Conclusion
In January of 2001 Troy State University established as its purpose for the Self-Study to
conduct a comprehensive, broad-based, analytical assessment to ensure the accuracy and
adequacy of its statement of purpose, to ensure that policies, practices, and procedures effectively
fulfill its mission, and to validate its strategic planning. During the process, the University set forth
10 major goals for the Self-Study.
The first goal was “to strengthen understanding of and appreciation for the purpose and
mission of the Troy State University System.” Informal surveys and dialogue with the various
constituencies of the University indicate overwhelmingly that this goal has been accomplished.
However, the printing schedule for this document did not permit the University to document this
assumption with the most recent data. Prior to the April 2003 visit of the reaffirmation visiting
committee, updated results of surveys and questionnaires will be compiled and included as part of
the Addendum to this report for this and other goals.
The second goal was “to demonstrate that the University complies with the Criteria for
Accreditation to earn reaffirmation of accreditation.” Although reaffirmation of accreditation will be
determined by the Commission on Colleges in its December 2003 meeting, it is abundantly obvious
that this self-study process has served as a catalyst to identify improvements necessary to meet
the requirements of these criteria, and to build upon identified strengths to enhance the quality of
programs and efficiency of operations.
As the various committees and subcommittees worked through the must statements, they
were asked to measure their analyses against the planning and decision-making processes.
Overall, the planning process proved to be extremely strong; however, as one might expect,
several minor needs were discovered at the departmental level, and these have been cogently
addressed in Chapter 3 of this report.
The Steering Committee tasked each major committee to cite strengths and weaknesses
they found in each section of the Self-Study. These have been compiled, and they will form a
valuable adjunct to the University’s ongoing strategic planning. The self-study process has
established the fact that Troy State University is today a much stronger institution than it was a
decade ago, particularly in regard to faculty qualifications, physical plant, planning and
assessment, the use of technology, and the academic inventory available to its student body.
The Institutional Effectiveness Plan has been enhanced by the establishment of a systemwide Academic Coordinating Council. This Council--comprised of representatives of the Troy
campus, Troy State University Phenix City, Troy State University Montgomery, Troy State
University Dothan, and University College--reviews and approves in the preliminary stages all
concepts and ideas for curriculum expansion and revision. This Council must also approve the
finished documents after they have been approved by the various other committees and councils,
thereby ensuring continuing assessment and essential revision of curriculum.
C-2
The sixth goal, evaluating the Institutional Effectiveness Plan and using this data to refine
and improve the plan, proved to be a formidable and somewhat contentious task. The Institutional
Effectiveness Committee (Section III) worked long and hard with administrative officers, colleges,
schools, and departments to determine that the various components, i.e., the Six Points of
Institutional Effectiveness, the Annual Assessment Report and Annual Plans were being properly
prepared and appropriately utilized. The committee ultimately discovered that the plan is an
excellent one, but several of the individuals responsible for the components lacked a complete
understanding of its purpose and its application to the operations of the entire institution.
Consequently, the Institutional Effectiveness Committee has offered suggestions for training
individuals to use the plan and for streamlining portions of the plan.
The self-study process enabled groups representing all areas of the Institution to work
together to accomplish assigned responsibilities. The process proved to be extremely valuable to
those individuals who had never experienced a reaffirmation review because they were exposed to
a wide array of information and concerns which are not part of their routine duties and
responsibilities. Although some committees worked together more intimately than others, all
committees met regularly, kept records, shared duties, and accomplished their assigned tasks.
Almost every committee utilized data from standard University sources such as the Fact
Book, Standing Committees, Compendium of Survey and Test Results, and reports required by
state and federal agencies. It became obvious that some data was not readily available. Several
committees suggested that, insofar as possible, such publications as the Fact Book be expanded
to include new categories; for example, percentages of credit hours taught by full-time faculty and
percentages of enrollment broken out in terms of upper-division and lower-division undergraduates.
These suggestions will be carefully considered by the Office of Institutional Research, Planning,
and Effectiveness and incorporated and made available as feasible and appropriate.
As mentioned elsewhere, the various committees remained mindful during their work of the
strategic initiatives as they relate to planning. As a result of their work and the work of several
focus groups, strategic initiatives will form a natural core for the established planning process.
Finally, the most positive aspect of the self-study process is the accumulation of
information reflected in the Plans for Improvement. As these plans are implemented, the Institution
will become a stronger one and better able to carry out its unique, dynamic mission.
Epilogue
Although the lives of all Americans and the operation of many American institutions of
higher education were forever changed by the tragic events of September 11, 2001, few institutions
have been impacted as seriously as the Troy State University System. The commitment to
providing educational opportunities for military personnel and to international education are
significant elements of this institution’s mission.
To the members of the University family and to their families, we pay homage to those who
gave their lives and those who suffered injuries on this infamous day in history and in its aftermath.
To those members of the faculty, staff, and student body who have been forced to interrupt their
careers and their pursuit of knowledge, our resolve to persevere has been strengthened. The
C-3
University pledges to remain steadfast in fulfilling its mission and will be ever vigilant and diligent in
providing measures and resources to enable our constituencies to realize their educational goals.
The University further pledges to continue to build an institution in which they may take pride
commensurate with the pride the University takes in their loyalty, dedication, sacrifice, and
courage.