AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: The School of Education
Program Reviewed: Early Childhood MSED 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
N/A
2b.
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
N/A
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
N/A
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 1
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
The National Overall Average for verbal is 150.6 and a quantitative of 151.9, based on those tested between August 1,
2011 and April 30, 2013.
Masters Programs in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction do not require GREs for admission.
New Graduate Students GRE Verbal
Mean Scores
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Ir Grev Score
EDU-Q
old
Fall 2012
Ir Grev Score
453
Fall 2013
Ir Grev Score
459
new
Ir Grev Score
424
399
149
149
New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative
Mean Scores
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Ir Greq Score
EDU-Q
old
Fall 2012
Ir Greq Score
489
Fall 2013
Ir Greq Score
535
new
Ir Greq Score
531
480
145
145
As of August 1, 2011, ETS revised the GRE General Test with a new scoring scale. Prior to 8/1/11 on a scale of 200-800(old) and after 8/1/11 on a scale of 130-170(new)
General test percentage distribution of scores within intended graduate major field that is based on the performance of
seniors and non-enrolled college graduates who were tested on the verbal and quantitative examination.
GRE
Intended Graduate Major
Early Childhood*
Test-Takers
835
Mean Score (Verbal)
Mean Score (Quantitative)
148
146
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
2e.
Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions.
(Suggested limit 1/2 page)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 2
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
2008
2009
Majors
68
62
49
40
41
Minors
0
0
0
0
0
Total
68
62
49
40
41
MAJORS
ECC
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
MSED
18
14
NM
ECF
13
9
1
1
14
10
1
MSED
8
1
NM
1
Total
26
17
Fall
Number of
Students
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Combined
15
46
67
68
62
49
40
41
ECC
8
28
48
55
48
39
32
29
ECF
7
18
19
13
14
10
8
12
Comments on trends from the above tables:
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 3
2h.
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Academic Year
Degrees
Granted
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
08/09
MSED
21
13
31
14
15
EDU-GR-Q
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees
Conferred
Degrees
Conferred
Degrees
Conferred
Early Child B-2 & Teac Dis B-2
MSED
Early Child/Dis B-2: Field Chg
MSED
Early Childhood Edu: Career
MSED
8
5
Early Childhood Edu: Field
MSED
5
1
13
9
Total
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
3
10
2
4
16
Self-Study Template 4
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 responses using data provided
below and any other data available. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 2.
Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 5
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.
Fastest Growing
Occupations
Special Education Teachers,
Preschool, Kindergarten and
Elementary School
Change, 2010-20
Percent
17%
Numeric
Occupations having the Change, 2010-20
largest numerical
Percent
Numeric
increase in employment
77,400
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow much faster than average – Increase 15 to 20.9%
Special Education Teachers, Preschool, Kindergarten and
Elementary School
Percent
Numeric
17%
77,400
*For more information please visit: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.toc.htm
Standard 3.
Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 6
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)
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.
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 7
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
# Majors/
FT Faculty
FT
PT
Total
Majors
6
62
68
Minors
FT
3
PT
59
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined
6
62
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
6.00
20.67
Fall 2007
Total
62
FT
4
PT
45
0
Fall 2008
Total
49
FT
0
PT
40
0
Fall 2009
Total
40
FT
12
PT
29
0
Total
41
0
68
3
59
62
4
45
49
0
40
40
12
29
41
26.67
3.00
19.67
22.67
4.00
15.00
19.00
0.00
13.33
13.33
12.00
9.67
21.67
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned
to the
program
0
0
0
0
0
FTE
Student/
FTE
Faculty
Ratio
0
0
0
0
0
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 8
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
5
21
26
4
Fall 2010
Total FTE MAJORS
Fall 2012
13
17
4
Fall 2011
10
14
4
Fall 2012
6
10
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
5
7
12
4
4.333
8.333
4
3.333
7.333
4
2
6
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
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
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
Taught
Fall 2005
#
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
1610
23%
1496
22%
2241
34%
2070
31%
2762
38%
PT Faculty
5345
77%
5177
78%
4332
66%
4665
69%
4587
62%
Total
6955
100%
6673
100%
6573
100%
6735
100%
7349
10%
FT Faculty
%
consumed
by
NonMajors
9%
Credit Hrs Taught
10%
13%
Fall 2010
Number
6%
Fall 2011
Percent
Number
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
6%
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
2,004
31.2%
1,806
32.3%
1,686
32.0%
2,196
45.1%
P-T Faculty (inc Admin)
4,426
68.8%
3,792
67.7%
3,581
68.0%
2,668
54.9%
0.0%
Total
6,430
100.0%
Fall 2010
% Consumed by NonMajors
501
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
0.0%
5,598
100.0%
0.0%
5,267
Fall 2011
8%
586
100.0%
Fall 2012
10%
314
0.0%
4,864
100.0%
Fall 2013
6%
541
11%
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
Taught
Fall 2005
#
Fall 2006
%
FT
Faculty
26
31%
PT
Faculty
58
69%
Total
84
100%
Courses Taught
Fall 2007
Fall 2009
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
22
26%
35
39%
41
32%
40
44%
62
74%
55
61%
88
68%
51
56%
84
100%
90
100%
129
100%
91
100%
2010
Number
Fall 2008
2011
Percent
Number
2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
33
40.7%
43
35.8%
25
33.8%
40
51.3%
P-T Faculty (inc Admin)
48
59.3%
77
64.2%
49
66.2%
38
48.7%
0.0%
Total
81
100.0%
0.0%
120
100.0%
0.0%
74
100.0%
0.0%
78
100.0%
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)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 11
Departmental Data
2005
FT
2006
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
2
14%
23
64%
Female
1
2
86%
13
Total
1
4
Black
FT
2007
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
25
2
13%
30
46%
36%
25
13
87%
35
100%
36 100%
50
15
2
14%
2
6%
4
Hispanic
1
7%
1
3%
Asian
1
7%
0
White
9
64%
Unknown
1
Total
FT
2008
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
32
2
13%
32
49%
54%
48
14
88%
33
100%
65 100%
80
16
2
13%
7
11%
9
2
1
7%
1
2%
0%
1
1
7%
0
33
92%
42
11
73%
7%
0
0%
1
0
0%
1
4
100%
36
100%
50
15
100%
Tenured
8
57%
8
9
Tenure-Track
5
36%
5
Not Applicable
1
7%
Total
1
4
100%
FT
2009
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
34
1
7%
38
54%
51%
47
14
93%
32
100%
65 100%
81
15
100%
2
13%
4
6%
6
2
2
2
13%
1
2%
3
0%
1
1
6%
0
0%
55
85%
66
11
69%
59
2
3%
2
0
0%
1
80
16
100%
60%
9
11
6
40%
6
1
0
0%
14
15
100%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
39
2
11%
32
53%
34
46%
46
16
89%
28
47%
44
70 100%
85
18 100%
60 100%
78
13%
5
7%
7
2
11%
3
5%
5
2
13%
1
1%
3
2
11%
1
2%
3
1
1
7%
0
0%
1
1
6%
0
0%
1
91%
70
10
67%
62
89%
72
13
72%
55 92%
68
2%
1
0
0%
2
3%
2
0
0%
1
1
81
15
100%
85
18 100%
69%
11
11
73%
11
11
61%
11
4
25%
4
4
27%
4
7
39%
7
0
1
6%
1
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
15
16
100%
16
15
100%
15
18 100%
Gender
Ethnicity
65 100%
65 100%
70 100%
2%
60 100%
78
Tenure Status
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 12
18
2010
FT
2011
PT
T
FT
#
%
#
%
#
Male
1
6%
37
52%
38
Female
15
94%
34
48%
49
14
Total
16
87
14
2012
PT
T
%
#
%
0%
44
53%
100%
39
47%
FT
2013
PT
T
#
%
#
%
44
1
7%
25
58%
53
14
93%
18
42%
97
15
FT
PT
T
#
%
#
%
26
2
12%
19
63%
21
32
15
88%
11
37%
26
58
17
Gender
71
83
43
30
47
Ethnicity
Black
2
13%
5
7%
7
2
14%
5
6%
7
3
20%
2
5%
5
3
18%
1
3%
4
Hispanic
2
13%
2
3%
4
2
14%
3
4%
5
1
7%
3
7%
4
1
6%
2
7%
3
Asian
1
6%
0%
1
1
7%
2
2%
3
2
13%
3
7%
5
3
18%
0
0%
3
0%
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
62
87%
73
86%
80
81%
44
59%
27
90%
37
1
1%
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
American Indian/Alaskan Native
White
11
69%
2 or More Races
0%
9
64%
71
0%
9
60%
35
10
1
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Unknown
Total
0%
16
1
71
1%
1
0%
87
14
1
83
1%
1
0%
97
15
0%
43
0
0%
58
17
30
47
Tenure Status
Tenured
11
69%
11
10
71%
10
10
67%
10
10
59%
10
Tenure-Track
5
31%
5
3
21%
3
5
33%
5
7
41%
7
0%
0
1
7%
1
0%
0
0%
0
16
14
Not Applicable
Total
16
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
14
15
15
17
17
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
1,664,288
1,329,166
2,247,935
736,181
603,505
$ Amount
Program *
$ Amount Department
Fiscal Year
External
Funding
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
270,000
296,251
272,859
413,000
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
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 only available through departmental records.)
Comments (Suggested limit ½ page)
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)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 14
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Early Childhood
(Q)
School of
Education
Total Graduate
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.24
4.33
4.3
4.4
4.48
4.49
4.14
4.16
4.3
4.37
4.39
4.52
Note: Instructional 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)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 15
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. (Suggest 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)
EDU_C&I_EARLYCHILD_MSED_Q
Self-Study Template 16