AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE Reporting School/College: St. John’s College Program Reviewed: Social Studies 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_SOC.STUDIES_BA_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 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Program 953 1047 1112 1156 1150 86 84 88 91 86 School/ College 1014 1057 1074 1069 1097 85 87 88 88 88 University 1068 1075 1075 1087 1092 86 87 87 87 88 Freshmen SAT Scores Fall 2011 Computed social studies 1,390 Freshmen High School Average Fall 2011 High School social studies 95 SAT Scores 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 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 2 SAT Test-Takers Intended College Major Mean Scores Number Percent (%) Critical Reading Social Sciences 2,069 1.5% Mathematics Total 536 1087 551 * 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% 100% 100% 60% 5 5 100% School/ College 76% 70% 79% 83% 77% 102 86 84% University 78% 78% 78% 79% 76% 3268 2557 78% 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 Returned # % 2010 DNR # Total % Returned # % 2011 DNR # Total % SST 1 2012 Returned DNR # % # 1 100% Total Returned % # % DNR # % Fall 2009 2010 2011 2012** # Fresh # Ret % School/ College - SI 85% 71% 85% 53 45 85% Total University 78% 78% 76% 2757 2195 80% * The % of students started in Fall 2012 and returned to the program in Fall 2013 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 3 2c. Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate Fall 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Program 67% 0% 50% 0% 75% School/ College Average Rate 74% 65% 60% 69% 58% University 64% 59% 61% 61% 58% 2004 Total Graduated # SST 1 2005 1 Total 2006 Graduated % # Total % 2007 Graduated # % Total Graduated # % 100% Fall 2004 2005 2006 2007 School/College Average Rate - SI 56% 74% 65% 58% 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) LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 4 2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below. St. John's College Lib Arts-SI SST Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Majors Majors Majors Majors BA 5 4 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Total Total Total Total Total 5 2h. 3 3 4 1 1 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 BA 1 4 7 1 5 SJC-UG-SI SST Social Studies BA 10/11 11/12 12/13 Degrees Conferred Degrees Conferred Degrees Conferred 2 1 2 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 45-Social Sciences. 20092010 20102011 20112012 Bachelors Local 3,417 National 137,582 3,423 3,322 142,145 143,422 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 5 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) Standard 2. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page) LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 6 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. Change, 2010-20 Fastest Growing Occupations Social and Human Service Assistants Percent 28% Numeric 106,00 Occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment Social and Human Service Assistants Change, 2010-20 Percent 28% Numeric 106,00 Changes, 2010-20 Grow much faster than average – Increase 21% or more Social and Human Service Assistants Percent Numeric 28% 106,00 *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 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 7 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. Fall 2005 Fall 2006 FT PT Fall 2007 # Majors/ FT Faculty FT PT Total Total Majors 9 0 9 12 0 12 Majors & Minors Combined 9 0 9 12 0 # of FTE Students (Majors & Minors) 9.00 0.00 9.00 12.00 0.00 FT Fall 2008 PT Total 5 0 5 12 5 0 12.00 5.00 0 FT Fall 2009 PT Total 13 0 13 5 13 0 5.00 13.00 0 FT PT Total 9 0 9 13 9 0 9 13.00 9.00 0 9.00 Minors # of FTE Faculty assigned to the program LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI 0 0 0 0 0 Self-Study Template 8 FTE Student/ FTE Faculty Ratio 0 0 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Total F Total F Total F Total Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors 4 1 5 3 MAJORS/MINORS 4 Fall 2011 4 1 Fall 2012 1 Fall 2013 F P Total F Total F Total F Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total 4 1 5 3 3 4 4 1 1 Fall 2010 FTE MAJORS 3 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 F P Total F Total F Total F Total FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE 4 0.333 4.333 3 3 4 4 1 1 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 0 Fall 2013 P Fall 2010 Total 0 F MAJORS Total 0 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_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI 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 % # % # % # % # % 2091 44% 2454 56% 2427 51% 3111 65% 3708 76% PT Faculty 2646 56% 1953 44% 2313 49% 1650 35% 1194 24% Total 4737 100% 4407 100% 4740 100% 4761 100% 4902 100% FT Faculty % consumed by Non-Majors Credit Hrs Taught 82% 82% Fall 2010 Number 79% Fall 2011 Percent Number Fall 2012 Percent Number Percent 2,046 55.9% 2,175 55.3% 2,358 67.2% P-T Faculty (inc Admin) 1,617 44.1% 1,761 44.7% 1,149 32.8% Total % Consumed by Non-Majors 3,663 2,433 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI 100% 66.4% 0.0% 3,936 2,568 100% 65.2% Number 2,112 936 0.0% 3,507 2,085 78% Fall 2013 F-T Faculty 0.0% 77% 100% 59.5% Percent 69.3% 30.7% 0.0% 3,048 1,935 100% 63.5% 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 % Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 # % # % # % # % 39 62% 44 59% 50 71% 54 79% FT Faculty 29 52% PT Faculty 27 48% 24 38% 30 41% 20 29% 14 21% Total 56 100% 63 100% 74 100% 70 100% 68 100% Courses Taught Fall 2010 Number Fall 2011 Percent Number Fall 2012 Percent Number Fall 2013 Percent Number Percent F-T Faculty 27 58.7% 35 62.5% 34 65.4% 33 67.3% P-T Faculty (inc Admin) 19 41.3% 21 37.5% 18 34.6% 16 32.7% 0.0% Total 46 100% 0.0% 56 100% 0.0% 52 100% 0.0% 49 100% 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_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 11 Departmental Data 2005 FT 2006 PT Total # % # % Male 12 80% 15 94% Female 3 20% 1 Total 15 100% Black 1 Hispanic FT 2007 PT Total # % # % 27 13 72% 13 93% 6% 4 5 28% 1 16 100% 31 18 100% 7% 0 0% 1 2 1 7% 1 6% 2 Asian 1 7% 0 0% White 10 67% 15 Unknown 2 13% Total 15 100% Tenured 10 Tenure-Track FT 2008 PT Total # % # % 26 11 61% 13 87% 7% 6 7 39% 2 14 100% 32 18 100% 11% 0 0% 2 1 1 6% 0 0% 1 1 1 6% 0 0% 94% 25 13 72% 13 0 0% 2 1 6% 16 100% 31 18 100% 67% 10 11 4 27% 4 Not Applicable 1 7% Total 15 100% FT 2009 PT Total # % # % 24 12 60% 12 92% 13% 9 8 40% 1 15 100% 33 20 100% 6% 1 7% 2 2 1 6% 0 0% 1 1 1 6% 0 0% 93% 26 13 72% 13 1 7% 2 2 11% 14 100% 32 18 100% 61% 11 12 4 22% 4 1 3 17% 15 18 100% FT PT Total # % # % 24 12 63% 9 100% 21 8% 9 7 37% 0 0% 7 13 100% 33 19 100% 9 100% 28 10% 2 15% 4 2 11% 2 22% 4 1 5% 0 0% 1 2 11% 0 0% 2 1 2 10% 0 0% 2 0 0% 0 0% 0 87% 26 13 65% 9 69% 22 13 68% 7 78% 20 1 7% 3 2 10% 2 15% 4 2 11% 0 0% 2 15 100% 33 20 100% 13 100% 33 19 100% 9 100% 28 67% 12 12 60% 12 12 63% 12 3 17% 3 5 25% 5 5 26% 5 3 3 17% 3 3 15% 3 2 11% 2 18 18 100% 18 20 100% 20 19 100% 19 Gender Ethnicity Tenure Status LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 12 2010 FT 2011 PT Total # % # % Male 5 42% 7 70% Female 7 58% 3 30% Total 12 FT 2012 PT Total # % # % 12 6 46% 6 55% 10 7 54% 5 45% 22 13 30% 5 2 15% 1 FT 2013 PT Total # % # % 12 6 43% 5 63% 12 8 57% 3 38% 24 14 27% 5 2 14% 8% 0% 1 1 1 FT PT Total # % # % 11 6 43% 4 40% 10 11 8 57% 6 60% 14 22 14 25% 4 2 14% 2 20% 4 7% 0% 1 1 7% 0 0% 1 7% 0% 1 1 7% 0 0% 1 0% 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 75% 16 71% 8 80% 18 2 or More Races 0 0% 0 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 0% 0 0 0% 0 Gender 10 11 8 10 24 Ethnicity Black 2 17% Hispanic 1 8% 0% 1 Asian 0% 0% 0 0% 0% 0 American Indian/Alaskan Native 0% 0% 0 0% 0% 0 70% 16 73% 18 White 9 Unknown Total 75% 3 7 0% 12 0% 10 10 0 77% 3 8 0% 22 13 0% 11 10 0 71% 2 6 0% 24 14 0% 8 10 0 0% 22 14 10 24 Tenure Status Tenured 8 67% 8 9 69% 9 11 79% 11 12 86% 12 Tenure-Track 4 33% 4 4 31% 4 3 21% 3 2 14% 2 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Not Applicable Total 12 LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI 12 13 13 14 14 14 14 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.) External Funding Fiscal Year 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 99,854 28,000 18,000 33,350 08/09 $ Amount Program $ Amount Department Fiscal Year External Funding 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 $ Amount Program $ Amount Department - LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI 2,500 1,000 - Self-Study Template 14 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) Overall Evaluation (Spring) 2011 2012 2013 Social Studies (SI) Saint John’s College Total Undergraduate Instructional Vibrancy (Spring) 2011 2012 2013 - - - - - - 3.95 4.01 4.00 4.28 4.33 4.33 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). 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) LAS_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 15 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_SOC.STUDIES_BA_SI Self-Study Template 16