Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
I. Introduction to Department/Program
A. Department Mission Statement
The Department of Law and Justice offers an important social science component of the
university's liberal arts and professional preparation curricula. Through its major and
minor courses of study the department provides instruction and experiences through
which students develop an understanding of the perspectives, content, and methodology
in law and justice-related disciplines. We endeavor to ensure that graduates have the
analytical ability, theoretical orientation, skill and knowledge to pursue law enforcement,
corrections, or paralegal related careers; or to continue their educations in law school or
graduate school.
In the context of a dynamic society, this mission is achieved by providing students with
(a) a broad background in the history, philosophy, and current trends in law and society
with a particular emphasis on diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, gender, and sexual
orientation issues; (b) instruction and opportunities to collaborate with faculty in research
and scholarly activities; (c) the ability to think critically and ethically about issues and
research in criminal justice, (d) and opportunities to obtain practical experience in public
or private sector agencies that address law and justice issues. We consider careers in law
and justice primarily as helping professions and our overarching goal is to provide
qualified personnel for the betterment of society. Our faculty is always cognizant of the
need to instill in our students the utmost respect for the rights of the individual in
pursuing the duties entrusted to them in their professional roles.
In addition to offering educational opportunities to students at the Ellensburg campus, the
department provides courses to place-bound students in the western and central regions of
the state at university centers in Yakima, Des Moines, Lynnwood, and Pierce County.
The department also serves as a center for scholarly inquiry related to law and justice.
Finally, the department is committed to providing services that respond to the needs of
law and justice agencies and programs, and to the community and the state.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
1
B. Brief description of department and program contexts including date of last review.
The Law and Justice Department grew out of a multidisciplinary program of courses
offered by psychology, political science and sociology based in the Political Science
Department. In the early 1990’s development of a more traditional criminal justice
curriculum was set up as the Department of Law and Justice with specializations in law
enforcement and corrections, followed by paralegal/pre-law. The addition of this
paralegal/pre-law specialization moved the department away from traditional criminal
justice and toward law and social justice issues. The department only offers upper
division courses at the 300 and 400 level. In 2000, a comprehensive law and justice
curriculum was created with psychology, political science, and sociology supplementing
the curriculum as elective courses. In 2002, a M.A. in Law and Justice was approved by
the University and the Washington State Higher Education Board. It has yet to be
implemented. The paralegal/pre-law specialization was changed to legal studies in 2006.
The date of the last program review was 2003-2004.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
2
C. Description of departmental governance system and organizational chart for
department.
The department is headed by the chair who is provided administrative support from the
secretary senior, and seeks guidance in decision making from the faculty During this
assessment period, Law and Justice Associate Professor Jim Roberts continued as chair in
Fall quarter, 2003, and then beginning winter quarter 2004 through spring 2006,
Psychology Professor and Associate Dean of the College of the Sciences, Phil Tolin
served as chair until his phased retirement. From academic year 2006-2007 through
2007-2008, Law and Justice Associate Professor Mary Ellen Reimund served as chair,
while based at the Des Moines Center, as well as serving as director of that center. She
resigned as chair in spring 2008. For academic year 2008-2009, former Department chair,
Law and Justice Professor Charles Reasons, has been elected chair. Each center (Des
Moines, Lynnwood, Pierce County and Yakima) has a tenured/tenure track faculty
member serving as director.
In addition to the senior secretary, in 2005, a part-time office assistant was added. In fall
of 2006, the senior secretary for the past 6 years left the department to pursue a criminal
justice career. The past two years have been one of transition and stabilization. In fall
2007, part of the responsibilities of the part time office assistant became pre-admission
advising in order to bridge the gap between admission to the major and assignment to
faculty advisor. In spring 2008, the secretary senior transferred to another department,
and the person holding pre-admission advising/office assistant was promoted to secretary
senior while continuing in the pre-admission advising role. This person also left the
department the end of summer, 2008. In fall 2008, CWU alumni Sharon Talley filled the
secretary senior position, and Crystal Boothman filled the part time office assistant/preadmission advising position. (See organizational chart)
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
3
Organizational Chart
2008-2009
Department of Law and Justice
Chair
Charles Reasons
(Professor)
Staff
Faculty
Charles Reasons (Professor)
Ellensburg
Sharon Talley
(Secretary Senior)
Crystal Boothman (Office Assistant III)
Mike Olivero
(Professor)
Sarah Britto
(Assoc Prof)
James Roberts
(Assoc Prof)
Teresa Francis
(Assist Prof)
Cathy Busha
(Full-time Lecturer)
(Adjuncts)
Des Moines
Center Director:
Mary Ellen Reimund (Assoc Prof)
(Adjuncts)
Lynnwood
Center Director:
Krystal Noga
(Assist Prof)
Robert Moore
(Full-time Lecturer)
(Adjuncts)
Pierce
Center Director:
Key Sun
(Assoc Prof)
(Adjuncts)
Yakima
Center Director:
Rodrigo Murataya (Assoc Prof)
(Adjuncts)
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
4
D Department Program
1. Department goals.
a. Assure the presentation of high quality programs.
b. Build partnerships to support academic program quality and enhance student
experiences
c. Assure faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all courses and
programs at all sites.
d. Support the involvement of students in scholarly activities.
e. Enhance the climate of productive faculty scholarship.
f. Serve as a center for services to the community and the region.
g. Promote and enhance an environment of diversity, equity, social justice and cultural
responsiveness.
2. Relationship of each department goal to relevant college and university strategic
goals.
The mission, goals and values of the Law and Justice Department are consistent with
both the mission of Central Washington University and the mission of the College of the
Sciences. Together, these three mission statements guide the activities and plans of the
Law and Justice Department.
a. The LAJ goal of assuring the presentation of high quality programs relates to College
Goals 1 & 2 – Provide for an outstanding academic and student experience in COTS,
college programs and courses at university centers and Goal 7 – Create and sustain
productive, civil, and pleasant learning environments and University Goals 1 & 2 –
Maintain and strengthen an outstanding academic and student life on Ellensburg and
University Center campuses and Goal 6. Build inclusive and diverse campus
communities that promote intellectual inquiry and encourage civility, mutual respect,
and cooperation.
b. The LAJ goal of building partnerships to support academic program quality and
enhance student experiences relates to College Goals 1 & 2 – Provide for an
outstanding academic and student experience in COTS, college programs and courses
at university centers and Goal 5 – Build partnerships that support academic program
quality and student experiences in the college of sciences including those with
private, professional, academic, government, and community based organizations and
University Goals 1 & 2 – Maintain and strengthen an outstanding academic and
student life on Ellensburg and University Center campuses and Goal 4 Build mutually
beneficial partnerships with the public sector, industry, professional and the
communities surrounding our campus communities groups, institutions.
c. The LAJ Goal of assuring faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all
courses and programs at all sites relates to College Goals 1 & 2 – Provide for an
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
5
outstanding academic and student experience in COTS, college programs and courses
at university centers and University Goals 1 & 2 – Maintain and strengthen an
outstanding academic and student life on Ellensburg and University Center campuses.
d. The LAJ Goal of supporting the involvement of students in scholarly activities relates
to College Goals 1 & 2 – Provide for an outstanding academic and student experience
in COTS, college programs and courses at university centers and Goal 5 – Build
partnerships that support academic program quality and student experiences in the
college of sciences, including those with private, professional, academic, government,
and community based organizations and University Goals University Goals 1 & 2 –
Maintain and strengthen an outstanding academic and student life on Ellensburg and
University Center campuses.
e. The LAJ Goal of enhancing the climate of productive faculty scholarship relates to
College Goals 1 & 2 – Provide for an outstanding academic and student experience in
COTS, college programs and courses at university centers and University Goals
University Goals 1 & 2 – Maintain and strengthens an outstanding academic and
student life on Ellensburg and University Center campuses.
f. The LAJ Goal of serving as a center for services to the community and the region
relates to College Goal 5 – Build partnerships that support academic program quality
and student experiences in the college of sciences, including those with private,
professional, academic, government, and community based organizations and
University Goal - Build mutually beneficial partnerships with the public sector,
industry, professional groups, institutions, and the communities surrounding our
campus communities.
g. The Law and Justice goal of promoting and enhancing an environment of diversity,
equity, sound justice and cultural responsibility reflects University strategic goal 6 of
building inclusive and diverse campus communities.
3. Data used to measure (assess) goal attainment.
a. Assure the presentation of high quality programs.
Method of Assessment:
i. Artifact of Core Courses; LAJ 300 Short Paper, LAJ 302 Legal Brief, LAJ
303 Law Library Assignment, LAJ 400 Research project, LAJ 401 Reaction
paper, LAJ 451 Theory paper or PowerPoint Presentation. Students taking
LAJ 300, 302, 303, 400, 401, 451 are assessed.
ii. Survey of Internship Supervisors
iii. Alumni Survey
iv. Peer review of tenured/tenure faculty and full time lecturer syllabi at
department’s annual assessment day in spring quarter for required content.
Chair and personnel committee review of part-time lecturer syllabi for
required content as part of annual evaluation.
v. SEOI average for department
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
6
b. Build partnerships to support academic program quality and enhance student
experiences
Method of Assessment:
i. Number of student internships using enrollment records for LAJ 490 at time
of cyclical program review and employer evaluation
ii. Guest speakers in LAJ Classes
c. Assure faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all courses and
programs at all sites.
Method of Assessment:
i. Monitor class sizes by evaluating enrollment records
ii. Monitor number of advisees per faculty using advisee numbers
iii. Monitor ratios of lecturers to tenured/tenure track annually
d. Support the involvement of students in scholarly activities.
Method of Assessment:
i. Professional meeting papers and presentations with students as authors / coauthors.
ii. Student presentations and research-via SOURCE and local symposia.
iii. Track student enrollment in directed research LAJ 495 and research related
LAJ 496 individual study
iv. Membership in Alpha Phi Sigma, Criminal Justice Honorary local affiliate,
Beta Tau Nu, of the National Criminal Justice Honor Society.
v. From 2000 on, we recognize outstanding student scholarship at our annual
student awards ceremonies before spring graduation honoring an outstanding
Eastside and Westside student and an outstanding student from each center.
e. Enhance the climate of productive faculty scholarship.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty publications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
ii. Faculty scholarly presentations of all tenured and tenure track faculty
iii. Faculty participation in professional conferences/training of all tenured and
tenure track faculty
iv. Internal grants applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
v. External grant applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
vi. Faculty awards and honors
vii. Sabbatical leave
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
7
f.
Serve as a center for services to the community and the region.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty involvement in community service activities
ii. Faculty membership on local, state, national boards or committees
iii. From 2000 on, we recognize alumni service to the community by awarding
annually an Eastside and Westside Alumni of the Year Award.
g. Promote and enhance an environment of diversity, equity, social justice and
cultural responsibility.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty diversity
ii. Student diversity
iii. Departmental courses
iv. Faculty / Student research/publications
v. Faculty / Student community involvement
4. Description of the criterion of achievement (standard of mastery) for each goal.
a. Assure the presentation of high quality programs.
Method of Assessment:
i. Artifact of Core Courses; LAJ 300 Short Paper, LAJ 302 Legal Brief, LAJ
303 Law Library Assignment, LAJ 400 Research project, LAJ 401 Reaction
paper, LAJ 451 Theory paper or PowerPoint Presentation. Students taking
LAJ 300, 302, 303, 400, 401, 451 are assessed.
Criterion of achievement:
i. Rubrics have been created for LAJ 400, 401 and 451. These were used for the
first time spring 2008 when the assessment committee evaluated artifacts
collected 2007-2008.
The faculty set a Standard of Mastery/Criterion of Achievement at 60% of
students receiving an “adequate” (2) or above (3) ranking on each of the skills
measured in the rubrics in the spring of 2008. Once this is achieved the goal
should be raised to 75%.
Rubrics are being developed for LAJ 300, 302 and 303 for use when the
assessment committee evaluates artifacts collected 2008-2009 for the first
time spring 2009.
Method of Assessment:
ii. Survey of Internship Supervisors
Criterion of achievement:
ii. The faculty set a Standard of Mastery/Criterion of Achievement of our
students average score being 4 or above on a 5 point scale for the employer
evaluation of student interns in the spring of 2008.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
8
Method of Assessment:
iii. Alumni Survey
Criterion of achievement:
iii. No criterion of achievement has been set for the Alumni Survey results.
Establishing a criterion of achievement for the Alumni Survey is on the
agenda for the Assessment Committee at their spring meeting. This criterion
will then be brought to the LAJ Department for a vote.
Method of Assessment:
iv. Peer review of tenured/tenure faculty and full time lecturer syllabi.
Criterion of achievement:
iv. Checklist of required syllabi content completed with suggestions for
improvements provided to faculty for incorporation into future syllabi.
At a yearly meeting, the LAJ tenured, tenure track faculty and full time
lecturers review one syllabus of their peers to ensure that all required elements
are clearly stated and the learning objectives complement the learner
outcomes measured in the assessment plan and offer suggestions for faculty
implementation. Quarterly, required elements of the syllabus and other
departmental policies are sent out to part time lecturers with the chair and
personnel committee annually reviewing part-time lecturer syllabi for required
content as part of annual performance evaluation.
Method of Assessment:
v. SEOI average for department
Criterion of achievement:
v. Our faculty average is above that of the college and university.
b. Build partnerships to support academic program quality and enhance student
experiences
Method of Assessment:
i. Number of student internships using enrollment records for LAJ 490 at time
of cyclical program review and employer evaluation.
Criterion of achievement:
i. Faculty supervise internships each year and at least 10% of students are
involved and students average 4 on a 5 point evaluation scale by emloyers.
Method of Assessment:
ii. Guest speakers in LAJ Classes
Criterion of achievement:
ii. Average number of Guest Speakers average three plus (3+) per faculty per
year.
c. Assure faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all courses and
programs at all sites.
Method of Assessment:
i. Monitor class sizes by evaluating enrollment records
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
9
Criterion of achievement:
i. Reach the College average for 300 and 400 level classes.
Method of Assessment:
ii. Monitor number of advisees per faculty.
Criterion of achievement:
ii. Reach the College average.
Method of Assessment:
iii. Monitor ratios of lecturers to tenured/tenure track annually and at time of
cyclical program review.
Criterion of achievement:
iii. Reach the College average.
d. Support the involvement of students in scholarly activities.
Method of Assessment:
i. Count professional meeting papers and presentations with student authors and
co-authors.
Criterion of achievement:
i. At least one student presentation per year.
Method of Assessment:
ii. Count student and faculty participation in local symposia, poster sessions, and
SOURCE participation.
Criterion of achievement:
ii. At least one student presentation per year
Method of Assessment:
iii. Track student enrollment in directed research LAJ 495 and research related
LAJ 496 individual study.
Criterion of achievement:
iii. All faculty are involved with such students during the review period.
Method of Assessment:
iv. Membership in Alpha Phi Sigma, Criminal Justice Honorary by annually
counting student members.
Criterion of achievement:
iv. At least 15 new members each year.
e. Enhance the climate of productive faculty scholarship.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty publications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
Criterion of achievement:
i. An average of one quarter of faculty are publishing each year
Method of Assessment:
ii. Faculty scholarly presentations of all tenured and tenure track faculty
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
10
Criterion of achievement:
ii. An average of one half of faculty are presenting each year
Method of Assessment:
iii. Faculty participation in professional conferences of all tenured and tenure
track faculty
Criterion of achievement:
iii. An average of two faculty are participating in professional conferences each
year
Method of Assessment:
iv. Internal grants applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
Criterion of achievement:
iv. An average of one application each year
Method of Assessment:
v. External grant applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty
Criterion of achievement:
v. An average of one application each year
Method of Assessment:
vi. Faculty awards and honors
Criterion of achievement:
vi. An average of one each year
f. Serve as a center for services to the community and the region.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty involvement in community service activities
Criterion of achievement:
i. All faculty are involved in community service
Method of Assessment:
ii. Faculty membership on local, state, national boards or committees
Criterion of achievement:
ii. At least 20% of faculty are on boards or committees
g. Promote and enhance diversity
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty diversity
Criterion of achievement:
i. Faculty reflect diversity of state
Method of Assessment:
ii. Student diversity
Criterion of achievement:
ii. Students reflect diversity of state
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
11
Method of Assessment:
iii. Departmental courses
Criterion of achievement:
iii. Most courses have a section on diversity issues, while more courses are
offered dealing with diversity issues.
Method of Assessment:
iv. Faculty research/publication
Criterion of achievement:
iv. At least one half of faculty are involved in research/publication on diversity.
Method of Assessment:
v. Faculty community involvement
Criterion of achievement:
v. At least one third of faculty are involved in related community involvement
Method of Assessment:
vi. Student research/community involvement
Criterion of achievement:
vi. No criterion established as of yet.
5. Describe the major activities that enabled goal attainment.
The major activities which have enabled us to reach many of our goals are listed
on page pps; 51 and 52, VII A. What has gone well in the department and degree
programs. Of particular significance is the additional of three tenure track faculty
since the last review.
E. Results for each department goal
1. Results in specific quantitative or qualitative terms
a. Assure the presentation of high quality programs.
In March of 2006 the Assessment Plan for the Law and Justice Department was
approved by the LAJ faculty (this can be found in Appendix A). This began a one
year pilot of the data collection methods. The initial artifacts that were collected
during this time period were used to develop rubrics for 3 of the LAJ core courses
(LAJ 400, LAJ 401, and LAJ 451). The Assessment Committee also met with
Tom Henderson, CWU Director of Testing and Assessment in the summer of
2007 to discuss revisions to the Assessment Plan and to generate new ideas about
how to assess the Law and Justice Program. This meeting resulted in a
modification of the data collection schedule, where the core courses were placed
in a two year rotation, resulting in artifacts from every core course being
evaluated during a two year period. The 2007-2008 academic year marked the
first year where artifacts were quantitatively evaluated using rubrics. The results
of this analysis were shared with the faculty during the spring quarter faculty
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
12
meeting. The full assessment reports for 2006-2007 and 2007-2008, along with
the rubrics, can be found in Appendix B.
Method of Assessment:
i. 2007-2008 Artifact of Core Courses; LAJ 400 Research project, LAJ 401
Reaction paper, LAJ 451 Theory paper or PowerPoint Presentation.
Some suggestions resulting from this process included making sure the related
learning objectives of the department were sufficiently addressed in the core
courses, to develop assignments that were more consistent across sections of the
same core course, and to continue to approve, develop and utilize rubrics to assess
the learning objectives in each of the core courses. The pilot year also
demonstrated several weaknesses in the original LAJ assessment plan, which has
been revised to improve on the ability of the LAJ department to adequately and
consistently measure learner outcomes both on the Ellensburg campus and at the
centers. Some improvements to the plan included creating a realistic timeline,
which focuses on specific core courses each quarter, for systematically collecting
data in Ellensburg and at the centers.
Table 1: Rubric Results for Ethics, Conflict and Diversity (LAJ 401)*
Total
Ellen.
Des Mo. Lynn
Pierce
Communication Skills
57.2%
62.5%
42.9%
87.5%
20.0%
Ethical Theories
39.3%
37.5%
42.9%
50.0%
20.0%
Ethical Reasoning
42.8%
50.0%
42.9%
62.5%
0.0%
Policy and Practical Implications
32.1%
0.0%
0.0%
62.5%
80.0%
Historical Context/Diversity
7.1%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
20.0%
Referencing
25.0%
25.0%
28.6%
25.0%
20.0%
* 401 was not taught in Yakima in 2006/2007
Table 2: Rubric Results for Research Methods in Law and Justice (LAJ 400)
Total
Ellensbg Des Mo. Lynn. Pierce Yakima
Communication Skills
74.2%
77%
100%
100%
0%
100%
Research Problem and
Hypothesis
58.1%
61.6%
25%
83.3%
60%
33.3%
Research Methods
61.3%
61.6%
75%
83.3%
60%
0%
Literature Review
64.5%
92.3%
0%
83.3%
0%
100%
Data Analysis and Display
51.6%
76.9%
50%
66.7%
0%
0%
Referencing
48.4%
69.3%
50%
16.7%
0%
100%
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
13
Table 3: Rubric Results for Crime in America (LAJ 451)*
Total
Communication Skills
Ellensbg Des Mo. Lynn. Pierce Yakima
43.3%
60%
50%
22.2%
40%
30%
30%
33.3%
0%
80%
53.3%
50%
66.7% 33.3%
Theory/Policy Connection
10%
20%
0%
0%
20%
Theory Weakness
10%
0%
0%
0%
60%
Referencing
20%
30%
0%
0%
0%
Historical Context
Theory
**
80%
* No papers received a 3 (exceptional) for this assignment
* Papers received after committee meeting date
Method of Assessment:
ii. Survey of Internship Supervisors
Table 4 presents the average performance levels of LAJ student interns as
assessed by their employment supervisor on a 1 – 5 Likert scale. Unfortunately,
there were not enough returned surveys to disaggregate by center.
Table 4: Employer Co-op Evaluation of Student Interns for 2007-2008
Skill
Avg. Score
Productivity
4.27
Attitude
4.47
Preparation
4.23
Dependability
4.40
Quality of Work
4.21
Creativity
4.07
Initiative
4.13
Communication Skills
4.07
Judgment
4.20
Interpersonal Relations
4.20
Total
4.07
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
14
Method of Assessment:
iii. Alumni Survey (for a copy of relevant survey results, as well as a PowerPoint
Summary of Results see Appendix C).
During the fall quarter of 2008 the Law and Justice Department, with major
assistance from Tom Henderson, CWU Director of Testing and Assessment,
conducted an alumni survey of 995 CWU LAJ Students who graduated between
2003 and 2007. 589 of these students were contacted by e-mail, of which 153
students replied for a response rate of 26% (these data represent the preliminary
data; some surveys are still being collected). Thirty-six percent of the respondents
were from the Lynnwood campus, 32% from Ellensburg the campus, 24% from
Pierce and 8% from the Des Moines campus. Fifty-nine percent of the
respondents came to the LAJ Department with an Associate’s Degree, 29% had a
high school degree or GED and the remainder transferred from a community
college or a four year institution.
The following table shows the results of the average alumni ratings of the
importance of several specific competencies (that match the LAJ programs learner
outcomes) and the preparation the students feel they received from the LAJ
department. The LAJ department’s preparation of students rating exceeds the
importance rating on several items, including: Legal Research, Substantive &
Procedural Law, Criminological Theory, and Criminal Justice System
Knowledge. Alternatively, the perceived importance rating exceeds the LAJ
department’s preparation of students rating on the following skills: Critical
Thinking, Communication, Quantitative Reasoning, Information Literacy, Ethics,
and Conflict Management.
Table 5:
Alumni Ratings of the Importance of Competencies and
Preparation they Received from CWU LAJ
5
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.1
4
3.9
3.8
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.8
3.5
3.6
3.5
4.1
3.9
3.6
3.5
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
tM
an
ag
em
C
en
J
Sy
t
st
em
K
no
w
le
dg
e
Et
hi
cs
C
on
fl i
c
y
rim
in
ol
og
y
Th
eo
r
al
La
w
C
&
Pr
oc
ed
ur
es
ea
rc
h
R
Le
ga
l
Li
te
ra
cy
ea
so
ni
ng
R
In
fo
rm
at
io
n
Su
bs
ta
nt
iv
e
Q
ua
nt
it a
tiv
e
om
m
un
ic
at
io
n
C
rit
ic
al
Th
in
ki
ng
0
C
Mean Value
3.1
Com petency
Importance
Preparation
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
15
In terms of satisfaction with the Law and Justice Program, Useful Perspectives on
Critical Issues, Adequate Preparation for Graduate School, adequate Preparation
for Profession and Degree Led to Career Advancement LAJ alumni respondents
consistently rank the department 4 and above on a 5 point Likert scale (1=
strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).
Table 6:
LAJ Alumni Agreement with Statements on a 5 point scale
( 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree)
5
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.1
4
4
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Very Satisfied w ith LAJ
Program
Useful Perspectives on
Critical Issues
Adequate Preparation for
Graduate School
Adequate Preparation for
Profession
Degree Led to Career
Advancement
The following table shows that the majority (59%) of LAJ alumni respondents
either had a job before graduation or found employment in less than six months.
Fifteen percent of our alumni did not find work for six months to a year following
graduation and the remaining twenty-six percent took over a year to gain
employment.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
16
Table 7: LAJ Alumni Time to Find Current Job
The survey also showed that LAJ Alumni are employed in a variety of different
fields, which do not necessarily correlate with the degree tracks that were offered by
the department during the evaluation period. These include accounting, real estate,
retail, and telecommunications, among others.
Finally, open-ended questions revealed several themes. The following table shows
themes common among alumni who had trouble with career placement. The most
consistent desire of these students was better job preparation and career placement.
We have attempted to have more employers visit for career placement, plus close
work with the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission job fairs. To
help with job experience and job preparation we encourage internships and coop
placements.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
17
LAJ Alumni Challenges and Difficulties
Following Graduation







Career Placement
Stress related to
applying book
knowledge to job
No experience
Job preparation
Background barriers
to employment in CJ
field
No paralegal
certificate
No Masters option




Need additional
degree
Lacked knowledge
because the
curriculum was not
demanding
Degree lacks
credibility – seen as
easy
Lack of feedback on
papers and
assignments
Several suggestions to improve the program are listed below. Interestingly, many of
the suggestions are already issues that the faculty have addressed with policy changes
or have been working on in response to the initial results of our Assessment Plan.
These include requiring a theory course, strengthening the writing component of our
classes, increasing research opportunities for students, and increasing access to
electronic library resources.
Suggestions to Improve the Quality of
CWU LAJ Program






More internship opportunities
Higher expectations from
profs.
Job placement help
Fewer multiple choice tests
More writing assignments w/
feedback
Be very selective about who
teaches classes











Less apathy
More civil classes
Sequence courses – less
repetition
Better attendance from profs.
Better knowledge of WA law




More guest speakers from
field
More research
Job fair
Oral board preparation
opportunities
More report writing
assignments
Increase standards for
admission and graduation
More theory
More focus on electronic
resources in legal research
More conflict management
Increase course availability
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
18
Finally, the LAJ Faculty received much positive qualitative feedback about the
program and several suggestions on how tweak the program to make it better. In
particular, numerous students asked about the possibility of offering a Masters
program.
Additional LAJ Alumni Comments




Especially appreciated
profs. who were
challenging
Appreciated feedback
on papers and help
preparing for law
school
Recommend program
to family and friends
Kudos to many
individual professors





Very practical
program
Develop a Masters
program
Could public safety be
included in
curriculum?
Curriculum should be
updated to reflect
current reality
Flexibility at centers
was wonderful
iv. Method of Assessment:
Peer review of tenured/tenure track faculty and full time lecturer syllabi at
department’s annual assessment day in spring quarter for required content. Chair
and personnel committee review of part-time lecturer syllabi for required content
are part of the annual evaluation.
Annually since 2005, we have peer reviewed one syllabus of each tenured/tenure
track faculty and full time lecturer using a checklist of required syllabi content
with suggestions for improvements provided to faculty for incorporation into
future syllabi.
v. SEOI average for department
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
19
Table 8:
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Student Evaluations of Courses
Fall
Winter
Spring
Summer
Department of Law & Justice
4.32
4.27
4.37
4.26
College of the Sciences
4.25
4.21
4.27
4.37
CWU
4.24
4.25
4.29
4.38
Department of Law & Justice
4.35
4.26
4.37
4.65
College of the Sciences
4.19
3.29
4.20
4.38
CWU
4.22
3.97
4.26
4.45
Department of Law & Justice
4.36
4.32
4.43
4.72
College of the Sciences
4.18
4.20
4.24
4.43
CWU
4.20
4.22
4.26
4.40
Department of Law & Justice
4.09
4.26
4.32
4.28
College of the Sciences
4.17
4.19
4.19
4.32
CWU
4.20
4.23
4.24
4.36
Department of Law & Justice
3.72
4.26
4.38
4.23
College of the Sciences
3.72
4.18
4.24
4.27
CWU
4.19
4.23
4.26
4.39
Table 8: Overview
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
20
Table 9: Student Evaluations of Instruction
Fall
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Winter
Spring
Summer
Department of Law & Justice
4.40
4.33
4.48
4.37
College of the Sciences
4.34
4.31
4.37
4.45
CWU
4.36
4.33
4.38
4.44
Department of Law & Justice
4.41
4.32
4.41
4.74
College of the Sciences
4.30
3.14
4.28
4.51
CWU
4.31
3.99
4.35
4.50
Department of Law & Justice
4.43
4.39
4.55
4.80
College of the Sciences
4.28
4.29
4.35
4.53
CWU
4.31
4.31
4.35
4.47
Department of Law & Justice
4.18
4.32
4.37
4.41
College of the Sciences
4.27
4.30
4.30
4.45
CWU
4.30
4.32
4.33
4.43
Department of Law & Justice
4.35
4.37
4.45
4.35
College of the Sciences
4.35
4.30
4.34
4.30
CWU
4.30
4.33
4.35
4.42
Table 9: Overview
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
21
b. Build partnerships to support academic program quality and enhance student
experiences.
Table 10: Faculty / Student community involvement
Faculty Mentored Research:
SOURCE
Student Publications
Student paper presentation
Student research
20032004
1
2
4
20042005
1
4
20052006
2
20062007
3
2
6
1
20072008
3
1
4
1
TOTAL
9
4
20
2
Method of Assessment:
i. Number of student internships using enrollment records for LAJ 490
Cooperative Education, at time of cyclical program review.
Table 11:
Student Enrollment in LAJ 490 Cooperative Education
Annual
Average
200304
2004-05
200506
200607
2007-08
Total
Ellensburg
63.20
97
76
68
34
41
316
Des Moines
10.20
3
12
16
16
4
51
Lynnwood
8.20
7
12
7
7
8
41
Pierce
4.80
8
5
2
2
7
24
Yakima
11.40
10
5
9
16
17
57
125
110
102
75
77
489
TOTAL
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
22
Table 12: Student Enrollment in LAJ 490 Cooperative Education
Annual
Average
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Total
Britto,
7.00
n/a
3
17
7
1
28
Francis
8.50
n/a
n/a
n/a
13
4
17
Murataya
12.00
11
5
7
16
21
60
Noga
3.00
n/a
n/a
n/a
4
2
6
Olivero
18.80
24
36
24
3
7
94
Reasons
8.60
10
12
1
8
12
43
Reimund
9.00
2
9
15
16
3
45
Roberts
24.20
62
23
22
2
12
121
Sun
4.20
7
5
2
0
7
21
TOTAL
95.30
116
93
88
69
69
435
ii. Guest speakers in LAJ Classes.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
23
Method of Assessment:
i. Count average number of Guest Speakers per year
Criterion of Achievement:
i. Based upon faculty responses, the number of Guest Speakers average three
per faculty per year.
c. Assure faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all courses and
programs at all sites.
Method of Assessment:
i. Monitor class sizes by evaluating enrollment records.
Table 13:
Average Student Enrollment per Class
LAJ CENTERS
200304
200405
200506
200607
200708
Ellensburg
Des Moines
Lynnwood
Pierce
Yakima
LAJ Dept Combined Avr
College of the Sciences
33
25
27
23
16
25
23
32
22
30
22
13
24
23
31
29
27
19
19
25
24
31
25
28
18
24
25
23
28
25
24
20
18
23
21
ii. Monitor number of advisees per faculty using advisee numbers.
With the addition of 2 faculty members in Ellensburg, the number of advisees
per faculty member has been reduced since the last program review. An
effort is made when assigning majors/minors in Ellensburg to have each
faculty member maintain an equal advising load. Since there is only one
tenured/tenure track member at the each center, equity is more difficult to
achieve since it is dependent on enrollment at the individual center. In
Yakima, since advising numbers are lower, Dr. Murataya is assigned advisees
from Ellensburg, since he teaches there several quarters, so there is equity in
his numbers.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
24
Table 14 : Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty Advising
Faculty Name
Britto, Sarah L.
Francis, Teresa I
Murataya, Rodrigo
Noga, Krystal E
Olivero, J Michael
Reasons, Charles E
Reimund, Mary Ellen
Roberts, James B
Sun, Key
Department Average
Av # of Students
56
53
45
59
51
55
75
49
29
52
College Average
15
Annual Advising Load
Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty
200405
200506
200607
200708
Department of Law and Justice
Other COTS Departments
45.6
11.5
49.2
13.8
51.8
15.1
51.3
15.2
iii. Monitor ratios of lecturers to tenured/tenure track annually.
Table 15: Overview: Ratio of Classes Taught: Lecturer to Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
25
Table 16: Ratio of Classes Taught: Lecturer to Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty
LAW & JUSTICE
Ratio
COTS Ratio
2003-04
Tenured/Track
0.49%
0.73%
Lecturers
0.51%
0.27%
2004-05
Tenured/Track
0.50%
0.69%
Lecturers
0.50%
0.31%
Tenured/Track
0.49%
0.65%
Lecturers
0.51%
0.35%
Tenured/Track
0.60%
0.70%
Lecturers
0.40%
0.30%
Tenured/Track
0.62%
0.68%
Lecturers
0.38%
0.32%
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
d. Support the involvement of students in scholarly activities.
Method of Assessment:
i. Professional meeting papers and presentations with student authors and coauthors.
ii. Count student and faculty participation in local symposia, poster sessions, and
SOURCE participation.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
26
Table 17: Number of Faculty Mentored Student Research Projects
(See Appendix D)
Faculty Mentored Research:
20032004
2004- 2005- 2006- 20072005 2006 2007 2008 TOTAL
SOURCE
1
2
Student Publications
2
1
Student paper presentation
4
4
2
Student research
3
3
9
1
4
6
4
20
1
1
2
iii. Track student enrollment in directed research LAJ 495 and research related
LAJ 496 individual study.
Table 18: Student Enrollment in LAJ 495 / LAJ 496
Year
LAJ 495
LAJ 496
Instructor
Location LAJ495
2003-04
0
69
Britto, Sarah L.
EBURG
2004-05
14
67
Chapman, Yvonne K
LYNNW
2005-06
23
39
Francis, Teresa
EBURG
6
1
2006-07
19
9
Murataya, Rodrigo
YAKIM
8
2
2007-08
22
3
Noga, Krystal
EBURG
1
Olivero, J Michael
EBURG
11
30
Reasons, Charles
EBURG
4
22
Reimund, Mary Ellen
DESMO
8
18
Roberts, James
EBURG
14
24
Sun, Key
PIERC
TOTAL
78
188
TOTAL
17
LAJ 496
27
45
8
69
177
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
27
iv. Membership in Alpha Phi Sigma, Criminal Justice Honor Society by annually
counting new student members.
The local affiliate, Beta Tau Nu, of the National Criminal Justice Honor
Society, Alpha Phi Sigma, began in 1984. It has several hundred members.
The following data reflects new members per year over the 5 year period.
Table 19: Membership in Alpha Phi Sigma
2003-2004
17 new members
2004-2005
40 new members
2005-2006
18 new members
2006-2007
29 new members
2007-2008
16 new members
v. We recognize outstanding student scholarship at our annual student awards
ceremonies before spring graduation honoring an outstanding Eastside and
Westside student and an outstanding student from each center.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
28
e. Enhance the climate of productive faculty scholarship (see Appendix E)
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty publications of all tenured and tenure track faculty.
ii. Faculty scholarly presentations of all tenured and tenure track faculty.
iii. Faculty participation in professional conferences of all tenured and tenure
track faculty.
Table 20:
Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty Profile
* Scholarship
Measures:
Publications
20032004
5
20042005
9
20052006
6
20062007
10
20072008
15
5 Year
TOTAL
Conference
presentations
8
10
12
14
10
54
3
6
1
10
1
2
Other conference
participation
Other
1
45
iv. Internal grant applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty.
v. External grant applications of all tenured and tenure track faculty.
Table 21:
* Grants:
External: Funded
Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty Grant Profile
20032004
20042005
20052006
3
20062007
2
External: Unfunded
20072008
5
1
Internal: Funded
2
Internal: Unfunded
1
4
1
1
1
7
1
3
vi. Faculty awards and honors
Four faculty members have gotten tenure and been promoted to associate
professor since the last program review.
2004
Key Sun
2005
Mary Ellen Reimund
2007
Rodrigo Murataya
2008
Sarah Britto
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
29
Three faculty members have been continued after post tenure review.
2006-2007
Charles Reasons
2007-2008
J. Michael Olivero
2007-2008
Key Sun
Two tenure track faculty have been reappointed annually for academic years
2006-2007 and 2007-2008 Teresa Francis and Krystal Noga
Two faculty members were awarded the Excellence in Teaching Award for
the College of Sciences (only one award per year in entire college).
2003
Mary Ellen Reimund
2007
Sarah Britto
Advisor of the Quarter
Summer 2007 Krystal Noga
vii. Sabbatical Leave
Two faculty members received Sabbatical research awards.
2005-2006
Charles Reasons
2007-2008
Key Sun
f.
Serve as a center for services to the community and the region.
Method of Assessment:
i. Faculty involvement in community service activities.
ii. Faculty membership on local, state, national boards or committees.
Table 22:
Tenured and Tenure-track Community Involvement
* Service Measures:
CWU Committees
State Committees
Leadership & Service Professional Organizations
Community Service
Other
20032004
6
1
20042005
4
3
2
10
1
4
10
2
2005- 2006- 20072006 2007 2008
14
15
20
3
2
2
6
13
3
4
24
5
11
13
8
TOTAL
59
11
27
70
19
iii. From 2000 on, we recognize alumni service to the community by awarding
annually an Eastside and Westside Alumni of the Year Award.
g. Promote and enhance an environment of diversity, equity, social justice and
cultural responsiveness. (see Appendix F)
i. Faculty diversity.
Of our current nine tenured/tenure track positions, we have five men and four
women. Of these nine positions, we have three faculty of color, including
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
30
African American, Hispanic and Asian. In 2003, of our six tenured/tenure
track positions, we had five men and one woman, including one person of
color. This is a dramatic increase in gender/racial/ethnic diversity.
ii. Student diversity
We have the most diverse racial/ethnic group of Majors in the College of
Sciences, with 30% of our Majors being of racial/ethnic minority. In 20072008 student diversity is highest at the centers, enriching the department and
university.
iii. Diversity classes
Cultural diversity in American society influences many sociological and
political aspects of the law and justice system. These topics are explicitly
explored in LAJ 332 Police Community Relations, LAJ 401 Ethics, Diversity
and Conflict in Criminal Justice, and LAJ 451 Crime in America. Such issues
are explained in a broad cross section of courses such as LAJ 300
Administration of Justice, LAJ 302 Evidence and Arrest, LAJ 313
Introduction to Criminal Law, LAJ 324 Correctional Law, LAJ 327
Community Corrections, and LAJ 459 Current Issues.
iv. Faculty/student research/scholarship in this area.
Our faculty and students have been involved in research/scholarship which
addresses issues of diversity. Faculty scholarship, professional development,
and professional service also focus on issues of diversity and informs the
curriculum. Topics include Mexican prisons; Mexican law enforcement;
homophobia and law enforcement majors; multi-cultural victim offender
mediation; race, class, and multicultural models of psychotherapy; and gender
and justice in America. Faculty have participated in conferences such as
“Washington State Faculty and Staff of Color in Higher Education,”
“Washington Summit on Law Enforcement and Cultural Awareness,” Race,
Class and the War on Drugs.” Faculty also participate in university initiatives
such as membership on CWU’s Diversity Council, CWU’s DIRECT (Dispute
Resolution Consultation and Training) and minority recruiting efforts.
v. Faculty/student community involvement in these issues.
As is evident in Appendix C, faculty are heavily involved in community
service concerning diversity issues. We have yet to establish a methodology to
capture student community involvement.
vi. Program/courses reflecting this emphasis.
Our Department Mission Statement expressly commits the department to
providing students with:
(a) A broad background in the history, philosophy, and current trends in law
and society with a particular emphasis on diverse racial, ethnic, cultural,
gender and sexual orientation issues.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
31
While our major requires students to take LAJ 401 Ethics, Diversity and
Conflict, as part of this commitment, we have made strides during this review
period to broaden our offerings. For example, Crime and the Media, a new
course, explores the representations and stereotypes in the media concerning
gender, race and ethnicity. Professor Teresa Francis developed a new course,
African Americans and the Constitution which she co-teaches with Professor
Reasons. This is a required course in the new African and Black Studies minor
at Central Washington University. Professor Rodrigo Murataya has developed
a new course, Comparative Criminal Justice, which will be taught in 2009,
while Professor Michael Olivero, has developed a course on Sexual Minorities
the Law, and Justice, to be taught in 2009. All of these program developments
reflect our commitment to providing our students with a broad appreciation
and understanding of diversity issues.
2. Comparison of results to standards of mastery listed above
a. Assure the presentation of high quality program.
Concerning the presentation of high quality programs, rubrics were created for
LAJ 400, 401, and 451 and artifacts were assessed for 2007-2008. Using the
standard of 60% mastery is adequate for each skill in each course, only the
research methods (LAJ 400) achieved this in some of its skills. There appears
to be problems in the validity of some artifacts to include measured skills.
There are also wide variations in attainment levels at the respective centers.
Much work needs to be done on refining the measures and improving the
scores.
While the results were lower than hoped for they do provide a baseline for
improvement and suggest there are some problems with assessment that need
to be worked out. Some suggestions resulting from this process included
making sure the related learning objectives of the department were sufficiently
addressed in the core courses, to develop assignments that were more
consistent across sections of the same core course, and to continue to approve,
develop and utilize rubrics to assess the learning objectives in each of the core
courses. The pilot year also demonstrated several weaknesses in the original
LAJ assessment plan, which has been revised to improve on the ability of the
LAJ department to adequately and consistently measure learner outcomes
both on the Ellensburg campus and at the centers. Some initial suggestions
include that the faculty should review the rubric results concurrently with a
review of assignments in the appropriate courses and make changes to both
where necessary. The learning objectives were designed to be quite broad and
contain many sub-categories; therefore it may be unrealistic to require so
many skills in a particular artifact. Meeting as a group will allow us to focus
and refine the rubrics and artifact assignments to better measure the skills
demonstrated by students. In addition, the Assessment Committee should
continue to work on interater-reliability in the use of rubrics, as there still
appears to be variation in the assignment of rubric scores.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
32
In the fall faculty meeting the faculty set a Standard of Mastery/Criterion of
Achievement at 60% of students receiving an “adequate” (2) or above (3)
ranking on each of the skills measured in the rubrics. Once this is achieved
the goal should be raised to 75%.
The faculty set a Standard of Mastery/Criterion of Achievement of our
students average score being 4 or above on a 5 point scale for the employer
evaluation of student interns in cooperative placement in the spring of 2008.
Applying this criterion retroactively our student interns averaged above a 4 on
all measured skills, thus meeting the criterion of success.
These results indicate that our students are doing very well in cooperative
internship placements further reflecting a high quality program. Law and
Justice Students are displaying high levels of professionalism, responsibility,
and knowledge of the field. One area that needs improvement is the response
rate to our employer surveys, so that we can better assess how our students are
performing in their field work.
Although no criterion of achievement has been established for the Alumni
Survey, the results were encouraging. Overall, LAJ Alumni respondents were
quite satisfied with the CWU Law and Justice Program. The specific results
indicate that while the LAJ department is exceeding expectations in some
learning outcome areas, there are other areas that still need work.
The peer review of syllabus based on a checklist of required content has been
established providing faculty with timely feedback. Also, part-time lecturers
are provided quarterly guides for syllabus and an annual evaluation. The
above meets the criterion of success.
Concerning student evaluation of LAJ professors, the SEOI average over the
five years is above 4.4 on a five point scale. Law and Justice student
evaluations of faculty average above that of the College of Sciences and the
University as a whole. This meets the criterion of success. When evaluating
the course, the LAJ courses averaged just over 4.3 during the five year period.
Again, this exceeds the College and University averages, meeting the success
criterion.
b.
Build partnerships to support academic quality and enhance student
experiences.
Student enrollment in our cooperative education course (LAJ 490) enhances
our student experiences and our program quality. As noted above, employers
rate students well in their cooperative experience. All faculty, except one, had
at least one student cooperative education student to supervise each year.
Since that faculty member was on sabbatical that year, the criterion of success
of at least one per year was met. Also, at least 10% of majors were enrolled in
LAJ 490 for each of the five years, thus the success criterion was met.
Regarding guest speakers, the criterion of at least three per year average per
faculty was met.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
33
c.
Assure faculty staffing adequate to support timely delivery of all courses and
programs at all sites.
An indication of adequate staffing is the average enrollment per class. Over
the five year period it ranged from 25 in 2003-2004 to 23 in 2007-2008. This
compared to the COTS average of 21. Adequate faculty to provide advisement
is another piece of evidence of staffing needs. The average number of student
advisees per tenured/tenure track LAJ faculty is 52, while the COTS average
is 15.
The proportion of classes taught by lecturers to tenured/tenure track faculty is
another indicee of adequate deliver of program and quality of programs. This
proportion has been reduced over the five year period from 51% in 2003-2004
to 38% in 2007-2008. However, this still exceeds the COTS proportion of
27% in 2003-2004 and 32% in 2007-2008, which does not reach the criterion
of achievement.
d.
Support the involvement of students in scholarly activities.
The support of student involvement in scholarly activities was measured by
professional paper presentation, participation in SOURCE, enrollment
research related LAJ 495 and 496, and membership in the National Criminal
Justice Honor Society – Alpha Phi Sigma.
In terms of student participation in SOURCE, there was student participation
in four of the five years, missing the criterion of at least one per year.
However, there were student paper presentations in other venues every year,
totaling 20 for the five year period, exceeding the criterion of achievement.
All faculty were involved with supervising student research in LAJ 495 and/or
LAJ 496 during this period, meeting the criterion of achievement. Four
students published professional articles with professors during this period.
Beta Tau Nu, the local chapter of Alpha Phi Sigma, added at least 15 new
members per year, meeting the criterion of achievement. Finally, during this
five year period annual student awards were given for outstanding students at
each center, and for the overall Westside and Eastside.
e.
Enhance the climate of productive faculty scholarship.
The enhancement of productive faculty scholarship was measured by
publications, presentations and participation at professional conferences,
grants, and faculty awards/recognition. During the five year period there were
45 publications by faculty, exceeding criterion of achievement. A total of 54
conference presentations occurred during this period, exceeding the criterion
of achievement of an average of one half of faculty participating over the five
years. The faculty made other contributions to professional conferences during
this five year period.
The criterion of achievement for both internal and external grants is an
average of one application per year over the five year period. This goal was
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
34
met for both internal and external grants, with 6 external and 10 internal
applications.
There were numerous faculty awards and honors during the five year period,
exceeding the average of one per year criterion of achievement. Four faculty
members received tenure and promotion to associate professor, while three
members successfully completed post tenure review, two tenure track faculty
were successfully reappointed annually while another two received sabbatical
research awards. Finally, one faculty member, Sarah Britto, received the
College of the Science’s Excellence In Teaching Award in 2007.
f.
Serve as a center for services to the community and the region.
Service to the community has been a cornerstone of the LAJ department. All
faculty have been involved in service for the CWU community and the larger
community, meeting the criterion of success. In terms of membership on local,
state, and national boards and committees, more than 20% of faculty served
over the five year period, exceeding the success criterion.
g.
Promote and enhance environment of diversity, equity, social justice and
cultural responsibility.
In terms of diversity, our faculty has greatly diversified during the five year
period. By 2007-2008, one third are faculty of color and 4 are women. Since
the state of Washington is 22% people of color, the criterion of success has
been met. LAJ has the most diverse student racial/ethnic makeup (30%) in the
College of Sciences, and has met the criterion of reflecting the state (22%).
The university had 19% of students of racial/ethnic minorities in 2007-2008
The majority of LAJ courses have a section devoted to diversity issues, with
several specifically aimed at this topic. Over the five year period this focus
has increased with addition of new courses to address this issue. The criterion
of success has been met.
There has been a great deal of faculty / student research / scholarship
concerning diversity. As noted in Appendix C, nearly all faculty have
published, presented papers and/or conducted research in this area over the
five year review period. Several faculty have done this with students. This
greatly exceeds the criterion of success of the third of the faculty.
Besides scholarship, over one half of the faculty have been involved in
community service diversity issues as found in Appendix C. This far exceeds
the success criterion of one half. We have yet to develop a methodology for
gauging student community involvement.
3.
Concise interpretation of results:
In assuring the presentation of a high quality program, three core courses were
evaluated using rubrics and artifacts. While only one course met the 60%
standard of mastery, this established a methodology for assessing progress in
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
35
the future. Our students are averaging above 4.0 on a 5.0 scale in employer
evaluation of their co-operative education internships, while the alumni survey
results showed they were quite satisfied overall with the Law and Justice
Program. A methodology has been developed and applied for peer review of
faculty syllabi, including full time and part-time faculty. Law and Justice
course and instructor SEOI evaluations from students exceed College and
University averages for the five year period. Thus, the only area concerning
quality of program where the established criteria of achievement were not met
was regarding student mastery of skills in two of the three core courses
evaluated.
All faculty supervised at least one cooperative education intern per year, while
all faculty averaged at least three guest speakers per year, enhancing our
student experience. The goal of adequate staffing is not met due to the fact
that LAJ average class size, advisees per faculty, and part-time lectures to
tenured/tenure track faculty all exceed the College average.
The goal of involving students in scholarly activities was met based on
professional paper presentation, SOURCE participation, enrollment in
independent study and directed research, and involvement with the National
Criminal Justice Honor Society.
The enhancement of productive faculty scholarship is evident as the criterion
of achievement was met in terms of publications, conference presentations /
participations, grants, and faculty awards / recognition. The goal of
community service was met in terms of university committee work, local,
state and national service. In terms of promoting and enhancing diversity, the
faculty exceeds the diversity of the state, while the LAJ student body does not,
although it is the most diverse “major” in the College. Faculty exceed mastery
level in publishing, community service, and faculty / student research in the
area of diversity. Most courses have diversity content, and several new
courses are devoted to diversity issues, meeting achievement levels.
F. Description of the results listed above:
1. Specific changes for the department as they affect programs
a. Addition of Faculty: Since the last program review, three new tenure track
faculty have been hired to meet the needs of our program. In 2003, Dr. Sarah
Britto based in Ellensburg joined the faculty and has successfully gone
through probation and will be tenured in fall 2008. In Fall 2006, Professors
Teresa Francis was hired for Ellensburg and Krystal Noga for the Lynnwood
Center and as Program Director at that location. These hires help to stabilize
the department and lower the student/advisor numbers for the department.
The new faculty compliment and expand the department’s mission with their
professional experiences and scholarship emphasis in racial, ethnic, cultural
and gender studies, restorative justice and criminal justice and media.
A full time lecturer was added in 2004 on the Westside for the Des Moines
and Lynnwood campuses with a corrections emphasis experienced in online
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
36
course delivery who assists with mentoring and advising students. A second
full time lecturer in Ellensburg was hired for fall 2008 with Legal Studies
emphasis experienced in online course delivery who assists with mentoring
and advising. Both full time lecturers help provide stabilization and
consistency in instruction while reducing the number of quarterly lecturers.
The full time lecturers also provide important contributions to the department
through their participation in departmental meetings.
b. Curriculum changes: Crime in America (our theory course) was moved to the
core as a program requirement in 2006 and the Current Issues course
converted to an LAJ Approved elective. We felt it was important to have a
theory course as part of our required courses in the major. In place of Crime
in American in the Corrections and Law Enforcement Specializations was
Juvenile Justice. It was thought that students seeking careers in law
enforcement and corrections would benefit from having an understanding
about young people in the criminal justice system.
Beginning in fall 2008, all 400 level LAJ Courses will require that students
have completed their basic 100 level skills courses which include English,
math, writing and logic. We did this because many students including transfer
students (all center students are transfer students completing their
junior/senior years at CWU) were coming in without these basic courses. Thus
we made the change in order to have students complete their basic skill
courses before taking 400 level courses.
c. Legal Studies Specialization: In 2006, the Pre-law/Paralegal Specialization
was changed to Legal Studies to be more reflective of what the course of
study was. Since we do not offer an ABA approved paralegal program this
caused confusion for students and we felt the curriculum better reflected legal
studies.
d. Updating and standardizing department practice on Internships, Teaching
Assistants, Research Assistants and Independent Studies, and course
substitutions.
e. Pre-Admission Advisor: The part time office position was modified to include
pre-admission advising responsibilities. Having a person in the office who
can handle student inquires about the major, give new majors a standard
packet of information and orientation as well as provide support to faculty
advisors by having major specific expertise has helped to provide better
transition into the major.
f. Online Delivery of Courses: The LAJ department has been among a handful
of departments leading the university in the development of online delivery of
courses since 2002. Offering quality online delivery has expanded the
accessibility of courses to students especially those at the university centers
who face travel and time challenges. For the past two summers, an almost
total online schedule has enhanced access of courses to students and been
profitable to the department which has resulted in more money for faculty
development and other departmental activities
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
37
g. Since the university started in fall 2007, putting quarterly holds on students
who had completed 75 credits of academic work without completion of basic
skills courses, this also helps to encourage students to complete their basic
skills timely, which then reduces significant workload this new requirement
has put on our department. There is also a hold put on at 120 credits, which
requires the student to contact their advisor. This also helps our advising.
2. Specific changes related to the assessment process
The LAJ department has made huge strides in the development and
implementation of an evaluation process in the past five years. As
recommended in the last LAJ program review (2003-2004) the LAJ
department has devised and implemented an assessment plan. The pilot of
this plan was implemented in 2006/2007 and the department is now working
on improvements suggested by this process. Some suggestions resulting from
this process included making sure the related learning objectives of the
department were sufficiently addressed in the core courses, to develop
assignments that were more consistent across sections of the same core
course, and to continue to approve, develop and utilize rubrics to assess the
learning objectives in each of the core courses.
The pilot year also demonstrated several weaknesses in the original LAJ
assessment plan, which has been revised to improve on the ability of the LAJ
department to adequately and consistently measure learner outcomes both on
the Ellensburg campus and at the centers. Some improvements to the plan
included creating a realistic timeline, which focuses on specific core courses
each quarter, for systematically collecting data in Ellensburg and at the
centers, working closely with the Career Service office to collect Employer
Evaluation of Cooperative Field Experience so that we can evaluate our
students’ performances at internship and gage additional programmatic needs
related to Alumni employment not currently being met by the LAJ
department.
On a yearly basis the Assessment Committee reports to the faculty the results
of the previous year’s assessment and at a dedicated faculty meeting these
results are discussed and plans are made for both individual and programmatic
improvement.
At a yearly meeting, the LAJ tenured, tenure track faculty and full time
lecturers review syllabi to ensure that all required elements are clearly stated
and the learning objectives complement the learner outcomes measured in the
assessment plan and offer suggestions for faculty implementation. Quarterly,
required elements of the syllabus and other departmental policies are sent out
to part time lecturers.
Beginning in academic year 2007-2008, as part of their annual review, the
syllabi of part time lecturers are evaluated by the chair and personnel
committee with the same objectives as for the other faculty members.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
38
Additionally, time is regularly allocated at LAJ faculty meetings for
discussions of planned change that incorporate suggestions made during our
last program review, suggestions from the dean, as well as a continued focus
on the mission and goals of the LAJ department.
3. Documentation of continuing program needs including reference to statewide
and regional needs assessment.
Law and Justice remains one of the largest majors in the University, graduates
more students each year than most other majors, and job availability remains
high. Increasing retirement of baby boomer employees in the law and justice
field, accompanied by a basic need which is largely recession proof, indicates
future demand for our students. A department/program assessment plan for
the future is located in appendix B.
II Degree programs and curricula
A. Description of degree programs and curricula
Table 23: Programs Offered in LAJ Department
Degree Program
Location(s) Faculty # Students in Major
B.A. Law &
Justice
FTE
Yr1
Yr2
Yr3
Yr4 Yr5
Yr1
Yr2
Yr3
Yr4
Yr5
Ellensburg
6
526
534
505
480
376
128
139
134
110
123
Yakima
1
24
29
28
35
28
6
8
5
8
16
Pierce
1
97
87
63
50
47
33
36
17
26
14
Des Moines
1
40
76
101
105
83
31
14
26
42
28
Lynnwood
2
118
118
108 103
91
29
29
31
35
27
11
805
844
805
625
227
226
213
221
208
TOTALS
Minor Programs
Corrections,
Law Enforcement,
Legal Studies,
Prelaw/Paralegal
Combined
# Degrees Awarded
Location(s)
Faculty
FTE
773
# Students in Minor
# Minors Completed
Yr1
Yr2
Yr3
Yr4
Yr5
Yr1
Yr2
Yr3
Yr4
Yr5
Ellensburg
6
47
47
45
47
44
10
15
7
15
10
Yakima
1
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
Pierce
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
Des Moines
1
4
5
7
5
8
2
1
4
1
2
Lynnwood
2
1
2
1
5
3
0
1
0
2
1
TOTALS
11
53
55
53
58
65
12
18
11
18
13
Totals
11
858
899
858
831
690
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
39
b. General education courses.
We have no general education courses, professional educator’s courses or service
courses.
c. Required measures of efficiency for each department over the last five years
1. SFR (FTES/FTEF) disaggregate data
Table 24: State-Funded Course FTE
Law and
Upper Division
Justice
Graduate
Total
Academic Years 2003-2008
2003-04
2004-05
318.0
333.5
318.1
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
324.3
302.5
269.4
333.5
324.3
302.5
269.4
0.2
College of
Lower Division
1,584.6
1,624.6
1,689.1
1,780.0
1,731.2
the Sciences
Upper Division
1,218.6
1,286.3
1,300.2
1,333.8
1,271.8
142.9
155.6
150.4
138.6
131.7
Total
2,946.2
3,066.5
3,139.7
3,252.3
3,134.7
University
Lower Division
4,021.7
4,138.8
4,211.9
4,269.0
4,214.1
Total
Upper Division
4,254.9
4,386.3
4,481.5
4,595.3
4,456.9
372.8
358.9
363.6
363.1
324.3
8,649.4
8,884.0
9,057.0
9,227.5
8,995.3
Graduate
Graduate
Total
Table 25: State-Funded Course FTE by Center Academic Years 2003-08
Ellensburg
Upper Division
Graduate
Total
2003-04
2004-05
2006-07
2007-08
172.2
177.8
2005-06
176.1
160.2
150.4
172.4
177.8
176.1
160.2
150.4
0.2
Des Moines
Upper Division
42.9
46.2
50.8
48.5
38.2
Lynnwood
Upper Division
50.2
56.9
50.5
48.4
36.6
Pierce
Upper Division
35.6
34.4
26.5
24.9
23.5
Yakima
Upper Division
17.0
18.2
20.4
20.5
20.8
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
40
2. Average class size; disaggregate data upper and lower divisions and graduate
courses.
Table 26: Average Class size by location
Table 27: Average Student Enrollment per Class
LAJ CENTERS
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Ellensburg
33
32
31
31
28
Des Moines
25
22
29
25
25
Lynnwood
27
30
27
28
24
Pierce
23
22
19
18
20
Yakima
16
13
19
24
18
LAJ Department TOTAL
24.8
23.8
25
25.2
23
College of the Sciences
23.3
23.2
24.2
22.9
21.2
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
41
Table 28: Student Enrollment by Location
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Yakima
228
240
244
268
245
Pierce
533
482
366
318
301
Des Moines
544
630
751
631
538
Lynnwood
638
759
794
632
475
Ellensburg
2078
2204
2159
2029
1872
1943
2111
2155
1849
1559
LAJ Department TOTAL
3. Assessment of Student Learning
Starting in 2006-2007 the Law and Justice Department produces a yearly report
on the Assessment of Student Learning (see Appendix G) for the reports of the
past two years. This report includes artifact assessment, based on standardized
rubrics, for the LAJ core classes, an evaluation of employer co-op evaluation of
student interns, and a review of the data gathered during Alumni Surveys (these
are currently only collected every 5 years). Additionally, the faculty meets to
conduct peer-reviews of syllabi on a yearly basis.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
42
D. Currency of curricula in discipline.
The Law and Justice Department has made several minor revisions to its
curriculum during this period and is in the middle of a major revision to reflect
student needs, the social justice focus of the faculty and emerging trends (as
evidenced by leading criminology and criminal justice programs, pre-law
programs, publications in the field, presentations at the ACJS and ASC
conferences, as well as several regional conferences). The Law and Justice
program is unique because it combines elements of criminal justice, criminology
and legal studies, and our faculty pedigrees and interests, as well as the
curriculum, reflects this interdisciplinary focus. We have many of the standard
courses offered in criminal justice and criminology programs such as Introduction
to the Administration of Justice, Research Methods, Crime In America
(criminological theory), Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, and courses in
policing and corrections. Also, we have more law oriented courses typically found
in pre-law programs such as Legal Research, Civil Procedure, and Family Law.
Our program is also unique in providing courses such as Mediation and
Correctional Counseling.
Since the time of our last review we have made Crime in America (criminological
theory) a requirement for all of our majors. A version of this course is almost
universal in criminology and criminal justice departments across the country. We
have also added Terrorism and Crime and the Media to our list of electives
because they both represent areas where our students may want to develop
expertise, whether for the workforce or to aid in their pursuit of a graduate
education. Our commitment to diversity is evident in our required core courses
Ethics, Diversity and Conflict and Community and Social Justice and recent new
courses concerning African Americans and the Constitution, Sexual Minorities
and Law and Justice, and Comparative Criminal Justice.
We are in the midst of submitting a major curriculum change that would remove
the tracts (law enforcement, corrections and legal studies) from our program, and
focus on a general liberal arts/social science Law and Justice degree. The faculty
did not make this change lightly and the reasons for the change include: 1) a
desire to continue to move away from the perception that our focus is on content
similar to that found in training academies, and to represent the reality that we
offer a broad liberal arts degree with a focus on criminological and legal theory,
critical analysis, social justice, ethics and diversity; 2) pragmatic concerns about
offering a law and justice program that is consistent across all of our locations,
and 3) the belief that the curriculum revisions better reflect the faculties focus on
social justice.
After our last program review we carefully examined suggestions made by
members of the review team and the administration at Central Washington
University that included the need to explore offering an ABA paralegal
certification and to make sure our program is consistent with ACJS standards. As
we explored these two suggestions we discovered that they were incompatible
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
43
because the ABA certification requires that the majority of classes are taught by
individuals with a JD and who have current standing with the ABA and the ACJS
standards, which are technically only for traditional Criminal Justice programs,
require that only a limited number of faculty members have a JD without a PhD.
Armed with this knowledge we voted to remove the goal of offering an ABA
paralegal certification program from our agenda. We also felt it important to keep
the ACJS standards on our radar screen, especially because a new set of standards
and certification process for universities was approved in 2005. However, we did
not want to be bound to all of their requirements because we are not a traditional
Criminal Justice program. That being said, we are certainly not alone in this
decision. Since the new standards were introduced and the certification process
began only one master’s program has been certified and no bachelors programs
have been certified by the national body.
In reviewing the just more than 50 standards required in an ACJS certification
process it appears that our program meets approximately 90% of the standards.
The areas where we do not meet ACJS standards include:
1) We are not a Criminal Justice program and therefore the content of many of
our courses fall outside their review process and our current program would
not be considered for certification.
2) ACJS requires that “two-thirds of all full-time faculty in baccalaureate
degree programs must hold an earned doctorate in criminal justice or a closely
related discipline.” Because of the hybrid nature of our program, specifically
our focus on the law, the Law and Justice Department actively seeks to
balance (with the approval of the CWU administration) our faculty with
PhD’s with faculty with a JD and a master’s degree (this combination is
considered a terminal degree in our program) in a related field.
3) ACJS requires that “the institution awards degrees only to those students
who have earned at least 50 percent of the credit hours in the program through
instruction offered by that institution.” Up until recently, it was possible for
students to receive our degree with slightly less than 50 percent of our credit
hours – this has now been modified and will be in effect shortly.
4) ACJS requires that “programs rely on full-time faculty to teach corecourses and to deliver at least two-thirds of the teaching in the undergraduate
program.” Although the LAJ Department has improved in this area since the
last program review there is still work to be done as evident in this Program
Review.
E. Effectiveness of Instruction
1.
Departmental teaching effectiveness via SEOI’s. See Tables 8 and 9 on pp. 20 and
21.
2. Besides SEOI’s, the syllabi of all instructors is analyzed yearly based upon specific
criteria. This provides further evidence of the effectiveness of instruction. Also, all
instructors, full-time and part-time, undergo periodic assessment of their teaching via
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
44
reappointment, tenure, promotion and post-tenure review. At these stages there is a
systematic evaluation of their teaching, including, but not limited to, the SEOI scores.
3. Traditional and Innovative instructional methods are evident in Tables 16 and 17 on
p. 27. There is much collaborative research between faculty and students. Students
are very involved in service learning, as evidenced by student enrollment in
cooperative education (Tables 11 and 12 on pp. 22 and 23.) Field experiences such as
court room visits, visits to correctional institutions, among others are conducted in
many of our classes. Many classes involve group projects/learning while others are
more based on classic lectures, plus guided discussion. The teaching methodology to
produce student learning may vary quite dramatically from Correctional Counseling
and Mediation to Legal Writing and Legal Research, to Crime in America. The case
method approach is used in all of the law related classes. Nearly all courses now
incorporate a Blackboard component, while the use of distance education technology
is quite prevalent as will be noted in the next section.
F. Degree to which distance education technology is used for instruction.
1. I T V Courses
Data breakdown by class description per quarter can be found in Appendix H.
Table 29: ITV
The department offers a few courses through ITV. Three ITV courses have been
offered over the past 4 academic years. We have found that students prefer online
delivery to ITV. ITV offers no benefit for students in scheduling or commuting.
Also, we have found that the level of student dissatisfaction with this delivery method
to the remote location is high with the faculty SEOI score as much as one full point
lower in some cases.
2. Online Courses
The Law and Justice Department has increased the delivery of classes online from 9
in the 2003-2004 academic year to 43 in the 2007-2008 academic year. (See Table 29
on following page showing the number of totally delivered online courses through
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
45
Blackboard over the past 5 academic years). (See Appendix I for complete list of
courses).
The courses offered online are:
LAJ 300
Administration of Criminal Justice
LAJ 303
Legal Research
LAJ 313
Introduction to Criminal Law
LAJ 316
Introduction to Paralegal Studies
LAJ 324
Correctional Law
LAJ 342
Juvenile Justice Process
LAJ 350
Criminal Justice and Media
LAJ 451
Crime in America
LAJ 453
Domestic Violence Issues
LAJ 459
Current Issues
Table 30: Number of Online Classes by Academic Year
As the Table shows, more online delivery has been offered over the review
period. These are primarily directed to our centers since for the non-traditional
student, online courses offer more scheduling flexibility and alleviate the
commuting issues of traffic congestion which are a concern for Westside students.
At some of the centers with lower enrollment, online delivery allows students to
have more course selection.
The number of faculty members teaching total online courses has more than
doubled in the last five years ago going from only two to five tenured/tenure track
faculty and two full time lecturers in 2007-2008, (64% of the faculty).
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
46
The majority of summer courses are offered online because of their popularity,
which makes them more efficient for the department and also convenient for
students regardless of location.
G. Assessment of programs and student learning
1. a. See LAJ Assessment Plan for the Law and Justice Department and Matrix of Law
and Justice Learner Outcomes Aligned to Courses. (See Appendix G).
2. a. The specific quantitative results for each student learning outcome can be found at
pp. 12-21.
b. A comparison of the above results to standards of Mastery is to be found on pp.
32-33.
c. For a concise interpretation of the above see p. 35.
3. a. In the fall of 2008 the LAJ Assessment Committee met with the faculty and
presented the findings found in this document. Some suggestions included:
1. The faculty should review the rubric results concurrently with a review of
assignments in the appropriate courses and make changes to both where
necessary. The learning objectives were designed to be quite broad and contain
many sub-categories; therefore it may be unrealistic to require so many skills in a
particular artifact. Meeting as a group will allow us to focus and refine the rubrics
and artifact assignments to better measure the skills demonstrated by students. In
addition, the Assessment Committee should continue to work on interaterreliability in the use of rubrics, as there still appears to be variation in the
assignment of rubric scores.
2. The faculty set a Standard of Mastery/Criterion of Achievement at 60% of
students receiving an “adequate” (2) or above (3) ranking on each of the skills
measured in the rubrics. Once this is achieved the goal should be raised to 75%.
This was approved by the faculty. Additionally, the faculty set a Standard of
Mastery/Criterion of Achievement of our students average score being 4 or above
on a 5 point scale for the employer evaluation of student interns.
3. Faculty members who have demonstrated strength in a particular skill area share
ideas and technique with other faculty members.
4. Encourage faculty members to form partnerships with the writing center and
library staff to improve student communication, library and referencing skills.
5. Develop rubrics to assess student learning in the remainder of our core classes
(LAJ 300, LAJ 302, and LAJ 303), which will be the focus of next years’
assessment efforts.
6. The faculty should discuss ways to improve our collection and completion rates
for artifacts and surveys respectively.
7. The faculty should discuss a revision to the Assessment Plan schedule because the
Assessment Committee found it particularly onerous to complete the rubrics and
report during the last two weeks of the quarter.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
47
b.
III.
The specific changes related to assessment process are noted above in a. An
updated programming student outcome assessment plan for the future is in
appendix G.
Faculty
A. Faculty Profile
Table 31: Tenured and Tenure-track Faculty Profile
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
5 Year Annual
Total
Avg.
49%
50%
49%
60%
62%
270%
54%
6
6
7
9
9
37
7.4
Peer Reviewed Articles
5
9
6
10
15
45
9
Conference Presentation
8
10
12
14
10
54
11
1
3
6
2
12
2
0
3
2
1
6
1
3/0
2/0
0/1
5/1
2
2
5
1
10
2/0
1/1
4/1
0/1
7/3
% of Classes Taught by TT-T
Faculty
# TT-T of Faculty
 Scholarship Measures:
Other
 Grants:
External
0
Funded / Unfunded
Internal
0
Funded / Unfunded
2
 Service measures:
CWU Committees
6
4
14
15
20
59
12
State Committees
1
3
3
2
2
11
2
Leadership & Service –
Professional Organizations
2
4
6
4
11
27
5
Community Service
10
10
13
24
13
70
14
Other
1
2
3
5
8
19
4
1
0
2
3
3
9
2
6
5
2
7
5
26
5
 Faculty Mentored Research
SOURCE
Graduate Committees
UG, Publications, Presentations
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
48
B. Faculty Vitae
(See Appendices J - R)
C. Faculty Awards
See vi and vii on pp. 29 and 30.
D. Department, college and university performance standards (See Appendix E)
IV.
Students
A. Student accomplishment over the five year period.
Our students have been quite involved in professional activities such as paper
presentations and independent research as indicated in tables 15 and 16 on pp. 2527. No systematic data are available concerning the number of students who go on
to graduate study, however, anecdotal evidence suggests several go to law school
or pursue a M.S., M.A. or M.S.W. Our alumni survey data, Appendix E, indicate
that 17% of respondents were in law school/graduate school, while another 48%
were currently employed in law and justice areas. Thus, 65% of respondents were
pursuing law and justice areas.
B. Masters Project
N.A.
C. Student Advising
As evident in Table 14, p. 25, our faculty have a very high number of students to
advise. Once the student is admitted to our department s/he is assigned to an
advisor on the Ellensburg campus based on equitable numbers among Ellensburg
based faculty. At the Centers, each Center Director has the responsibility to advise
all the LAJ students at their respective Center. The Center Directors hold
quarterly orientations with all new students, providing basic information on the
program, scheduling, advising, etc. Each Center and the Ellensburg campus have
two year schedules of course offerings to facilitate advising and progression
through the program. All new students must meet with an advisor upon entering
the program. Also, all students have a hold put on their registration at 75 credits
and 120 credits, until they meet with their advisors. Several handouts describing
the program, course scheduling, electives, among other things, are made available
to students at all sites.
On the Ellensburg campus, where the large majority of students attend, a new
part-time staff position was added in 2008. One of the duties of this new position
is to provide preliminary, general information to students, including assignment to
advisors and facilitating meetings with advisors. This has greatly aided the
advising process and student satisfaction.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
49
The results of the Alumni survey (Tables 5, 6, and 7 on p. 15-17 and Appendix C)
indicate overall satisfaction with the program, including advising.
D. Law and Justice student club, advised by Professors Francis and Britto, has
been very active over this five year period.
The LAJ Club in Ellensburg has been extremely productive over the past three
years. In 2005-2006 the Ellensburg Club reorganized and made a commitment to
focus on scholarly/professional and service activities rather than purely being a
social club. Part of this reorganization included the election of two faculty coadvisors.
The 2005-2006 Ellensburg LAJ Club had over 35 active members and dedicated
the majority of the year to raising funds to attend the Academy of Criminal Justice
Science meeting in Baltimore, MD. The club rose over $22,000 to attend this
conference. Thirty-one students attended this conference and participated in a
variety of Law and Justice related activities while in Baltimore including a visit to
the FBI training academy in Quantico, Virginia, visits to local law schools, a tour
of the national monuments in the Washington D.C. area and attendance at many
ACJS panels. Three students presented academic research at ACJS. In the fall the
club donated to local agencies to help with food needs during the holiday season
and in the spring the club donated clothing, blankets and toiletries to agencies
working with victims of interpersonal violence.
The 2006-2007 Ellensburg LAJ Club voted at their first meeting to dedicate their
efforts to raising money to do a service project. There were over 20 active
members during this time period. They unanimously decided to travel to New
Orleans to help rebuilding efforts after Hurricane Katrina and meet with criminal
justice officials to discuss how the hurricane had impacted the criminal justice
system in New Orleans. The efforts yielded over $14,000 to complete this service
learning project. The LAJ-Ellensburg Club also partnered with the LAJ-Des
Moines Club on this project. The end result was 14 students and two faculty
members (Teresa Francis and Robert Moore) went to New Orleans for just under
a week. Professor Reimund arranged for meeting with a local prosecutor and
police official during their visit. LAJ Club members helped gut flooded houses,
worked at an animal shelter and helped feed the homeless. The students also
toured the devastated areas in the greater New Orleans area and learned
invaluable lessons about social justice. The club also formed a chapter of Lambda
Alpha Epsilon (a professional national criminal justice fraternity) and several club
members were inducted into this organization.
The 2007-2008 Ellensburg LAJ Club opted to focus on local service, and organize
and host a showing of the film Execution. There were over 20 active members
during this period. The club donated to local food banks during the Thanksgiving
season. Some club members volunteered their services to tutor disadvantaged
youth. During the winter holiday season the club sponsored a giving tree and
collected hats, scarves, mittens and jackets, and other items for local youth. In the
spring the club collected needed items to assist families affected by interpersonal
violence. Several club members also volunteered their time to work at the
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
50
Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences conference in Seattle, WA. In coordination
with the Des Moines and Lynnwood LAJ Clubs the Ellensburg LAJ Club brought
the director/producer the leading actor (who also was an ex-death row inmate) of
the film Execution to the Des Moines, Lynnwood and Ellensburg campuses
during spring quarter. Club fundraising garnered over $6,000 to bring these events
to fruition. The event included a panel discussion after the film. The panel
consisted of the director (Steven Scaffidi), the ex-death row inmate (William
Moore) and CWU LAJ Alumni currently work in the criminal justice field. The
events were a huge success and attended by more than 500 individuals including
alumni, students, faculty and members of the general public. The events were
also written up in several newspapers and CWU was the focus of several positive
You Tube clips describing the events.
V.
Facilities and Equipment
A. Facilities available and adequacy
Each of the Centers moved into new facilities during the five year period in
conjunction with their paired Community College. The Ellensburg based program
remains short on space for students, clubs, and adjuncts. However, in Spring
Quarter, 2009 the Department will move to a new location in Farrell Hall. This
will provide much more space for departmental needs. The major need in the next
period for the Ellensburg campus is creation of space for a computer lab, plus
room for a mock court.
B. At the Centers, the Law and Justice program share all equipment with other
programs. In Ellensburg, the department shares a copy machine with Political
Science. After the move in Spring, 2009, the Law and Justice Department will
need to obtain a copy machine, plus create a computer lab. In order to establish a
mock courtroom, remodeling will need to be completed, plus the purchase of
related furniture and specialty items.
C. While all Centers have distance education possibilities, they need to be upgraded
for delivery of more courses to multiple sites. The Ellensburg program needs
more computers to establish a computer lab in their new location, plus a new copy
machine.
VI.
Library and Technological Resources
A. The Centers have availability to all of the same library resources that are available
on campus. With electronic availability of many databases and resources, we have
not found this to be a problem. Des Moines and Lynnwood have a library
resource person who can assist students and Marcus Kieltyka is the instruction
and outreach librarian and he comes to the centers to assist and facilitate the
centers with any library issues and also along with the two on site resources
people at Des Moines and Lynnwood gives instruction sessions to students. He
also assists the department with the administration of Westlaw by assigning
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
51
passwords to students each quarter at all locations and assists in doing training on
the legal resources and online databases.
In Ellensburg, the main library provides adequate resources, particularly online
materials. The new location in Farrell Hall will allow for the establishment of a
departmental library/study area. In the future, funds for departmental library
acquisitions eg. law materials, would be needed.
B. Faculty regularly use the main library for hard copy resources, while there is a
heavy reliance on computer based resources, particularly law and justice related
eg. Professional journals, government documents, abstract services, etc. Also, the
two major online legal resources, West Law and Lexis Nexis, are invaluable to
students and faculty. In the classroom, most faculty use blackboard and various
related I.T.
C. At the Centers, there is adequate upgrading of computers, plus availability of
computer labs for students. In Ellensburg, the major need in the future is a
computer lab in the new building adequate for class instruction.
VII
Analysis of the Review Period
A. What has gone well in the department and degree programs
1. Since the last review, we have added three tenure track faculty.
2. The Law and Justice Student Club has been active in both professional and public
service activity, including helping build homes in the aftermath of hurricane
Katrina.
3. A new part-time office assistant/pre-admission advising position has been
obtained, greatly aiding students and the program.
4. Overall, our student teaching evaluations of instruction and courses are above
college and university averages.
5. The faculty are accessible and approachable to students in classes and through
advising, in spite of the high number of advisees.
6. The department provides excellent advising, this is especially notable at the
university centers where non-traditional students, who juggle work and family,
often encounter numerous issues that need individual attention and understanding.
7. Our faculty and students have increased in terms of ethnic/racial and gender
diversity.
8. An assessment plan has been implemented for some core classes.
9. Employer evaluation of law and justice cooperative student interns is over 4 on a
5 point scale.
10. An alumni survey finds that there is high overall satisfaction with the program.
11. According to the alumni survey, nearly two thirds of graduates get a job in the law
and justice related area or do graduate work.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
52
12. The faculty are dedicated to getting students through the program in a timely
manner by offering independent study opportunities and arranged courses as
necessary for students to complete their degrees in a timely manner, as indicated
by graduation numbers.
13. We maintain currency in our areas of scholarly interest by regularly attending
professional training programs and professional conferences.
14. All faculty are yearly involved in mentoring students in cooperative internships.
15. All professors expose their students to guest speakers from the field.
16. Law and Justice students are involved in presentations at professional meeting,
SOURCE and other forums, including publications.
17. Over 10% of students avail themselves of directed and/or independent research
via LAJ 495 and 496.
18. Membership in the National Criminal Justice Honor Society – Alpha Phi Sigma,
increases each year.
19. The average number of faculty publications a year is 9 while conference
presentations average 11.
20. The department has done well at organizing appropriate summer courses so that
enrollments allow for revenues, which are used for faculty professional
development, amongst other needs.
21. The department has done well at actively participating in the McNair Scholars
Program and the Link Program.
22. The department has a high level of commitment to recognizing students through
the annual Eastside and Westside banquets to honor outstanding students and
alumni.
23. Several faculty have been promoted and one has been chosen as the Teacher of
Excellence for the year in the College of Sciences.
24. The first two sabbatical leaves granted to law and justice faculty occurred during
this review period.
25. One professor’s book gained national recognition.
26. All professors are very active in service activity.
27. Our faculty has greatly increased their research, publications, presentations and
service activity concerning diversity issues.
28. Our breadth of courses has increased, particularly regarding issues of diversity.
29. The department facilitates student participation in the annual career fair at the
Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission.
30. The department continues to do well in providing the opportunity for people
already in the criminal justice field (police, paralegals, probation and correctional
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
53
officers) to complete their degrees so they have career advancement opportunity
with increased compensation.
31. The department and faculty members have organized and provided two-day
Victim Offender Mediation Training for people in the community and across the
state.
32. The department provides our students with high ethical standards and quality
education through our LAJ courses and they are serving all of us in communities
across the state by being on the front lines as police officers, probation officers,
correctional officers, lawyers and paralegals.
33. Our commitment to social justice and service has increased.
34. LAJ alum, Christine Henderson, is an active member of the COTS Development
Board.
35. The difference between Law and Justice and COTS in terms of class size and
proportion of tenure track/lecturer teaching has narrowed over the five year
period.
B. Existing Challenges
1. Establishing stable internal leadership in the Chair position. During the five year
review period there were three department chairs, including one faculty member
from outside the department. There were also two interim and one “permanent”
College of Science Deans. One of the causes of the instability is that the demands
on the Chair have greatly increased over the years, while the rewards/benefits
have largely remained the same. In terms of professional progress, it does not
make sense for an Associate Professor to take on this responsibility. They have to
largely give up their research agenda, while still being held accountable for
research. Changes in the reward/compensation structure would help to foster
junior faculty to take on this significant position.
2. Creating more frequent, effective communication/exchange between faculty about
their professional activities, teaching issues and community service. Given the
fact that nearly half the faculty are off the main Ellensburg campus, face to face
meetings have been rare. Faculty meetings are generally done via telephone
conference. The Center Directors must act as quasi-chairs of their respective sites,
and have little time for collegial meetings with other faculty. There are, on
average, only two face to face meetings each academic year of the entire faculty.
3. The department still faces challenges gaining recognition and respect at the
college and university levels. This challenge becomes greater because we are not
a traditional science, so gaining respect for what we do within the college and an
understanding of our unique program can be challenging. Further compounding
our difficulty, we have a small staff and a large number of majors at disparate
locations, so we have difficulties in participating in activities and committees to
gain voice and exposure for the department. We are making efforts to increase
our participation on university committees and in disseminating information about
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
54
the department. During this review period there was increased participation of
faculty on University and College committees. This effort needs to continue.
4. Distance Education presents challenges because of occasional technical problems
and because of the logistics of getting papers and assignments collected and
returned to students timely and difficulty of engaging students at the remote
location. It is evident from the data that we have significantly increased distant
education offerings, including web based courses. This has led to some concerns
with availability of appropriate technology and quality control issues.
Nonetheless, the SEOI’s of the department remain high.
5. The role of center directors has been challenging since their responsibilities have
not been formalized in employment contracts or through separate service
contracts. Although their work is recognized departmentally, there are concerns
about their status at the college and university levels since these added
responsibilities do not allow faculty time to do what a traditional on-campus
faculty member would be doing in order to gain tenure and promotion. While we
now have full-time tenured/tenure track professors at all four centers, their ability
to move forward in terms of professional research obligations remains
problematic. This is particularly so in terms of promotion. Like the position of
Chair, there is a great deal of administrative demand, but little formal recognition
of this in terms of promotion criteria.
6. There is a demand for a master’s program. We are challenged because we are
unable to respond to this need. The Higher Education Coordinating Board
approved our proposed program in 2001. However, there has been no specific
effort by the University to pursue this program. Our alumni survey (appendix C),
plus anecdotal evidence from the field, attest to the demand. It was well
documented in the earlier approved masters program. Since the approval by the
HEC Board, only Seattle University has added such a program in the state. The
only state public university with a masters’ remains Washington State University.
7. The department needs a full-time tenure track position on campus with a focus on
law enforcement. Although approximately 40% of our majors focus in this area,
we rely almost exclusively on adjuncts to teach these courses. The need for
mentoring, advising, and career counseling, besides teaching, is great. As evident
from the data concerning our major’s focus, law enforcement is in high demand.
While we have over 300 majors on the Ellensburg campus, we do not have a full
time faculty member devoted to this specialty.
8. Operating our program with a large proportion of adjuncts remains a challenge.
As the data indicates, in 2007-2008, 38% of classes were taught by nontenured/tenure track instructors.
9. Given the large proportion of non-tenured/tenure track faculty, the department
remains very vulnerable to downturns in the economy. When staff are cut, it is
first those that are non-tenured/tenure track. This was experienced by the
department in the early part of this decade. Therefore, since we have a higher
proportion of such instructors than other COTS programs, we remain most
vulnerable in terms of economic crisis.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
55
10. The department needs to increase its visibility through a variety of strategies,
particularly at the Centers.
C. Implementation of Previous Program Review Recommendations
1.
Undergraduate curriculum and outcomes-based assessment.
As is evident from this report, we have made great strides in establishing
outcomes-based assessment. While we have much yet to do, we have established
a methodology and framework for continual assessment and feedback. Both
student learning expectations and knowledge and skill-based learned outcomes
have been built into course syllabi and expectations. Periodic review of all faculty
course syllabi ensures the development of standard expectations and course
uniformity across campuses. Alumni survey results largely confirm positive
outcomes and satisfaction with the program.
2. Faculty credentials performance standards and department
culture/leadership.
We have developed departmental performance standards which have been
approved by the Provost. Peer review of instruction has been implemented via
syllabus review and an annual retreat to discuss this issue. A standard checklist
for syllabi has been established and periodic evaluations of part-time adjuncts
have been instituted to develop adequate consistency and maintain rigorous
standards.
The three new tenure track faculty hired since the last review, Professors Britto,
Noga and Francis, have excellent credentials and have greatly enhanced the
department in teaching, scholarship and service. As evidenced from the current
review, the more recent, younger additions to faculty have made great
contributions to the faculty.
In terms of culture and leadership, the more recent members of the faculty have
helped to invigorate and change the culture in a positive way. As they rise through
the ranks, new leadership will be forthcoming. As noted in the challenges section,
this, in part, necessitates larger changes in inducements/rewards for those
assuming leadership roles.
Some indicees of changed culture include representation of law and justice in
wider university committees. For example, we had a faculty member , Mary Ellen
Reimund, on the Dean’s Search Committee, among other committees. Along with
faculty member Mike Olivero, our Secretary Senior, Sharon Talley serves on the
President’s Art Selection and Permanent Collection Committee. In addition, two
sabbaticals were awarded during this review period to Professors Reasons and
Sun. These are the first sabbaticals in the history of the department. Two books
were published by Professors Britto and Sun, with Britto’s gaining national
honors. The greatly increased diversity of the department faculty has provided
positive cultural changes. All of the above portend a vibrant, active, and creative
future for the program.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
56
3. Completing the transition to an academic model and staging for the Master’s
program.
This has progressed well with the addition of a theory course (LAJ 451) as part of
our core required courses, plus the addition of several new courses such as
African Americans and the Constitution and Crime and the Media. The addition
of three new faculty, Professors Britto, Noga and Francis, who have been strong
contributors to our academic/professional advancement, adds to our transition and
staging for our Master’s.
4. The most critical direction for the department is to fund additional faculty
positions so that the dependence on adjuncts can be reduced to acceptable levels.
As evident from our average class size, faculty advising load and proportion of
non-tenured/tenure track faculty, we continue to need more faculty to obtain
acceptable staffing levels with quality assurance. Our specific need is for the
addition of two new Ph.D. positions, one in policing and one as a generalist.
While 40% of our majors in Ellensburg are law enforcement oriented, we do not
have a tenure track faculty with this specialization. This is crucial to correct the
above noted deficiencies and to set the conditions for the establishment of a
Master’s during the next five year cycle.
5. Additional support staff to address the demands of increased enrollment in
the major and address the needs of students at five locations.
This has been partially met by the addition of a regular part-time office assistant
III position, filled by Crystal Boothman. Given the demands of the program at
five locations, this should be a full-time position.
Implementation of the graduate program.
Issues with the undergraduate program regarding standardization, academic
integrity, learner objectives/outcomes, among others, are being addressed. The
principle need for implementing the graduate program is the addition of two new
Ph.D. Faculty.
6. Revision of departmental mission and goals.
This has been completed.
7. Continue to address the issue of faculty diversity in full time and adjunct
hires.
As evident by this report, much progress has been made in this area.
8. Maintain and enhance the achievements of the department in teaching,
research and service to the university and to the community.
This has been accomplished as is evident in this report.
9. Continue to offer opportunities for students to participate in research.
The current report provides evidence of this accomplishment.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
57
10. Development of research/resource centers within the department regarding
topical areas of faculty strength such as Restorative Justice and
Mexican/American policing.
This has not been done largely due to the lack of resources. New courses such as
Comparative Criminal Justice and Community Justice will in part, address this
need.
11. LAJ Advisor position to handle the express advising needs of LAJ majors
thus freeing up faculty time for teaching, research and service.
The new part-time position does pre-advising on campus, but there are no
resources for a part-time/full-time academic advisor.
12. Pursuit of ABA approval of the campus paralegal program and alliances
built with Edmonds Community College and Highline Community College so
Westside center paralegal students could graduate with ABA Approved Paralegal
Certificates.
This has not been pursued due to change in focus to the Master’s and lack of
resources.
13. Additional faculty and alliances with related departments for elective
offerings.
This has been done with our offerings for Family Studies, African and African
American Studies, and IDS. Progress is being made to provide some service law
and justice courses in the future.
D. Make a comparison between the last program review and where the department
is now.
1. Our advances since the last program review are listed in VII A. pp. 52-54. These
have been particularly aided by the addition of three new tenure-track faculty.
Such external support by the college and university has been crucial to this 50%
increase in our regular faculty. The addition of these younger faculty, has greatly
contributed to our diversity in terms of gender, race/ethnicity and ideas. This
infusion of new faculty has had a beneficial impact on departmental culture,
policies and practices. It has allowed more involvement with students in terms of
research, advising, maturing and quality instruction. Their contributions to the
department have enhanced our respect as a department in the larger university.
Through teaching, scholarship and community involvement, they have added
significantly to positive visibility for the Law and Justice Department.
2. One of the outstanding unmet needs from the last program review is the
implementation of the graduate program. The department only needs one more
tenure track faculty position on campus in the policing area in order to offer it on
campus. Given recent program changes eliminating the tracks, there will not be the
need to offer a wide variety o courses each year. Assuming adjunct instructors can
cover several courses, regular faculty will be able to teach graduate courses on
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
58
campus. This assumes that the graduate program approved by the H.E.C. Board in
2002 is still viable.
While some of the other recommendations from the previous Program Review (pp.
56-58) have not been achieved, there are efforts to pursue them as noted.
VIII Future Directions
A retreat was held on Friday, November 21 to address this issue, among other
departmental concerns. Carolyn Thurston acted as a group facilitator. Combined
with earlier meetings and discussions of department aspirations, the following
arose:
A. Department Aspirations
1. Continue to establish a social justice identity through our teaching, research and
service activity.
2. Implementation of the graduate program.
3. Maintain and enhance the achievements of the department in teaching, research
and service to the university and community.
4. Continue to offer opportunities for students to participate in research.
5. Continue to address issues of diversity in the program, including faculty, students
and course offerings.
6. Continue to establish a culture of professionalism, collegiality, and inclusiveness
in the department, amongst faculty, students and staff.
7. Continue to establish stable consistent leadership within the department.
8. Continue to foster the mentoring and progress of junior faculty through the trials
and tribulations of reappointment/tenure and promotion.
9. Establish a new location, culture and identity in the move to Farrell Hall in Spring
2009.
10. Continue to promote collaborative work with other programs and units in the
university.
11. Continue to enhance the academic consistency and rigor of the program at all five
sites.
12. Continue to address issues of learner outcomes and assessment.
13. Continue to update/revise departmental policies and practices where necessary.
14. Re-establish a working Advisory Board.
15. Increase distance education courses, particularly web-based, with an emphasis on
consistency and academic integrity.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
59
16. Continue to reduce the reliance on part-time instructors.
17. Provide more flexibility/support for junior faculty as they progress through their
career.
18. Reduce both average classroom size and advisee load to the COTS average.
19. Establish a joint computer lab with Sociology in Farrell Hall.
20. Establish a social science survey research center in Farrell Hall with Sociology
and Political Science.
21. Establish a mock courtroom and oral board venue in Farrell Hall. The mock
courtroom will allow students to recreate trials, while the oral board venue will
allow students to undergo mock interviews.
22. Facilitate more face to face interaction between faculty at the various sites.
23. Enhance opportunities for Center Directors to participate in campus
events/culture.
24. Support the needs of Center Directors.
25. At least a half time position for a student advisor.
26. Enhancing and updating our we site to assist current students in getting
information about the program as well as for recruiting efforts.
27. More marketing and recruiting efforts to gain more students at all of our locations.
28. Continue our efforts to involve our alum in departmental activities such as guest
speakers, panel participation and mentors.
B. Ways the department might increase quality, quantity and/or efficiency with
evidence that supports the promise for outstanding performance.
The evidence of our promise is in our current level of performance. We graduate
more students per tenured and tenure-track faculty than other departments; we
maintain scholarly records that are consistent with university expectations and
comparable to those in more resource-rich departments; we serve the community
with distinction. Our faculty have more advisees and larger classes than the
College and University norm; yet exceed College and University averages for
SEOI’s evaluation of both the Courses and Instructors.
To increase quality, quantity and/or efficiency:
1. The elimination of tracks will increase efficiency, particularly at the Centers.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
60
2. Increasing distance education, particularly online courses would help in both
efficiency and quantity.
3. Creation of an online minor will help efficiency and increase enrollment.
4. Establishment of assessment and peer review of syllabi increases quality.
5. Implementing specific pre-requisites for some classes may increase quality.
6. Providing some courses as service courses will increase quantity.
7. The quality of the program would be enhanced through investment in additional
tenure track faculty and less dependence on adjunct faculty.
8. Addition of an advisor position would increase efficiency, quality and quantity
since one individual could handle the bulk of the advising load, thus freeing up
faculty to concentrate on teaching and research, which would greatly increase
their efficiency and quantity in these areas.
9. While the addition of a part-time staff position has greatly aided in the quality of
service, this should be a full-time position.
10. Our establishment of a two-year scheduling plan lends itself to efficiency because
faculty and students know for planning purposes what the department course
offerings will be. With good master scheduling plans, less time is needed to work
out courses each quarter.
11. The scheduling of weekend/evening courses will continue to optimally serve
students. Further additions/revisions to this may enhance efficiency/quantity.
C. Specific resources needed to pursue future directions
1. Two new tenure track positions.
2. Resources to hold at least one meeting per quarter face to face for faculty from all
sites.
3. Enhanced technology in Farrell Hall to have audio-visual connections with all
sites for faculty meetings.
4. Resources to hold two annual meetings of the newly constituted Advisory Board.
5. Remodeling costs for establishing a mock courtroom in Farrell.
6. Costs for establishing a computer center in Farrell for at least 26 computer
stations.
7. A half time position for a student advisor.
8. Financing the increase of our part-time office staff position to full time.
9. Remodeling costs to establish a social science survey center in Farrell.
D. What do you want us to know that is not included in this self-study?
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
61
Nothing.
IX. Suggestions for the program review process of contents of the self-study?
There is a great deal of redundancy in this reporting form which should be
eliminated.
Department of Law and Justice - Program Review - 2008-2009
62