AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: College of Professional Studies
Program Reviewed: Legal Studies 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)
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_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
High School Average
2007
2008
2009
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Program
1073
1034
1059
1046
1051
87
87
84
86
87
School/
College
963
959
973
990
1020
82
82
82
83
84
University
1068
1075
1075
1087
1092
86
87
87
87
88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Computed
legal studies bs
Fall 2012
Computed
1,100
Fall 2013
Computed
1,088
Computed
1,091
1,088
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
High School
legal studies bs
Fall 2012
High School
85
Fall 2013
High School
87
High School
84
SAT Scores
88
High School Average
2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
School/
College - SI
997
1017
1004
996
83
84
83
85
Total
University
1097
1087
1096
1104
87
87
88
89
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 2
Intended college major for 2012 college-bound seniors
SAT
Test-Takers
Intended College Major
Mean Scores
Number Percent (%) Critical Reading
Mathematics Writing
Social Sciences
2,069
1.5%
551
536
536
Legal Professions and Studies
4,280
3.2%
497
496
487
Security and Protective Services
5,565
4.1%
436
447
423
* 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
Program
School/
College
University
# Ret
%
76%
100%
82%
100%
88%
15
12
80%
81%
82%
77%
87%
85%
138
108
78%
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
#
LES/3
2010
9 7
%
DNR
#
%
78% 2 22%
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Total
2011
Returned
#
8 7
%
DNR
#
%
88% 1 13%
Total
2012
Returned
#
8 7
%
DNR
#
%
88% 1 13%
Total
Returned
#
10 9
%
DNR
#
%
90% 1 10%
Self-Study Template 3
Fall
2009
2010
2011
2012**
# Fresh
# Ret
%
School/
College - SI
78%
85%
86%
68
60
88%
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
1999
2000
2001
Program
2002
2003
82%
71%
53%
School/College
Average Rate
69%
63%
78%
76%
65%
University
64%
59%
61%
61%
58%
Fall
2004
2005
2006
2007
School/College
Average Rate - SI
56%
58%
63%
65%
Total University
58%
58%
59%
55%
2004
Total
LES
15
2005
Graduated
#
%
11
73%
Total
22
2006
Graduated
#
%
14
64%
Total
12
2007
Graduated
#
%
9
75%
Total
16
Graduated
#
%
12
75%
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Not Applicable
2e.
Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
Information not available.
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 4
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
2008
2009
110
96
91
87
86
Minors
1
0
2
3
3
111
96
93
90
89
LES
BS
LES3
BS/MA
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Majors
Majors
Majors
Majors
57
Total
MINORS
2007
Majors
Total
MAJORS
2006
57
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
46
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Minors
Minors
Minors
LES
Total
46
3
2
47
36
1
1
48
37
2
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Total
Total
Total
Total
57
49
50
39
Self-Study Template 5
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
35
31
33
24
17
Undergraduate BS
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees
Degrees
Degrees
Conferred Conferred Conferred
CPS-UG-SI
LES
Legal Studies
BS
27
14
11
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 22-Legal Professions and Studies.
20092010
20102011
20112012
Bachelors
Local
0
0
0
National
3,866
4,429
4,592
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)
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 6
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)
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.
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 7
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
Percent
Numeric
Legal Occupations (excluding
paralegal)
14%
3,100
Private Detectives and
Investigators
21%
7,100
Law Enforcement Workers
7%
58,700
Occupations having the
largest numerical increase
in employment
Law Enforcement Workers
Change, 2010-20
Percent
Numeric
7%
58,700
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow much faster than average – Increase 21% or more
Private Detectives and Investigators
Percent
Numeric
21%
7,100
Changes, 2010-20
Grow about as fast as average - Increase 7 to 14.9%
Percent
Numeric
Law Enforcement Workers
7%
58,700
Legal Occupations (excluding paralegal)
14%
3,100
*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
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 8
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
# Majors/
FT Faculty
FT
PT
Majors
100
10
Minors
1
Majors
& Minors
Combined
101
10
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
101.00
3.33
Fall 2006
Total
110
FT
89
PT
7
1
Fall 2007
Total
FT
PT
96
85
0
2
6
Fall 2008
Total
FT
PT
91
83
2
3
4
Fall 2009
Total
FT
PT
87
81
3
3
5
Total
86
3
111
89
7
96
87
6
93
86
4
90
84
5
89
104.33
89.00
2.33
91.33
87.00
2.00
89.00
86.00
1.33
87.33
84.00
1.67
85.67
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned
to the
program
2
2
2
2
2.5
FTE
Student/
FTE
Faculty
Ratio
52/1
45/1
44/1
43/1
34/1
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 9
Fall 2010
F
Fall 2011
P
Majors
Total
F
P
Total
53
4
57
Fall 2010
F
P
Minors
MINORS
Total
44
2
P
Total
F
P
Total
4
49
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
F
F
F
Total
1
3
4
4
Total
36
2
38
Total
2
2
2
Fall 2011
2
Fall 2012
F
P
Total
F
P
Total
F
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
55
5
60
48
2
50
47
Fall 2010
FTE MAJORS
45
Minors Minors Minors Minors Minors Minors Minors Minors
2
MAJORS/MINORS
46
Fall 2011
Fall 2010
Total
F
Fall 2013
Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors
MAJORS
Total
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
P
Fall 2013
Total
F
P
Total
Total Total Total Total Total
4
51
38
Fall 2012
2
40
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
55
Fall 2010
1.667 56.667
Fall 2011
48
0.667 48.667
Fall 2012
47
1.333 48.333 38
0.667 38.667
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 and includes first and second majors.
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_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
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
4395
56%
3690
50%
3912
55%
4002
60%
3726
57%
PT Faculty
3516
44%
3717
50%
3192
45%
2694
40%
2802
43%
Total
7911
100%
7407
100%
7104
100%
6696
100%
6528
100%
FT Faculty
% consumed by
Non-Majors
Credit Hrs
Taught
19%
Fall 2010
25%
22%
Fall 2011
19%
Fall 2012
17%
Fall 2013
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
4,032
60.7%
3,984
58.0%
3,963
58.8%
3,939
60.4%
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
2,613
39.3%
2,883
42.0%
2,775
41.2%
2,586
39.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Total
6,645
100%
6,867
100%
6,738
100%
6,525
100%
% Consumed
by NonMajors
1,026
15.4%
984
14.3%
864
12.8%
813
12.5%
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
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
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
46
42%
57
50%
56
53%
50
51%
FT Faculty
54
49%
PT Faculty
57
51%
64
58%
58
50%
50
47%
48
49%
Total
111
100%
110
100%
115
100%
106
100%
98
100%
Courses
Taught
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
53
55.8%
64
57.7%
59
54.6%
60
56.6%
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
42
44.2%
47
42.3%
49
45.4%
46
43.4%
0.0%
Total
95
100%
0.0%
111
100%
0.0%
108
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)
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 12
Departmental Data
2005
FT
2006
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
11
65%
32
76%
Female
6
35%
10
Total
17
100%
Black
3
Hispanic
FT
2007
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
43
10
67%
34
77%
24%
16
5
33%
10
42
100%
59
15
100%
18%
3
7%
6
2
0
0%
1
2%
1
Asian
1
6%
0
0%
White
12
71%
38
Unknown
1
6%
Total
17
100%
Tenured
12
Tenure-Track
FT
2008
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
44
13
72%
27
73%
23%
15
5
28%
10
44
100%
59
18
100%
13%
6
14%
8
2
0
0%
2
5%
2
1
1
7%
1
2%
90%
50
12
80%
35
0
0%
1
0
0%
42
100%
59
15
100%
71%
12
11
5
29%
5
Not Applicable
0
0%
Total
17
100%
FT
2009
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
40
13
72%
22
71%
27%
15
5
28%
9
37
100%
55
18
100%
11%
8
22%
10
2
0
0%
1
3%
1
2
1
6%
1
3%
80%
47
15
83%
27
0
0%
0
0
0%
44
100%
59
18
100%
73%
11
11
4
27%
4
0
0
0%
17
15
100%
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
35
12
71%
22
76%
34
29%
14
5
29%
7
24%
12
31
100%
49
17
100%
29
100%
46
11%
5
16%
7
2
12%
3
10%
5
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
0%
0
2
1
6%
0
0%
1
1
6%
0
0%
1
73%
42
15
83%
25
81%
40
14
82%
25
86%
39
0
0%
0
0
0%
1
3%
1
0
0%
1
3%
1
37
100%
55
18
100%
31
100%
49
17
100%
29
100%
46
61%
11
12
67%
12
13
76%
13
7
39%
7
6
33%
6
4
24%
4
0
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
15
18
100%
18
18
100%
18
17
100%
17
Gender
Ethnicity
Tenure Status
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 13
2010
FT
2011
PT
T
#
%
#
%
Male
12
67%
17
68%
Female
6
33%
8
32%
Total
18
FT
2012
PT
T
#
%
#
%
29
12
67%
17
65%
14
6
33%
9
35%
43
18
16%
6
2
11%
4
0%
1
1
6%
4%
2
1
6%
0%
0
19
76%
33
1
4%
FT
2013
PT
T
#
%
#
%
29
12
67%
19
73%
15
6
33%
7
27%
44
18
15%
6
2
11%
1
4%
2
1
6%
1
4%
2
1
6%
0%
0
19
73%
33
1
4%
FT
PT
T
#
%
#
%
31
12
67%
20
74%
32
13
6
33%
7
26%
13
44
18
15%
6
2
11%
3
11%
5
0%
1
1
6%
1
4%
2
4%
2
1
6%
1
4%
2
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
20
77%
34
78%
21
78%
35
1
4%
1
4%
1
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
Gender
25
26
26
27
45
Ethnicity
Black
2
11%
Hispanic
1
6%
Asian
1
6%
American Indian/Alaskan Native
White
4
1
0%
14
78%
2 or More Races
0%
14
78%
4
1
0%
14
78%
14
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Unknown
Total
0%
18
0%
25
0
0%
43
18
0%
26
0
0%
44
18
0%
26
0
0%
44
18
27
45
Tenure Status
Tenured
14
78%
14
15
83%
15
15
83%
15
16
89%
16
Tenure-Track
4
22%
4
3
17%
3
2
11%
2
2
11%
2
0%
0
0%
0
1
6%
1
0%
0
18
18
Not Applicable
Total
18
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
18
18
18
18
Self-Study Template 14
18
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
$ Amount Program
$ Amount Department
External
Funding
Fiscal Year
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
-
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
-
-
-
Self-Study Template 15
5h.
Please comment on the table below that shows trends in overall course evaluations instructional vibrancy for
your program (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Legal Studies
BS (SI)
College of
Professional
Studies
Total
Undergraduate
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.04
4.09
4.14
4.34
4.33
4.43
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 /3page)
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)
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 16
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)
CPS_CRJ_LEGAL.STU_BS_SI
Self-Study Template 17