AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: Tobin College of Business
Program Reviewed: Business (Marketing) MBA 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)
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a.
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
Not Applicable
2b.
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
Not Applicable
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Not Applicable
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 1
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Fall
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
School/College
Average Rate
508
511
507
522
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
Program
Fall 2010
Business Administration
Marketing
MBA
Q
Fall 2010
Peter J.Tobin Coll of Bus-Grad
Fall 2011
517
Fall 2011
540
Fall 2012
558
Fall 2012
563
Fall 2013
554
540
Fall 2013
549
542
General test percentage distribution of scores within intended graduate major field that is based on the profile of GMAT
candidates, 2011-12.
GMAT®
Degree Pursued
Gender
Master's in Business
Administration (MBA)
Men: Number
Mean Total
Score
Women:
Number
Mean Total
Score
Total: Number
Mean Total Score
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
2010-11
2011-12
86,926
94,833
555
50,694
516
560
56,554
523
137,620
151,387
541
546
Self-Study Template 2
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)
2g.
Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
Fall
Number of Students
2005
2007
2008
2009
Majors
93
91
71
64
77
Minors
0
0
0
0
0
Total
93
91
71
64
77
BUS (MKT)
2h.
2006
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
MBA
80
64
48
39
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Academic Year
Degrees
Granted
MBA
TCB-GR
MARKETING
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
21
34
34
34
29
MBA
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
32
33
32
Self-Study Template 3
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
Master's
Local
4,898
National 177,684
5,532
5,719
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_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 4
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_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 5
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
Market and Research Analysts
Advertising, Marketing,
Promotions, Public Relations
Managers, & Sales Managers
Percent
Numeric
41%
116,600
14%
29,400
Occupations having the
largest numerical increase
in employment
Market and Research
Analysts
Change, 2010-20
Percent
Numeric
41%
116,600
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow Much Faster Than Average - Increase 21% or More %
Market and Research Analysts
Percent
Numeric
41%
116,600
Changes, 2010-20
Grow About as Fast as Average - Increase 7 to 14.9%
Advertising, Marketing, Promotions, Public Relations
Managers, & Sales Managers
Percent
Numeric
14%
29,400
*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
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 6
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
Majors
& Minors
Combined
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned to
the
program
FTE
Student/
FTE Faculty
Ratio
# of Total
FTE Faculty
in the
Departmen
t
FT
45
Fall 2005
PT
Total
48
93
0
45
48
45.0
0
16.0
0
FT
46
Fall 2006
PT
Total
45
91
0
FT
30
Fall 2007
PT
Total
41
71
0
FT
28
Fall 2008
PT
Total
36
64
0
FT
47
Fall 2009
PT
Total
30
77
0
93
46
45
91
30
41
71
28
36
64
47
30
77
61.0
0
46.0
0
15.0
0
61.0
0
30.0
0
13.6
7
43.6
7
28.0
0
12.0
0
40.0
0
47.0
0
10.0
0
57.0
0
1.27
1.03
0.75
0.71
0.98
48.1
7
59.4
9
58.3
2
56.6
4
58.1
5
11.6
7
10.3
3
9.67
10.6
7
11.3
3
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 7
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
MAJORS
53
27
80
48
16
Fall 2010
Total
Fall 2012
FTE MAJORS
64
36
12
Fall 2011
48
31
8
Fall 2012
39
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
53
9
62
48
5.333
53.333
36
4
40
31
2.667
33.667
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.
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 8
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
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
1437
58%
1815
69%
1977
72%
2121
85%
2295
90%
PT Faculty
1023
42%
810
31%
750
28%
378
15%
261
10%
Total
2460
100%
2625
100%
2727
100%
2499
100%
2556
100%
FT Faculty
% consumed
by
NonMajors
Credit Hrs Taught
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
49%
Fall 2010
53%
Fall 2011
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
2583
98.9%
1803
85.1%
1716
92.3%
30
1.1%
315
14.9%
144
7.7%
2613
100%
1,491
57.1%
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
0.0%
2118
100%
Fall 2011
1,248
58.9%
61%
Number
Percent
1,437
90.7%
147
9.3%
0.0%
1860
0.0%
100%
1,584
Fall 2012
1,248
59%
Fall 2013
Percent
Fall 2010
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
Fall 2012
Number
0.0%
Total
58%
67.1%
100%
Fall 2013
918
58.0%
Self-Study Template 9
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
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
27
68%
24
67%
25
76%
30
86%
FT Faculty
20
61%
PT Faculty
13
39%
13
33%
12
33%
8
24%
5
14%
Total
33
100%
40
100%
36
100%
33
100%
35
100%
Courses Taught
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2013
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
33
97.1%
34
89.5%
30
88.2%
27
84.4%
1
2.9%
4
10.5%
4
11.8%
5
15.6%
0.0%
Total
Fall 2012
34
100%
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
0.0%
38
100%
Number
0.0%
34
100%
Percent
0.0%
32
100%
Self-Study Template 10
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
%
#
PT
%
Gender
Male
Female
Total
8
2
10
80%
20%
100%
5
0
5
100%
0%
100%
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
White
Unknown
Total
0
0
3
7
0
10
0%
0%
30%
70%
0%
100%
0
0
0
5
0
5
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
100%
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Total
8
2
0
10
80%
20%
0%
100%
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
2006
Total
#
FT
%
#
PT
%
13
2
15
7
2
9
78%
22%
100%
4
0
4
100%
0%
100%
0
0
3
12
0
15
0
0
3
6
0
9
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
100%
1
0
0
3
0
4
25%
0%
0%
75%
0%
100%
8
2
0
10
7
2
0
9
78%
22%
0%
100%
2007
Total
#
FT
%
#
PT
%
11
2
13
7
2
9
78%
22%
100%
1
1
2
50%
50%
100%
1
0
3
9
0
13
0
0
3
6
0
9
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
100%
0
0
0
2
0
2
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
100%
7
2
0
9
8
1
0
9
89%
11%
0%
100%
2008
Total
#
FT
%
#
PT
%
8
3
11
7
3
10
70%
30%
100%
1
1
2
50%
50%
100%
0
0
3
8
0
11
0
0
3
7
0
10
0%
0%
30%
70%
0%
100%
0
0
0
2
0
2
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
100%
8
1
0
9
7
3
0
10
70%
30%
0%
100%
2009
Total
#
FT
%
#
PT
%
Total
8
4
12
7
4
11
64%
36%
100%
1
0
1
100%
0%
100%
8
4
12
0
0
3
9
0
12
0
0
3
8
0
11
0%
0%
27%
73%
0%
100%
0
0
0
1
0
1
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0
0
3
9
0
12
7
3
0
10
7
3
1
11
64%
27%
9%
100%
Self-Study Template 11
7
3
1
11
2010
FT
2011
PT
#
%
#
%
8
67%
1
100%
Female
4
33%
0
0%
Total
12
Total
FT
2012
PT
#
%
#
%
6
60%
3
100%
4
4
40%
13
10
Total
FT
2013
PT
#
%
#
%
7
64%
3
75%
4
4
36%
1
25%
13
11
Total
FT
PT
#
%
#
%
7
64%
1
33%
36%
2
67%
Total
Gender
Male
1
9
0%
3
9
10
5
4
15
11
25%
1
1
4
3
8
6
14
Ethnicity
Black
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
Hispanic
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
3
25%
0%
3
2
20%
0%
2
2
18%
0%
2
9
75%
8
80%
9
82%
Asian
Native American
White
0%
1
0%
0
100%
10
0%
0
0%
3
0%
0
100%
11
0%
0
1
0%
3
0%
0
75%
12
0%
0
9%
1
33%
2
0%
0%
0
2
18%
0%
2
8
73%
0%
2
0%
0
67%
10
0%
0
2 or More Races
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
Unknown
Total
0%
12
1
0%
13
10
3
0%
13
11
4
0%
15
11
3
14
Tenure Status
Tenured
7
58%
7
7
70%
7
7
64%
7
7
64%
7
Tenure-Track
2
17%
2
2
20%
2
2
18%
2
3
27%
3
Not Applicable
3
25%
3
1
10%
1
2
18%
2
1
9%
1
Total
12
12
10
10
11
11
11
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
11
Self-Study Template 12
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
-
-
-
-
5h. Please comment on the table below that show trends in overall course evaluation nd instructional vibrancy for y9ou
rprogram (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)
TCB_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 13
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Marketing (Q)
4.02
3.89
3.83
4.40
4.17
4.28
Tobin College
of Business
4.09
4.24
4.25
4.36
4.49
4.50
Total Graduate
4.14
4.16
4.30
4.37
4.39
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)
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_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 14
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_MKT_BUS(MKT)_MBA_Q
Self-Study Template 15