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