AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: Tobin College of Business
Program Reviewed: Management BS 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)
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 1
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a.
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
SAT
2005
2006
High School Average
2007
2008
2009
Program
1083
1071
1086
1109
School/
College
1094
1079
1111
1100
University
1068
1075
1075
1087
2005
1126
2006
2007
2008
2009
87
86
88
87
89
1112
87
87
88
87
89
1092
86
87
87
87
88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010
management
Fall 2011
1,083
Fall 2012
1,100
Fall 2013
1,099
1,114
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010
management
Fall 2011
87
Fall 2012
85
Fall 2013
87
89
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
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 2
Intended college major for 2012 college-bound seniors
TestTakers
SAT
Intended College Major
Business Management, Marketing, and Related Support
Services
Mean
Scores
Number
Percent
(%)
Critical
Reading
14,762
10.9%
474
Mathemati Tota
cs
l
511
985
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
2b.
Fall
2003
2004*
2005
2006
2007
2008**
# Fresh
# Ret
%
Program
83%
70%
85%
78%
66%
59
45
76%
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
MGT
55
2010
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
45
82%
10
18%
Total
28
2011
Returned
DNR
Total
#
%
#
%
21
75%
7
25%
2012
Returned
53
DNR
#
%
#
%
40
75%
13
25%
Total
60
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
%
47
78%
13
22%
Fall
2009
2010
2011
2012*
# Fresh
# Ret
%
School/
College - Q/M
79%
83%
76%
376
299
80%
Total University
78%
78%
76%
2757
2195
80%
* The % of students started in Fall 2012 and returned to the program in Fall 2013
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 3
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Fall
1999
2001
2002
2003
Program
60%
59%
65%
60%
63%
School/ College
Average Rate
63%
62%
65%
63%
62%
University
64%
59%
61%
61%
58%
2004
Total
MGT
2000
64
2005
Graduated
#
%
36
56%
Total
114
2006
Graduated
#
%
74
65%
Total
2007
Graduated
113
#
%
71
63%
Total
87
Graduated
#
%
41
47%
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)
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 4
2g.
Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
Fall
Number of Students
2005
2006
2007
2009
Majors
383
410
391
325
307
Minors
0
0
0
0
0
383
410
391
325
307
Total
MAJORS
MGTY
BS/MS
MGT
BS
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
294
307
2
3
300
288
13
29
315
320
BS/MBA
Total
2h.
2008
294
307
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Academic Year
Degrees
Granted
BS
TCB-UG
MGT
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
73
77
63
71
65
Management
BS
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
83
80
83
Self-Study Template 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 52-Business, Management, Marketing,
and Related Support Services.
20092010
20102011
20112012
Bachelors
Local
4,149
National 358,293
4,315
4,362
365,093
366,815
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_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 6
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_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 7
Fastest growing occupations and occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment by level of education
and training projected.
Change, 2010-20
Occupations having the
Change, 2010-20
Fastest Growing Occupations
largest numerical increase
Percent
Numeric
Percent
Numeric
in employment
Financial Managers
9%
46,300
Sales Managers
12%
40,100
Management Analysts
22%
157,200
Human Resource Managers
13%
9,300
22%
Management Analysts
157,200
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow Much Faster Than Average - Increase 21% or More %
Management Analysts
Percent
Numeric
22%
157,200
Changes, 2010-20
Grow About as Fast as Average - Increase 7 to 14.9%
Percent
Numeric
Human Resource Managers
13%
9,300
Sales Managers
12%
40,100
Financial Managers
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)
1. Standards within the discipline
2. Curriculum integrity, coherence, academic internships, teaching excellence, teaching vibrancy, and study
abroad experiences.
3. The University Core competencies
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 8
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.
# Majors/
FT Faculty
Majors
Minors
Fall 2005
FT
PT
Total
359
24
383
0
Fall 2006
FT
PT
Total
393
17
410
0
Fall 2007
FT
PT
Total
378
13
391
0
Fall 2008
FT
PT
Total
317
8
325
0
Fall 2009
FT
PT
Total
296
11
307
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined
359
24
383
393
17
410
378
13
391
317
325
296
11
307
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
359
8
367
393
6
399
378
4
382
317
320
296
4
300
8
3
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned to
the program
5.03
5.17
4.55
3.61
3.76
FTE Student/
FTE Faculty
Ratio
72.99
77.13
83.90
88.67
79.88
# of Total FTE
Faculty in the
Department
20.33
22.00
21.00
17.33
18.00
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 9
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
285
9
294
297
10
Fall 2010
MAJORS/MINORS
FTE MAJORS
307
303
12
Fall 2011
315
314
6
Fall 2012
320
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
285
9
294
297
10
307
303
12
315
314
6
320
Fall 2010
Total
Fall 2013
F
MAJORS
Total
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
285
3
288
297
303
4
307
314
2
316
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
3.333 300.333
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.
The figure for majors includes first and any second majors.
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.
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 10
Credit Hours
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Taught
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
FT Faculty
3323
65%
3153
63%
2518
48%
3650
72%
3919
73%
PT Faculty
1773
35%
1848
37%
2739
52%
1398
28%
1452
27%
Total
5096
100%
5001
100%
5257
100%
5048
100%
5371
100%
% consumed
by
NonMajors
65%
Credit Hrs Taught
68%
Fall 2010
Number
71%
Fall 2011
Percent
Number
72%
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
3,974
78.4%
3,577
81.1%
3,255
79.4%
3,236
82.8%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
1,098
21.6%
831
18.9%
846
20.6%
672
17.2%
0.0%
Total
5,072
100%
0.0%
4,408
Fall 2010
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
3,616
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
71.3%
100%
Fall 2011
2,982
67.6%
0.0%
4,101
100%
0.0%
3,908
Fall 2012
2,857
72%
69.7%
100%
Fall 2013
2,479
63.4%
Self-Study Template 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
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Taught
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
FT Faculty
47
70%
41
61%
35
52%
42
69%
47
71%
PT Faculty
20
30%
26
39%
32
48%
19
31%
19
29%
Total
67
100%
67
100%
67
100%
61
100%
66
100%
Courses Taught
Fall 2010
Number
Fall 2011
Percent
Number
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
46
78.0%
55
80.9%
50
76.9%
56
81.2%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
13
22.0%
13
19.1%
15
23.1%
13
18.8%
0.0%
Total
59
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
100%
0.0%
68
100%
0.0%
65
100%
0.0%
69
100%
Self-Study Template 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
12
5
71%
29%
8
2
80%
20%
Total
17
100%
10
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
White
Unknown
0
0
3
14
0
0%
0%
18%
82%
0%
Total
17
100%
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Total
14
2
1
17
82%
12%
6%
100%
FT
2007
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
20
7
12
5
71%
29%
13
2
87%
13%
100%
27
17
100%
15
0
0
0
10
0
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0
0
3
24
0
0
0
2
15
0
0%
0%
12%
88%
0%
10
100%
27
17
100%
14
2
1
17
14
2
1
17
82%
12%
6%
100%
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
FT
2008
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
25
7
10
5
67%
33%
12
6
67%
33%
100%
32
15
100%
18
2
0
0
13
0
13%
0%
0%
87%
0%
2
0
2
28
0
0
0
3
12
0
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
15
100%
32
15
100%
14
2
1
17
13
1
1
15
87%
7%
7%
100%
FT
2009
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
22
11
9
5
64%
36%
5
5
50%
50%
100%
33
14
100%
10
2
0
1
15
0
11%
0%
6%
83%
0%
2
0
4
27
0
0
0
2
12
0
0%
0%
14%
86%
0%
18
100%
33
14
100%
13
1
1
15
13
0
1
14
93%
0%
7%
100%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
14
10
9
6
60%
40%
6
3
67%
33%
15
9
100%
24
15
100%
9
100%
24
1
0
1
8
0
10%
0%
10%
80%
0%
1
0
3
20
0
1
0
2
12
0
0
0
1
7
1
0
0
1
7
1
0%
0%
11%
78%
11%
1
0
3
19
1
10
100%
24
15
9
9
100%
24
13
1
0
14
13
1
1
15
87%
7%
7%
100%
Self-Study Template 13
13
1
1
15
2010
FT
2011
PT
#
%
#
%
Male
10
63%
5
83%
Female
6
38%
1
17%
Total
16
Total
FT
2012
PT
#
%
#
%
15
10
63%
4
80%
7
6
38%
1
20%
22
16
17%
2
1
6%
2
13%
13
81%
Total
FT
2013
PT
#
%
#
%
14
10
63%
6
86%
7
6
38%
1
14%
21
16
0%
1
1
6%
2
13%
13
81%
Total
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
16
11
65%
6
86%
17
7
6
35%
1
14%
7
23
17
0%
1
1
6%
2
12%
14
82%
Gender
6
5
7
7
24
Ethnicity
Black
1
6%
0%
0%
0
Asian
American Indian/Alaskan
Native
2
13%
0%
2
White
13
81%
Hispanic
1
0%
5
0%
0
83%
18
0%
0
0%
0%
0
1
20%
3
0%
0
4
80%
17
0%
0
0%
0%
0%
0
1
14%
3
0%
0
6
86%
19
0%
0
0%
0%
0%
1
0%
0
1
14%
3
0%
0
6
86%
20
0%
0
0%
2 or More Races
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
Unknown
Total
0%
16
6
0%
22
16
5
0%
21
16
7
0%
23
17
7
24
Tenure Status
Tenured
12
75%
12
11
69%
11
11
69%
11
12
71%
12
Tenure-Track
3
19%
3
4
25%
4
4
25%
4
5
29%
5
Not Applicable
1
6%
1
1
6%
1
1
6%
1
0%
0
Total
16
16
16
16
16
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
16
17
17
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
$ Amount
Funding
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
Program
$ Amount Department
Fiscal Year
External
Funding
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
-
TCB_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
-
-
4,800
Self-Study Template 15
5h.
Please comment on the table below that shows trends in overall course evalutation and instructional vibrancy
for your program (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)
Management
(Q)
Tobin College
of Business
Total
Undergraduate
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
4.22
4.12
4.21
4.44
4.38
4.44
3.95
3.98
4.00
4.22
4.26
4.2i8
4.01
3.21
4.07
4.27
4.29
4.35
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_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 16
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_MGT_MGMT_BS_Q
Self-Study Template 17