AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: College of Professional Studies
Program Reviewed: Sports Management MPS Q
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)
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a. Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
Not Applicable
2b. Undergraduate 1 st Year Retention Rate
Not Applicable
2c. Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Not Applicable
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 1

2d. Graduate Standardized Test Scores
2005
Program
School/College
Average Rate
Regional Comparison N/A
2006
Fall
2007
380/543
2008 2009
380/495
N/A
380/543
N/A N/A
425/493
N/A
National Comparison
The National Overall Average for verbal is 150.6 and a quantitative of 151.9, based on those tested between August 1,
2011 and April 30, 2013.
New Graduate Students GRE Verbal
Mean Scores
Sport Management MPS old new
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score
417 530 485
151 146
New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative
Mean Scores
Sport Management MPS old new
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score
655 584 510
145 149
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)
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 2

New Graduate Students GRE Verbal
Mean Scores
Coll of Profession Stud-
Grad old new
Fall 2010
447
Fall 2011
Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score Ir Grev Score
430
Fall 2012
475
146
Fall 2013
315
146
New Graduate Students GRE Quantitative
Mean Scores
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Coll of Profession Stud-
Grad old
Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score Ir Greq Score
567 530 633 415 new 144 148
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)
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 Mean Score (Verbal) Mean Score (Quantitative)
Social Sciences* 75,604 153
*For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
150
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)
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 3

2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
Fall
Number of Students
Majors
Minors
2005
0
0
2006
0
0
2007
23
0
Total 0 0 23
MAJORS SPM MPS
Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Majors Majors Majors Majors
58 66 71
2h. Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Academic Year
81
2008
34
0
34
Degrees Granted
Graduate MPS
04/05
0
05/06
0
06/07
0
07/08
0
CPS-GR-Q SPM Sport Management MPS
2009
08/09
6
10/11
Degrees
Conferred
18
11/12
Degrees
Conferred
26
12/13
Degrees
Conferred
22
45
0
45
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 4

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 31-Parks, Recreation, Leisure and
Fitness Studies.
2009-
2010
2010-
2011
2011-
2012
Local 56
Masters
49 65
National 5,617 6,553 7,047
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_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 5

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.
Standard 3. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 6

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)
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.
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 7

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
Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009
FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total
Majors
Minors
0
0
0
0
2 21 23
0
4 30 34
0
32 13 45
0
Majors
& Minors
Combined 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 21 23 4 30 34 32 13 45
# of FTE
Students
(Majors &
Minors) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 7.00 9.00 4.00 10.00 14.00 32.00 4.33 36.33
# of FTE
Faculty assigned to the program
FTE
Student/
FTE
Faculty
Ratio
0
0
0 2
0
1 2.3 3
3.9
2 3.7 4
3.8
1 4.3
8.4
MAJORS
F
Fall 2010
P Total F
Fall 2011
P Total F
Fall 2012
P Total F
Fall 2013
P Total
Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors Majors
36 22 58 45 21 66 51 20 71 59 22 81
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 8

Total FTE MAJORS
F
Fall 2010
P Total F
Fall 2011
P Total F
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 SJU for all external reporting.
Fall 2012
P Total F
Fall 2013
P Total
FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE
36 7.333 43.333 45 7 52 51 6.667 57.667 59 7.333 66.333
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q 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 Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009
Taught # % # % # % # % # %
FT Faculty 2481 81% 2427 80% 2640 78% 2343 68% 2229 63%
PT Faculty
Total
% consumed by
Non-Majors
588 19% 618 20% 750 22% 1128 32%
3069 100% 3045 100% 3390 100% 3471 100%
21% 21% 18% 19%
Credit Hrs
Taught
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
Total
Fall 2010
Number
1,995
Percent
Fall 2011
Number
54.2% 2,289
Percent
Fall 2012
Number
54.6% 1,935
Percent
Fall 2013
Number
56.3% 1,680
1290
3519
Percent
49.0%
1,683 45.8% 1,905 45.4% 1,500 43.7% 1,746 51.0%
3,678
0.0%
100% 4,194
0.0%
100% 3,435
0.0%
100% 3,426
0.0%
100%
37%
100%
13%
% Consumed by Non-
Majors 567 15.4% 1,083 25.8% 414
Note: Hospitality Management was a part of this department until Fall 2012.
12.1% 390 11.4%
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q 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 Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009
Taught # % # % # % # % # %
FT Faculty 27 75% 28 74% 30 71% 31 65% 29 62%
PT Faculty
Total
9
36
25%
100%
10
38
26%
100%
12
42
29%
100%
17
48
35%
100%
18
47
38%
100%
Courses
Taught Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
F-T Faculty
P-T Faculty
(inc Admin)
Number
21
Percent Number
46.7% 48
Percent Number
60.0% 23
Percent Number
51.1% 19
Percent
44.2%
24 53.3% 32 40.0% 22 48.9% 24 55.8%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 45 100% 80 100% 45 100% 43 100%
Note: Hospitality Management was a part of this department until Fall 2012.
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_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 11

Gender
Male
Female
Total
Departmental Data
2005
FT PT
# % # %
Total FT
2006
PT
# % # %
Total FT
2007
PT
# % # %
Total FT
2008
PT
# % # %
Total
#
FT
%
2009
#
PT
%
Total
6 75% 6 86% 12 5 63% 5 71% 10 5 63% 3 75%
2 25% 1 14% 3 3 38% 2 29% 5 3 38% 1 25%
8
4
6
3
67%
33%
7
2
78%
22%
13
5
5
3
63%
38%
7
3
70%
30%
12
6
8 100% 7 100% 15 8 100% 7 100% 15 8 100% 4 100% 12 9 100% 9 100% 18 8 100% 10 100% 18
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
White
Unknown
Total
1 13% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
1 13% 0 0%
1 1 13% 0 0%
0 0 0% 0 0%
1 1 13% 0 0%
1 0 0% 0 0%
0 0 0% 0 0%
1 1 13% 0 0%
0 1 11% 2 22%
0 0 0% 0 0%
1 1 11% 0 0%
3 1 13% 2 20%
0 0 0% 0 0%
1 1 13% 0 0%
5 63% 7 100% 12 6 75% 7 100% 13 6 75% 4 100% 10 6 67% 6 67% 12 5 63% 7 70% 12
1 13% 0 0% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 13% 0 0% 1 1 11% 1 11% 2 1 13% 1 10% 2
8 100% 7 100% 15 8 100% 7 100% 15 8 100% 4 100% 12 9 100% 9 100% 18 8 100% 10 100% 18
3
0
1
Tenure Status
Tenured 2 25%
Tenure-Track 3 38%
Not Applicable 3 38%
Total 8 100%
2 4 50%
3 1 13%
3 3 38%
8 8 100%
4
1 2 25%
3 2 25%
8
4 50%
8 100%
4
8
5 56%
9 100%
2 2 22%
2 2 22%
5 5 63%
2 2 25%
2 1 13%
9 8 100%
2
1
8
5
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 12

Gender
Male
Female
Total
FT
# %
2010
#
PT
%
T FT
# %
2011
#
PT
%
T FT
# %
2012
#
PT
%
T
#
FT
%
4 57% 7 54% 11 6 67% 12 67% 18 5 71% 11 100% 16 4 57%
3 43% 6 46% 9 3 33% 6 33% 9 2 29%
7 1 13 20 9 18 27 7 11
0% 2 3
18 7
43%
2013
#
PT
%
T
9 90% 13
1 10% 4
10 17
Ethnicity
Black
Hispanic
Asian
1 14% 1
0%
1 14%
8% 2 2 22% 2 11% 4 1 14% 1
0% 0 0% 0% 0 0%
0% 1 1 11% 0% 1 0%
9%
0%
0%
2
0
0
0%
0%
0%
1 10% 1
0% 0
0% 0
American Indian/Alaskan Native 0%
White 5 71% 12
0%
92%
0
17 6
0%
67% 16
0%
89%
0
22 6
0%
86% 10
0%
91%
0
16 7
0%
100% 9
0%
90%
0
16
2 or More Races
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Unknown
Total
0%
7 13
0% 0 0%
20 9 18
0% 0 0%
27 7 11
0% 0
18 7
0% 0% 0
10 17
Tenure Status
Tenured
Tenure-Track
Not Applicable
Total
4 57%
3 43%
0%
7
4 4 44%
3 3 33%
0 2 22%
7 9
4 3 43%
3 3 43%
2 1 14%
9 7
3 3 43%
3 4 57%
1
7 7
0%
3
4
0
7
Note: Hospitality Management was a part of this department until Fall 2012.
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q 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.)
Fiscal Year
External Funding 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
$ Amount Program n/a n/a n/a 0 0
$ Amount Department n/a n/a n/a 0 0
Fiscal Year
External
Funding 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
$ Amount
Program
$ Amount
Department - 1,000 - -
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
Instructional Vibrancy (Spring)
2011 2012 2013
Sports
Management
MPS (Q)
College of
Professional
Studies
Total Graduate
3.46
3.97
4.14
3.65
4.12
4.16
4.24
4.32
4.30
3.95
4.29
4.37
3.93
4.40
4.39
4.40
4.47
4.52
CPS_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 14

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)
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_HTSM_SPORTSMGMT_MPS_Q Self-Study Template 15