplines related to their developmental deficiencies. The holds are not
removed until the students have successfully completed the assigned developmental course(s).
63
Students are notified shortly after they complete the placement tests if they have to complete any
developmental coursework. However, neither the students nor their academic advisors receive
their placement test scores. This is one of the problems that the University hopes to remedy
when a new and more efficient screening system, Accuplacer, becomes operational during the
2008-09 academic year.
Academic Advisement
In accordance with the collective bargaining agreement between the Association of State College
and University Faculties (APSCUF) and PASSHE, student advisement is the responsibility the
University’s faculty. Thus, with the exception of incoming freshmen who have not declared a
major, each incoming student is assigned a faculty advisor from the department in which he/she
has chosen to major. The undeclared freshmen are assigned advisors from the Academic
Advisement Center. Members of the Advisement Center staff then work with the undeclared
students to help them select appropriate majors by the time they have complete 45 credits of
coursework.
New faculty receive advisement training as part of their faculty orientation and through peer
mentoring within their academic departments. All faculty normally receive training and updates
on curricular changes either through programs sponsored by the Teaching and Learning Center
(TALE) or the Registrar’s Office. The individual colleges also have their own procedures for
updating their faculty on curricular and other matters affecting advising.
Each academic department has a particular method for advising students. In some departments,
the chairperson conducts group advisement sessions; in other departments, advisees are assigned
to individual faculty members and one-on-one advising occurs. Most students also receive group
advisement during their first semester on campus as part of their University Seminar course. In
addition, students who participate in Living Learning Communities, or one of the other special
support programs, receive additional advisement through those programs.
Each academic department has its own rules concerning how often students must see their
advisors. Some departments place a hold on their majors’ records each semester. This prevents
the students from registering for next semester’s classes until they confer with their advisor and
the advisor removes the hold. Other departments simply recommend that students visit their
advisor each semester prior to registering for classes.
Regardless of the advisement requirements imposed, each department has a printed Graduation
Requirements Sheet that allows both the student and advisor to accurately track the student’s
progress towards graduation [Exhibit 66]. This worksheet, which was a recommendation that
came out of the last Middle States Self-Study, has taken much of the ambiguity out of the
advisement process for both the students and their advisors.
64
Graduate Programs
The University’s enrollment management plan [Exhibit 44] has identified increased graduate
enrollment levels as one means of countering the anticipated decline in the pool of high school
graduates after 2009.
The following graduate program statistics provide an overview of annual fall semester graduate
student enrollment and annual graduation numbers for the University.
Fall F.T.E.
Fall Headcount
Male
Female
Total Headcount
Degrees Granted
Masters Degrees
Audiology (Au.D.)
Total Graduate
Degrees Granted
Fall Graduate Student
Enrollment By Race
Minority
International
Caucasian
Non Reporting
Total
2000
346
Selected Graduate Program Statistics
2001
2002
2003
2004
332
386
438
467
2005
461
2006
500
2007
483
2008
456
191
513
704
195
498
693
226
515
741
221
542
763
214
567
781
249
538
787
257
589
846
241
566
807
242
532
774
228
0
239
0
275
0
308
0
337
0
325
7
316
6
335
10
n/a
n/a
228
239
275
308
337
332
322
345
n/a
3.83%
4.96%
91.21%
0%
100%
2.75%
4.62%
92.63%
0%
100%
3.92%
4.18%
88.53%
3.37%
100%
3.15%
3.28%
89.90%
3.67%
100%
2.69%
3.59%
90.90%
2.82%
100%
2.92%
4.45%
90.47%
2.16%
100%
2.72%
4.49%
89.24%
3.55%
100%
3.59%
3.97%
89.71%
2.73%
100%
3.88%
2.84%
90.83%
2.45%
100%
Sources: Exhibit 57 - Bloomsburg University Official Enrollment Data, Fall Semesters 1999
through 2008.
Exhibit 58 - Bloomsburg University, Degrees Granted.
Exhibit 67 - Bloomsburg University, Total Graduate Enrollment by Race, Fall
Semesters 1998 through 2008.
The University’s only doctoral program, Audiology, graduated its first students in May 2006.
The program is offered through the Audiology and Speech Pathology Department, which has
successfully operated both undergraduate and masters level programs for several decades.
Both the number of students enrolled in graduate programs and the F.T.E. hours generated grew
at a fairly steady pace through 2006. However, both enrollment and F.T.E. hours generated have
begun to decline during the last two years. The University is currently reviewing the graduate
enrollment data in an effort to develop strategies to reverse the decline.
Approximately fifty-six percent of the students are part-time which explains why most of the
graduate programs offer many of their classes in the evening. In the summer, many of the
graduate programs in education experience a spike in enrollment as K through 12 teachers return
to work on graduate degrees.
In addition to offering the graduate students the same resources and support infrastructure that
are available to undergraduate students, the University also operates the Office of Graduate
65
Studies and Research. That office coordinates all graduate programs and activities on campus
and serves as the principle service area for both current and potential graduate students.
Additional discussion of the University’s graduate programs can be found in Chapter Seven.
Student Athletes
As a NCAA Division II school, the University’s student athletes must comply with all NCAA
academic eligibility requirements as well as all policies and procedures applicable to any other
student attending the institution. In addition to all the support services that are available to other
students, many of the athletic teams have mandatory study periods and provide mentors for their
athletes. The various coaching staffs also send out progress report requests to the athletes’
instructors each semester and arrange tutoring for students who are having difficulty with their
coursework.
Like the rest of the student body, the student athletes are responsible for making up all missed
assignments and exams. Class Attendance policy PRP 3506 [Exhibit 68] states that “regular
classroom attendance is expected of all students.” Students who participate in a “universitysponsored activity” “will be afforded reasonable assistance by a faculty member” if the absence
results from “extenuating circumstances beyond the student’s control.” The policy leaves it up
to the student and instructor to determine what, if any, special consideration will be granted.
In addition to all the financial support options available to other students, the University’s
student athletes are eligible for a limited number of athletic scholarships and other financial
support approved by the NCAA. All financial assistance to the University’s student athletes is
closely monitored by the NCAA.
Student Services
The University has created a coordinated student services center, the Warren Student Services
Center, which is centrally located in the middle of the lower campus. Most of the academic
support services available to the student body are housed in this one facility, which allows for
easy referral and coordination of services for students requiring assistance.
Examples of the student services provided at the center and elsewhere on campus include:
Living Learning Communities
TRiO Student Support Services
Academic Advisement
Adult Advisement
Accommodative Services
Residence Life
Career Development Center
Women’s Resource Center
Counseling Center
DAWN Program
Community Government Association
Writing Center
Developmental Instruction
Office of Multicultural Affairs
University Seminar
Day Care Center
Several of the student services are discussed in the following paragraphs.
66
Living Learning Communities
The first Living Learning Communities (LLC) were established in 1996 to provide theme
housing and support services for targeted students. Each year, at time of admission, all admitted
freshmen receive a postcard encouraging them to examine the LLC web page. An LLC
application is also included in the enrollment packet that is mailed to each student who pays a
deposit. Currently there are eleven LLC: Business, Helping Professions, International Studies,
Frederick Douglass, Civic Engagement, Honors, Social Justice, Education, Presidential
Leadership, Sciences and Health Sciences, and Fine Arts & Humanities.
The primary goals of the LLC are to provide students with opportunities to: meet people with
similar interests; live with like-minded individuals; enjoy a quieter study environment; form
stronger relationships with faculty; receive help through peer networking; take several courses
during their freshmen year with other students from their learning community; participate in
social and community service; and attend workshops and conferences.
Academic Advisement
The four professional staff in the Academic Advisement Center (AAC) are responsible for
advising between 850 and 1,150 undeclared students who have not selected a major. The staff
also process over 2,000 requests annually from students wanting to change their area of study
(major, minor, career concentration, advisement area).
The AAC also coordinates a variety of certificate programs. Each program is composed of a
series of academic courses designed to meet the needs of individuals working in the region.
Currently the Center offers the following certificate programs:
Certificate Programs
Community Recreation Leader
Gerontology
Community Service
Public Administration
Environmental Planning
Small Business/Entrepreneurship
Among the other programs that the AAC coordinates are the initial screenings for all NonTraditional Students (older, first time, or returning students) and the Summer Freshman Program
(contains approximately 400 conditional freshmen who must successfully complete 7 credits of
coursework during the summer in order to qualify for admission into the University).
Each fall, the Center conducts a Majors Fair where undeclared, as well as other students, can
meet with faculty representatives from each major on campus. The Advisement Center also
participates in open houses and freshmen orientation sessions and conducts advising workshops
for new faculty.
67
Accommodative Services
The Office of Accommodative Services for Students with Disabilities offers a wide range of
services designed to support and enhance the performance of students with disabilities. Services
include, but are not limited to, provision of accommodative testing, note-takers, scribes,
interpreters, readers, auxiliary aids, adaptive equipment, and serving as a liaison between
students and faculty in arranging classroom accommodations. The office also serves as an
advocate for the student in issues of accommodation beyond the classroom and acts as a liaison
with other campus services.
Career Development Center
The Career Development Center provides career planning assistance to all students and alumni.
The Center maintains an up-to-date career library that contains occupational information, job
search guides, employer/school district directories, corporate literature, graduate/professional
school information, and the FOCUS and CareerBeam job search databases. In addition, the
Center sponsors job search workshops, seminars, and job fairs; maintains credential files for
students and alumni; and hosts employers wishing to interview students for internships or
permanent employment.
The Center uses the College Central Network on-line system for all on-campus recruiting
activities. Seniors can place their resumes on line and apply for and schedule interviews over the
internet. College Central also provides students with easy access to information about all of the
Center’s events and activities.
Approximately ninety days after graduation, the Center surveys all Bachelors’ degree recipients
to determine employment status. An individual is considered employed if he or she has obtained
meaningful employment, is serving in the armed forces, or has been admitted into graduate
school. The following table provides a summary of the survey results.
Business
Liberal Arts
Professional Studies
Science and
Technology
Total
2000
87.3%
92.0%
88.9%
Note
Undergraduate Placement Rates
2001
2002
2003
2004
91.1%
87.6%
84.6%
84.6%
88.1%
87.4%
86.6%
86.6%
88.2%
90.4%
86.4%
86.4%
92.5%
90.5%
82.4%
82.4%
2005
90.2%
90.7%
87.8%
83.2%
2006
94.0%
91.0%
88.4%
83.5%
2007
90.2%
90.1%
86.2%
91.9%
89.1%
89.3%
88.9%
90.1%
89.1%
88.8%
85.6%
85.6%
Source: Exhibit 69 – Bloomsburg University, Class Follow-up Reports.
Note: Prior to 2001 the College of Science and Technology was part of the College of
Liberal Arts.
68
Counseling Center
The Center for Counseling and Human Development provides free counseling by professional
psychological counselors. Any student who is currently enrolled in at least six credit hours of
coursework at the University is eligible. Typical counseling concerns include: study skills;
depression; relationship issues; stress management; assertiveness and effective communications;
racism; sexism; homophobia; human sexuality; anxiety; drug and alcohol abuse; eating
disorders; survivors of rape, incest, and sexual assault; family issues; and self-esteem issues.
Every student has the right to a confidential relationship with a counselor. Normally,
information shared in counseling will not be revealed outside the center without written
permission from the student. Exceptions to this rule include cases of child abuse or neglect,
elder abuse or neglect, and danger of imminent bodily harm to the student or another person.
Information may also be released in response to a court subpoena.
Writing Center
The writing center is supervised by a faculty member from the English Department who is given
a 50 percent release time reassignment to direct the program. The director employs
approximately 25 trained student volunteers each semester who possess strong writing skills.
These unpaid consultants provide approximately 500 free one-on-one consulting sessions each
semester to all students, regardless of discipline or course, who wish to have writing assignments
critiqued or who need assistance in developing writing projects.
Each semester the writing center reaches out to faculty and students through flyers, bookmarks,
emails, and web announcements on the Today page (http://www.bloomu.edu/today).
Consultants are also available to visit classrooms to discuss their services or to conduct mass
tutorial sessions. Currently, the center maintains a primary location in the Bakeless Center for
the Humanities as well as satellite locations in Columbia Hall, Northumberland Hall, and the
Andruss Library.
Department of Developmental Instruction
The Act101/ Educational Opportunities Program (Act101/EOP) program was established in 1971
by the Pennsylvania State Legislature to provide access and support to help equalize educational
opportunities for students who have been traditionally underrepresented in higher education.
The Department of Developmental Instruction is responsible for administering Act101/EOP at
the University. There were 528 students enrolled in the program during fall 2008. Sixty percent
of the students are women, twenty percent fall into the non traditional student age range, and
about half are from historically underrepresented groups.
All Act101/EOP students receive special instructional support, academic advising, counseling,
tutoring, financial aid, and other assistance as necessary. Students admitted through this program
take diagnostic tests to ensure correct placement in classes and, prior to their first regular
semester of classes, most students participate in a summer program where special tutoring and
counseling is given to address specific academic, financial and social needs.
69
Act101/EOP is one of the University’s programs that has not been able to reach its targeted
retention goals. As a result, the program is currently reassessing its mentoring program in an
effort to enhance student performance and retention.
Office of Multicultural Affairs
The Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA) was established to support the social and academic
development of students from differing cultures through specific academic support services and
to educate the entire academic community about multicultural issues. The office provides
support to students who are United States citizens of African, Asian, Hispanic/Latino/Chicano
and indigenous descent, disabled, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender individuals, women, and
religious groups, as well as other protected classes.
Programs offered include: the OMA Mentoring and Advisement Program; Latino Banquet;
OMA Student and Faculty Advisory Board; study hall sessions; graduate school tours; Career
Internship Expo; personal and professional development workshops; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and
Transgendered Student Conference; First World Graduation Ceremonies; the Sankofa
Conference; and the Multicultural Orientation Friends and Family Brunch. The Office also
supports eighteen multicultural organizations on campus as well as six multicultural Greek
Organizations.
University Seminar
The University Seminar program is a one credit course that is designed to aid students in their
academic transition to the university environment. The course is available to all incoming
students during their first semester on campus. As part of their initial admissions packet,
students are informed about the program and encouraged to request to be enrolled in the course
as part of their first semester schedule.
Two colleges, Business, and Science and Technology, require all students within their majors to
complete the University Seminar course as part of their graduation requirements. For two other
programs, computer science, and engineering, the course is required by their national
accreditation bodies. Several of the programs also provide their own faculty to teach seminar
sections that are reserved for their majors. This allows the faculty to tailor the course content to
their department’s program of study. The program is discussed further in Chapter Seven.
Dissemination of Information to Students
Bloomsburg University has been working for the last several years to make all forms and
documents available to students in electronic formats. Although the project is not complete, the
University web page (http://www.bloomu.edu) is currently the primary information resource for
the entire campus community. Prospective students access an electronic university catalog and
apply for admission to the University on line. Current students can access information about
virtually any University resource or activity electronically, review current and past course
catalogs on line, and register for courses electronically. In addition, the alumni office has its
own dedicated web site to provide an interactive resource for the University’s alumni.
70
Web Improvement
In 2006, at the request of the University President, a web improvement committee was appointed
to coordinate the redesign of the University web site. The committee commissioned Creosote
Affects to conduct a comprehensive review of the university web pages [Exhibit 70]. The results
of the study were widely disseminated to members of the campus community and discussed for
more than a year. In fall 2008 a preliminary feasibility study will begin to better define the
scope, cost and timeline for the redesign. It is anticipated that the redesign and migration to the
new web site should take approximately 18 months to complete.
Electronic Security
Because of the pivotal role that technology plays in every aspect of University life, the Office of
Technology has initiated a Technology Disaster Recovery/Continuity Plan [Exhibit 71] to
provide recovery and continuous technology services in the event of a disaster. The plan
concentrates the University’s efforts toward retention of mission-critical systems that directly
affect the overall campus community. These systems and services include the mainframe
Student Information System, the campus data and voice network, key services that provide
email, web services and centralized file storage, off campus connection to the internet, and
local/long distance telephone services which are considered mission critical. In the event of a
technology disaster, the plan documents a systematic response by the Office of Technology staff,
a method to provide temporary operations, and a strategy to permanently restore services to their
pre-disaster status.
The Office of Technology is also responsible for the security of all electronic data and
information systems on campus. That security includes sophisticated firewalls, user tracking
systems, a series of password systems that require all campus users to update their passwords
every 90 days, and other unpublished procedures and systems.
Other Key Information Sources
Every student receives a copy of the Pilot [Exhibit 72] each year. This is the official student
guide. It provides official information on all policies and procedures that affect students at the
University. Examples include the academic dishonesty policy, academic performance standards,
procedures for filing a grievance, and available campus resources. The Pilot is extensively
reviewed and updated each year to ensure that all of the information is current and accurate.
The Kehr Union information desk, located in the main lobby of the student union, is known as
“the place to go for things you need to know.” This desk is staffed by knowledgeable student
workers whenever the Union is open. An information table also provides a broad range of
brochures that disseminate useful information to students about services provided by the
University and the local community.
Each year the Orientation Office helps students to adapt to life at the University by preparing an
orientation packet which is given out to all new freshmen and their families during their initial
one day orientation in June. The packet contains the New at BU Orientation Guide, a campus
71
map, an Academic Calendar with a quick guide to important resources at Bloomsburg, an
Orientation Workshop Leaders Flyer, the brochure “A few words on wise decisions,” a letter to
students and their parents from the Mayor of the Town of Bloomsburg, its Chief of Police, and
its Code Enforcement Officer, and assorted other brochures.
Financial Aid
Most of the students who attend the University qualify for some form of financial aid, and
without that assistance most could not afford to remain enrolled at the institution. In recognition
of that fact, the Office of Financial Aid is prominently located next to the Admissions Office on
the main floor of the Warren Student Services Center. In addition, the staff makes financial aid
presentations at all visitation days and summer orientation sessions. They also work one-on-one
with families requesting assistance in identifying funding or completing applications.
A full range of needs-based financial aid is available to all students enrolled at the University.
The aid includes student employment, grants, scholarships, and low-interest loans. In fall 2007
seventy-seven percent of the full-time undergraduate students enrolled in degree programs at the
University received some form of financial aid. The scholarship and grant funds awarded that
semester totaled $17,593,528, loans and work study wages totaled $34,428,760, and other
awards and waivers totaled $8,733,417. In total, the students received over 60 million dollars in
aid [Exhibit 73]. Many of the students qualified for, and received, more than one form of
financial support.
Unfortunately, the University does not have a large scholarship endowment. During fall 2007
the University was able to award only $1,162,119 in scholarships. Since most of the
scholarships awarded were for the entire academic year, that amount is a good approximation of
the total annual academic scholarship dollars currently awarded by the University [Exhibit 73]
Student Rights
To protect the individual rights of all of its students, the University has instituted a series of
Policies, Rules and Procedures (PRP) that are periodically reviewed and updated to ensure that
they comply with all related federal and state statutes. The students’ rights and responsibilities
under each PRP, as well as instructions on how to file a grievance, are discussed in detail in the
Pilot (the student handbook) [Exhibit 72].
The key PRP [Exhibit 74] are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PRP 2060: Americans with Disabilities Grievances
PRP 3557: Academic Dismissal and Appeals Procedure
PRP 3592: Academic Grievance Procedure
PRP 4020: Student Harassment Policy and Procedure
PRP 4842: Campus Judicial Policy
PRP 4862: Student Non-Academic Grievance Policy
PRP 6814: Harassment and Discrimination Policy
72
Each PRP contains a formal procedure to adjudicate any grievance filed under the policy while
simultaneously protecting the rights of all parties to the grievance and ensuring resolution of the
matter in an expeditious manner. To ensure easy access, all University PRPs are available for
public review on the University’s webpage (http://www.bloomu.edu/policies/).
Other Educational Offerings
In an attempt to provide quality educational experiences to constituencies in a variety of
traditional and non-traditional settings, Bloomsburg University offers several nontraditional
programs on Campus as well as at a variety of remote locations.
Advance College Experience (ACE) Program-High School in College
The University offers courses to over 100 high school students from approximately 20 regional
school districts. Qualified high school juniors and seniors, with their school district’s
permission, take regular for-credit courses at the University during the academic year. In
addition, the University offers selected courses at two local high schools in the Benton and
Shikellamy school districts.
Off Campus and Remote Offerings
The University offers several courses in Psychology, Biology, Mathematics, History, English,
and other disciplines at off-campus locations in Sunbury, and Danville. These locations serve
over 125 non-traditional students.
Degree Completion programs
The University has partnered with Luzerne County Community College and Lehigh Carbon
County Community College to provide an on-site completion program in Elementary Education.
Students who have completed an associate’s degree in education at one of the two community
colleges, and who meet the Bloomsburg University Elementary Education Department’s
admission requirements, are guaranteed acceptance into the program. All classes beyond the
associate’s level are conducted on-site at the community colleges by Bloomsburg University
faculty.
Approximately 50 students are currently enrolled in the program.
Remote Courses
The University currently offers several remote courses in the Nursing, Instructional Technology
and Exceptionality programs. The students complete the remote courses utilizing a variety of
technologies from web pages to interactive video conferencing.
Other academic departments at the University are currently exploring the feasibility of offering
their courses remotely.
73
Dixon University Center Harrisburg Pa.
The University’s American Sign Language/English Interpreting Program offers an opportunity
for skill development and enhancement for educational interpreters. The sequence of courses
was developed with the specific needs of educational interpreters in mind. Courses are geared
toward non-traditional students with online, evening and weekend courses available at the
PASSHE’s Dixon Center in Harrisburg Pa. The program is run by the Department of
Exceptionality Programs.
During the 2007-08 academic year, the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology received
concept approval to offer a M.Ed. in Speech Pathology off campus. The program will be offered
as a hybrid program at the Dixon Center. It will combine traditional classroom and distance
learning with on-site field-based experiences in partnership with educational agencies in
Pennsylvania. Several courses in the proposed program were offered at the Dixon Center during
the summer of 2008.
Corporate and Continuing Education
The division of Corporate and Continuing Education provides educational programs for people
of all ages at the University’s Magee Center which is located 1.5 miles from campus at the west
end of town. Instructors include qualified individuals from the region as well as University
faculty and staff. A variety of non credit classes are offered. They include: mini-courses, CDL
Class A and Class B prep courses, human capital and workforce training, business and
professional training, and computer training.
During the 2007 – 2008 academic year, 1,431 individuals participated in mini-courses, and 76
workforce training programs were conducted at client worksites where 2,604 employees received
customized instruction.
University Employee Training
In addition to encouraging its employees to pursue undergraduate and graduate degrees on
campus, the University provides them with a wide variety of other educational opportunities.
Through training opportunities provided by the offices of Social Equity, Corporate and
Continuing Education, Instructional Technology, and Human Resources, employees are able to
enhance their skills and increase their personal and professional development. A sampling of
these courses include: negotiation and customer service; instruction in utilization of Microsoft
Office programs at all levels of proficiency; administrative communication; leadership training;
and training in CPR and in safeguarding oneself and others.
An online newsletter, available on the Human Resources web site (http://www.bloomu.edu/hr/),
also addresses issues such as caring for your parents and other topics that are of personal benefit
to the members of the University’s workforce.
74
Recommendation
Even though student retention is one of the primary goals of the University’s Strategic Plan,
students who withdraw from the University receive no formal counseling as part of the
withdrawal process and there is no exit interview to determine why they are withdrawing.
Recommendation 6: A formal process for withdrawal from the University
should be instituted that includes notification of the student’s advisor and
department chair, a counseling session with an advisor, and an exit interview with
a designated administrator.
Justification
The current withdrawal practices simply require students to complete and deliver a
University Withdrawal Form to the Registrar’s Office.
• The instructors of the courses the student is enrolled in and the department chair of the
students major are only notified after the withdrawal form has been processed.
• There is no formal exit interview to determine why the student decided to leave the
University.
Process
•
In order to reduce the number of individuals who withdraw from the University it is necessary to
understand their motives for leaving. Some of these withdrawals might be avoided if each
student was required to complete a formal withdrawal process that includes a meeting with an
advisor. More importantly, the students would have an opportunity to meet with someone who
may be able to help them through the decision process and present clear options to them.
75
CHAPTER SEVEN
EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS AND GENERAL EDUCATION
Standards 11 & 12
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education statements regarding the standards
discussed in this chapter are:
Standard 11: Educational Offerings
The institution’s educational offerings display academic content, rigor, and
coherence that are appropriate to its higher education mission. The institution
identifies student learning goals and objectives, including knowledge and skills,
for its educational offerings.
Standard 12: General Education
The institution’s curricula are designed so that students acquire and demonstrate
college-level proficiency in general education and essential skills, including at
least oral and written communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning,
critical analysis and reasoning, and technological competency.
Methodology
A fourteen member working group was assigned to review the University’s educational offerings
and general education curriculum. The review included examination of University Catalogs,
minutes of the Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee, relevant policies and procedures
documents, and the reports of several committees who have reviewed curricular matters recently.
Analysis
Bloomsburg University constantly seeks to meet the varied educational needs of the citizens of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The current University mission statement specifically
addresses the need for a broad range of educational opportunities for students.
While maintaining programs for which Bloomsburg has been traditionally
recognized, such as those in business and education, the university has identified
strategic directions that include programs in health-related fields; programs that
promote student-faculty interaction in teaching, learning, and research; programs
that emphasize regional, national, international, and environmental concerns; and
programs that incorporate the application of technology into instruction.
(Bloomsburg University Mission Statement approved July 1987) [Exhibit 75]
As a comprehensive masters institution, the University has 32 academic departments that
currently offer 99 undergraduate degrees/tracks, 45 undergraduate minors, 5 undergraduate
76
concentrations, 17 graduate programs leading to a master’s degree, a doctorate in audiology, as
well as 2 supervisory certificate programs for professional educators. All of the programs are
consistent with the University’s overall mission as a four-year, public institution, and support the
mission of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education.
The following table shows several of the key academic statistics broken down by college.
Key Academic Statistics
College of
College of
Business
Liberal Arts
14
38
College of
Professional
Studies
5
21
College of
Science and
Technology
7
32
8
4
2
0
0
129
23
1
2
0
0
833
2
0
10
1
2
181
12
0
3
0
0
335
441
63
82
242
54
1919
192
915
423
389
Statistic
Total
Academic Departments
Undergraduate Degrees and
Tracks (Note 1)
Undergraduate Minor
Career Concentration
Masters Degrees
Doctorate (Au.D.)
Supervisory Certificate
Number of Approved
Undergraduate Courses (Note
2)
Number of Approved
Graduate Courses
Total Approved Courses
32
99
6
8
45
5
17
1
2
1478
Source: Exhibit 76 – Bloomsburg University Undergraduate Academic Catalog, 2008-2009
Academic Year.
Note 1: The University offers 57 approved undergraduate degrees. However, several
departments offer multiple specialized tracks within one degree. For instance, Exercise
Science offers tracts in Clinical Exercise, Coaching, Corporate Fitness, and Adventure
Leadership, all of which lead to a B.S. in Exercise Science.
Note 2: Includes 9 developmental courses whose credits are not counted toward graduation.
Courses/Programs
Bloomsburg University has a dynamic undergraduate curriculum which is constantly undergoing
review and change in response to the evolving educational needs of both its students and their
prospective employers. Each year, the Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee (BUCC)
approves dozens of new courses, as well as several new majors, minors, concentrations, and
certificate programs.
The following table lists the new programs created since the last Middle States reaccreditation
visit in 1999.
77
College of
Business
Minor in
Entrepreneurship
Minor in Office
Information
Systems
Concentration in
Fraud Examination
College of Liberal
Arts
Music Education K12
New Degree Programs
College of
College of Science
Professional Studies and Technology
Electronics
Engineering
Technology
Computer Forensics
New Minors, Concentrations, and Certificate Programs
Minor in Ethnic
Minor in
Minor in Computer
Studies
Educational
Science/Web
Technology
Development
Minor in Criminal
eLearning
Minor in Computer
Justice
Certificate Program
Forensics
Minor in
Professional Writing
Minor in Creative
Writing
Minor in Chinese
Studies
Masters/Doctoral
Programs
Doctorate in
Audiology
Masters in
Curriculum and
Instruction with
Certification
Masters in
Radiologist
Assistant
Masters in Guidance
Counseling and
Student Affairs
Masters in Clinical
Athletic Training
ESL Program
Specialist Certificate
Program
Course Development
The University continuously addresses the needs of its students through a careful analysis of
existing instructional offerings and the creation of new courses and programs of study that relate
to the institution’s strategic plans. All proposals involving changes and/or additions to the
existing curriculum must undergo a well documented approval process.
To ensure that every curriculum proposal undergoes a thorough review, Document P – Omnibus
Course and Program Development Cover Sheet (Omnibus Form) [Exhibit 77] must accompany
each curricular proposal. The Omnibus Form provides a precise checklist for the review of each
type of curriculum proposal and requires approval signatures at each step in the process. A
proposal can not move on to the next step in the approval process until the Omnibus Form is
signed off at the current review level.
For most curricular requests, final approval rests with the University Provost and Vice President
for Academic Affairs. However, because the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education
has final oversight over the curriculum offered by the University, several curricular changes must
78
also receive a positive review by the University President, the University Council of Trustees,
and ultimately either the PASSHE Board of Governors or the PASSHE staff. Final approval
must be attained from the Board of Governors or the state system staff for the following
curricular items:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
New Degree Program (Board of Governors)
New Degree Designation (Board of Governors)
Minor where no major already exists (State System Staff)
Certificate Program where no major or minor exists (State System Staff)
Non-Degree Certificate Program (State System Staff)
Program Deletion – Informed, no action required (State System Staff)
Program Placed in Moratorium – Informed, no action required (State System Staff)
As part of the Omnibus Form, all curricular proposals must include the rationale for making the
request, anticipated resource requirements, and the impact, if any, on the operating units who
would be affected by the change.
All curricular proposals requiring PASSHE approval must comply with the following state
system requirements:
Each program proposal shall emanate from an institutional program approval
process, which assures appropriate faculty, administrative, and trustee review.
The proposal shall include, depending upon type of program, sufficient
information relative to the intellectual value, student demand, regional and
national market demand for program completers, as appropriate, and value to such
things as student breadth, faculty vitality, and community enhancement.
The proposal shall include information on the plan for continuing assessment of
student learning outcomes and periodic institutional, professional, and regional
accreditation reviews, as well as plans to seek specialized accreditation, if
appropriate. (PASSHE Policy 1985-01, Exhibit 78)
Each academic college has an internal curriculum committee that conducts the initial review of
all curricular proposals emanating from within the college. However, the primary campus
oversight committee for all curricular requests is the Bloomsburg University Curriculum
Committee (BUCC). The BUCC is composed of 14 voting faculty members, 10 elected from
across the campus community and 1 each chosen by the University’s four college level
curriculum committees. In addition, there are ex-officio members representing the
administration and the student body.
The committee’s role is clearly explained in the BUCC bylaws [Exhibit 23]:
The BUCC shall serve as the faculty recommending body to the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs on all matters that affect the development,
modification, change, adoption, and implementation of the curriculum.
79
Furthermore, the BUCC shall provide procedures and mechanisms for the
systematic review, evaluation, and change of the curriculum at the institutionwide level. In addition, all such procedures and mechanisms shall be in
compliance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between
Bloomsburg University/State System of Higher Education and APSCUF.
The BUCC will be responsible for acting upon curricular proposals at the
institution-wide level, will serve as a coordinating committee of the curricular
proposals emanating from all components of the academic community, will serve
as a faculty advisory committee to the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs recommendations for improving the curriculum at Bloomsburg
University. (Bylaws, Bloomsburg University Curriculum Committee)
Sources of Curricular Change
Academic policy PRP 3230 – Course and Program Development [Exhibit 79], states that:
The development of academic programs is a crucial aspect of the long-range wellbeing of the University. New programs must be mounted as student and societal
needs become known. Existing programs facing declining enrollments become
subject to review so that adjustment steps may be taken. In some cases a program
may have to face the possibility of discontinuation. Courses within programs go
through a similar evolutionary cycle.
Curricular change at the University is usually initiated by one of the following actions.
As part of their comprehensive five-year cyclical review, each academic department is required
to critically evaluate all curricular offerings using appropriate outcomes assessment practices.
This includes an outside review by an individual familiar will the field of study under review.
Traditionally, these reviews have been the source of many of the requests for curricular changes.
As documented elsewhere in this self-study, several departments and programs at the University
are accredited by one or more national/ international accrediting and licensing bodies. Many
curricular changes occur because the various accreditation bodies make changes in their
recommended curriculums. For instance, the Pennsylvania Department of Education recently
revised the state-wide teacher certification requirements. Thus, all teacher education programs
offered at the University are currently being revised to comply with the new guidelines.
Finally, in order to adequately prepare students for the constantly changing labor market, many
departments have had to engage in ongoing reviews of their curricula. New programs have been
designed, course offerings revised, and some old programs terminated. For example, because of
the rise in white collar and computer-related crime, the University has developed a major in
computer forensics and a concentration in fraud examination.
80
Course Requirements for Graduation
The University has several processes in place to aid both current and prospective students in
understanding the specific course requirements of all undergraduate and graduate programs
currently being offered by the institution. The University Catalog, which is available
electronically at http://www.bloomu.edu/catalog/, provides complete course requirements, course
sequence sheets, and curriculum worksheets for each major, as well as descriptions for all
courses currently being offered. In addition, each department has developed a Graduation
Requirements Sheet [Exhibit 66] which it issues to its majors and faculty advisors. The
worksheet identifies all course requirements for the major and serves as a check sheet that
enables both the student and the advisor to monitor the candidate’s progress toward graduation.
Transfer Credits
The Legislature of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania recognized that the transferability of
courses is paramount to accommodating students wishing to transfer from one institution to
another. Accordingly, the Legislature has required all PASSHE institutions to standardize the
process for transfer of credits among two and four year public institutions within the
Commonwealth. The Pennsylvania Department of Education has responded by establishing a
system-wide data base to assist students in identifying course equivalencies between schools.
The University has already identified over 1,000 course equivalencies. Those courses are now
part of the state system database. In addition, the University developed its own internal BATS
(Bloomsburg Articulation and Transfer System) database that allows administrators, academic
advisors and admissions counselors to identify specific course transfer equivalencies for a broad
range of public and private institutions throughout several eastern states. The BATS database
has immeasurably expedited the evaluation of transfer credits.
Students
The University recognizes that the best curriculum in the world is irrelevant if students are not
engaged. Accordingly, the University has taken several actions designed to engage students in
the learning process.
Informing Students
The University recognizes that a student who understands the purpose of a course usually
performs better than one who does not. In an effort to ensure that each student receives a broad
range of information at the beginning of each course, the University has two academic policies
that detail the minimum information that the instructor must provide to each student.
Academic policy PRP 3233 – Required Format for Course Syllabi for BUCC Approval [Exhibit
54], provides specific guidelines relative to the minimum content to be included in the syllabi for
all courses taught at the University. The primary content items include:
81
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prerequisites
Catalog Description: Should reflect the general aims and nature of the course.
Goals and/or Objectives: May be general goals, specific objectives, behavioral
objectives, or other indications of the aims of the course.
Content Outline
Methods
Evaluation Procedures
Supporting Materials
Text
Academic policy PRP 3264 – Student Course Requirements and Progress Information [Exhibit
80], provides specific course requirement guidelines that instructors must distribute to their
students via paper, electronic mail, or the course web site during the first week of classes. The
information includes:
•
•
•
•
•
Procedures for determining each letter grade.
Any relationship of class attendance to the course.
Any other course requirements.
Weighting of requirements for grade computation.
Procedures for making up tests or other work missed through excused absences.
Traditionally, faculty members combine the required content of both policies and include all of
the information in their course syllabi.
Freshman Year Experience
The University has developed several initiatives that are intended to increase the potential for
students to succeed in the classroom. The combination of these initiatives is referred to as the
Freshman Year Experience. A key component of that experience is the 1 credit University
Seminar Course. The course is designed to introduce first semester freshmen to the tools they
need to succeed at the University. In addition to discussing a broad range of academic issues
ranging from academic integrity to remaining in good academic standing, students are introduced
to the plethora of services provided by the University. Students also learn how to use the
resources in the library and how to navigate the other electronic networks at the University.
Many of the University Seminar sections are reserved for students in specific majors,
departments or developmental programs, and are taught by instructors from those areas. For
instance, the College of Business has several dedicated sections taught by business faculty. The
course content is geared specifically towards the needs of students majoring in business.
The University Seminar course has steadily grown in popularity since its inception in 1995. The
following table shows the extent of that growth.
82
Enrollment
Total Fall Freshmen
University Seminar
Percent in Seminar Class
2000
1,426
269
19%
University Seminar Course
2001
2002
2003
2004
1,692 1,487 1,671 1,542
531
593
800
996
31%
40%
48%
65%
2005
1,697
1,211
71%
2006
1,644
1,227
75%
2007
1,685
1,323
79%
2008
1811
1464
81%
Study Abroad
The Office of International Education provides assistance to students who wish to complement
their traditional undergraduate education with an international component. The various Study
Abroad programs are operated at the individual college level and are intended to cultivate an
interdisciplinary perspective and foster an understanding of ethnic and national diversity. The
immersion of the University’s students in different areas of international study helps them
understand the interdependence of nations and enables them to better understand the world in
which they live and work.
The University currently offers exchange programs with universities in 14 countries. However,
as the following statistics indicate, relatively few students take advantage of this opportunity.
Study Abroad Enrollment
Number of Students Studying Abroad
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
16
24
29
27
71
2005
48
2006
68
2007
76
Practicum
The University has several programs which require some form of practicum as part of their
degree requirements. For instance, all education tracts require a variety of teaching experiences
over the course of a student’s academic studies. Most health-related programs at both the
undergraduate and graduate levels require clinical experiences. Although not required, all
programs in the College of Business recommend an internship experience. Finally, the
Instructional Technology graduate program has incorporated working with business partners into
their curriculum.
Students are also exposed to the practical aspects of various disciplines through an assortment of
academic-related organizations on campus. Most disciplines at the University have one or more
clubs or organizations that bring speakers to campus, allow students to participate in regional and
national conferences, visit work sites, enter discipline-related competitions, or conduct other
activities that enable the members to apply their new skills and knowledge.
Graduate Programs
Oversight of graduate programs is provided by the Graduate Council and the Assistant Vice
President and Dean of Graduate Studies and Research. In addition to an internal college review,
all graduate curricular proposals must be reviewed by the Graduate Council prior to submission
to the BUCC.
83
Several academic policies have been formulated that are specific to the graduate program. The
key policies [Exhibit 81] are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
PRP 3223 – Graduate Degree Programs
PRP 3449 – Graduate Courses in Senior Year
PRP 3463 – Graduate Admissions, Withdrawal, Course Repeat, Transfers, and
Graduation Requirements
PRP 3565 – Graduate Academic Progress, Probation, and Dismissal
PRP 3870 – Graduate Faculty Appointment
PRP 3880 – Graduate Course Repeat
The collective bargaining agreement between the Association of Pennsylvania State College and
University Faculties and PASSHE prohibits masters degree candidates from teaching lecture
courses or supervising laboratory periods. Accordingly, the University has no academic policies
that address the issue of graduate students teaching classes.
All graduate programs except Biology and Reading are accredited by one or more national/
international accrediting bodies. In addition, all but five of the programs use some form of
external examination to validate the level of relevant knowledge possessed by their graduates.
The remaining programs use candidacy exams, comprehensive examinations, or other forms of
outcomes assessment measures to evaluate their graduates.
The following table summarizes the status of the University’s active graduate programs.
Program
Audiology
Biology
Business. Education
Counseling
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
Early Childhood
Ed. Studies/El. Ed.
Exercise Science
Instructional
Technology
Nursing
MBA
Radiologist Asst.
Reading
Speech Pathology
Special Ed./
Exceptionalities
Accreditation,
Approval Agency
ASHA; CAA
PDE; NCATE
CACREP (In Process)
CED
PDE; NCATE
NCATE; PDE
ASEP; CAAHEP
PDE
CCNE
AACSB International
ARRT
ASHA; CAA; NCATE;
PDE
PDE; Council for
Exceptional Children
(Aligned)
Active Graduate Programs
National
Candidacy or
Examinations
Comprehensive
Examinations
PRAXIS
+
PRAXIS
PRAXIS
PRAXIS
+
PRAXIS
+
Faculty
Graduate
Qualified
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
AANC
ETS Major
Field Test; Iliad
Assessment
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
PRAXIS
PRAXIS
PRAXIS
PRAXIS
Other Forms
Of Outcomes
Assessment
+
Note: Some programs, such as Biology (MS, MEd), offer more than one type of graduate
degree.
84
+
+
+
In compliance with PRP 3870 – Graduate Faculty Appointment [Exhibit 82], faculty members
awarded graduate faculty status must have a demonstrated record of research and publishing and
must hold a terminal degree appropriate for the courses they teach in the graduate program. They
must also be qualified to guide and evaluate the research and other creative activities of their
graduate students.
The University recognizes that the awarding of a graduate degree implies that the recipient is
capable of conducting independent research and can think critically at an advanced level.
Therefore, each graduate program has a structured research component.
The following table identifies those research components.
Graduate Programs – Research Component
Program
Audiology
Specific Research
Course
Specific Research
Projects
+
Thesis or Directed
Study
Other Research
Opportunities
+
Biology
+
Business Education
+
Counseling
+
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
+
Early Childhood
+
Ed. Studies/Sec. Ed.
+
Exercise Science
+
Instructional Technology
+
Nursing
+
MBA
+
+
Radiologist Asst.
Optional
+
+
Reading
+
Speech Pathology
+
Special Ed/Exceptionalities
+
+
+
Optional
+
In accordance with the University and PASSHE missions, all of the graduate programs have
been created to fulfill the regional and national need for trained professionals in the business,
education and health care fields.
Additional discussion of the University’s graduate programs can be found in Chapter Six.
General Education
The University’s general education requirements have remained basically unchanged since they
were reviewed over 20 years ago. The goals of the general education program are explained in
PRP 3612 [Exhibit 46]. The program is designed to give students an opportunity to develop:
•
•
an ability to communicate effectively.
an ability to think analytically and quantitatively.
85
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
a facility to make independent and responsible value judgments and decisions according
to high ethical values and life-long goals.
an appreciation of the need for fitness and lifelong recreation skills.
a capacity for assessing the validity of ideas and an understanding of the approaches used
to gain knowledge through development of critical thinking abilities.
a greater appreciation of literature, art, music, and theatre through stimulation of one's
creative interests.
an understanding of our society and the relative position of an individual in this society.
an understanding of the relationship between an individual to his/her physical and
biological environments.
a familiarity with the major contributions of human knowledge in the humanities, social
sciences, and mathematics.
an awareness and global understanding of the relative position of the individual in the
world community.
Each student normally takes a minimum of 53 credits in general education subjects. The
University’s general education requirements are:
1. Communication - Nine Credits
a. Two courses (six credits) consisting of Composition 1 (20.101) and one of the
university approved second level writing or writing-intensive literature courses.
b. One additional course (three credits) from the approved list of communication
courses.
2. Quantitative/Analytical Reasoning - Three Credits from the approved list of
quantitative/analytical reasoning courses.
3. Values, Ethics, and Responsible Decision-Making - Three Credits from the approved
list of values, ethics, and responsible decision-making courses.
4. Fitness and Recreation Skills - Two Credits from the approved list of fitness and
lifelong recreation skill courses.
5. Diversity Requirement - Six Credits (two courses from different departments) which
are from an approved list of diversity focused courses. (These credits double count to
fulfill other general education or major requirements.)
6. Thirty six (36) credits with 12 credits from each of the three general academic areas of
humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences and mathematics. No more than six
credits from a given academic major may count toward this requirement.
•
Group A--Humanities, 12 Credits - Twelve credits from courses in at least three
different humanities departments must be represented in these 12 credits with two or
more credits taken from each department selected. The humanities departments
86
•
•
include Art, Communication Studies and Theatre Arts, English, History, Languages
and Cultures, Mass Communications, Music, and Philosophy.
Group B--Social Sciences, 12 Credits -Twelve credits from at least three different
social sciences departments must be represented in these 12 credits with two or more
credits taken from each department selected. The social sciences departments include
Anthropology, Economics, Geography and Geosciences (courses with “41” numbers),
Political Science, Psychology, and Sociology and Social Work and Criminal Justice.
Group C--Natural Sciences and Mathematics, 12 Credits- Twelve credits from at least
three different natural sciences and mathematics departments must be represented in
these 12 credits with two or more credits taken from each department selected.
Natural sciences and mathematics departments include Biological and Allied Health
Sciences, Chemistry, Geography and Geosciences (courses with "51" numbers),
Mathematics and Computer Science (courses with "53" numbers), and Physics and
Engineering Technology (courses with "54" numbers).
As reported in Chapter Five, the University utilizes the Educational Testing Services Measure of
Academic Proficiency and Progress Test (MAPP) to measure proficiency in reading, writing,
mathematics, and critical thinking. The MAPP results indicate that freshmen enter the
University with a lower level of knowledge in general subjects than students nationally.
However, once they complete their general education core courses, their level of knowledge
equals or exceeds peer cohorts.
Student Survey
A student survey [Exhibit 83] containing questions regarding perceptions of various aspects of
the University’s general education curriculum was completed electronically by approximately
400 of the University’s undergraduates. The respondents were divided with regard to the utility
of the general education requirements. About a third felt that the general education requirements
will help them in their future career, a third were neutral, and a third did not believe the courses
will be of help to them.
The students who were nearing completion of their general education requirements were less
convinced of the future usefulness of general education courses than the freshmen. However, 57
percent of all respondents believed that the general education courses they took will help them
become more well-rounded individuals. Only 20 percent of the respondents reported that they
were not sure why the University requires them to take general education courses. Students in
nursing and education reported more concern about the relevancy of general education courses to
their future career than students in other disciplines. As a whole, the data does suggest that some
students fail to grasp the importance of general education courses in developing a broad range of
basic skills and core knowledge expected of every college graduate.
Overall, only 11 percent of the respondents reported that input from their advisor was not
important and only 10 percent would oppose “requiring” students to meet with their advisor
regularly. These results are consistent with the fact that 79 percent of the respondents reported
that they met with their advisor at least once a semester. These responses would indicate that
most of the students do have good working relationships with their advisor.
87
Approximately 60 percent of the survey respondents supported the replacement of the English
Composition 2 requirement with a writing intensive course in their own college or major while
only 36 percent of the respondents supported the idea of requiring more courses that focus on
writing skills. Many respondents seemed to desire discipline specific-writing instruction over
writing instruction geared toward a more general audience.
With respect to technology, 90 percent of the respondents supported the inclusion of courses that
specifically focus on the use of technology. Business majors were particularly enthusiastic about
the idea of including more technology courses in the curriculum.
Faculty Survey
As part of a larger Middle States Self-Study survey presented elsewhere in this report [Exhibit
3], the faculty were asked about the University’s general education curriculum. The percentages
of the full-time faculty who completed the survey were: College of Business, 86 percent; College
of Liberal Arts, 43 percent, College of Professional Studies, 50 percent; and College of Science
and Technology, 69 percent.
The responses to two particular survey questions have been chosen for inclusion here because
they convey the sense of the faculty regarding two core components of the general education
curriculum at the University. The following table summarizes the faculty’s responses to the
questions.
Selected Survey Questions on General Education Curriculum
Total
College of
College of
College of
Survey
Business
Liberal Arts Professional
Responses
Studies
Question 34 – I am:
a. Pleased with the ability of our
students to write well.
b. Concerned that students exhibit
difficulty in writing well.
c. Very concerned with the inability of
students to write effectively.
d. No opinion.
e. Did not respond to the question
Question 35 – I am:
a. Pleased with the ability of our
students to think critically.
b. Concerned that students exhibit
difficulty in thinking critically.
c. Very concerned with the inability of
students to think critically.
d. No opinion.
e. Did not respond to the question
College of
Science and
Technology
7%
5%
9%
13%
7%
34%
53%
43%
45%
37%
27%
33%
35%
17%
44%
10%
22%
2%
7%
0%
13%
8%
17%
3%
9%
9%
5%
13%
20%
8%
39%
67%
49%
48%
37%
20%
17%
26%
7%
43%
10%
22%
7%
4%
0%
12%
7%
18%
3%
9%
The responses to Questions 34 and 35 clearly indicate that the vast majority of the faculty are
concerned about both the writing and critical thinking abilities of the University’s students. With
88
the exception of the College of Professional Studies, over 1/3 of the faculty were very concerned
with the ability of students to write effectively. The College of Science and Technology had, by
far, the greatest concern about the students’ critical thinking skills. This broad consensus of
opinion would indicate that the faculty believe that students need additional work in both areas.
In response to concerns about student writing skills, in spring 2006, the Provost and Vice
President for Academic Affairs created a university-wide Writing Strategy Task Force. The
Task Force gathered information from the review of existing University programs, faculty
experiences, opinion surveys, and conversations with administrators and department chairs who
were knowledgeable about writing opportunities and deficiencies on campus. They also
conducted a selective review of writing programs at several peer colleges/universities. Based on
their work, the Task Force made the following recommendations [Exhibit 84]:
A. Continue introductory writing requirements/placement practices in English
Composition 1 and Developmental Instruction courses as at present, pending
conclusions developing from the review of General Education now being initiated.
Meanwhile, encourage both departments to establish and implement internal
assessment of these courses.
B. Create a subcommittee on review/revision of introductory writing requirements as
part of the General Education review or to work in conjunction with that review.
Members of the sub-committee should include at least one representative from each
college as well as faculty with expertise in writing and writing-program
theory/practice.
C. Formalize and accelerate the existing movement toward discipline-specific writing as
the second-level requirement. Require each college to take responsibility for defining
second-level course work appropriate to the disciplines involved, whether by
individual department or by more general disciplinary groupings within the college.
Identification of appropriate course content, development of any necessary new
courses, and provision of staffing for those courses will be the responsibility and right
of the college to determine.
D. Provide significantly expanded support for the University Writing Center, facilitating
its increased function as a center for information and guidance on discipline-specific
writing. Expanded support should include professional assistance in developing
materials for discipline-specific writing, enlarging the Center web site to provide a
central locus for online information on research tools and writing formats appropriate
to specific disciplines, and hiring student consultants from a variety of disciplines to
work knowledgeably with student clients in those disciplines. Encourage
establishment of an Advisory Council, with representatives from all colleges, to work
with the Writing Center Director on comprehensive service to a program of writing in
the disciplines.
E. Consider instituting a competency/proficiency examination, perhaps after 45 or 60
credits, requiring a pass on the examination as a condition of graduation. Begin with
discussion of this possibility in college councils of chairs and the BUCC open forum
to explore positives and negatives of the proposal,
F. Develop adequate resources for support of ESL students, supporting the offering of
ESL courses and providing tutorial help knowledgeable of the requirements and
89
expectations of academic writing.
G. Disband the current University Writing Strategy Task Force in favor of smaller
committees with more focused expertise to address specific elements of a complex
and increasingly comprehensive university writing program.
Many of the recommendations such as development of discipline-specific writing courses and
enhancing the Writing Center are currently being implemented. Others, such as the competency
examinations are still in the discussion stage.
After reviewing the work of groups such as the Writing Strategy Task Force, conducting their
own interviews and surveys, and examining the practices of peer institutions, the Middle States
Self-Study Task Force on General Education issued the following summary of their findings and
recommendations [Exhibit 85]:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The goals of general education are not well communicated nor are they well understood
by students.
There is a serious disconnect between student and faculty perceptions of general
education.
The structure of the current general education requirements and programmatic constraints
very much favors a route through general education that results in students, by and large,
not achieving a significant number of the learning goals of general education.
There are key components of general education goals that are not being met in a
prescribed manner.
There is currently no mechanism, nor a way to monitor, or enforce, the rational
completion of general education requirements such that foundational skills are in place
before more advanced coursework is attempted.
Faculty views overwhelmingly support the notion that the general education goals of
developing effective writing and critical thinking skills are not being met for many of our
students.
There are key differences of opinion by faculty in different colleges about student
capabilities that suggest that there are different levels of expectations among the faculty.
Recognizing the urgency of addressing the Task Force’s preliminary findings, the Bloomsburg
University Middle States Steering Committee on October 3, 2007 submitted a letter to the
Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Bloomsburg University
Curriculum Committee (BUCC) recommending that a General Education Task Force be
assembled to review the University’s General Education Curriculum [Exhibit 86].
In November 2007, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs created the General
Education Task Force and gave it the following charge:
The General Education Task Force will develop an ongoing review process for
the university’s general education program. The task force should engage the
entire university community in the development of this process. The products of
the task force deliberation will include:
90
•
•
•
•
•
•
Review Bloomsburg University’s current general education program. The
review should determine the general education needs of Bloomsburg
University students and also consider the standards of accrediting,
certification and licensure bodies that apply to the University and its curricula;
Review Bloomsburg University’s current general education courses. The
review should include an evaluation of whether or not each current general
education course includes learning objectives and outcomes that are consistent
with the learning objectives that have been established for our general
education program;
If needed, modify the university’s general education learning objectives based
on the initial review of general education and as appropriate to satisfy the
requirements of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education;
Provide initial recommendations regarding possible modifications to the
university’s general education program;
Develop a strategic plan that provides for an on-going review of the general
education program and includes a permanent committee structure and a longrange general education assessment protocol that is based upon measurable or
observable criteria;
Provide recommendations on resources and faculty development needed to
carry out any revisions to the general education program deemed necessary.
The General Education Task Force is expected to complete their work and deliver their final
general education recommendations and related strategic plan to the Bloomsburg University
Curriculum Committee (BUCC) by May 2010.
Additional discussion of the University’s general education program can be found in Chapter
Five.
91
CHAPTER EIGHT
CONCLUSION
As part of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) Bloomsburg
University’s mission is to provide the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a
quality education at an affordable cost. As this self-study has documented, the University has
done an excellent job of fulfilling its mission.
Through coordinated planning and assessment activities, the University has maintained an
academically strong institution. As a result, the number of academic programs that have
achieved national and international accreditation have steadily grown during the last decade.
Much of the institution’s academic success can be attributed to the efforts of the University’s
dedicated faculty and staff. The workforce at Bloomsburg University is very stable and consists
of individuals who have a great deal of institutional pride and are dedicated to serving the
intellectual and social needs of the students. Definitely, the faculty and staff are the most
valuable resource that the institution possesses.
Since the last decennial Middle States review in 1999, the University has experienced sustained
enrollment growth while simultaneously increasing the academic quality of the student body.
This includes systematically increasing the percentage of students who have been historically
underrepresented. Of equal importance is the fact that the University has been able to maintain
an overall second year retention rate of approximately 80 percent and a six-year graduation rate
that has grown to 65 percent.
The expanding enrollment levels have translated into increased tuition and state appropriation
revenues which have enabled the University to remain financially strong. Accordingly, during
the last decade, the University has been able to initiate several capital projects that have resulted
in the renovation of most existing academic and student housing buildings, construction of
additional classrooms, and erection of additional student housing units on campus. At the same
time, the institution has been able to maintain a balanced budget.
Retaining strong enrollment levels in the face of declining numbers of high school graduates
after 2009 is one of the biggest challenges facing the University in the next decade. As was
discussed in the body of the report, the Enrollment Management Steering Committee has
developed a comprehensive plan to ensure that enrollment continues to remain strong for the
foreseeable future.
The current economic recession has resulted in a significant decline in anticipated state funding
for the 2009-2010 academic year. Accordingly, the University has decided to increase total
freshman enrollment by approximately 10 percent for the 2009-2010 academic year. The
resulting increase in tuition and fees should be sufficient to enable the University to acquire the
additional resources needed to serve the student body and to remain financially stable during this
92
period of economic turmoil. However, the current plan is dynamic and will continue to be reevaluated as new financial and enrollment data becomes available.
A great deal of the University’s current success can be attributed to its coordinated planning and
assessment activities. Every department within the institution undertakes a variety of annual
planning and assessment activities which are integrated into a comprehensive strategic plan for
the University. This has resulted in a planning and assessment process that focuses primarily on
the basic mission of the University, the clientele to be served, the major goals and objectives to
be pursued, specific programmatic priorities, and the means by which the institution seeks to
differentiate itself from other universities.
This self-study, conducted as part of the Middle States reaccreditation process, has given
Bloomsburg University an opportunity to conduct a critical self-evaluation. Although the results
have reaffirmed that the University is strong academically and fiscally, the self-study has
identified a variety of concerns that the institution needs to address. Each of these concerns is
addressed in one or more of the following recommendations.
Recommendation 1: A comprehensive review of the Bloomsburg University Mission Statement
should be undertaken as part of the next planning cycle.
Status at December 31, 2008: The review of the Mission Statement is incorporated into the
development of the University’s next strategic plan which was begun near the end of the fall
2008 academic semester.
Recommendation 2: A clear organizational structure needs to be defined between the
Bloomsburg University Foundation and the University Office of Development.
Status at December 31, 2008: Despite a PSAAHE initiated administrative hiring freeze, the
University has received permission to hire a Vice President for University Advancement. The
position has been advertised and should be filled by the beginning of the fall 2009 academic
semester. The position will have joint oversight responsibilities for both the Foundation and
Office of Development.
Recommendation 3: A percentage of the annual budget should be assigned for the upkeep of
academic and general purpose facilities.
Status at December 31, 2008: Implementation of this recommendation has been deferred until
the end of the current economic recession.
Recommendation 4: Bloomsburg University should create an Office of Outcomes Assessment.
Status at December 31, 2008: In fall 2008 a search was begun for a Director of Planning and
Assessment. A subsequent administrative hiring freeze mandated by PASSHE means that the
position will remain vacant until further notice.
93
Recommendation 5: Bloomsburg University should create an elected Outcomes Assessment
Committee.
Status at December 31, 2008: Creation of this committee has been postponed until a Director of
Planning and Assessment can be hired.
Recommendation 6: A formal process for withdrawal from the University should be instituted
that includes notification of the student’s advisor and department chair, a counseling session with
an advisor, and an exit interview with a designated administrator.
Status at December 31, 2008: No action has been taken on this recommendation.
Postscript
All of the exhibits referenced in this report can be viewed on the accompanying CD.
94