AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: St. John’s College
Program Reviewed: Speech Language Pathology MA Q
Date Submitted to Department/Division Chair: 9/30/15
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.
The MA Program in Speech-Language Pathology is a fully accredited program by the Council on Academic Accreditation
of the American Speech-Language and Hearing Association in Speech-Language Pathology, and is Licensure Qualifying
according to the New York State Department of Education. The program meets all accreditation standards to ensure our
students can become certified nationally and licensed in New York State.
Students completing the MA Program in Speech-Language Pathology are also eligible to apply for New York State
Certification as Teachers of Students with Speech-Language Disabilities. The program provides sufficient pedagogy and
student teaching experience to allow the student to be endorsed by the program to the State Education Department for
permanent certification once the Masters Degree is completed. Plans for a bilingual Extension Program are in the works
to enhance the quality of services to linguistically diverse clients. Enhancing the current program will address a pressing
need for bilingual services in the New York City Department of Education (NYC DOE) where students speak more than
100 different languages.
The program fosters the development of sensitive compassionate professional service providers who are trained to be
responsive to the needs of individuals with communication impairment, fully cognizant of the importance of serving
based on the clients’ social realities. As such, it reflects the mission of the university in preparing students to receive the
best education and training to serve those whose participation in school, employment, or society has been
compromised by a communication disorder.
Our students are fully prepared to meet current professional demands in the workplace, as suggested by our high
employment rates and pass rate in the national certification examination.
Currently, we are assessing options to enhance communication and collaboration between academic faculty and clinical
supervisors in order to strengthen students’ training and develop specialty programs that, while distinguishing our
training from other institutions, will similarly strengthen our students’ preparation and employability. We are also
planning on updating our curriculum and are exploring the possibility of developing a speech-language pathology clinical
doctoral program. Expanding our online and global study course offerings is also on our future agenda.
Self-Study Template 1
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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 pag
“Respect for the rights and dignity of every person” constitutes a core value underlying our academic and clinical
training. The profession itself is earmarked for service by preparing students to assist persons with handicapping
conditions in need of support. Our Speech and Hearing Center provides diagnosis and treatment to individuals with
communication impairments on a sliding fee scale, thus ensuring that all who come to the Center will be served,
regardless of their ability to pay.
Commitment to Vincentian values comes to life through the incorporation of academic service-learning in several
graduate courses. Our students engage in tutoring students at St. Joachim and Anne’s afterschool program, participate
as conversational partners with international students on Campus, and offer therapeutic feeding services to residents at
the Ozanam Hall nursing home and at a medical orphanage in Guatemala.
Our department is proud to report that five full-time faculty members have completed AS-L certification training (Drs.
Colodny, Geffner, Jacobson, Thompson, Wiseheart). In addition, Dr. Jacobson is a Vincentian Scholar and Dr. Colodny
received the Louise De Marillac Service Award (2014) for her service work with orphans in Guatemala.
The metropolitan nature of the program is evidenced by the relatively high enrollment of students from diverse cultural,
linguistic, and religious backgrounds relative to students from other universities nationwide who are enrolled in MA
graduate programs in speech-language pathology. Several of our faculty members are nationally and internationally
recognized for their expertise in communication disabilities in bilingual speakers and/or multicultural issues (Drs.
Centeno, Jacobson, Colodny and Walden specifically). Dr. Jose Centeno received an award for his Special Contributions
in Multicultural Affairs at the ASHA Convention in 2013. Drs. Jacobson and Colodny are also involved in long-term
international service and teacher/caregiver training in Nicaragua and Guatemala.
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)
The St. John’s University Master of Arts Graduate Program in Speech-Language Pathology clearly exemplifies the mission
of the university. The program provides academic and clinical preparation for students to serve individuals who may be
marginalized as a result of communicative impairment. The rigorous academic coursework and clinical training provide
students with a wide knowledge and skill base to enter the profession of speech-language pathology. Comparable to
other large programs regionally (e.g., Columbia Teachers College, Adelphi University, and Lehman College) and
nationally (e.g., University of Central Florida, University of Rhode Island, and Boston University), we provide education
for over 100 students at a given time. Unique to our program, our students have the opportunity to engage in Academic
service learning specific to the discipline of communication disorders on our Queens campus and abroad. Faculty
expertise regarding bilingualism and linguistic diversity prepare our students to serve the immigrant population of New
York City. Because of our faculty involvement with international service in countries with limited economic resources,
our students are highly aware of the global demand for speech-language pathology services to individuals with
communication disorders outside of the United States. Together with healthcare and housing, we strive to impart to our
Self-Study Template 2
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
students the notion of education and communication as basic human rights for all with communication impairments.
This is consistent with recent initiatives of the World health organization and The Report on Disability (2011).
Our students are committed to academic excellence as indicated by their acceptance into a highly competitive MA
graduate program. Our students remain committed to academic excellence by maintaining high GPAs throughout their
training. Several students participate in research activities. The faculty are committed to ongoing research in varied
areas including assessment practices of children with language disorders; diagnosis and treatment of swallowing
disorders; reading and literacy skills; diagnosis and treatment of bilingual language disorders; adult learning practices in
a professional setting; speech perception using electrophysiology, and, auditory processing disorders. Student
participation in research is evidenced by the number of students completing independent research projects
(approximately 15 annually), student presentations at local and national research conferences. The global aspect of
training in speech-language pathology is demonstrated by the offering of a pediatric dysphagia course in a medical
orphanage in Guatemala, and through faculty involvement in international service projects in Guatemala and Nicaragua.
Moreover, internal and external funding has been obtained to support international service projects (Academic ServiceLearning Award to Dr. Nancy Colodny to support staff at a medical orphanage in Guatemala; U.S. State Department
Award to Peggy Jacobson to support training of teachers, caregivers, and rehabilitation professionals in Nicaragua.
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)
Our CSD Graduate program is student-centered in line with our institutional goal to enhance student success. We
provide individual advisement every semester for each student and develop a personalized plan of study. Faculty
members are available during office hours and other times to meet with students. Students are also invited to
participate in faculty- mentored research projects resulting in local, national, and international meetings and
publications. Our commitment to community service is evidenced by opportunities for academic service-learning in our
courses. Our employment rate exceeds national rates compared to other programs of a comparable size. Reflecting the
national and local demographic trends, our student body and faculty are ethnically diverse.
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a.
Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
2b.
Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
2c.
Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
2d.
Graduate Standardized Test Scores
New Graduate Students GRE Verbal
Mean Scores
Speech
MA
old
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
400
473
394
490
Self-Study Template 3
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Pathology
new
149
150
New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative
Mean Scores
Speech
Pathology
MA
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
old
477
557
new
538
574
147
148
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)
New Graduate Students GRE Verbal
Mean Scores
Graduate School Arts &
Sci
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
Ir Grev Score
old
491
500
new
497
532
154
153
New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative
Mean Scores
Graduate School Arts &
Sci
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
Ir Greq Score
old
585
566
new
593
604
149
150
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
Test-Takers
Arts and Humanities*
31,657
Mean Score (Verbal)
157
Mean Score (Quantitative)
150
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
Self-Study Template 4
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Comments: Refer to Charts 2a – 2d in your response. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
Our program is very competitive and attracts candidates from several states and the New York Metropolitan area.
Approximately 600 applicants apply to our MA program in the fall and 250 in the spring. We offer approximately 40
seats in the fall and approximately 10-15 in the spring. Students are attracted to our course offerings, research
opportunities, special programs (e.g. academic and global service-learning courses) and diverse faculty. We currently
have 110 students enrolled in our graduate program.
Student selection is based on GRE scores, undergraduate GPA, letters of recommendation, and personal statement.
Students selected for our program attain an average quantitative and verbal combined score of close to 300. Moreover,
most receive GRE analytical writing scores above the 25 percentile. Once enrolled, students maintain an average GPA of
3.7. Our rates for student retention, program completion, successful scores on the national examination, and
employment are consistently above 95%.
2e.
Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
Similar to other institutions in the New York metropolitan area, we offer quality academic and clinic training which
results in our students performing well on the national certification examination and securing employment. Unique to
our program, students embody the Vincentian Mission throughout their SJU experience. Active learning experiences
(e.g. academic-service learning, tutoring, research engagement, etc.) provide students opportunities to connect with
persons who are marginalized due to disability, immigration status, or poverty.
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)
Our students continue to do well on the National Examination in Speech-Language Pathology (PRAXIS). Our average
passing rate over the past three years is 95%. Our three year average far exceeds the minimal recommended passing
rate (80%).
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
149
129
146
122
119
Minors
0
0
0
0
0
149
129
146
122
119
Total
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Self-Study Template 5
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Majors
MAJORS
Majors
Majors
SPE
MA
16
SPE5
MA
103
102
98
100
119
102
98
100
Total
2h.
Majors
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
MA
47
59
60
44
63
SJC-GR
10/11
11/12
12/13
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
Degrees Conferred
MA
57
48
52
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 51-Health Professions and Related
Programs.
20092010
20102011
20112012
Doctorate
Local
1,163
1,132
1,225
National
57,746
60,153
62,090
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)
We are comparable to other large graduate programs in the New York Metropolitan area.
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)
Self-Study Template 6
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Following a mandatory student orientation, students are advised regarding their Program of Study. Expectations of the
program, remediation and dismissal policies and other student-related requirements are discussed at the orientation meeting
and can be found in the CSD graduate handbook. The handbook is available online on the CSD Groups page and the university
website. Students meet with their advisor every semester (and more often if necessary) to review their Plan of Study and
discuss any pertinent issues. A remediation plan is developed if a student receives lower than 80 % on a midterm, final
examination or assignment/project. If a student goes on probation, they are counseled and a plan of action is developed.
Students are encouraged to use the writing center, library services, CTL, and other support services if warranted. Every effort
is made to facilitate student success.
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)
Ninety-eight percent of our MA graduates secure employment after graduation.
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)
We have a competitive MA program and students graduating from our program are well-prepared for employment in a
variety of settings including schools, healthcare facilities and private practice as suggested by our high employment rate
(98%). Likewise, our students continue to do well on the National Examination in Speech-Language Pathology (PRAXIS).
Our average passing rate over the past three years is 95%. Our three year average far exceeds the minimal
recommended passing rate (80%).
Self-Study Template 7
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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
Our goals are to enhance our current program by providing specialty clinics, additional online course opportunities,
developing a bilingual extension certificate program, expand on our global offerings, and develop a clinical doctoral
program. Our goals are consistent with the college and university’s strategic plan.
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?
We have strived to develop a program that addresses the professional and research trends in the field. In this regard,
our faculty has complementary areas of expertise that reflect the current professional demands to train our students
and facilitate their employability. Our graduate program is competitive and researched-based. We offer academicservice learning opportunities and global experiences in line with our institutional mission. We have high program
completion and employment rates. A high percentage of our students pass the national examination.
Relative to other graduate programs, we have been able to fill our full-time faculty vacancies with qualified Ph.Ds.
Currently, there are 71 unfilled positions nationally as per the CSD Education Survey Aggregate Data Repot (2012-2013).
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
Audiologist
Speech Language Pathologists
Change, 2010-20
Percent
Numeric
37%
4,800
23%
28,800
Occupations having the
largest numerical increase
in employment
Speech Language
Pathologists
Change, 2010-20
Percent
Numeric
23%
28,800
Projected Changes in Related Occupations (2010 – 2020)
Changes, 2010-20
Grow much faster than average – Increase 21% or more
Percent
Numeric
Audiologist
37%
4,800
Speech Language Pathologists
23%
28,800
*For more information please visit: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.toc.htm
Self-Study Template 8
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Standard 3.
Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
Speech-language Pathology is one of the fastest growing occupations. Our employment rates are excellent. We
anticipate that enrollments in CSD graduate programs will remain steady in view of the demographic and health care
trends.
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
Curricular planning and offerings in the CSD M.A. Program are grounded in external professional standards
in order to fulfill the Program’s mission to train individuals to be competent professionals that would accurately
evaluate and treat communication and swallowing impairments in both children and adults. In compliance with
professional accreditation requirements from the Council of Academic Accreditation (CAA) of the American
Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) and licensure-qualifying criteria from the New York State Board of
Professional Licensing of the State Education Department, student training is based on a teaching framework
that integrates theoretical, empirical, and clinical domains to meet the knowledge and skills pertinent to the
field of SLP and New York State professional license. Students learn the bases of the various
disorders to assess and treat, the formal and informal assessment procedures to collect diagnostic
evidence, and the approaches to interpret such assessment data, using theoretical principles and
reported research evidence, in order to design suitable clinical interventions.
Adherence to professional accreditation standards ensures that our curricular offerings are meaningfully
planned and interconnected to enhance mutual reinforcement between academic and clinical foundations in
the curriculum. Teaching excellence and vibrancy in those course offerings is monitored through students’ input
through term course assessments and an exit interview at the completion of the program. Similarly, teaching
observations of both tenured and non-tenured faculty allows peer feedback to enhance instructional growth
and evolution. Also, a highly popular global education experience (CSD 341) in Guatemala complements student
exposure to the impact of cultural diversity on clinical service delivery provided by another course in the
program (CSD 381: Cultural Diversity Principles in Speech-Language Pathology).
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)
Self-Study Template 9
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
1. We have two kinds of measures in line with assessment accreditation requirements that give us learning outcomes
information that we use to improve the program:
A) Two objective measures: The comprehensive examination, taken by our graduate students at the end of the Master’s
program, and the Praxis reports, which give us performance profiles for our students in all of the required areas of
competency in the national certification exam. These two measures give us information on the particular strengths and
weaknesses our students have on the required academic and clinical content areas.
B) An indirect measure: The exit interview, given to our graduate students through an online survey at the end of the
program, to assess their individual learning in both academic and clinical areas.
2. How we use the collected information to improve our program: Information collected from the comprehensive
examination, Praxis reports, and exit interview is consolidated to modify course content and its presentation, revise the
curriculum, develop new courses, etc.
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)
The M.A. program in Speech-Language Pathology is accredited by the Council of Academic Accreditation (CAA) of the
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), the national professional, scientific, and credentialing
association for speech-language pathologists and audiologists. This accreditation attests to the full compliance that our
graduate program with the national quality standards to train our students to qualify for the professional certification
needed to practice. Such accreditation is evaluated in 8-year cycles to ensure that the program continues to maintain
quality academic and clinical components in the curriculum.
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
# Majors/
FT Faculty
FT
PT
Total
Majors
64
85
149
Minors
PT
66
63
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined
64
85
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors)
64.00
28.33
6.1
1.4
# of FTE
Faculty
assigned to
the
FT
Fall 2007
Total
FT
129
PT
75
71
0
Fall 2008
Total
FT
146
PT
33
89
0
Fall 2009
Total
FT
122
85
PT
34
Total
119
0
0
149
66
63
129
75
71
146
33
89
122
85
34
119
92.33
66.00
21.00
87.00
75.00
23.67
98.67
33.00
29.67
62.67
85.00
11.33
96.33
6.4
2
4.8
2.2
6.2
1.5
6
1.58
7.5
8.4
7.0
7.7
7.58
Self-Study Template 10
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
program
FTE
Student/
FTE Faculty
Ratio
0
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
0
0
Fall 2012
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
76
43
119
72
Fall 2010
Total
0
FTE MAJORS
30
102
66
Fall 2011
32
98
79
Fall 2012
21
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
72
10
82
66
10.667
76.667
79
7
86
76
14.333 90.333
Fall 2010
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
100
Fall 2013
# of FTE faculty assigned
to the program
8
FTE Student/FTE Faculty
Ratio
Approximately
10:1
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 FTE faculty-student ratio did not meet the professional accreditation standards (7:1) for academic year
2014-2015. In the fall of 2015, a full-time faculty member was hired and another full-time position was
requested.
Self-Study Template 11
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
2571
43%
2638
40%
2545
37%
1756
59%
Not
available
as of yet
PT Faculty
3467
57%
3936
60%
4295
63%
1231
41%
Total
6038
100%
6574
100%
6840
100%
2987
100%
FT Faculty
% consumed
by
NonMajors
Credit Hrs Taught
62%
Fall 2010
63%
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
F-T Faculty
1,555
56.4%
1,503
57.6%
P-T Faculty (inc
Admin)
1,201
43.6%
1,107
42.4%
0.0%
Total
% Consumed by
Non-Majors
2,756
413
100%
15.0%
62%
Number
2,610
417
100%
16.0%
Percent
1,643
61.2%
1,496
55.8%
1,040
38.8%
1,185
44.2%
0.0%
261
0
0%
Fall 2013
Number
2,683
0%
22%
Percent
0.0%
%
100%
9.7%
0.0%
2,681
348
100%
13.0%
Note: The Department of Speech split beginning in Fall 2008. Figures from Fall 2005 – Fall 2007 reflect the department at
that time and fall 2008 represents the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorder
5c.
Below you will find the number of courses the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time
faculty (including administrators).
Self-Study Template 12
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Courses
Taught
Fall 2005
#
Fall 2006
%
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
45
42%
15
37%
21(16)
50%(67%)
16
67%
FT Faculty
43
43%
PT Faculty
58
57%
63
58%
26
63%
21(8)
50%(33%)
8
33%
Total
101
100%
108
100%
41
100%
42(24)
100%(100%)
240
100
Courses
Taught
Fall 2010
Number Percent
Fall 2011
Number
Fall 2012
Percent
Number
Fall 2013
Percent Number Percent
F-T Faculty
25
59.5% 32
55.2% 27
62.8% 23
54.8%
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
17
40.5% 26
44.8% 16
37.2% 19
45.2%
Total
42
0.0%
0.0%
100% 58
100%
0.0%
43
100%
0.0%
42
100%
Note: The Department of Speech split beginning in Fall 2008. Figures from Fall 2005 – Fall 2007 reflect the department at
that time and fall 2008 represents the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders
Self-Study Template 13
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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)
Two of our CSD M.A. full-time faculty members took the VSO in the Spring of 2014.
Representative nature of our faculty for 2014-2015 academic year:
 8 full-time faculty (5 tenured)
 6 female and 2 males
 1 Hispanic
Developmental Plan
2005
FT
#
2006
PT
%
#
Total
%
FT
#
2007
PT
%
#
Total
%
FT
#
2008
PT
%
#
Total
%
FT
#
2009
PT
%
#
Total
%
FT
#
PT
%
#
Total
%
Not
available
as of yet
Gender
Male
7
41%
13
38%
20
9
50%
16
42%
25
8
40%
15
38%
23
7
64%
3
21%
10
0
Female
10
59%
21
62%
31
9
50%
22
58%
31
12
60%
25
63%
37
4
36%
11
79%
15
0
Total
17
100%
34
100%
51
18
100%
38
100%
56
20
100%
40
100%
60
11
100%
14
100%
25
0
Black
0
0%
1
3%
1
1
6%
1
3%
2
0
0%
2
5%
2
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
Hispanic
1
6%
0
0%
1
0
0%
2
5%
2
3
15%
0
0%
3
1
9%
0
0%
1
0
Asian
1
6%
0
0%
1
2
11%
0
0%
2
1
5%
0
0%
1
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
White
14
82%
32
94%
46
15
83%
34
89%
49
16
80%
36
90%
52
9
82%
12
86%
21
0
Unknown
1
6%
1
3%
2
0
0%
1
3%
1
0
0%
2
5%
2
1
9%
2
14%
3
0
Total
17
100%
34
100%
51
18
100%
38
100%
56
20
100%
40
100%
60
11
100%
14
100%
25
0
Ethnicity
Self-Study Template 14
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Tenure Status
Tenured
10
59%
10
12
67%
12
12
60%
12
5
45%
5
0
Tenure-Track
6
35%
6
3
17%
3
6
30%
6
4
36%
4
0
Not Applicable
1
6%
1
3
17%
3
2
10%
2
2
18%
2
0
Total
17
100%
17
18
100%
18
20
100%
20
11
100%
11
0
Note: The Department of Speech split beginning in Fall 2008. Figures from Fall 2005 – Fall 2007 reflect the department at that time and fall 2008
represents the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders.
2010
FT
2011
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
Male
3
27%
1
6%
Female
8
73%
16
94%
Total
11
FT
2012
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
4
3
27%
1
6%
24
8
73%
15
94%
28
11
FT
2013
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
4
3
25%
3
20%
23
9
75%
12
80%
27
12
FT
PT
Total
#
%
#
%
6
2
18%
2
13%
4
21
9
82%
14
88%
23
27
11
Gender
17
16
15
16
27
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
0%
2
18%
1
0%
0
6%
3
0%
2
18%
1
0%
0
6%
3
0%
2
17%
1
0%
0
7%
3
2
0%
0
0%
0
18%
1
6%
3
Asian
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
American
Indian/Alaskan Native
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
88%
23
88%
22
11
73%
20
82%
14
88%
23
1
7%
0
0%
0
0
0%
0
1
6%
1
White
8
73%
15
8
73%
14
9
75%
2 or More Races
9
Native
Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
Unknown
1
9%
1
6%
2
1
9%
1
6%
2
1
8%
2
13%
3
0%
Self-Study Template 15
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
Total
11
17
28
11
16
27
12
15
27
11
16
27
Tenure Status
Tenured
6
55%
6
6
55%
6
6
50%
6
8
73%
8
Tenure-Track
5
45%
5
5
45%
5
5
42%
5
3
27%
3
0%
0
0%
0
1
8%
1
0%
0
11
12
Not Applicable
Total
11
11
11
12
11
11
Self-Study Template 16
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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)
Faculty research publications and presentations are listed in the Annual Reports every year. Publications (and some
presentations) are also listed on the faculty web page. In the 2014-2015 academic year, (12) papers were published or
accepted for publications and (4) were under review. Our faculty presented (9) papers at national meetings, (3) at
international meetings, and (4) regionally. Several of our faculty members serve on professional committees and review
manuscripts for prestigious scholarly journals.
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)
Faculty members are encouraged to present research at regional, national and international conferences, enroll in
webinar courses, engage in self-study programs and participate in ongoing research. Funding for travel is available as
well as research reduction to promote faculty development. Our professional organization, the ASHA, also requires
thirty hours of course work within a three-year period in order to maintain clinical competency.
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
82,500
408,686
107,225
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
22,000
Fiscal Year
External
Funding
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department
4,000
14,345
17,500
-
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)
Self-Study Template 17
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
No information provided.
Overall Evaluation (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
Speech
Language
Pathology/
Audiology (Q)
Saint John’s
College
Total Graduate
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011
2012
2013
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.23
4.26
4.19
4.37
4.40
4.40
4.14
4.16
4.30
4.37
4.39
4.52
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)
All faculty members in the CSD M.A. program have terminal degrees and professional certification.
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)
Our dedicated lab space is insufficient to meet the research needs of the faculty. It is difficult for faculty to obtain
external funding due to lack of adequate space to conduct their research.
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 industrystandards 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)
Laboratory Equipment
Our dedicated Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences Lab in Room 344G was lost to faculty offices at the beginning of
the 2008-2009 academic year. All of our lab computers are now housed in the Conference Room that we share with
the Department of Rhetoric, Communication, and Theatre. This lab/conference room is not private and only has a few
computers, which limits student access. We have approximately 100 students that are required to use this lab to
complete various assignments.
Our program has limited “state of the art” software and equipment, which prevents us from providing our students
with the most current research and clinical innovations. Resources are needed to purchase specialized software for
normal speech and language processes and disorders and equipment such as the Kay Pentax Voice and Swallowing
Work Station.
Self-Study Template 18
CSD MA. Program Review 2015
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)
Clinical Aspects
Our Speech and Hearing Center (Seton Complex) needs to be redesigned so that the space is used to maximum
benefit. The waiting room is too small, the secretary station is in an awkward location, and there is limited space to
conduct group sessions. In addition, the students would benefit from additional workspace.
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)
None provided.
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)
Our MA program is very profitable with a contribution margin of $1, 512,512.
STANDARD 7. Effective actions have been taken based on the findings of the last program review and plans have
been initiated for the future.
Previous Goals of our M.A. Program:
 Reduce Student/Faculty ratio to be closer to level recommended by accrediting agency (6:1)
 Improve lab facilities for speech-language-hearing research, so that faculty and students may increase research
activities (currently, all lab work is conducted in the dept. faculty lounge
Our student/faculty ratio improved from 2010-2014. As mentioned, two of our faculty members took the VSO in June of
2014.
Our lab facilities have not improved from the previous self-assessment.
Future Goals of our CSD M.A. Program:
 Improve Student/faculty ratio
 Update our curriculum
 Develop a collaborative relationship with the clinical faculty in our Speech and Hearing Clinic
 Develop Specialty Clinics
 Develop a Bilingual Extension Program
 Expand online and global study course offerings
 Obtain sufficient lab space and equipment
Self-Study Template 19
CSD MA. Program Review 2015