Review of the Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Health Sciences
College of Education and Professional studies
Central Washington University
Daniel J. McCann, Ph.D.
Professor of Human Physiology
Gonzaga University
Spokane, WA 99258-0004
Ph (509) 313-3487
mccann@gonzaga.edu
I. Overview
This review is based on the Department’s Self-Study Review, interviews with faculty, students,
administrators, and staff during a visit to campus on May 18 and 19, 2009. The report is divided
into three sections: strengths, challenges, and recommendations. Within each section specific
findings are presented when appropriate for each of four possible areas: programs and curricula,
faculty, students, and facilities and equipment.
Because the Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Health Sciences (NEHS) formed only
recently and contains three major programs (two of which offer undergraduate and graduate
degrees) a comprehensive and exhaustive evaluation of all aspects of NEHS is beyond the scope
of this report. Rather, as requested by Dr. Pellett, Associated Vice President for Undergraduate
Studies, this report presents my perceptions of the strengths and challenges of the Department
with specific attention to the major areas of the Department’s self-study.
II. Strengths
Programs and Curricula. The major strengths of the current and future programs in NEHS are the
integrated nature of the degree programs and the collaborative vision of the faculty and
administration. Indeed, the formation of NEHS a department in a new College (i.e., the proposed
College of Applied Science and Technology (CAST)), separate from the College of Education, is
I believe key to the future growth and development of the programs within NEHS. This exciting
new development, coupled with the ongoing integrative work of the faculty will be the most
essential step in clarifying the identity, purpose, and role NEHS is to have at Central Washington
University and in the region.
The strengths of the individual degree programs in NEHS emanate from the rigorous
accreditation processes recently completed by the Food Science and Nutrition program
(American Dietetic Association’s Commission on Accreditation of Dietetic Education
(ADA/CADE)), and the EMS Para-Medicine program (Committee on Accreditation of
Educational Programs for the Emergency Medical Services Profession (CoAEMSP)), as well as
the ongoing development of the Exercise Science curricula guided by appropriate professional
organizations such as the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the American
Association of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP).
Additionally, the individual programs goals of NEHS are matched to relevant University and
College goals and there is strong evidence in the self-study document of ongoing collaborative
efforts by the faculty to continually evaluate the effectiveness of each program. For example,
potential changes in the Food Science and Nutrition program include consolidation of the Food
Service Management (FSM) program and modification of the Dietetic Internship selection
process. Additional evidence exists in the recent development of the Clinical Physiology
specialization in Exercise Science and the possible revision of the time frame for the paramedic
major along with the potential for on-line non-clinical curricular development in program
planning and management.
And finally, current class sizes are moderate through most of the curriculum in each program and
interviews with students from each program (undergraduate and graduate) indicate students are
2
extremely happy with their programs and faculty. The exception to this strength are difficulties
keeping class sizes reasonable in laboratory classes because of limited facilities and equipment.
A further discussion of this issue is presented under Challenges in this report.
Faculty. The quality of faculty in each of the program is very high as evidenced by teaching
evaluation data, student interviews, scholarly productivity, participation in professional
organizations, and academic and public service. Supporting data are presented in the self-study
in Section III (pg. 28) and Appendix III. In addition, the new reorganization of the College and
formation of NEHS has had a palpable effect on unifying the faculty and creating a high degree
of esprit de corps. Interviews among faculty clearly indicate a high degree of respect for one
another and an appreciation of the role each play in the NEHS. Across the programs the faculty
include senior and junior faculty, all clearly active in the curricular development and delivery of
the programs. Faculty report sufficient support for professional development, with opportunities
for funding from both NEHS and the College. The Department also has an effective
organizational structure of shared governance including five faculty committees (Executive,
Personnel, Research, Technology, and Graduate Faculty). Junior faculty describe an effective
faculty mentoring process with an emphasis on creating and maintaining clear expectations for
the process of and accomplishment necessary for successful reappointment, tenure, and
promotion. Although there is a paucity of evidence in the self-report regarding the effectiveness
of advising, faculty and student interviews indicate quality advising is taking place and a serious
commitment by faculty exists at both the undergraduate and graduate level. Detailed advising
strategies and activities evidencing the commitment of faculty to advising are presented for each
program in section IV (pg. 31-32) of the self-study.
Students. Student accomplishments are presented in section IV of the self-study (pg. 30) for
each program. These data indicate students in Nutrition and Exercise Science actively
participate in collaborative research activities and participate regularly in the Symposium on
University Research and Creative Expression (SOURCE). Students in these undergraduate
programs are gaining admission to graduate programs, working in fields related to their
disciplines, and attaining national certification. For example, admission into very competitive
dietetic internship programs over the past five years is about 70 %, and approximately 75 % of
Exercise Science graduates have attained employment in related fields, and 100 % of students
from the EMS-Para-Medicine program have passed the National Registry of EMT-Paramedic
written examination and practical skills evaluation. The Department continues to make a
consistent effort to obtain survey data from graduates, however the content of the surveys and
detailed results were not contained in the self-report.
Facilities and Equipment. Review of the self-report and interviews with faculty indicate that one
would be hard-pressed to state that the current state of the facilities and equipment available for
teaching and research are strengths. However, the consolidation of faculty offices in the Physical
Education Building has been positive for both faculty and students. Once again, faculty
genuinely want to be part of a cohesive academic unit and this is reflected in their enthusiasm for
a unified location. More importantly, the commitment of the College and University to hold as a
high priority the need for a new comprehensive facility for NEHS is indeed a strength. In
addition, the recent attainment of new equipment for the EMS-Pramedic program has greatly
strengthened the program, and the excellent office and laboratory support staff are making the
3
most of the facilities at hand. Also, the recent effort of the College to help purchase of a new
metabolic cart for Exercise Science highlights the kind of continued support needed for these
programs. And finally, although the cadaver lab is not what anyone would call a state-of-the-art
facility, or even one on par with best-practices for the study of anatomy, the fact that the
department commits the time and effort to maintain the facility reflects a commitment to provide
effective opportunities for meaningful study in anatomy that positively impact all three degree
programs. This commitment to make the most of whatever facilities are available is evidence that
improved facilities would be used to the fullest extent possible to ensure the investment yielded
the highest possible returns to students, faculty and the institution.
III. Challenges
Programs and Curricula. As indicated in the self-report, NEHS faces several challenges. In the
category of programs and curricula the Food Science and Nutrition’s challenges are in two areas:
the Bachelor of Applied Science in Food Service Management (BAS in FSM) program based in
Lynnwood, and the limited number of dietetic internships available for their students.
Approaches to meet these challenges are being considered, although it was unclear at the time of
this review exactly how successful these approaches might be. Students and faculty both
recognize these challenges as significant and indicated timely remedies are warranted and would
be welcomed. More specifically, students indicated the distance-learning portion of the BAS
FSM, which uses a hybrid of classroom-video delivery, was at best, disappointing.
The Exercise Science programs and curricula appear well integrated and effective, although a
conspicuous absence in the undergraduate curriculum is a course in biomechanics. Without a
biomechanist on the faculty, or a dedicated biomechanics laboratory, the absence is
understandable. However, both the undergraduate and graduate programs would be strengthened
by development in this area because biomechanics is a fundamental aspect of both clinical and
performance evaluation of movement phenomena: central foci of the programs. Indeed, when
interviewed both undergraduate and graduate students spontaneously voiced disappointment that
biomechanics was not a part of their curricula. Yet, the central challenge in responding to this
need is that biomechanics requires specially trained faculty and expensive specialized laboratory
equipment. Thus, a successful response to this challenge will require a coordinated plan to
increase resources in the area of faculty hiring, facilities, and technology.
A major challenge that exists for all the programs in NEHS is the development and an ongoing
comprehensive and quantitative assessment of program and student outcomes. Assessment is a
necessary and valuable process in understanding and improving any complex process and as
scientists and clinicians the faculty in NEHS are well suited to carry out effective assessment of
their programs. However, my review of the self-study documents and interviews with faculty
indicate that the Department is facing a significant challenge in the area of assessment. While
the faculty of NEHS and the College and University administration recognize this challenge, it
seems there is a disconnect between the expectations of the Administration and the current
efforts of the faculty. My own view is that the Administration is correct in being concerned that
the current efforts of the faculty will not be sufficient to satisfy the Northwest Commission on
Colleges and Universities (NWCCU). However, the NWCCU will emphasize that the
assessment process originates from the faculty and therefore a top-down process will not suffice.
Specifically, what is needed is a systematic process that enables NEHS to quantitatively and
4
qualitatively determine the effectiveness of their work. My visit indicated to me this work is
being done, yet the data are not be compiled, analyzed and presented in a way that lends itself to
drawing meaningful conclusions and making informed decisions about curricula. In addition,
faculty report that data that would be helpful and is being compiled by the Office of Institution
Research is not being provided to NEHS in a timely fashion. This situation is also evident in
specific instances of missing data in the self-report. Generally, it is my opinion that too great a
reliance has been placed by the faculty on global measures of student performance (i.e., course
grades, grade point averages, and professional certification exams) to provide meaningful
assessment. Although courses grades and grade point averages (GPA) can provide global
measures of student performance, using a course grade, or a GPA to assess outcomes is
analogous to measuring the total energy content of a diet to assess the quality of that diet.
Without describing the contents and proportions, along with the energy expenditure, little can be
done to assess and improve the quality of the diet or ensure energy balance. Similarly, pass rates
on professional certification exams provide critical information, yet specific weaknesses or
strengths are not reflected in these data, nor are the characteristic outcomes that reflect a welleducated graduate of the University.
It is not clear to me that the faculty of NEHS fully appreciate how valuable assessment can be to
them in better understanding the results of their efforts and plans for curricular development.
What is clear is that the faculty recognize that creating effecting assessment practices will require
significant effort and time. The final challenge in this area is therefore for the administration to
provide resources that will expand the faculty’s understanding and appreciation of the process of
assessment with specific application to science and clinical curricula. It is my experience, that
once this is accomplished faculty “buy in” will increase significantly and the process will be
driven internally by the faculty’s desire to better understand the results of the work they do each
and every day.
Faculty. Challenges faced by the faculty are not necessarily specific to NEHS. For example,
faculty ask for greater consideration of the time and effort necessary for graduate student
mentoring in their work load plans. More generally, the self-report states that “…faculty are
saturated with responsibilities in teaching, research and service. If anything, the amount of time
spent among teaching, research and service needs to be adjusted by the faculty member so that
he/she can devote time in a specific area of interest (i.e., research).” Faculty are also
understandably concerned that Washington State budget issues will result in decreased state
funding while University enrollments are being maintained at their current level. And finally, as
a consequence of University budget concerns faculty feel increasing pressure to seek and obtain
external grant funding, yet they question whether the value of such activity is appropriately
considered in the faculty evaluation process and work load plans. Consequently, there is a need
to establish increased clarity among faculty and administrators of exactly what the expectations,
rewards, and resources are, or should be, to foster greater activity in individual and collaborative
grant writing.
Students. As indicated in the section Strengths, student quality and satisfaction is high.
However, interviews with graduate students in both Nutrition and Exercise Science indicate that
students are to some extent disappointed with the academic depth of the curricula at the graduate
level. Specific comments were that although the faculty were “amazing” and the breadth of
5
study was “good,” the faculty could “ask more of the students and the curriculum was the “same
basic curriculum” as in the undergraduate exercise science or dietetic curriculum. In addition,
graduate students in nutrition stated that their primary rationale for obtaining the Master’s degree
was to “make them more marketable,” rather than to increase the breadth and depth of their
knowledge of the science and practice of nutrition science. As indicated in the self-report (pg.
13) no projected major (my italics) modifications of the graduate curricula exist at this time.” It
is therefore unclear if the faculty are aware of what appears to be an opportunity to increase the
depth of the curriculum in their graduate programs.
Facilities and Equipment. It is clear from the self-report, interviews with faculty, and the sitevisit that a major challenge for the NEHS is meeting the increased need for a comprehensive
facility that would bring together faculty and staff offices and increase the number and quality of
teaching and research laboratories. In addition, no systematic program is in place to support the
purchase, maintenance, and continued operation of laboratory equipment. Although the EMSParamedic program has recently significantly improved this aspect of their program, this
challenge is especially evident for both the Nutrition and Exercise Science programs. The origin
of this challenge appears to be multifaceted. For example, before the creation of NEHS, the
needs of the current NEHS programs were not well represented in past requests for facility and
equipment by the organizations that housed these programs. Thus, significant increases in
enrollments that occurred five to eight years ago have never been appropriately accommodated
for with additional space and equipment, and increases in the expectations of faculty to publish
original research have not been accompanied by the establishment of space dedicated for
research. For example, the Exercise Science laboratory facilities are relatively the same as they
were over a decade ago, while enrollments are not, nor are the expectations for scholarly
productivity of junior faculty. In their self-report, the Department articulates their need for
facilities, equipment, and staff support (pp. 60-62). I agree with their assessment. Indeed, one of
the primary challenges faced by the Department is the acquisition of sufficient space, equipment,
and technical support for teaching and research laboratories that are the essence of their
curricula.
Importantly, the new structure of NEHS and the formation of a new College should give faculty
a far greater voice and opportunity to resolve these issues. More specifically, important
consequences of the formation of the new College such as the reallocation of budgets and the
completion of a comprehensive needs analysis for facilities, equipment and technology should be
an effective mechanism to respond to these challenges. However, these steps need to happen
soon while momentum and enthusiasm for such substantial change exists. Otherwise, faculty
morale, which is substantial at this point, will wane, momentum will be replaced with inertia,
and a major opportunity will be missed.
6
IV. Recommendations. (These recommendation are not prioritized)
Programs and Curricula.
It is recommended that the Executive Committee of NEHS request and receive assistance from
the administration in identifying and obtaining resources to expand the faculty’s understanding
and appreciation of the process of assessment with specific application to science and clinical
curricula. In concert with receiving this assistance, the Department should development ongoing
comprehensive and quantitative assessments of program and student outcomes that diminish the
reliance on global measures of student performance such as course grades and certification pass
rates. In addition, a mechanism for ensuring greater assistance from the Office of Institution
Research needs to be developed and maintained.
It is recommended that the faculty of the Food Science and Nutrition continue to utilize feedback
from ADA/CAD in refining their curricula and in particular to consider further refinement of the
BAS in FSM program and the effectiveness of its distance delivery format. The faculty should
also develop methods to better match the needs and availability of dietetic internships.
It is recommended that the Exercise Science faculty consider additional course requirements in
biomechanics in both the undergraduate and graduate curricula.
It is recommended that the EMS-Para-medicine faculty continue to pursue expansion of the
degree from one to two years and further develop their proposal for on-line non-clinical
curricular development in program planning and management.
It is recommended that the faculty of NEHS consider how the academic depth of their graduate
curricula might be increased to levels that are measurably matched to the needs and expectations
of their current and future students.
Faculty. It is recommended that the Executive Committee of NEHS work with the administration
to clarify, or when necessary develop, clear expectations, rewards, and resources designed to
foster greater activity in pursuing individual and collaborative efforts to obtain external funding.
Facilities and Equipment.
It is recommended that the faculty of NEHS produce a comprehensive immediate and future
needs analysis for faculty, facilities, equipment, and staff support and that this analysis be the
basis for future faculty and administration efforts to develop a proposal for a single facility that
would house and support all the programs within NEHS. This analysis should include
mechanisms to support the purchase, maintenance, and continued operation of laboratory
equipment.
7