AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: St. John’s College
Program Reviewed: Psychology BA 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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template1
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a.
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
High School Average
SAT
Program
2005
1105
2006
1060
2007
1063
2008
1083
2009
1125
2005
89
2006
87
2007
88
2008
89
2009
88
School/
College
University
1014
1068
1057
1075
1074
1075
1069
1087
1097
1092
85
86
87
87
88
87
88
87
88
88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Computed
Fall 2012
Computed
psychology
1,009
Fall 2013
Computed
1,160
Computed
1,089
1,099
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
High School
psychology
Fall 2012
High School
87
Fall 2013
High School
89
High School
88
SAT Scores
88
High School Average
2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
School/
College - SI
1079
1113
1097
1104
87
88
88
90
Total
University
1097
1087
1096
1104
87
87
88
89
SAT
Intended College Major
Psychology
Test-Takers
Mean Scores
Number Percent (%) Critical Reading
7,261
5.4%
488
Mathematics
Total
478
966
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template2
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
2b.
Fall
2003
2004*
2005
2006
2007
Program
94%
80%
86%
84%
74%
# Fresh
22
2008**
# Ret
20
School/
College
University
76%
78%
70%
78%
79%
78%
83%
79%
77%
76%
102
3268
86
2557
%
91%
84%
78%
Note* The % of student started in Fall 2004 and returned to the program in Fall 2005
** The % of student started in Fall 2008 and returned to the program in Fall 2009
2009
Total
PSY
26
2010
Returned
#
%
DNR
#
%
22
4
85%
15%
Total
11
2011
Returned
#
%
DNR
#
%
9
2
82%
Total
18%
15
2012
Returned
#
%
DNR
#
%
11
4
73%
Total
27%
7
Returned
#
%
DNR
#
%
6
1
86%
14%
Fall
2009
2010
2011
2012**
# Fresh
# Ret
%
School/
College - SI
93%
85%
77%
42
36
86%
Total University
78%
78%
76%
2757
2195
80%
2002
81%
2003
56%
69%
61%
58%
58%
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Program
School/
College
Average Rate
University
PSY
2004
Total
Graduated
#
%
10 5
50%
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
1999
70%
2000
74%
Fall
2001
58%
74%
64%
65%
59%
60%
61%
2005
Total
Graduated
#
%
21 #
81%
2006
Total
Graduated
#
%
19 #
79%
2007
Total Graduated
#
%
27 #
59%
Self-Study Template3
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
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
Majors
Minors
Total
MAJORS
2005
85
3
88
PSY
2006
76
3
79
2007
79
3
82
2008
98
3
101
2009
101
0
101
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
BA
86
69
55
55
1
1
1
BA/MA
PSY7
BA/MA
1
Total
MINORS
Total
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
86
70
56
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Psychology
2
3
2
4
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Total
Total
Total
Total
88
73
58
57
61
Self-Study Template4
2h.
Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Degrees
Granted
BA
SJC-UG-SI
PSY
04/05
15
Psychology
Academic Year
05/06
06/07
07/08
27
24
9
BA
08/09
23
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees
Conferred
Degrees
Conferred
Degrees
Conferred
24
22
17
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 42-Psychology.
20092010
20102011
20112012
Bachelors
Local
1,938
1,813
1,995
National
97,213
100,893
108,986
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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template5
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.
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template6
Change, 2010-20
Fastest Growing Occupations
Psychologists
Percent
Numeric
22%
37,700
Occupations having the
largest numerical
increase in employment
Psychologists
Change, 2010-20
Percent
22%
Numeric
37,700
Changes, 2010-20
Grow faster than average - Increase 15 to 20.9%
Psychologists
Percent
Numeric
22%
37,700
*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
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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template7
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/
Faculty
Ratio
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
FT
79
3
PT
6
0
Total
85
3
FT
72
3
PT
4
0
Total
76
3
FT
76
3
PT
3
0
Total
79
3
FT
96
3
PT
2
0
Total
98
3
FT
98
0
PT
3
0
Total
101
0
82
6
88
75
4
79
79
3
82
99
2
101
98
3
101
82.00
2.00
84.00
75.00
1.33
76.33
79.00
1.00
80.00
99.00
0.67
99.67
98.00
1.00
99.00
3
2.33
5.33
3
2
5
3
1.67
4.67
3
1.67
4.67
3
1.67
4.67
15.76
15.27
17.13
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
21.34
Fall 2012
21.20
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
F
P
Total
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
MAJORS
84
2
86
67
Fall 2010
3
70
Fall 2011
57
57
Fall 2012
54
3
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
F
Total
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
Minors
MINORS
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
1
1
2
5
1
6
4
57
4
5
5
Self-Study Template8
Fall 2010
Total
MAJORS/MINORS
Fall 2011
FTE MAJORS
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
F
P
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
85
3
88
72
4
76
61
61
59
3
62
Fall 2010
Total
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
F
P
Total
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
FTE
85
1
86
72
1.333
73.333
61
61
59
1
60
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 STJ for all external reporting.
The figure for majors includes first and any second majors.
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template9
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
FT Faculty
Fall 2005
#
%
4860 69%
Fall 2006
#
%
4733
68%
Fall 2007
#
%
4598
67%
Fall 2008
#
%
4911
71%
Fall 2009
#
%
5465
76%
PT Faculty
Total
2139 31%
6999 100%
2244
6977
2262
6860
2010
6921
1719
7184
25%
%
consumed
by
NonMajors
Credit Hrs
Taught
32%
100%
24%
Fall 2010
Number
33%
100%
23%
Number
Fall 2012
Percent
24%
100%
22%
Fall 2011
Percent
29%
100%
Number
20%
Fall 2013
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
5,048
65.4%
4,736
58.4%
5,108
65.6%
4,687
63.3%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
2,665
34.6%
3,370
41.6%
2,684
34.4%
2,721
36.7%
0.0%
Total
% Consumed
by Non-Majors
7,713
1,716
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
100%
22.2%
0.0%
8,106
1,891
100%
23.3%
0.0%
7,792
1,819
100%
23.3%
0.0%
7,408
1,436
100%
19.4%
Self-Study Template10
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
FT Faculty
PT Faculty
Total
Courses
Taught
Fall 2005
#
%
55
32
87
63%
37%
100%
Fall 2006
#
%
56
63%
Fall 2007
#
%
60
67%
Fall 2008
#
%
63
69%
Fall 2009
#
%
68
71%
33
89
30
90
28
91
28
96
Fall 2010
Number Percent
37%
100%
33%
100%
Fall 2011
Number Percent
31%
100%
29%
100%
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Number Percent Number Percent
F-T Faculty
63
66.3% 100
62.1% 69
69.7% 65
61.3%
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
32
33.7% 61
37.9% 30
30.3% 41
38.7%
Total
95
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100% 161
100% 99
100%
0.0%
106
100%
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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template11
Departmental Data
2005
FT
2006
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
20
65%
14
45%
Female
11
35%
17
Total
31
100%
Black
2
Hispanic
FT
2007
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
34
18
60%
14
41%
55%
28
12
40%
20
31
100%
62
30
100%
6%
1
3%
3
2
3
10%
1
3%
4
Asian
1
3%
1
3%
White
25
81%
28
Unknown
0
0%
Total
31
100%
Tenured
23
Tenure-Track
FT
2008
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
32
16
55%
15
50%
59%
32
13
45%
15
34
100%
64
29
100%
7%
1
3%
3
2
4
13%
3
9%
7
2
1
3%
1
3%
90%
53
23
77%
28
0
0%
0
0
0%
31
100%
62
30
100%
74%
23
24
5
16%
5
Not Applicable
3
10%
Total
31
100%
FT
2009
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
31
15
50%
14
54%
50%
28
15
50%
12
30
100%
59
30
100%
7%
1
3%
3
3
5
17%
1
3%
6
2
1
3%
1
3%
82%
51
21
72%
26
1
3%
1
0
0%
34
100%
64
29
100%
80%
24
23
5
17%
5
3
1
3%
31
30
100%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
29
15
50%
14
54%
29
46%
27
15
50%
12
46%
27
26
100%
56
30
100%
26
100%
56
10%
0
0%
3
3
10%
0
0%
3
5
17%
0
0%
5
5
17%
1
4%
6
2
1
3%
2
8%
3
1
3%
0
0%
1
87%
47
21
70%
23
88%
44
21
70%
24
92%
45
1
3%
1
0
0%
1
4%
1
0
0%
1
4%
1
30
100%
59
30
100%
26
100%
56
30
100%
26
100%
56
79%
23
24
80%
24
25
80%
25
4
14%
4
4
13%
4
5
17%
5
1
2
7%
2
2
7%
2
1
3%
1
30
29
100%
29
30
100%
30
30
100%
30
Gender
Ethnicity
Tenure Status
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template12
2010
FT
2011
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
15
52%
12
46%
Female
14
48%
14
54%
Total
29
FT
2012
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
27
15
52%
12
48%
28
14
48%
13
52%
55
29
0%
3
3
10%
4%
6
5
17%
0%
1
1
3%
20
69%
FT
2013
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
27
15
52%
13
43%
27
14
48%
17
57%
54
29
0%
3
3
10%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
28
16
52%
16
53%
32
31
15
48%
14
47%
29
59
31
0%
3
3
10%
1
3%
4
Gender
26
25
30
30
61
Ethnicity
Black
3
10%
Hispanic
5
17%
Asian
American
Indian/Alaskan
Native
1
3%
White
20
69%
0%
5
5
17%
2
7%
7
5
16%
3
10%
8
1
4%
2
2
7%
2
7%
4
2
6%
2
7%
4
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
23
92%
43
19
66%
25
83%
44
21
68%
23
77%
44
2 or More Races
0
0%
0
Native
Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
0
0%
0
1
3%
1
0%
Unknown
Total
1
0%
29
24
1
26
0%
0
92%
44
4%
0%
1
0%
55
29
1
25
4%
0%
1
0%
54
29
1
30
3%
1
0%
59
31
30
61
Tenure Status
Tenured
23
79%
23
23
79%
23
26
90%
26
28
90%
28
Tenure-Track
5
17%
5
5
17%
5
2
7%
2
2
6%
2
Not Applicable
1
3%
1
1
3%
1
1
3%
1
1
3%
1
Total
29
29
29
29
29
29
31
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
31
Self-Study Template13
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.)
External
Funding
$ Amount
Program
04/05
$ Amount
1,154,015
Department
External
Funding
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
05/06
Fiscal Year
06/07
07/08
08/09
1,465,723
1,326,898
597,315
793,401
Fiscal Year
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
406,258
821,179
789,022
1,310,434
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)
Psychology (SI)
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
4.18
4.32
4.34
4.28
4.52
4.43
Saint John’s
3.95
4.01
4.00
4.28
4.33
4.33
College
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).
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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template14
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. (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)
LAS-PSY_PSYCH_BA_SI
Self-Study Template15