FORMAT FOR APR COMMITTEE REPORTS TO THE FACULTY SENATE
1. The Academic Program Review (APR) Committee makes recommendations
about each program that it reviews in written reports to the Faculty Senate.
The APR Committee Report to the Faculty Senate should provide
constructive feedback that encourages program improvement. APR should
provide a report to Faculty Senate using the reporting grid attached to this
document. In addition, APR may choose to request a mid-review period
follow-up (3 years) to concerns raised regarding the program.
2. All materials referenced by the APR Committee should be in electronic format
and are received from the Deans’ Office. The following materials comprise
the report to APR:
ƒ The APR Self-Study Report provided by the departmental self-study
committee (including the annual reports and other important
departmental documents contained therein);
ƒ the unit data sheet provided by the Office of Institutional Research to
the department under review
ƒ the report of the external consultant(s) or accreditation agency;
ƒ the departmental response to the aforementioned reports; and
ƒ the dean’s summary report, which is prepared by the dean after
reviewing the APR Self-Study Report, the external consultant’s or
accreditation agency’s report, and the departmental response to this
report.
Approved by Faculty Senate 9/28/06
Academic Program Review SUMMARY*
Department under review__ESS Human Performance___________________
Date self-study received in Dean’s office: August 2011
Date of external consultant’s review: November 2009
Date APR received report: September 2011
APR’S summary of self-study (first two boxes must be completed)
APR’s summary of how the academic program attempts to reach its goals and objectives
and the extent to which those goals and objectives have been achieved.
The ESS: Human Performance program is a master’s program, where graduates
will seek positions in sport coaching or strength and conditioning of athletes.
Experiences within the program include coursework in exercise physiology,
biomechanics and motor control, research and practical experiences.
Program goals now identified and outlined by the National Strength and
Conditioning Association (NSCA) seem to be met successfully, demonstrated by the high
percentage of students passing the Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist
(CSCA) Exam since 2004 (17/17 in the last three years of data included in this report).
Many students are also awarded $10,000 grants by the NSCA as well (to fund graduate
tuition).
APR’s comments including:
Notable Strengths
1. The ESS: Human Performance program has developed an identified niche that
has students making research contributions and being gainfully employed.
2. The program has developed relations to collaborate with other programs to
stretch resources (e.g., health professions, strength & conditioning coaches)
Notable Weaknesses
1. Learning goals are not really articulated in a manner consistent with
assessment and the determination of attained skills.
2. They are stretched for resources. While they are making it, it is tenuous and
could negatively impact the program in the long run.
3. GAs need to be provided to help attract students. Currently it is underresourced.
APR comments on any/all of the six specific components of the self-study (if applicable)
Self Study: Purposes
The Human Performance master’s program is one of eight programs housed within
the Department of Exercise and Sport Science, which has four undergraduate programs
and four graduate programs. Beyond the clarity of the degree program, the mission of the
program is to develop “meaningful active living where the benefits of physical activity are
understood, valued and integrated into daily life.” (APR, ESS-Human Performance, p. 2).
The program has also spent time aligning goals and objectives with the National Strength
and Conditioning Association (NSCA), giving much more focus to courses and preparing
students for the certification exam administered by the NSCA. This program is rather
unique because of its focus on scientific training for athletes at a high level of performance
including high school, college, Olympic and professional sports.
Self Study: Curriculum
The master’s program in Human Performance requires a minimum of 32 credits
(generally 30 credits is the minimum for a graduate degree). There are two areas of
concentration: the strength and conditioning emphasis and the applied sport science
emphasis. The coursework for the strength and conditioning emphasis includes the
following: over 200 hours of supervised internship (under a coach/sport of interest for
each candidate) within the 18 required credits, 6-12 credits in research, and the balance
(2-8 credits) in electives. Because this is clearly an applied program, there is a question
as to the necessity of the intense research portion of this emphasis, which is a minimum
of 6 credits and can expand to 12 credits. However, the Director of the Human
Performance program clarified that the option of 12 credits in research is to aid those
students interested in pursuing doctoral work. The coursework for the applied sport
science emphasis includes 12 credits of coursework including a laboratory techniques
course toward each student’s desired expertise, 6-12 credits in research, plus 6 credits of
electives. Most students pursue a thesis due to the nature of this emphasis, again
probably continuing in doctoral studies.
The program would benefit from being able to house a biomechanics course within
the Human Performance program. Currently the course in this area is coordinated
through Health Professions. The Health Professions have an ESS class that meets the
needs of the program. This is an ongoing relationship, but one that is prone to change
based on budgets and re-allocation of resources. It is critical that the students in the
program continue to have this course. The efforts to recruit the Human Performance
program’s own PhD person have failed, but there is a need for a PhD to maintain
graduate program status as well as to help with the thesis projects.
The program has really worked to achieve outstanding internships beyond the
campus as well, citing that the master’s students are now working with professional
organizations such as the Milwaukee Bucks and Seattle Mariners, as well as D1 athletic
programs.
Self Study: Assessment of Student Learning & Degree of Program Success
It appears that the program is grounded in the national goals consistent with the
professional expectations. Specific classes have been identified that directly correlate with
the national goals. In addition, the program has identified a specific scope and sequence
to the courses and having specific prerequisites to classes controls this sequence.
The program had developed a rubric of the national goals and the courses that the
student was expected to progress through. It was unclear in the review of materials what
the association was between specific (course imbedded) learning outcomes and the
national goals. There was nothing beyond course grades to indicate that a student was
successfully progressing through the sequence of courses. It would be beneficial for the
program and the individual students to have certain assessments elevated to provide
clear information on how the students are progressing through program material. This
information could also be used to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the program
and to ensure optimal program delivery.
The program provided a number of points indicating student success. There was
information on student success in terms of completing research presentations at the state
or national level or first-author student peer reviewed publications. There was also the
indication of some success across the two programs in the number of students that found
employment 6 months following graduation or were enrolled in a doctoral program.
There was no evidence of a capstone assessment of the students (e.g., portfolio,
examination, etc.) that was expected for all students to complete. Rather, the certification
exam noted in the report was encouraged from some students that were completing the
terminal master’s degree and not progressing on to a doctoral program. While the
students that have taken this examination have all passed, it would be helpful to see that
all students could pass some mark of proficiency within their chosen field.
Self Study: Previous Academic Program Review and New Program Initiatives
In 2004 the program made significant changes with the hiring of a program director.
Under the leadership, it would appear that the program has focused its mission on two
programs: Applied Sport Science and Strength & Conditioning. Many of the courses were
re-aligned to achieving the objectives of both of these core areas as well as the updated
national standards. Both tracks begin with foundational classes and move to applied
practices. All of these changes were made based on feedback from the national trends,
student input and faculty knowledge and skills to deliver an appropriate and effective
curriculum. There have not been any major changes since 2004.
Self Study: Personnel
The personnel seems to be set except there is no biomechanic person. This is an
issue since the coursework is a requirement for the program, and is dependent upon
another department’s offering of the course (which may be tenuous with the budget
situation). Furthermore, a biomechanics PhD would upgrade the research activity and
also aid in acquiring ERP status, which they are very close to having and would be a
boost in attracting the best candidates from across the country.
Self Study: Support for Achieving Academic Program Goals (Resources)
The program appears to enjoy the benefits and the constraints of operating in a
Division III school. The most striking benefit is the opportunity to work with athletes. This is
not available to students in a training program at a Division I school because of the
scholarships and liability that the program would be operating under. The limitation is that
the resources are not optimal. While this is acknowledged in the report, there have been
some beneficial changes. The recent change to segregate all athletes to the Mitchell Hall
training center has allowed better access to the students in this program to work with
these athletes. In addition, the faculty are planning to submit a lab modernization proposal
to more efficiently use the research space they do have.
External Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on External Reviewer (if applicable)
The Reviewer was fair and positive. Because there are very few programs in
human performance, the review praised the program as a good niche and to refrain from
making the program more broad in an effort to attract more people to the program. One
suggestion for creating more funding for research and other needed resources was to
seek external funding for graduate assistantships who would provide more resources for
graduate students (i.e., GA’s). The program could then take a more aggressive role
toward actively recruiting outside of Wisconsin and seeking top candidates for this
program.
The reviewer advocated more research space and dedicated resources. With the
applied science emphasis of the program there may be better ways to do more applied
research than with the traditional thesis. The reviewer suggested collaboration with other
programs within ESS (such as physical therapy and clinical exercise physiology) to create
more opportunities for research and to also provide students opportunities to work with
faculty from these fields of study and increase research perspectives.
The Reviewer did encourage this program to seek ERP status, as the NCSA, which
has over 30,000 members, has direct links to all ERP programs (of which there are
approximately 8 in the country). Unfortunately, in order to attain this ERP status, the
Human Performance program needs to have a tenure track person in biomechanics,
which has failed after two searches and seems to be problematic due to the emphasis on
teaching and the small program at a Division III school.
There was also concern for the workload of the director. The program director is
working the summer to manage student inquires and student concerns as well as chairing
a number of thesis committees. For the theses that the director is not chairing, he is
serving on most of the committees. There is currently no summer stipend for the director.
One of the prime responsibilities of the director is to attract students to come to UW-L
specifically for this graduate program. The responsiveness of the director in the summer
may be critical to the decision of some students.
Department’s response to the Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on the Department’s Response (if applicable)
The program has developed a niche market that allows students to work with
student athletes and recreation individuals. While there is a growing trend nationwide to
offer this type of program, other programs are starting at D1 schools and have limited
contact for the students with athletes.
The need to rely on Health Professions to supply the content and skills in
biomechanics cannot be highlighted enough. This is an integral component to student
training and knowledge exiting the program. Without this relationship, the ability of the
program to continue without a professor in biomechanics would be cast in serious doubt.
Attempts to hire within the program have failed due to lack of applicants and lack of a
competitive salary.
The relatively recent changes to focus strength and conditioning training in Mitchell
Hall has been beneficial for the program and increased the opportunities for the graduate
students to acquire practical experiences. The space to conduct research is “functional”
however there is talk to write a classroom modification to expand the research area.
The ability to offer graduate assistantships to attract the best and the brightest
graduate students on campus is a limitation to the program. Many quality students pass
on the opportunity to study at UW-La Crosse, despite the strong practical experiences it
can offer, due to the lack of financial support. In essence it is trying to be a golden
program on less than a golden budget and resources.
Dean’s Letter
APR’s Comments on Dean’s Letter (if applicable)
The Dean does suggest that there have been additional curricular changes to
insure that graduate students are challenged beyond what the undergraduate courses
might entail, which was a concern of the External Reviewer. He also says that staffing
changes have occurred so that faculty are engaged beyond the teaching portion of the
load, which apparently was not happening when there were joint athletic and academic
appointments. Overall, he also praises the quality and effectiveness of the program.
APR’s Recommendations (must be completed)
Recommendations:
• The program has done well to develop a specialized niche market in this
competitive field and offers excellent hands-on opportunities for student learning.
• There has been an established critical relationship with Health Sciences to offer a
specialized class that is necessary for the vitality of the program. We would
recommend continuing that relationship, but also want to continue to advocate for
the program to look for ways to find and fund this critical position within the
program array.
• In reviewing the website for the program, it may need to be improved to attract
students to the program.
• Need to develop learning goals consistent with student evaluation of progress
through the program and overall program evaluation. This could be done through
elevating some key assignments that demonstrate all students’ growth and
knowledge in the field.
• There are a number of summer projects that need to be completed. Some are
ongoing (e.g., recruiting and responding to student inquiries) and some are finite
(e.g., updating the website, developing learning outcomes). Given the current
heavy load of the director, it may be important to provide summer support through
a stipend to the program director to ensure the completion of these important
program requirements.
□ No serious areas to address – review in 7 years
X Some areas to address – review in 7 years
□ Some areas to address – department should submit short report on progress to Fac
Senate/Provost’s Office in 3 years
* APR’s report to faculty senate will consist of this completed form in electronic
form.