Reporting School/College: Tobin College of Business
Program Reviewed: Public Accounting MS M
Date Submitted to Department/Division Chair:
Overview and Program Review Summary: Please summarize this program’s mission and its relationship to the vision and mission of St. John’s University, and the program’s School/College. Identify similar programs regionally and nationally and distinguish this program from them. In addition, summarize your findings as they relate to (1) program quality, (2) market growth potential, and (3) student learning. Also, summarize any significant changes, achievements
(by faculty and students and the program itself), and plans for the future. Finally, based on the information gleaned from the data in the self-study, give an overall rating of the program’s Enrollment/Market Potential by categorizing it as one of the following: (1) Enhance; (2) Maintain; (3) Reduce support, Phase out, Consolidate, or Discontinue.
(Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 1. The purpose of the program reflects and supports the strategic vision and mission of St. John’s
University, and the program’s School/College.
1a. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the Catholic, Vincentian, and metropolitan identity of St. John’s University? www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission .
(Suggested limit 1/3 page)
1b. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the University’s vision. www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission/vision-statement . (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
1c. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the vision and mission of the program’s School/College? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 1. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a. Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
Not Applicable
2b. Undergraduate 1 st Year Retention Rate
Not Applicable
2c. Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Not Applicable
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 1

2d. Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Program
School/College
Average Rate
2005
508
2006
511
Fall
2007
507
2008
522
2009
545
Regional Comparison N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
National Comparison N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Public Accounting MS M
Fall 2010
540
Fall 2011
572
Fall 2012
565
Fall 2013
564
Peter J.Tobin Coll of Bus-Grad
Fall 2010
540
Fall 2011
563
Fall 2012
549
Fall 2013
542
General test percentage distribution of scores within intended graduate major field that is based on the profile of GMAT candidates, 2011-12.
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 2

GMAT®
Degree Pursued
Master's of
Accountancy (MA)
Total: Number
Mean Total Score
Master's in Business
(MS, MSc, MA)
Gender
Men: Number
Mean Total
Score
Women:
Number
Mean Total
Score
Men: Number
Mean Total
Score
553
2010-11 2011-12
7,737
7,951
531
8,966
527
528
9,926
531
16,703 17,877
529 530
11,339 14,307
553
Women:
Number
Mean Total
Score
12,609
552
17,422
557
Total: Number
Mean Total Score
23,948
552
31,729
555
2e. Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions.
(Suggested limit 1/2 page)
2f. If applicable, describe the program’s student performance over the past five years on licensure or professional certification exams relative to regional and national standards. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 3

2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
Fall
TCB-GR
Number of Students
Majors
Minors
Total
2005
5
0
5
2006
12
0
12
2007
22
0
22
2008
MAJORS ACC1 MS
Fall 2010
Majors
43
Fall 2011
Majors
40
Fall 2012
Majors
40
Fall 2013
Majors
34
2h. Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Degrees Granted
MS
04/05
-
05/06
-
Academic Year
06/07
2
07/08
5
ACC1 Public Accounting MS
25
0
25
2009
08/09
11
10/11
Degrees Conferred
12
11/12
Degrees Conferred
23
12/13
Degrees Conferred
23
30
0
30
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 4

Below is comparison degrees conferred data for local and national institutions based on data retrieved from the IPEDS website. This is based on the Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) Code of 52-Business, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services.
2009-
2010
2010-
2011
2011-
2012
Local 4,898
Master's
5,532 5,719
National 177,684 187,213 191,571
1 Local institution include: Adelphi University, Columbia University, CUNY Queens College, Fordham University,
Hofstra University, Iona College, C.W. Post University, Manhattan College, New York University, Pace University,
Seton Hall University, Stony Brook University, and Wagner College.
Comments : Based on the data in 2g and 2h, how do these trends compare to institutional, regional and national patterns? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
2i. What mechanisms are in place to monitor students’ progress toward degree? And, to what extent is there a collaborative effort to provide quality advising and support services to students? (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
2j. If available, provide information on the success of graduates in this program as it relates to employment or attending graduate school. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 5

2k. Please comment on the students’ competencies in the program. Support your response using data provided below and any other data available. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 2. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 3. The program engages in ongoing systematic planning that is aligned with the University and
School/College planning, direction, and priorities.
3a. How does your program’s strategic goal/objectives link to your School/College plan and the University’s strategic plan? http://www.stjohns.edu/about/leadership/strategic-planning
3b. What is the evidence of monitoring the external and internal environments, specifically what are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing the program? How were they identified? What actions have been taken in response to these findings? What characteristics of the program suggest a competitive edge against other programs regionally and nationally?
3c. What is the current and future market demand for the program? Support your response using the data provided below or any other internal or external sources to justify your response.
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 6

Fastest growing occupations and occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment by level of education and training projected.
Fastest Growing Occupations
Change, 2010-20
Percent Numeric
Occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment
Change, 2010-20
Percent Numeric
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow faster than average - Increase 15 to 20.9%
Percent Numeric
*For more information please visit: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.toc.htm
Standard 3. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 4. The program provides a high quality curriculum that emphasizes and assesses student learning and
engagement.
4a. Please indicate how the program curriculum is in alignment with the following three items:
(Suggested limit 1/2 page for each of the three categories below)
1.
Standards within the discipline
2.
Curriculum integrity, coherence, academic internships, teaching excellence, teaching vibrancy, and study abroad experiences.
3.
The University Core competencies
4b. The syllabi for the courses within this program incorporate the suggested elements of a syllabus – an example of which can be found at the following St. John’s University Center for Teaching and Learning link. (Suggested limit 1/3
page) http://stjohns.campusguides.com/content.php?pid=71651&sid=984766\
4c. Describe the assessment model currently in place for the program and indicate the extent to which disciplinary and core knowledge, competence, and values are met, as well as findings and action plans for improvement. For reference, visit WeaveOnline – https://app.weaveonline.com//login.aspx
; Digication – https://stjohns.digication.com
(Suggested limit 1/2 page)
4d. What, if any, external validations, e.g. specialized accreditations, external awards, other validations of quality has the program received? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 4. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 7

STANDARD 5. The program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals.
5a. Below you will find the number of students enrolled as majors and minors in the program. Please complete the table by adding the number of full-time faculty assigned to the program. Then calculate the student to full-time faculty ratio.
Fall 2005
# Majors/
FT Faculty FT PT Total FT
Fall 2006
PT Total FT
Fall 2007
PT Total FT
Fall 2008
PT Total FT
Fall 2009
PT Total
MS Accounting
3 2 3 5
6
2
16
5
22 11
2
14
7
25 23
9
7
6
30 5 2 10 12
# of FTE
Students 1.00 1.33 2.33 2.00 3.33 5.33 6.00 5.33 11.33 11.00 4.67 15.67 23.00 2.33 25.33
MBA Public Accounting
7 9 15
# of FTE
Students 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 1.67 3.67 2.00 2.33 4.33 9.00 2.00 11.00
Total Graduate Accounting Manhattan
8 4 13 17 8 21 29 13 21 34 32 13 45
# of FTE
Students 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 4.33 8.33 8.00 7.00 15.00 13.00 7.00 21.00 32.00 4.33 36.33
# of FTE
Faculty assigned to the program** 0.83 1.88 1.58 1.67 1.83
FTE
Student/
FTE
Faculty
Ratio*** 4.01 4.43 9.49 12.57 19.85
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 8

MAJORS
F
Majors
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
P Total F P Total F P Total F P
Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors
Total
Majors
FTE MAJORS
35 8 43 27 13 40 28 12
Total
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
# of FTE faculty assigned to the program
FTE Student/FTE Faculty
Ratio
Important Notes:
FTE Students = Number of FT Students + (number of PT Students/3)
FTE Faculty = Number of FT Faculty + (number of PT Faculty/3)
This methodology is used by SJU for all external reporting.
40 23 11 34
F
FTE
Fall 2010
P Total
FTE FTE
F
FTE
Fall 2011
P Total
FTE FTE
F
FTE
Fall 2012
P Total
FTE FTE
F
FTE
Fall 2013
P Total
FTE FTE
35 2.667 37.667 27 4.333 31.333 28 4 32 23 3.667 26.667
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 9

5b. Below you will find the credit hours the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty
(including administrators) and the total credit hours consumed by non-majors.
Credit Hours Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009
Taught
FT Faculty
#
3550
%
68%
#
3718
%
69%
#
4576
%
71%
#
5602
%
81%
#
5488
%
74%
PT Faculty
Total
% consumed by Non-
Majors
1698 32%
5248 100%
32%
1669
5387
31%
100%
32%
1906
6482
29%
100%
29%
1312
6914
19%
100%
41%
1905
7393
26%
100%
22%
Credit Hrs Taught
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
5,751 77.1% 4,571 66.6% 4,621 76.5% 4,684 79.0%
1,706 22.9% 2,293 33.4% 1,423 23.5% 1,245 21.0%
Total
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
7,457 100% 6,864 100% 6,044 100% 5,929
0.0%
100%
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
1,620 21.7% 1,446 21.1% 1,344 22.2% 1,431 24.1%
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 10

5c. Below you will find the number of courses the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty (including administrators).
Courses Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009
Taught # % # % # % # % # %
FT Faculty
PT Faculty
Total
56
26
82
68%
32%
100%
59
25
84
70%
30%
100%
65
24
89
73%
27%
100%
66
18
84
79%
21%
100%
71
26
97
73%
27%
100%
Courses Taught
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
Total
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
69 76.7% 80 70.2% 80 79.2% 80 80.8%
21 23.3% 34 29.8% 21 20.8% 19 19.2%
90
0.0%
100% 114
0.0%
100% 101
0.0%
100% 99
0.0%
100%
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 11

5d. What is the representative nature of faculty in terms of demographics, tenure and diversity? (See departmental information on next page). How well does this support the program? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
Gender
Male
Female
Total
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
FT PT
Tot al FT PT
Tot al FT PT
Tot al FT PT
Tot al FT PT
Tot al
# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %
1
4 74%
1
1 61% 25
1
4 70%
1
4 78% 28
1
5 71%
1
1 73% 26
1
4 70% 9 82% 23
1
5 71%
12
86% 27
8 5 26% 7 39% 12 6 30% 4 22% 10 6 29% 4 27% 10 6 30% 2 18% 8 6 29% 2 14%
1
9
100
%
1
8
100
% 37
2
0
100
%
1
8
100
% 38
2
1
100
%
1
5
100
% 36
2
0
100
%
1
1
100
% 31
2
1
100
%
1
4
100
% 35
Ethnicity
Black 1 5% 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 6% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 2 18% 2 0 0% 2 14% 2
Hispanic
Asian
White
0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0% 1 9% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0
3 16% 1 6%
1 1
5 79%
4
4 78% 29
0
1
7
0%
85%
3
1
0
17%
56%
3
27
3
1
7
14%
81%
1
1
3
7%
87%
4
30
3
1
6
15%
80%
1
6
9%
55%
4
22
3
1
6
14%
76%
1
1
0
7%
71%
4
26
3 Unknown 0 0% 3 17% 3 3 15% 4 22% 7 1 5% 1 7%
Total
1
9
100
%
1
8
100
% 37
2
0
100
%
1
8
100
% 38
2
1
100
%
1
5
100
%
2 1 5% 1 9%
36
2
0
100
%
1
1
100
%
2 2 10% 1 7%
31
2
1
100
%
1
4
1000
% 35
Tenure
Status
1
6 84% Tenured
Tenure-
Track 3 16%
Not
Applicable 0 0%
Total
1
9
100
%
16
3
0
19
1
8
2
0
2
0
90%
10%
0%
100
%
18
2
0
20
1
8
3
0
2
1
86%
14%
0%
100
%
18
3
0
21
1
7
3
0
2
0
85%
15%
0%
100
%
17
3
0
20
1
7
4
0
2
1
81%
19%
0%
100
%
17
4
0
21
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 12

Total
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Gender
Male
Female
Total
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
American Indian/Alaskan
Native
White
2 or More Races
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
Unknown
Total
FT
2010
PT
# % # %
Total FT
2011
PT
# % # %
Total
#
FT
%
2012
PT
# %
14 70% 9 82% 23 15 71% 12 75% 27 17 71% 11 92%
6 30% 2 18% 8 6 29% 4 25% 10 7 29% 1 8%
20 11 31 21 16 37 24 12
0% 2 18%
0% 0%
3 15% 1 9%
2
0
4 3
0%
0%
14%
2
3
13%
0%
19%
2
0
6 5
0%
0%
21%
3
2
25%
0%
17%
0
7
3
Total FT
# % #
2013
PT
%
Total
28 18 72% 12 100% 30
8 7 28% 0% 7
36 25 12 37
0% 1 8%
0% 1 8%
5 20% 3 25%
1
8
1
0% 0% 0 0% 0% 0 0% 0%
17 85% 7 64% 24 17 81% 10 63% 27 18 75% 6 50%
1 1
0% 1 9%
20 11
15 75%
3 15%
2 10%
20
1 0% 1 6%
31 21 16
15 15 71%
3
2
20
4
2
21
19%
10%
1
37 24
4
2
21
15 15 63%
7
2
24
0%
29%
8%
1
12
8%
0 0% 0%
24 19 76% 7 58%
1
1 0%
36 25 12
15 16 64%
7 8 32%
2 1 4%
24 25
0%
16
8
1
25
0
37
0
26
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 13

5e. What evidence exists that the program’s faculty have engaged in research and scholarship on teaching and/or learning in the program’s field of study? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
5f. What initiatives have been taken in the past five years to promote faculty development in support of the program? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
5g. The table below shows the amount of external funding received by the department. If available, please provide the dollar amount of externally funded research for full-time faculty supporting the program under review. (Program dollar amounts are available through departmental records.)
Fiscal Year
External
Funding 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
External
Funding 09/10
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
Fiscal Year
10/11 11/12 12/13
- - - -
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 14

5h. Please comment on the table below that shows trends in overall course evaluation and instructional vibrancy for your program (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011 2012 2013
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011 2012 2013
Public
Accounting
(M)
Tobin College of Business
Total Graduate
-
4.09
4.14
-
4.24
4.16
-
4.25
4.30
-
4.36
4.37
-
4.49
4.39
-
4.50
4.52
Note: Institutional Vibrancy is the average of the first 14 questions on the course evaluation, with questions pertaining to course organization, communication, faculty-student interaction, and assignments/grading. All course evaluation questions range from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).
5i. What percentage of full time faculty assigned to this program have terminal degrees or industry certifications renewed within the past 2 years? Comment. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 5. Comments: Indicate to what extent the program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals. Include references from 5a – 5i. (Suggested limit 1 page)
Standard 5. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 6. The program has adequate resources to meet its goals and objectives. And, it is cost-effective.
6a. Narrative/Supportive Technological Environment - Comment on classrooms and labs meeting industry-standards for quality and availability of hardware, software, and peripherals; library space, holdings and services; science laboratories, TV studios, art/computer graphic labs; etc. (Suggested limit 1 page)
6b. Narrative/ Supportive Physical Environment - Comment on level of faculty and student satisfaction with HVAC; faculty and student satisfaction with classroom lighting, crowdedness, and acoustics; flexible teaching environments, and faculty offices, etc.. (Suggested limit 1 page)
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 15

6c. To what extent has the University funded major capital projects, e.g., renovations, which are linked directly to the program during the past five years? (Bulleted list)
6d. If external data that describes the cost effectiveness of the program has been provided by your School/College
Dean, please comment on the program’s cost-effectiveness. (Suggested limit 1 page)
Standard 6. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 7. Effective actions have been taken based on the findings of the last program review and plans have
been initiated for the future.
Comments: (Suggested limit 1page)
TCB_ACC_PUB.ACCT_MS_M Self-Study Template 16