AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: Tobin College of Business
Program Reviewed: Marketing BS SI
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_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
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
2007
High School Average
2008
Program
1004
1087
1120
1085
School/
College
1044
1072
1051
1125
University
1068
1075
1075
1087
2009
2005
1077
2006
2007
2008
2009
85
89
91
88
88
1108
87
88
88
88
88
1092
86
87
87
87
88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010
marketing
Fall 2011
1,200
Fall 2012
1,027
Fall 2013
1,050
1,100
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010
marketing
Fall 2011
92
Fall 2012
83
Fall 2013
88
89
SAT Scores
High School Average
2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
School/
College - SI
1111
1054
1116
1080
88
85
88
89
Total
University
1097
1087
1096
1104
87
87
88
89
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
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
Mathematics
Total
14,762
10.9%
474
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
100%
100%
86%
86%
75%
4
3
75%
School/
College
76
75
80
90
90
64
53
83%
78%
78%
78%
79%
76%
3268
2557
78%
University
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
MKT
3
2010
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
3
100%
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Total
%
2
2011
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
2
100%
Total
%
4
2012
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
2
50% 2
Total
%
50%
4
Returned
DNR
#
%
#
4
100%
%
Self-Study Template 3
Fall
2009
2010
2011
2012**
# Fresh
# Ret
%
School/
College - SI
93%
85%
77%
42
36
86%
Total University
78%
78%
76%
2757
2195
80%
* The % of students started in Fall 2012 and returned to the program in Fall 2013
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Fall
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Program
100%
67%
67%
60%
67%
School/
College
Average Rate
67%
76%
78%
71%
64%
University
64%
59%
61%
61%
53%
2004
Total
MKT
2005
Graduated
4
Total
#
%
4
100%
2006
Graduated
#
7
3
Total
Graduated
%
43%
2007
7
#
%
7
100%
Total
Graduated
#
4
1
%
25%
Fall
2004
2005
2006
2007
School/College
Average Rate - SI
58%
68%
66%
68%
Total University
58%
58%
59%
55%
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Not Applicable
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 4
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
2006
2007
2009
Majors
50
59
40
37
31
Minors
0
0
0
0
0
Total
50
59
40
37
31
MAJORS
MKT
BS
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
28
22
17
12
1
5
18
17
BS/MBA
Total
2h.
2008
28
22
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Academic Year
Degrees
Granted
BS
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
24
13
18
16
11
Self-Study Template 5
TCB-UG-SI
MKT
Marketing
BS
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees
Degrees
Degrees
Conferred
Conferred
Conferred
12
13
7
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)
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)
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 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 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.
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
41%
Numeric
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
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 7
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_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 8
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
Fall 2006
# Majors/
FT Faculty
FT
PT
Total
Majors
49
1
50
Minors
FT
55
PT
4
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined
49
1
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
49.00
0.33
Fall 2007
Total
59
FT
39
PT
1
0
Fall 2008
Total
40
FT
35
PT
2
0
Fall 2009
Total
FT
37
30
PT
1
0
Total
31
0
50
55
4
59
39
1
40
35
2
37
30
1
31
49.33
55.00
1.33
56.33
39.00
0.33
39.33
35.00
0.67
35.67
30.00
0.33
30.33
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned to
the program
.68
.66
.42
.41
.39
FTE
Student/
FTE Faculty
Ratio
72.47
84.73
93.25
87.36
76.86
# of Total
FTE Faculty
in the
Department
11.67
10.33
9.67
10.67
11.33
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 9
Fall 2010
F
Fall 2011
P
Total
F
P
Total
MAJORS
25
3
28
19
3
Fall 2010
MAJORS/MINORS
FTE MAJORS
P
Total
22
16
2
Fall 2011
F
Total
18
18
Fall 2012
18
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
25
3
28
19
3
22
16
2
18
18
18
Fall 2010
Total
F
Fall 2013
Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors
Majors
Total
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
25
1
26
19
1
20
16
18
18
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
0.667 16.667
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.
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 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
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
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
Fall 2012
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
2583
98.9%
1803
85.1%
1716
92.3%
1,437
90.7%
30
1.1%
315
14.9%
144
7.7%
147
9.3%
2613
100%
1,491
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
57.1%
0.0%
2118
100%
Fall 2011
1,248
58.9%
0.0%
1860
0.0%
100%
1,584
Fall 2012
1,248
59%
Fall 2013
Percent
Fall 2010
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
61%
Number
0.0%
Total
58%
67.1%
100%
Fall 2013
918
58.0%
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
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
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%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
0.0%
Total
Fall 2012
34
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
100%
0.0%
38
100%
Number
0.0%
34
100%
Percent
0.0%
32
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
%
#
PT
%
Gender
Male
Female
8
2
80%
20%
5
0
100%
0%
Total
10
100%
5
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
White
Unknown
0
0
3
7
0
0%
0%
30%
70%
0%
Total
10
100%
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Total
8
2
0
10
80%
20%
0%
100%
2006
#
%
#
PT
%
13
2
7
2
78%
22%
4
0
100%
0%
100%
15
9
100%
4
0
0
0
5
0
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0
0
3
12
0
0
0
3
6
0
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
5
100%
15
9
100%
8
2
0
10
7
2
0
9
78%
22%
0%
100%
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Total
FT
2007
Total
FT
PT
%
#
%
#
11
2
7
2
78%
22%
1
1
50%
50%
100%
13
9
100%
2
1
0
0
3
0
25%
0%
0%
75%
0%
1
0
3
9
0
0
0
3
6
0
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
4
100%
13
9
100%
7
2
0
9
8
1
0
9
89%
11%
0%
100%
2008
Total
FT
2009
PT
%
#
%
#
PT
%
8
4
7
4
64%
36%
1
0
100%
0%
8
4
100%
12
11
100%
1
100%
12
0
0
0
2
0
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0
0
3
9
0
0
0
3
8
0
0%
0%
27%
73%
0%
0
0
0
1
0
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0
0
3
9
0
2
100%
12
11
100%
1
100%
12
7
3
0
10
7
3
1
11
64%
27%
9%
100%
#
%
#
8
3
7
3
70%
30%
1
1
50%
50%
100%
11
10
100%
2
0
0
0
2
0
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0
0
3
8
0
0
0
3
7
0
0%
0%
30%
70%
0%
2
100%
11
10
100%
8
1
0
9
7
3
0
10
70%
30%
0%
100%
Total
FT
Total
Self-Study Template 13
7
3
1
11
2010
FT
2011
PT
#
%
#
%
Male
8
67%
1
100%
Female
4
33%
0
0%
Total
12
Total
FT
2012
PT
#
%
#
%
9
6
60%
3
100%
4
4
40%
0%
13
10
Total
FT
2013
PT
#
%
#
%
9
7
64%
3
75%
4
4
36%
1
25%
13
11
Total
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
10
7
64%
1
33%
8
5
4
36%
2
67%
6
15
11
25%
1
1
9%
2
0%
Gender
1
3
4
3
14
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
3
Native American
White
9
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
25%
0%
3
0%
0%
0
100%
10
0%
0
75%
1
2
8
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
20%
0%
2
0%
0%
0
100%
11
0%
0
80%
3
0%
2
9
1
0%
0%
0
18%
0%
2
0%
0%
0
75%
12
0%
0
82%
3
8
33%
2
0%
0%
0
18%
0%
2
0%
0
67%
10
0%
0
73%
1
2
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_MKTG_BS_SI
11
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
Fiscal Year
External
Funding
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
-
-
-
-
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)
Marketing
(SI)
Tobin College
of Business
Total
Undergraduate
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
4.60
4.34
4.81
4.68
4.53
4.89
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).
TCB_MKT_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 15
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)
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_MKTG_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 16