AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: Tobin College of Business
Program Reviewed: Economics BS Q and BA Q
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)
1
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a.
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average (Tobin College)
SAT
2005
2006
High School Average
2007
2008
2009
Program
1251
1211
1142
1265
School/
College
1094
1079
1111
1100
University
1068
1075
1075
1087
2005
1192
2006
2007
2008
2009
87
93
88
91
89
1112
87
87
88
87
89
1092
86
87
87
87
88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Computed
economics
Fall 2012
Computed
1,149
Fall 2013
Computed
1,184
Computed
1,132
1,149
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
High School
economics
Fall 2012
High School
87
Fall 2013
High School
89
High School
86
90
SAT Scores
High School Average
2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
School/
College - Q
1111
1113
1116
1112
87
87
87
89
Total University
1097
1087
1096
1104
87
87
88
89
2
Intended college major for 2012 college-bound seniors
TestTakers
SAT
Intended College Major
Mean
Scores
Number
Percent
(%)
Critical
Reading
14,762
10.9%
474
Business Management, Marketing, and Related Support
Services
Mathemati Tota
cs
l
511
985
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
2b.
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rates (Tobin College)
Fall
2003
2004*
2005
2006
2007
2008**
# Fresh
# Ret
%
Program
100%
100%
75%
75%
92%
11
10
91%
School/
College
79%
74%
81%
81%
75%
445
346
78%
University
78%
78%
78%
79%
76%
3268
2557
78%
Note* The % of students started in Fall 2004 and returned to the program in Fall 2005
** The % of students started in Fall 2008 and returned to the program in Fall 2009
2009
Total
ECO
20
2010
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
14
70%
6
30%
Total
15
2011
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
13
87%
2
13%
Total
21
2012
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
15
71%
6
29%
Total
30
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
22
73%
8
27%
3
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate (Tobin College)
Fall
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Program
44%
58%
33%
78%
75%
School/
College
Average Rate
63%
62%
65%
63%
62%
University
64%
59%
61%
61%
58%
2004
Total
2005
Graduated
#
ECO
5
Total
Graduated
%
4
#
80%
2006
8
5
Total
Graduated
%
63%
2007
#
8
5
Total
Graduated
%
63%
#
13
9
%
69%
Fall
2004
2005
2006
2007
School/College
Average Rate Q/M
59%
58%
61%
59%
Total University
58%
58%
59%
55%
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Not Applicable
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)
4
2g.
Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
Tobin College
Fall
Number of Students
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Majors
39
42
52
70
78
Minors
0
0
0
1
0
Total
39
42
52
71
78
MAJORS
ECOZ
BS/MBA
ECOY
BS/MS
ECO
BS
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
3
6
1
Total
80
86
101
97
80
86
104
104
2h.
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Tobin College
Academic Year
TCB-UG
Degrees
Granted
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
BS
10
5
7
10
14
ECO
Economics
BS
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees
Conferred
Degrees Conferred
Degrees
Conferred
13
18
15
5
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 45-Social Sciences.
20092010
20102011
20112012
Bachelors
Local
3,417
National 137,582
3,423
3,322
142,145
143,422
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)
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)
6
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 th eUniversity’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.
7
Fastest growing occupations and occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment by level of
education and training projected.
Change, 2010-20
Fastest Growing Occupations
Percent
Numeric
Personal Financial Advisors
32%
66,400
Financial Analysts
23%
54,200
Financial Managers
9%
46,300
Occupations having the
largest numerical increase
in employment
Personal Financial Advisors
Change, 2010-20
Percent
32%
Numeric
66,400
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow Much Faster Than Average - Increase 21% or More
Percent
Numeric
Personal Financial Advisors
32%
66,400
Financial Analysts
23%
54,200
Changes, 2010-20
Grow About as Fast as Average - Increase 7 to 14.9%
Financial Managers
Percent
Numeric
9%
46,300
*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)
8
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)
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
Majors
FT
PT
36
3
Minors
Fall 2006
Total
39
FT
PT
39
3
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined
39
3
39
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
36
1
37
Fall 2007
Total
42
FT
51
PT
1
39
3
1
42
40
51
51
Total
FT
PT
52
68
0
1
1
52
69
0.33
51.33
0
39
Fall 2008
69
2
Fall 2009
Total
70
FT
77
PT
1
1
2
71
0.67
69.67
Total
78
0
77
77
1
78
0.33
77.33
9
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
81
81
85
2
Fall 2010
MAJORS/MINORS
FTE MAJORS
87
100
5
Fall 2011
105
101
3
Fall 2012
104
Fall 2013
F
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
83
83
87
2
89
101
5
106
101
3
104
Fall 2010
Total
Fall 2013
F
MAJORS
Total
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
F
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
83
83
87
0.667
87.667
101
1.667
102.667
101
1
102
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
# of FTE faculty assigned
to the program
FTE Student/FTE Faculty
Ration
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.
The figure for majors includes first and any second majors.
10
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
Taught
Fall 2005
#
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
5760
66%
5985
68%
6042
64%
7170
78%
5949
75%
PT Faculty
2985
34%
2826
32%
3351
36%
2049
22%
2028
25%
Total
8745
100%
8811
100%
9393
100%
9219
100%
7977
100%
FT Faculty
% consumed
by
Non-Majors
62%
Credit Hrs Taught
66%
Fall 2010
Number
Fall 2011
Percent
Number
59%
56%
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
5,409
75.7%
4,869
78.7%
4,200
70.3%
4,659
76.7%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
1,740
24.3%
1,317
21.3%
1,776
29.7%
1,416
23.3%
0.0%
Total
7,149
100%
0.0%
6,186
Fall 2010
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
4,107
57.4%
100%
Fall 2011
3,591
0.0%
5,976
100%
0.0%
6,075
Fall 2012
58.1%
3,900
57%
65.3%
100%
Fall 2013
3,582
59.0%
11
5c.
Below you will find the number of courses the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time
faculty (including administrators).
Courses
Taught
Fall 2005
#
Fall 2006
%
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
68
68%
72
69%
76
75%
69
71%
FT Faculty
69
66%
PT Faculty
36
34%
32
32%
33
31%
25
25%
28
29%
Total
105
100%
100
100%
105
100%
101
100%
97
100%
Courses Taught
Fall 2010
Number
Fall 2011
Percent
Number
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
64
75.3%
71
77.2%
63
71.6%
71
78.0%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
21
24.7%
21
22.8%
25
28.4%
20
22.0%
Total
0.0%
85
100%
-
0.0%
92
100%
-
0.0%
88
100%
0.0%
91
100%
12
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)
2005
FT
2006
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Gender
Male
Female
Total
23
5
28
82%
18%
100%
20
3
23
87%
13%
100%
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
White
Unknown
Total
1
0
9
18
0
28
4%
0%
32%
64%
0%
100%
0
2
7
14
0
23
0%
9%
30%
61%
0%
100%
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Total
23
5
0
28
82%
18%
0%
100%
TCB_ECO_ECON_BS_Q
FT
2007
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
43
8
51
22
6
28
79%
21%
100%
16
3
19
84%
16%
100%
1
2
16
32
0
51
1
0
9
18
0
28
4%
0%
32%
64%
0%
100%
0
1
5
11
2
19
0%
5%
26%
58%
11%
100%
23
5
0
28
25
3
0
28
89%
11%
0%
100%
FT
2008
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
38
9
47
22
5
27
81%
19%
100%
16
2
18
89%
11%
100%
1
1
14
29
2
47
0
1
9
17
0
27
0%
4%
33%
63%
0%
100%
0
2
4
11
1
18
0%
11%
22%
61%
6%
100%
25
3
0
28
24
3
0
27
89%
11%
0%
100%
FT
2009
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
38
7
45
21
5
26
81%
19%
100%
11
2
13
85%
15%
100%
0
3
13
28
1
45
1
0
9
16
0
26
4%
0%
35%
62%
0%
100%
0
1
5
6
1
13
0%
8%
38%
46%
8%
100%
24
3
0
27
23
3
0
26
88%
12%
0%
100%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
32
7
39
21
5
26
81%
19%
1000%
15
2
17
88%
12%
100%
36
7
43
1
1
14
22
1
39
1
0
9
16
0
26
4%
0%
35%
62%
0%
200%
0
1
6
9
1
17
0%
6%
35%
53%
6%
100%
1
1
14
25
1
43
23
3
0
26
24
2
0
26
92%
8%
0%
100%
Self-Study Template 13
24
2
0
26
2010
FT
2011
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
19
79%
9
82%
Female
5
21%
2
18%
Total
24
FT
2012
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
28
18
78%
10
83%
7
5
22%
2
17%
35
23
9%
2
1
4%
7
30%
14
FT
2013
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
28
19
79%
14
93%
7
5
21%
1
7%
35
24
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
33
22
81%
9
90%
31
6
5
19%
1
10%
6
39
27
Gender
11
12
15
10
37
Ethnicity
Black
1
4%
Asian
American Indian/Alaskan
Native
7
29%
White
15
2 or More Races
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
1
Hispanic
0%
0%
0
1
9%
8
0%
0
63%
8
73%
23
0%
1
9%
1
0%
Unknown
Total
1
0%
0%
1
0%
0
2
17%
9
0%
0
61%
9
75%
23
0%
1
8%
1
0%
1
24
11
35
23
96%
23
22
0%
0
4%
1
1
24
23
0%
0%
0
0%
1
7%
1
7
29%
4
27%
11
0%
0
16
67%
9
60%
25
0%
1
7%
1
0%
1
12
35
24
96%
22
22
0%
0
2
4%
1
0%
0%
0
0%
1
10%
1
9
33%
1
10%
10
0%
0
17
63%
8
80%
25
0%
0
0%
1
15
0%
39
27
10
37
92%
22
23
85%
23
8%
2
2
7%
2
0%
0
2
7%
2
24
27
Tenure Status
Tenured
23
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
1
Total
24
TCB_ECO_ECON_BS_Q
23
24
27
Self-Study Template 14
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
$ Amount
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
Program
$ Amount Department
18,107
Fiscal Year
External
Funding
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
-
TCB_ECO_ECON_BS_Q
10,000
7,562
10,000
Self-Study Template 15
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)
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
Economics
3.65
3.80
3.76
4.01
4.16
4.11
(Q)
Tobin College
3.95
3.98
4.00
4.22
4.26
4.2i8
of Business
Total
4.01
3.21
4.07
4.27
4.29
4.35
Undergraduate
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).
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)
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)
TCB_ECO_ECON_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 16
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_ECO_ECON_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 17