Proposal for Final Approval
Bachelor of Arts Program in Leadership and Organizational Studies
School of Liberal Arts
Annalee Lamoreaux, Academic Chair
Ken Otter, Director, Leadership Studies Programs
April 5, 2012
Revised October 26, 2012
Table of Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Introduction and Mission
A. Program Mission ..................................................................................................... 1
B. Consistency with Mission of the College ................................................................ 3
C. History of the BA Program in Leadership and Organizational Studies ................... 4
D. Process Used to Prepare Proposal .......................................................................... 5
E. Action Plan in the Area of Mission .......................................................................... 5
Curriculum
Curriculum Overview .............................................................................................. 5
A. Comparison with Peer Programs ............................................................................ 7
B. Quantitative Comparison with Peer Programs ....................................................... 8
C. Substantive Changes in the BALOS Curriculum Since Provisional Approval .......... 8
D. Program Learning Goals and Outcomes; Changes Since Provisional Approval ...... 9
E. How Program Goals are Evaluated ....................................................................... 10
F. Changes in Measures of Assessment Since Provisional Approval ........................ 11
G. Professional or Accreditation Standards in Leadership ........................................ 11
H. Response to Librarian Recommendations ............................................................ 11
I. Results of Assessment of Education Effectiveness Based on Learning Outcomes;
How Feedback and Assessment have Led to Program Enhancements and
Revisions ............................................................................................................... 11
J. Strengths and Weaknesses of Curriculum ............................................................ 13
K. Action Plan for Curriculum .................................................................................... 14
Student Outreach, Advising, and Services
A. Additional Services Provided Beyond Curriculum: Advising ................................ 15
B. Importance of Advising for Student Success and Program Viability .................... 15
C. Action Plan for Student Advising ......................................................................... 16
Faculty
A. Faculty Changes Since Provisional Approval and Effect in BALOS ........................ 16
B. Faculty Expertise to Cover The Programmatic and Curricular Needs .................. 16
C. Major Faculty Needs in the Next Five Years ......................................................... 17
D. Challenges Faculty are Facing Since Provisional Approval .................................. 17
E. Approach to Faculty Mentoring, Development and Evaluation ........................... 18
F. Faculty Diversity .................................................................................................... 19
G. Faculty Strengths and Weaknesses in Teaching, Scholarship and Service. Special
Awards or Recognition. ....................................................................................... 18
H. Action Plan for Faculty .......................................................................................... 20
Program Infrastructure
A. Infrastructure Strengths and Weaknesses............................................................ 20
B. Interdependencies with Other Programs at the College ...................................... 24
VI.
VII.
VIII.
C. Action Plan for Infrastructure ............................................................................... 25
Summary Plan of Action.................................................................................................... 25
References ........................................................................................................................ 28
Appendices
A. Appendix A – Copy of College Catalog Entry ........................................................ 26
B. Appendix B – Brochures or Advertising Materials ................................................ 26
C. Appendix C - Review of Library Resources and Information Literacy .................. 27
D. Appendix D - Supporting materials for Section II. Curriculum
i. Sample syllabi with learning objectives. .................................................. 33
ii. List of courses ......................................................................................... 117
iii. Enrollments since the beginning of the program. .................................. 119
iv. Cohort/Course Schedule 2009-2013 ...................................................... 120
v. Core Curriculum Draft Plan for BALOS .................................................... 122
vi. BALOS Learning outcomes from Initial (2008) Proposal......................... 123
vii. Learning outcomes map ......................................................................... 124
viii. Course/Instructor Evaluation (online survey questions) ........................ 125
E. Appendix E - Supporting materials for Section IV. Faculty
i. Number of faculty – tenure track, adjuncts, lecturers .......................... 127
ii. Ratio of tenure track to non-tenure track ............................................. 127
iii. Ethnic diversity of faculty ....................................................................... 127
iv. Gender distribution of faculty ................................................................ 127
v. Academic qualifications of faculty ......................................................... 127
vi. Faculty participation in Seminar and Jan Term ..................................... 127
vii. Faculty curriculum vitae ......................................................................... 128
1
Proposal for Final Approval
Bachelor of Arts Program in Leadership and Organizational Studies
School of Liberal Arts
Annalee Lamoreaux, Academic Chair
Ken Otter, Director, Leadership Studies Programs
April 5, 2012
I. Introduction and Mission
The mission of the Bachelor of Arts program in Leadership and Organizational Studies is to meet
the needs of adults learners who desire
 a quality BA degree-completion program from a reputable institution, and
 an education in leadership and organizational studies that is versatile and useful both
professionally and personally, and that enables them to create a real and sustainable
change that serves their organizations and the larger community to which they belong.
The study of leadership at the undergraduate level is expanding. Currently, the International
Leadership Association lists over 250 colleges and universities in the United States that offer
bachelor’s degrees with a major or minor in leadership studies (“Directory of Leadership
Programs,” n.d.). The increase in leadership as a focus of academic inquiry is also reflected in
an increasing number of journals devoted to leadership studies. A search of the periodical list
in the Saint Mary’s College Library reveals that the library has 56 full text journals with the
keyword “leadership” in the title.
Even so, the BA in Leadership and Organizational Studies (BALOS) program extends a liberal
education to a population that is underserved: although working adult learners may appear to
have many choices for continuing their undergraduate education, there are few that combine
socially-oriented, values-based liberal learning with professionally-oriented education. BALOS
is the only leadership program in the Bay Area situated within a school of liberal arts and
structured in an online-hybrid format convenient for working adults.
Leadership as defined in BALOS
As a degree completion program in Leadership Studies Programs (LSP), the B.A. in Leadership
and Organizational Studies (BALOS) is informed by the leadership orientation developed in the
M.A. in Leadership programs, and by the liberal arts orientation of the School for Liberal Arts,
where LSP resides. Recognizing there are many different definitions, theories and perspectives
of leadership, the focus in the BALOS program is relational leadership: Leadership is situated in
the relationship among people working together within some organizational or social context;
specifically, it is the capacity to influence others to work together toward meaningful systems
change. This definition assumes that leadership can be practiced by anyone in any
organizational setting, and not just by those in positions of authority. Thus, relational
2
leadership development involves attention to the whole person and the whole system and their
mutual enhancement. Particularly suited toward adapting to a highly dynamic and complex
globalized world, relational leadership is an emerging theory in the leadership field (Bolden,
Hawkins, Gosling, & Taylor, 2011; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Uhl-Bien, 2006, 2011).
Context and Content
Because relational leadership can occur in any social or organizational setting, the context can
be professional or personal (e.g., family, faith communities, volunteer, community service). The
BALOS program focuses primarily on the former, although students comment that what they
are learning also benefits their personal lives. BALOS students come from diverse professional
fields (profit and non-profit; corporate, government, and community-based), and they are
diverse in other ways as well; this diversity enhances students' exposure to different
perspectives and enriches their dialogue. The cohort-based structure of the program creates a
student-centered learning community and supportive network for students.
Because leadership occurs within cultural and organizational contexts, it is important that
leaders have the ability to analyze and understand the “contextual complexities of their lives…
[and] the multiple frameworks in which they and others interact” (Wren, 2009, p. 31). In the
BALOS program, students explore the meaning, implications, and practice of leading others to
work collectively toward desired goals, with an emphasis on ethics and values and within the
context of multiple perspectives. They do this through courses that address
 adult development, experience and learning, and the construction of meaning;
 organizational theory, dynamics, and change;
 leadership theory and ethics;
 economics and policy;
 communication and public relations; and
 US and global diversity.
Critical thinking and quantitative analysis are developed through two Seminar courses and a
course in applied quantitative methods respectively. Students work in teams with a community
partner in a capstone, social justice-oriented, community-based research project that requires
synthesis and application of the knowledge and skills they have developed throughout the twoyear program.
Significance of the liberal arts as a setting for the study of leadership
The relationship between leadership and a liberal education is rooted in antiquity, when the
purpose of education was to prepare men for public life and pursuit of the common good.
Although liberal education has evolved, its goals still transcend self-interest to include fostering
human understanding, active citizenship, and social responsibility. When leadership is defined
as influencing others in the process of working together toward a common goal, it is especially
important to have the capacity to understand oneself and others: one’s own values, others’
values, the influence of values (explicit and tacit) on perceptions and interactions, and making
ethical choices among competing values.
3
Beyond specific course content, the BALOS program focuses on enhancing capacities,
knowledge and skills across the curriculum that are characteristic of a liberal arts education and
also essential to relational leadership. These include
 self- knowledge and the ability to learn from experience through reflection and critical
thinking;
 a capacity for ethical thinking and behavior especially as they relate to leadership,
decision-making, and influencing others in organizational settings;
 clarity about one’s own values and an ability to communicate them to others;
 effective listening skills and a sensitivity to others;
 openness to and ability to seek, explore, articulate, and understand perspectives and
interpretations other than one’s own;
 ability to question and seek evidence for one’s own and other perspectives, assertions,
and assumptions;
 ability to express oneself clearly in writing and speaking and to engage effectively in
critical discourse;
 adaptability in a changing environment;
 increased collaborative competency as part of teams, organizations, and communities.
The BALOS program provides an understanding and practice of leadership that is reflective and
responsive to increasingly diverse and complex environments. Among the qualities that make
the program distinctive are its emphasis on critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and a
collaborative, service-oriented approach to leadership. In other words, the program provides an
education in leadership that helps its students and graduates understand and effectively
respond to the unique challenges and opportunities of an evolving world.
B. Consistency with the Mission of the College
The mission of the College – cultivating the arts of thinking; fostering an understanding the
human person, with sensitivity to ethics and social concerns; and creating a student-centered
educational community whose members support one another with mutual understanding and
respect – is reflected in the learning goals, content, and structure of the BALOS program as
described above. The three traditions of the College are also evident:
 the Catholic tradition in the emphasis on the whole person including values, integrity,
dignity, inclusion, and respect for each individual;
 the Liberal Arts tradition in a strong focus in all courses on dialogue, critical engagement
and reflection, thoughtful writing, and lifelong learning;
 the Lasallian tradition in a focus on social responsibility and social justice and in
students’ community-based action research projects, which serve the needs of the
larger community.
The B.A. program in Leadership and Organizational Studies also contributes to the four strategic
directions of the Academic Blueprint for Saint Mary’s College:
4
1. Prepare students for ethical and effective engagement in a diverse and global
environment.
2. Promote learning and teaching for innovation, creativity, and collaboration.
3. Build leadership that advances social justice.
4. Improve student success.
C. History of the BA Program in Leadership and Organizational Studies
The proposal for the BA program in Leadership and Organizational Studies received provisional
approval in late spring 2008. The first cohort started in May 2009, so the program is 3 years
old.
The program was proposed to meet both the College’s needs and the needs of the market
place. The program proposal stated
… interest in the field of leadership is growing. Market research has found that
leadership development is one of the top five priorities for employers, and that
online/hybrid programs are the preferred choice of employers. Over 600 colleges and
universities in the U.S. and Canada are now offering leadership programs of some kind.
Our research has found, however, that there is little competition in the Bay Area for an
online/hybrid bachelor’s degree program in leadership. Adult students continue to be
one of the largest markets for higher education, and market research indicates that
adult students seek programs that are designed to meet their needs. Furthermore,
outstanding liberal arts programs for working adult students are rare. Our research has
found that adult students choose Saint Mary’s College for its reputation. Consequently,
we believe that an online/hybrid BA in Leadership and Organizational Studies program,
designed for working adults and offered by Saint Mary’s College, would be well-received
in the Bay Area.
The projected start date of the first cohort was January 2009 but was moved to May 2009 to
allow more time for marketing and recruiting. (A major marketing challenge was countering
the widespread belief that the College was no longer offering degree completion programs for
adults following the closure of the School of Extended Education.) Following the first cohort in
May 2009, new cohorts were started, as planned, every trimester (i.e., May, September,
January). However, following the fifth cohort, which started September, 2010, it was decided
to offer only two new cohorts per year due to the recruiting challenges created by the
economic downturn. The next cohorts were started in May, 2011, and January, 2012, and were
larger than the two previous cohorts (Enrollment, Appendix D). Following the start of the
seventh cohort, which started in January, 2012, it was decided that starting one larger cohort
each year in September would be most sustainable. The cohort that started in September,
2012, was the largest to date, with 20 students.
The first five cohorts completed the two-year curriculum at the end of April, August, and
December 2011; and April and August 2012. Students from the first cohort attended
5
Commencement in May 2011, and students from the next four cohorts attended
Commencement in May 2012. (The Cohort/Course Schedule 2009-2013, is provided in
Appendix D.)
The BALOS program and the MA in Leadership program merged on July 1, 2009 to become one
department, Leadership Studies Programs, with one Director and an Academic Chair for each
degree program. The Academic Chairs are responsible for faculty, curriculum, assessment, and
related matters.
In our "strategic plan" for integrating the BALOS program with the MA program, we envision
that the BA in Leadership and Organizational Studies (BALOS) offers transfer-eligible working
professionals seeking a degree completion program the opportunity to experience a
transformative education in leadership, which not only exemplifies the values and mission of
Saint Mary's College but also provides practical knowledge needed in today's world few
colleges can provide. As part of the overall program mix, BALOS contributes a modest revenue
surplus, provides a conduit to other graduate programs at the College, and achieves meaningful
educational outcomes. This overall mix of programs consisting of one BALOS cohort of 15 - 20
students a year and three MA in Leadership cohorts of 15 - 20 students, totaling 60 - 80 per
year for LSP allows us the resources for a sustainable staffing and operational infrastructure,
and on target for reaching the revenue contribution percentage sought by the College.
D. Process Used to Prepare Proposal
The Guideline for Program Approval were sent to BALOS program Lecturers with a request for
their thoughts, particularly in the areas of substantive course changes, strengths and
weaknesses of the curriculum as a whole, and challenges they have faced. Leadership Studies
Programs (LSP) staff were sent the Guidelines regarding program infrastructure. They met with
Ken Otter, LSP Director, who compiled their contributions, added his own, and wrote the
section on Infrastructure. The primary author of the proposal is BALOS Academic Chair,
Annalee Lamoreaux.
E. Action Plan in the Area of Mission
We believe our mission is clear, and we will keep it in mind during the 2012-2013 academic year
as we revise the BALOS program learning goals and outcomes and integrate the Core
Curriculum.
II. Curriculum
Curriculum Overview
The 12 courses comprising the two-year program focus not only on interdisciplinary content
related to leadership and organization but also reflect the program’s liberal arts orientation.
Additionally, as a bachelor’s degree program of the College, the program includes two required
6
seminar courses and a religious studies course. Course descriptions are provided in Appendix
D.
It is noteworthy that several BALOS courses meet two of the four strategic directions of the
College’s Academic Blueprint:
Direction 1: Prepare Students for Ethical & Effective Engagement in a Diverse and Global
Environment
 Goal 1A2. Outcome: Student achievement in ethical reasoning…
“Leadership Theory and Ethics” (LDSH102) focuses on ethics and “Leadership Project
and Fieldwork” (LDSH108) raises ethical dilemmas related to social justice.


Goal 1B3. Support curriculum development on diversity and inclusion.
Goal 1C3. Increase internationalization of graduate and undergraduate curricula.
“Leading in a Diverse World” (LDSH106) focuses on the impact of culture on leadership
in diverse cultural contexts, both domestically and internationally.
Direction 3: Build Leadership that Advances Social Justice
 Goal A: Build social justice learning outcomes and assessment into the curriculum
o 2. Develop expanded community partnerships...
In “Leadership Project and Fieldwork” (LDSH108), students carry out an action research
project in cooperation with our community partner, Catholic Charities of the East Bay
(CEEB). Students, in teams, research the social issues related to their projects and the
challenges faced by the community groups served by their projects as well as working
with community groups and CCEB staff to plan and carry out their projects. The projects
completed by the first four cohorts are
o Homelessness Prevention Programs
o Benchmarking Successful Social Enterprises
o Feasibility Study of Social Enterprises: Early Child Care Program
o Feasibility Study of Social Enterprises: Medical Assistant Program
o Alternative Funding Sources for Case Management Systems
o Alternative Funding Sources for Providing Financial Crisis Support
o Effectiveness Study of the Family Literacy Program
BALOS is an online hybrid program structured for working adults. Students meet approximately
monthly on campus on a Saturday and interact online between in-person classes. Students
remain with the same classmates (a cohort) throughout the two-year program, taking one
course at a time in a fixed sequence. (Students who have to withdraw can join a later cohort.)
In addition to providing camaraderie and support that promotes retention, the cohort serves as
a peer learning community where students collaborate and engage in teamwork. Shared
inquiry and dialog allow students to explore perspectives different from their own and to learn
from a diverse group of classmates from business, public, and non-profit sectors.
7
The program is accelerated, based on adults’ maturity, motivation, and their ability to take
more responsibility for their learning. It is also interactive, based on adult learners’ expectation
to be active partners in the learning process. Consequently, seminars, discussions, team
assignments, and projects are essential components of the program design. The program
integrates theory and experience in many ways, including acknowledging the experiential
learning students bring to the classroom; challenging students to critically assess their
experience, assumptions, and ‘old’ learning in light of new learning and theories; and providing
students with opportunities to test new learning through application in their professional work.
A. Comparison with Peer Programs
There are several degree completion programs in the greater Bay Area for working adults in the
areas of management, business, organizational studies and leadership. The comparison below
is based on programs in private liberal arts colleges who offer degree completion programs.
College:
Degree
Emphasis
Bachelor of
University
Science in
of San
Organizational
Francisco
Behavior &
Leadership
Bachelor of
Holy Names
Business
College
Administration
Brandman
Bachelor of
Organizational
College
Business
Leadership
(Chapman)
Administration
Bachelor of
Arts in
Saint Mary’s Leadership
College
and
Organizational
Studies
Delivery
Cohortbased
Curriculum
Online hybrid
No
Major and
Electives
In person
No
Major and
Electives
In person
No
Major and
Electives
Yes
Major + 2
core
required
courses
Online hybrid
All four programs are oriented toward working professionals and career advancement. Both
SMC and USF’s programs are online/hybrid programs; however, only SMC’s program is cohortbased. Both SMC and USF describe their programs as being informed by their values and
mission (i.e., social justice, service, and ethical action). Other differences are implied in the
names of the degrees and the schools or departments in which they reside. Only SMC’s BALOS
program is a BA program and is housed in the School of Liberal Arts, which implies a more
liberal-arts orientation than the three comparable programs listed above that are part of
Business or Management departments, implying a more technical and administrative focus.
8
B. Quantitative Comparison with Peer Programs
This data is not available to us at this time. We are in the process of acquiring it.
C. Substantive Changes in the BALOS Curriculum Since Provisional Approval
A substantive change has been the transition of the 12 courses comprising the BALOS program
from Blackboard to Moodle. The first BALOS course offered in Moodle began in late February,
2011; the last two courses to be offered in Moodle will take place this summer. Moving the
courses from one platform to another was time-consuming, and much of the work was done by
faculty members themselves, so substantial faculty development was needed for faculty
members to become comfortable and confident working with Moodle. The Academic Chair
was very involved in providing support to faculty members moving their courses, either directly
or through arranging help from Instructional Technology Services.
The other substantive change to the BALOS curriculum has been anticipated for a couple of
years and is beginning now to be implemented: the transition to the Core Curriculum. The
Core Curriculum replaces the College’s General Education requirements for undergraduates,
which BALOS students have fulfilled primarily through previously earned transfer credit. Many
Core Curriculum learning outcomes are very specific and may not be as readily met through
transfer credit as General Education requirements had been. However, due to the emphasis on
liberal arts-oriented outcomes already woven into many BALOS courses, it is likely that with
some revision to make Core Curriculum outcomes more intentional in certain BALOS courses,
that BALOS courses will be able to fulfill some Core Curriculum requirements. This would
prevent BALOS students from having to earn additional credit through courses elsewhere to
fulfill Core Curriculum requirements either prior to or after the BALOS program, which would
either delay their entry into the program or delay their degree completion after completing the
program. Preliminary work on this transition has already begun with meetings between the
Academic Chair of BALOS and the Liaison to the Core Curriculum Implementation Committee.
The Core Curriculum consists of three major groups of learning (Habits of Mind, Pathways to
Knowledge, and Engaging the World), each with four learning goals, some of which involve
more than one course. To be designated as fulfilling a particular learning goal, a course must be
submitted for review and approval by a committee for that learning goal (e.g., the Common
Good, a learning goal under “Engaging the World”). Some learning goals may spread across
several courses, building skills incrementally, such as writing in the major and information
literacy. Consequently, virtually all 12 BALOS courses will need revision. Planning for this
revision and approval began in the 2011-2012 academic year and will be completed during the
2012-2013 academic year. [The chart of the Core Curriculum requirements and their
relationship to BALOS courses is provided in Appendix D.]
9
D. Program Learning Goals and Outcomes; Changes Since Provisional Approval
We found that the initial 15 learning outcomes (Appendix D) listed in the Program Proposal
were too many and too difficult to assess, so they were revised in September 2009:
Students will be able to:
1. Demonstrate an awareness of and responsibility for their ongoing learning and
development as it relates to leadership development and personal growth.
2. Demonstrate competence in the skills of careful reading, analysis, critical thinking,
interpretation, and communication in both written and oral forms.
3. Integrate experience, theory, and reflection as sources of learning, and apply their
learning to their personal and professional lives.
4. Apply a systems perspective to the study of organizations, institutions, and global
concerns.
5. Collaborate and work effectively in teams, and demonstrate an openness to diverse
perspectives.
6. Demonstrate the ability to use resources to gather, analyze, evaluate, and effectively
use information, and to use research methods to collect, analyze, and evaluate data.
7. Lead an organizational change effort through planning, implementing, and evaluating a
community-based action research project.
8. Articulate and critically evaluate their own value systems, evaluate ethical dilemmas,
and make socially responsible decisions.
9. Demonstrate an appreciation for the religious and/or spiritual dimension of the human
person and of the human community.
The 9 revised outcomes need further revision; many are still too unclear and/or difficult to
assess. However, knowing that the Core Curriculum changes were coming, we postponed
further revision until we determined which outcomes will be met through the Core Curriculum.
Then the remaining outcomes will be revised along with a plan for assessing them. Given the
progress on the Core Curriculum, we anticipate beginning the revision soon.
The Map of Program Learning Outcomes (Appendix D) uses the outcomes revised in September
2009, listed above. These are also the outcomes listed in the G&PS “Viewbook.”
10
E. How Program Goals Are Evaluated
Program learning goals are evaluated using the following approaches:
Student Assessment via Course/Instructor Evaluation surveys
Course/Instructor Evaluation surveys are conducted at the end of each course. The Program
map (Appendix D) shows the relationship between program learning outcomes and individual
courses. The Course/Instructor Evaluation survey (Appendix D) includes questions directed at
program level learning outcomes.
Faculty Assessment via Faculty Meetings
All faculty meetings devote substantial time to hearing from each faculty member “what’s
working and what needs work in your current (or recently completed) course.” This includes
Program learning outcomes as well as other academic issues, student performance, logistical
and administrative issues. Faculty members who cannot attend in person attend via
conference call.
Student Self-Assessment and Assessment via Focus Groups
 Group Assessment of the Leadership Project at the beginning of the final course,
LDSH110, Integrative Leadership Seminar;
 Group Assessment and Self-Assessment of the BALOS Program at final class meeting of
final course.
Student Performance: Leadership Project
 Leadership Project Presentation (oral)
 Leadership Project Report (written)
Each cohort presents their team project(s) to our community partner, Catholic Charities of the
East Bay (CCEB). These presentations include their instructor; some of their previous
instructors; the Academic Chair; BALOS staff members; CCEB Executive Director, Chief Program
Officer and staff; and most recently, a member of the CCEB Board of Directors (and SMC alum).
Faculty and Community Partner Assessment of Leadership Project(s)
Following each “Leadership Project and Fieldwork Course” (LDSH108), the course instructor,
Academic Chair, and CCEB Chief Program Officer and/or CCEB project director meet to debrief
about the most recent project(s). Feedback from the student focus group is included. The
debriefing focuses on Program learning outcomes, especially relating to social justice, as well as
to what worked and what needs work related to logistics, coordination, and communication.
Student Performance: Reflective Papers on Learning
 Reflective Paper on Learning and Changes from Leadership Project (first assignment in
final course)
 Reflective Paper on Learning and Changes attributed to BALOS Program (final
assignment in final course)
11
F. Changes In Measures of Assessment Since Provisional Approval
The measures of assessment haven’t changed in that they still involve student assessment,
student self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and faculty assessment.
We encountered problems with course/instructor evaluation surveys that have contributed to
an initially low response rate (20% for some courses). We use the online version of the “Class
Climate Survey” rather than paper-based version used by traditional undergraduate courses
because the online survey allows us to ask more questions. (Students are given printed
“tickets“ generated by the survey program, with the url and a random password so they can
anonymously access the survey.) Our intent was that students would do the survey at the end
of the final class meeting of each course. It was almost impossible, however, to reserve rooms
with computers for the final class. Additionally, many final class meetings include presentations
and consequently run out of class time for students to do surveys. When instructed to
complete the survey at home, many students forgot or lost the “ticket.” With more emphasis
by instructors on the importance of the surveys and with more students bringing laptops to
class, the rate of return has increased to about 75%.
We anticipate that revising Program learning outcomes the assessment plan lead to more
sampling of student papers and using rubrics for program outcomes, especially for outcomes
involving skill improvement across the Program, such as writing and information literacy.
G. Professional or Accreditation Standards in Leadership
There are presently no accreditation standards in the field of leadership. In progress is a task
force through the International Leadership Association (www.ila-net.org) exploring
accreditation standards for undergraduate leadership programs. (Leadership Studies Programs
Director Ken Otter is a member of this task force.)
H. Response to Librarian Recommendations
Arranging meetings between BALOS faculty and librarians to discuss making better use of
library links in Moodle is a helpful suggestion for both curriculum development/enrichment and
faculty development. (Many courses already use eRes and link to journal articles, and students
attend two required library workshops, one near the beginning of their program and one near
the end.)
I. Results of Assessment of Educational Effectiveness Based on Learning Outcomes. How
Feedback and Assessment Have Led to Program Enhancements and Revisions.
Students in their final focus group at their last class meeting and in their final reflective papers
report the following changes that align with program outcomes (indicated in parentheses):
 wanting to continue their learning both academically and professionally. (1)
12

interest in reading books they wouldn’t have “picked up” prior to being in the program.
(1)
 asking more questions of others, listening more. (2)
 asking themselves about what might be behind others’ perspectives, more openness to
other viewpoints (2, 6)
 more confidence expressing themselves with superiors in the workplace. (2)
 more critical about what they read and hear in the media; wanting to know the source
of information and how credible it is. (2, 6)
 thinking about social issues differently and expressing an intent to become more
involved in volunteer activities for social needs. (8)
 being able to use in their workplaces what they learned in their courses right away, from
the first course. (3)
They have also demonstrated that they can work effectively in teams to plan and implement a
community-based research project. (5, 6, 7)
Feedback and Assessment which have led to enhancements or revisions:
1. Leadership Project and Fieldwork (LDSH108): Debriefing meetings among the instructor,
community partner and Chair have led to several changes in the course, but one stands out: in
one cohort, students divided project tasks so that some students did the library-based research
work while others worked directly with CCEB staff and clients. In another cohort, the project
focused on grants and funding to address social needs but didn’t involve any contact with those
to be served. Students who experienced the biggest impact in terms of compassion for those in
need and in questioning their assumptions about social issues and social justice (based on their
reflective journals during the course, their comments at their project presentations and the
reflective papers after completing their projects), were those who had direct contact the CCEB
programs, staff and clients. Consequently, the most recent project was and future projects will
be arranged so all students will have contact with CCEB staff and clients.
2. Group Assessment of the Leadership Project at the beginning of the most recent Integrative
Leadership Seminar (LDSH110, the final course in the BALOS program): Students’ feedback
regarding two aspects of the Leadership Project will lead to changes in earlier courses in the
curriculum. Students commented that although they had previously heard the term “Lasallian,”
they didn’t really understand what it meant until they viewed a film about the Lasallian mission
in their Leadership Project course. Because they found the film to be so meaningful and
important, they recommended that BALOS students should be exposed to it earlier in the
program. When asked when they thought that should be, they suggested LDSH102, Leadership
Theory and Ethics (the third course in the program), because the course focuses on values and
the Lasallian mission is about values. Their suggestion will be implemented.
Their second suggestion was that the “why and how” of a literature review should be
introduced earlier in the Program, not in the next-to-last course as part of the Leadership
Project. None of them had ever had to do a literature review before and found it frustrating.
The Chair’s initial discussions with some faculty members about this suggestion show support
13
for this change, especially since it dovetails with the need to reconsider some aspects of writing
and information literacy assignments across the curriculum and also the need to add upper
division “writing for the major” outcomes, which in the case of BALOS would be social sciences
(Core Curriculum requirements).
3. Faculty Meetings – At several faculty meetings last spring, faculty members shared their
assessments that students were continuing to be confused and make mistakes regarding
correct APA citation format, even though students had already had several courses where they
had been expected to learn it and use it. Additionally, faculty members had noticed that
students did not appear to be using the resources they had to help them with correct citation.
Finally, there had been two instances of plagiarism detected by Turnitin (which is used in all
courses in BALOS). As a result of these faculty discussions, a half-day, in-person, hands-on
workshop was added to the first course, starting May 2011. The workshop covers why and how
to cite, how to use easily accessible resources for help, interpreting rather than “plopping”
quotations into papers, plagiarism, and how to check their own “originality reports” in Turnitin.
Students in the last two cohorts state they have found this workshop helpful. What is needed is
follow-up with faculty in the following courses to see if citation has improved.
Another topic that emerged from faculty members’ assessment of student performance is
persistent, annoying errors with writing mechanics and how to support writing improvement
without faculty spending more time providing feedback about mechanics. The Chair met with
Lisa Manter, Director of the Writing Program, who suggested some free options available from
the publisher of The Little, Brown Handbook, the writing resource BALOS students are required
to purchase. The Chair will schedule a meeting with a representative of the publisher.
Yet another topic to emerge from faculty members at meetings is the progression of writing
assignments across the curriculum, and the need to consider how the wording of writing
assignments affects the kind of thinking and writing being asked for. The Chair contacted
Tereza Kramer from the Writing Center, who said she would be willing to provide a workshop
for faculty to help us analyze writing assignments so we can intentionally scaffold them across
the curriculum for developing writing and thinking skills as well as focusing on individual course
content.
J. Strengths and Weaknesses of Curriculum
Strengths
 Liberal arts orientation to leadership and organizational change
 Blend of theory and real-world application that are immediately useful to students
 Leadership project that applies teamwork and connects learning to social issues
 Connection to mission of the College
 Cohort model that provides peer learning, exposure to diverse perspectives and
professions, and encouragement for persistence
 Focus on ethics, values, and social responsibility
 Use of group discussion and shared inquiry for collaborative learning
14

Sequenced courses that allow building links and learning outcomes between courses
and across the program
Weaknesses
 Tech challenges related to learning Moodle
 Lack of an application that allows teamwork online (e.g., effective wiki application)
 Lack of clear program-level learning outcomes that can be assessed and a plan for doing
so, including which outcomes will be part of the Core Curriculum
Conclusions
The curriculum is effective but needs a “tune-up” in regard to program outcomes and related
assessment, especially in light of the changes due to implementation of the Core Curriculum.
K. Action Plan for Curriculum
 Seek approval for Core Curriculum outcomes in BALOS courses
o Make explicit the assignments and assessments related to developing writing
skills and information literacy across the curriculum
 Revise program learning outcomes and map to courses, and create new assessment
plan
 Reassess how the BALOS program reflects the "guiding questions" for leadership
programs from the International Leadership Association, and describe how BALOS
courses, objectives, and activities related to leadership reflect the “21st Century”
perspective.
 Increase response rate on course/instructor end-of-course evaluations
 Explore and acquire additional functions for Moodle, including effective wiki function
 Investigate and acquire access to video conference calls and related technology to allow
meetings among students and instructors between on-campus meetings.
 Explore adding additional links to Library sources (as suggested in Library Review)
The Following Supporting Documents Are Provided in Appendix D:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
Sample syllabi with learning objectives.
List of courses
Enrollments since the beginning of the program.
Core Curriculum Draft Plan for BALOS
BALOS Learning outcomes
Learning outcomes map
Course/Instructor Evaluation (online survey questions)
15
III. Student Outreach, Advising, and Services
A. Additional Services Provided Beyond Curriculum: Advising
The BALOS program provides advising to students, beginning with the recruiting and application
process to ascertain how many transfer units they have and whether they meet program
requirements for admission (64 semester units). If not, they are advised as to how they can
earn additional units, what kinds of courses would be transferable, so they can be admitted at a
later date (and a significant number do). Potential applicants can and do call for advice when
they are “building units” for admission.
Once admitted, each student is advised regarding an individualized plan to meet degree
requirements. Although students take the same 12 required courses in the program, some
have more than 64 semester units of transfer credit, some are eligible for credit from other
sources (e.g., relevant military service schools), some have already fulfilled General Education
requirements and some have not, and no student can apply more than 64 lower division units
toward the degree. With the help of the advisor (the BALOS Program Manager), students
create a plan to earn any additional credit needed toward their degree than cannot be earned
through the 12-course curriculum. Students work with the advisor throughout the program to
update their degree plan.
Students also receive advising as a group at an Orientation prior to the first class meeting of
their first course. The Orientation, led by the Program Manager, includes activities to begin to
bond students as a group and ease their anxieties as well as provide an overview of the
program, course schedule and cohort calendar, registration periods, and related information.
Students are also provided with a Resource Guide containing program information.
Additional activities intended to support student success are integrated into the first course,
including making the academic culture of the program transparent (e.g., explaining the role of
group discussion in learning), and planning and sharing about potential challenges (e.g.,
managing time).
Throughout the program, students need support as they figure out how to balance their
academic work with life events. Students in the first seven cohorts have had to deal with
illness, divorce, death of family members, and job changes, and they face decisions about
whether they will be able to stay in the program or withdraw for a period.
B. Importance of Advising for Student Success and Program Viability
Students choose Saint Mary’s College not only for its academic reputation but also for its
reputation of valuing students as individuals. Especially for students who are studying at a
distance, feeling a personal connection to the College is essential. This connection is
established in the recruiting process and continues through graduation. Students meet the
BALOS Program Manager at Open House and/or at Orientation; she becomes the “face on the
16
phone” and the person they call when they have questions or problems or want to check on
their progress toward their degree. BALOS alums invited to speak to potential students at
“Open House” events invariably comment on feeling that they were “in good hands” and that
they had become part of the “Saint Mary’s family.” That quality sets BALOS apart from its
competitors and is vital to the program’s viability.
The advising students receive regarding their individual degree plans throughout the program,
from both the Program Manager and the Academic Chair, are critical to student success. The
academic and professional learning history each student brings to the program is unique.
Creating individual plans for degree completion is labor intensive but an essential component of
student success. It also eases student anxiety to know they are “on track” and to know exactly
what they need to graduate. The current graduation rate for students earning the BA in
Leadership and Organizational Studies is 83%, which supports the Academic Blueprint’s 4th
strategic direction, to “improve student success,” specifically to “increase in graduation rates of
degree completion students.”
C. Action Plan for Student Advising
Add administrative staff hours to assist with individualized degree plans.
The combination of advising during recruitment, admission, orientation, and as needed
throughout the program, along with an individualized degree plan, is labor intensive but
effective for the success of students pursuing degree completion. BALOS will be better served
by moving some of these functions to dedicated additional administrative staff to handle, for
example, the multi-step processes determining credit at admission by applicants to the
program.
IV. Faculty
A.
Faculty Changes Since Provisional Approval and Effect in BALOS
With the retirement of Prof. Penny Washbourn and with Prof. Rebecca Proehl (a KSOE faculty
member) no longer teaching the Leadership Project course for BALOS, the program does not
have any full-time, tenure-track faculty. This represents a loss of a wealth of academic
experience and expertise for the BALOS program.
B.
Faculty Expertise to Cover The Programmatic and Curricular Needs
The BALOS program has a dedicated faculty who integrate real-world experience with academic
and teaching excellence. The average experience teaching online is 7 years. All have
experience in facilitative teaching for adult learners, as well as experience and degrees
appropriate to the courses they teach in BALOS. Many are qualified to teach more than one
course.
17
In January 2012, in a national survey of online BA programs by US News and World Reports ,
the Leadership and Organizational Studies program was rated third nationally in the area of
faculty training and credentials for online BA programs
C.
Major Faculty Needs in the Next 5 Years
Due to the decision in spring, 2012, to start only one new cohort each academic year, the
number of courses and therefore the number of instructors needed in the next 5 years will be
fewer than in the previous 3 years; however, we anticipate that some experienced lecturers will
retire in the next 5 years. Lecturers with “real world” experience relevant to course content (as
well as with appropriate academic credentials and experience teaching adults and online) have
been an asset to the program, given our emphasis on integration of theory, experiential
knowledge, and application. Consequently, lecturers will continue to make up part of the
BALOS faculty pool. We are, however, also interested in including the use of full-time
undergraduate and graduate faculty (as we did during the first 2 years of the BALOS program)
and in adding a full-time faculty position to the Leadership Studies Programs that would be
shared among the three programs. Finally, to enhance the stability to the BALOS program, we
will seek to convert the Academic Chair position (currently an adjunct position) to a tenure
track position.
D. Challenges Faculty are Facing Since Provisional Approval
The biggest challenge faced by BALOS faculty has been the transition to Moodle: learning how
to use Moodle to move their courses from Blackboard and how to make revisions to their
courses as needed. All but two courses have now been taught in Moodle, representing a very
substantial investment of time and effort by BALOS faculty and the Chair.
Moodle does not have an effective wiki feature, which is very frustrating for faculty who use
wikis in Blackboard for team projects.
In one course last fall, an instructor could not access the papers her students submitted
through the Turnitin link in her Moodle course. CaTS Instructional Tech staff could not resolve
the problem and referred her directly to Turnitin support staff. Turnitin could not resolve it.
Rather than devote more time to the problem, she had students submit their papers to her
directly.
Another challenge related to technology is keeping other faculty apprised of what functions
they are using in their online courses. There is not an expectation that every course use the
same functions, but when one faculty member uses something no one else is using but assumes
students are familiar with that function based on earlier courses, problems can follow.
18
E. Approach to Faculty Mentoring, Development and Evaluation
Mentoring:
Much of the mentoring has been informal, such as one instructor experienced in using wikis
showing another instructor how to use them and assisting him in creating them in his course.
However, more formal mentoring has occurred for the course “Leadership Project and
Fieldwork,” where an instructor new to teaching that course was mentored throughout the
course by the instructor who created the course but could no longer teach it. The former
instructor has extensive knowledge and experience working with community-based
organizations and had facilitated the community partnership with Catholic Charities of the East
Bay. The former instructor met with the new instructor before, during, and after the course.
(Mentoring a new instructor for this course meets Strategic Direction 3 of the Academic
Blueprint, “Build Leadership that Advances Social Justice,” specifically Goal A1: . “ Identify,
recruit, and train faculty for integration of social justice into curriculum.”)
Development:
Likewise, some faculty development is informal and some is more formal. Informal
development takes place through sharing (approaches that work, articles of interest, resources)
by email, faculty meetings, or via the “virtual faculty lounge,” which is currently on Blackboard
but will be moved to Moodle soon. More formal development is scheduled at particular faculty
meetings, on topics that have arisen during previous faculty meetings (e.g. using Moodle, APA
format, Turnitin). A workshop devoted to creating effective writing assignments, to be led by
Therese Noonan from the Writing Center, will be scheduled soon. (Faculty meetings had been
held approximately every 2 months up through the joint meeting with the M.A. program faculty
last November. The BALOS Chair’s injury postponed subsequent meetings. A goal is to set
dates for faculty meetings for the entire year rather than meeting by meeting.)
Faculty development also has occurred through individual faculty members meeting with CaTS
instructional staff or through participating in training offered to SMC faculty in general. BALOS
faculty have attended workshops conducted by Turnitin, webinars related to teaching online,
“SMC Tech Camp,” and workshops on assessment. Faculty members then share what they
have learned with other BALOS faculty members. It is a measure of lecturers’ commitment to
the program and College that they do this on their own time (i.e., they are not compensated for
it).
Evaluation:
Instructor evaluation is based primarily on student feedback on online surveys conducted at the
end of each course. Results are sent to instructors after grades are submitted, and are
reviewed by the Chair. Student feedback on instructor evaluations has led to a mutually
requested meeting between an instructor and the Chair to address issues in one course.
Although instructor evaluation using end-of-course surveys appears to be an effective source of
feedback for faculty, it would be useful to see whether faculty would like to see any changes in
the survey and/or other approaches used for feedback on their teaching. This could be
addressed at a faculty meeting and/or via an anonymous survey.
19
F. Faculty Diversity
The BALOS faculty would benefit from greater diversity and will continue to seek to increase its
diversity when adding new lecturers to the BALOS faculty and through use of full-time
undergraduate and graduate faculty, and lecturers who teach in the MA Leadership programs.
A lecturer who joined the BALOS faculty October, 2012, has added to the diversity of the BALOS
faculty as well as bringing experience teaching in the undergraduate seminar program.
G. Faculty Strengths and Weaknesses in Teaching, Scholarship and Service. Special Awards or
Recognition.
Strengths
Faculty strengths include real world experience and credentials in content areas, experience
teaching in online hybrid programs, and experience teaching adults. Many lecturers have
significant professional accomplishments as well as teaching experience. Many have been
lecturers at Saint Mary’s for decades as well as teaching at other institutions such as UC
Berkeley, UC Davis, Dominican, Dartmouth, Michigan State, Southern Oregon, and the
University of St. Thomas.
A very important strength is the collaborative culture of the BALOS faculty and the sense of
community among its members, which is vital for an integrated curriculum. Faculty members
are interested not only in the courses they teach but also in how those courses relate to other
courses in the curriculum, in program-level learning goals, and in their fellow faculty members.
They are committed to the success of students, the success of the program, the mission of the
College, and to their own continued development.
Weaknesses
Because the Academic Chair is the only full-time (adjunct) faculty member in BALOS, any
governance and/or service responsibilities are handled by her and/or the Director of Leadership
Studies Programs. This, combined with offices in Rheem, also contributes to diminished
awareness of the BALOS program within the SMC community.
Recent accomplishments
Barbara McLaughlin completed a doctoral degree in Educational Leadership in May 2009.
Annalee Lamoreaux, Academic Chair of BALOS, and Kathleen Taylor, faculty member in the
Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership (KSOE), were invited by the Australian Institute of
Company Directors to give a series of presentations and day-long workshop on learning and the
brain in Sydney and Melbourne in February, 2012. Annalee Lamoreaux and Kathleen Taylor
were also invited to write a chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Reciprocal Adult Development
and Learning, Carol Hoare (Ed.), published September 2011. Their chapter is titled “Prior
Learning Assessment and the Developmental Journey: From ‘Map-less’ to ‘Cartographer.’”
20
H. Action Plan for Faculty
 Seek to include full-time undergraduate and graduate faculty to teach BALOS courses
 Create a full-time faculty position in the Leadership Studies Programs
 Seek to convert the Academic Chair position (currently adjunct) to a tenure track
position
 Increase diversity in the BALOS faculty pool
 Increase return rate for end-of-course evaluations by students
 Seek faculty input on adequacy of current approaches for instructor evaluation
 Move “virtual faculty lounge” to Moodle
 Set annual dates for BALOS faculty meetings; seek video conference call capability to
include faculty who can’t attend in person
 Schedule faculty development workshop on creating written assignments with Therese
Noonan of the Writing Center
 Schedule meeting with Little Brown Handbook published regarding student support for
writing mechanics
 Schedule faculty development meeting with Library staff to learn more about possible
links to library sources
Documentation Provided in Appendix E:
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
Number of faculty – tenure track, adjuncts, lecturers
Ratio of tenure track to non-tenure track
Ethnic diversity of faculty
Gender distribution of faculty
Academic qualifications of faculty
Faculty participation in Seminar and Jan Term
Faculty curriculum vitae
V. Program Infrastructure
A. Infrastructure Strengths and Weaknesses
Student recruitment services
Strengths:
The BALOS program is integrated into Hobson enrollment management system, providing for
efficiencies in communication to prospective students and a system for data gathering over
time.
Each prospective student undergoes a pre-admission review of his or her work/life experience
to identify, review and assess to determine overall fit for program; there is no cookie cutter
format for determining admission eligibility for adult learners. The pre-admission process is an
investment in the quality of students admitted and the persistence to degree completion (83%
21
degree completion rate for first 3 cohorts of program). There is considerable skill and expertise
in the Program Manager and the Marketing Assistant in working with adult learners from initial
inquiry to application.
The BALOS program draws upon the highly regarded reputation of the previous B.A. Program in
Management, the strength of the College in the employer community, the quality of the
online/blended program design, and the philosophy of leadership and personal service.
Integrating marketing for BALOS with the M.A. in Leadership marketing strategy and tactics
provides a larger focus and branding for Leadership Studies Programs at SMC, providing
benefits for both programs (e.g., friend and colleague referrals across both programs and three
M.A. students admitted who initially inquired about the B.A. program and were given B.A.
degree equivalency based on a combination of previous SMC coursework and significant
professional accomplishment).
Weaknesses:
The lack of logical path on the SMC website for prospective degree completion students to find
and learn about the BALOS program is a major weakness that affects recruiting. A prospective
BALOS student sees no mention of the often-used phrase “degree completion for working
adults” on any web page of Graduate and Professional Studies. (How would adults looking to
complete their B.A. degree know to look in a Graduate and Professional section?) The quality
and reputation of SMC leads prospective students to the College website but they cannot find
the BALOS program.
Prospective students require considerable advising services to assess their transferable credit
for admission requirements (64 semester units) and to address the various work/life barriers to
re-enter formal education. This advising requires considerable staff time and specific expertise.
The population students seeking the B.A. degree completion program requires a unique
marketing strategy compared to that for graduate students, so the integrated marketing
strategy of the MA and BA program is limited in its effectiveness. There are not sufficient funds
or staff time for two distinct marketing strategies.
Program recruitment is labor intensive and costly; however, the result is getting the “right fit”
to achieve the quality of students desired, which in turn feeds the quality of the students’
experience at SMC (as well as student retention and success).
Understaffed recruitment function due to the multiple functions/roles of both the program
manager and marketing assistant creates a fragmented recruitment process. The market for
degree completion students requires a different marketing strategy than the one used for
graduate students.
Program budget
The program budget expenses are integrated, while the revenues are distinct.
22
Strengths:
This integrated budget on the expense side allows for some economies of scale.
An integrated budget fosters the integration of the two distinct programs into Leadership
Studies Programs (LSP).
Weaknesses:
It is difficult to differentiate the actual costs of each program.
There is not as much discretion for decisions in spending by program staff.
Office space
Strengths:
The LSP staff, BALOS program manager, and Academic Chair are located adjacent to each other
in Rheem, which fosters communication and collaboration. (The LSP Staff and BALOS program
manager are in cubicles and the Chair has an office.)
Weaknesses:
The BALOS program’s marketing assistant is located on campus due to allergies to something in
the Rheem building. This hinders communication and collaboration.
The location of LSP staff in Rheem is often noisy due to proximity to Back Conference room,
which lacks walls that run all the way to the ceiling, leaving a gap of several feet.
There is no integrated environment in LSP Rheem location; arrangement is “divided” by
program (i.e., B.A. and M.A. each in their own cubicles).
There is no dedicated place to meet privately with students in Rheem and shared conference
rooms are not always available due to high demand by others in the Rheem community (Grad
Business and Development).
There is a growing concern about what may happen to LSP staff located in Rheem if the rumors
that Grad Business staff is moving out are true.
Administrative assistance
Strengths:
This function is in one .8 staff position, which serves both the BALOS and MA in Leadership
programs.
Weaknesses:
As BALOS has grown to seven cohorts, administrative processes provided by the Academic Chair
23
and Program Manager for the start-up phase are still housed with them. BALOS will be better
served by moving these functions to dedicated additional administrative staff to handle, for
example, the multi-step processes for transfer course evaluation and assessment of other
credit at admission by applicants to the B.A. program.
Technical support
Strengths:
LSP has a dedicated technical support person who has recently added BALOS to her job
responsibility.
There are additional CaTS staff personnel who can provide support services if the LSP dedicated
person is not available.
A CaTS Instructional Technology staff member conducts a 2-hour, hands-on orientation the first
day of the first course for each new BALOS cohort. The orientation includes how to log in and
navigate from the “My Saint Mary’s” home page; find the G&PS Handbook for academic
policies; use GaelXpress to access their account and grades; and to use Moodle. Instructional
Technology staff have also worked with BALOS faculty members individually, in person or by
phone, to provide instruction with Moodle, answer questions, and assist with problems.
Weaknesses:
The failure of the SMC server, campus-wide, is frequent and results in lost work and delays in
production, as well as constant frustrations.
Instructional materials and equipment
Strengths:
The program has completed or just about completed its transition to Moodle as the primary
online learning platform. Most BALOS faculty members prefer Moodle to Blackboard for most
functions.
Faculty use the equipment provided in classrooms on campus (computer, projector, etc) for
their face-to-face class meetings on Saturdays. There is usually a CaTS staff member on call to
help with any problems.
Weaknesses:
Some of the computers for faculty use in classrooms are set up as Macs, and some of our
faculty are familiar only with PCs.
At the most recent orientation to Moodle for a new cohort, held in a Garaventa computer lab,
so many of the computers were not working that students had to share computers.
The failure of the SMC server, campus-wide, is frequent and results in lost work and delays in
production, as well as frustrations.
24
Library collection and other learning resources
Strengths:
BALOS faculty and students receive very good service from the library, both for in-person
workshops and individually in-person and at a distance. Being able to access databases from
home and full-text journal articles is very important in an online hybrid program.
Information technology hardware, software and services
Strengths:
The program has just about completed its transition to Moodle as the primary online learning
platform. Only two courses have not yet been transitioned to Moodle.
Weaknesses:
The transition to Moodle as the primary online learning platform has been problematic. In
particular, the wiki function available in Moodle is not acceptable. Given the number of team
projects throughout the BALOS curriculum, an effective wiki function is needed.
The failure of the SMC server, campus-wide, is frequent and results in lost work and delays in
production, as well as frustrations.
Admissions and recruitment facilities
Strengths:
We do make do to present the best of the history and brand of Saint Mary’s College to
prospective students.
Weaknesses:
LSP must schedule rooms in all corners of the campus for each Recruitment (“Open House”)
event because we do not have access to either consistent welcoming or presentation space to
meet prospective students in a group.
Other
There remain challenges in the integration of the BALOS and MA programs into one
department, resulting in both the MA and BALOS programs still operating to some extent as
standalone programs. More attention on how to integrate functions and allocate
responsibilities among staff is planned for FY2013.
B. Interdependencies with Other Programs at the College
BALOS is interdependent with the MA programs in Leadership. Additionally, BALOS has links
with LEAP, the other BA program in the Graduate and Professional Student division of the
College. Both BALOS and LEAP offer seminar courses, Critical Perspectives I and II; a course on
25
experiential learning and prior learning assessment; and integration of the new Core
Curriculum.
C. Action Plan for Infrastructure

Create a logical path on the SMC website for prospective degree completion students to
find and learn about the BALOS program.

Seek office space that allowed better integration of LSP staff.

Establish a regular place for recruitment events (e.g., Open House) in a space
appropriate for recruiting prospective students.

Create a more effective integration of the BALOS and MA programs into LSP, more
attention on how to integrate functions and allocate responsibilities among staff.
Create increased staff time for both recruiting and advising degree-completing students
by moving process related to determining credit at admission and individual degree
plans to dedicated administrative staff to handle.
VI. SUMMARY PLAN OF ACTION
We identified actions needed in the areas of Recruiting and Administration, Curriculum and
Faculty Development, and IT Resources. Each area has been divided by timeline: Immediate (36 months), Short-term (6-12 months) and Long-term (12-24 months) from the beginning of Fall
Trimester 2012.
Curriculum and Faculty Development (Academic Chair Responsible to Initiate)
Immediate (3-6 months)
 Increase diversity in BALOS faculty. (Progress has already been made on this action item
this trimester, Fall 2012, with the hiring of a lecturer new to BALOS who adds to the
diversity of the BALOS faculty. )
 Begin revising BALOS courses to integrate Core Curriculum outcomes
o Revise individual courses as needed to make explicit the assignments, course
outcomes, and assessment relevant to Core Curriculum outcomes
o Revise all courses to make explicit the assignments, outcomes, and assessments
related to developing writing skills and information literacy across the curriculum
 Begin revision of program learning outcomes and map to courses, and creation of an
assessment plan for program outcomes not covered by Core Curriculum outcomes
 Increase response rate on course/instructor end-of-course evaluations
 Set annual dates for BALOS faculty meetings
 Schedule faculty development workshop on creating written assignments with Therese
Noonan of the Writing Center
26
Short-term (6-12 months)
 Submit revised BALOS courses for Core Curriculum approval
 Seek to convert the Academic Chair position (currently adjunct) to a tenure track
position
 Reassess how the BALOS program reflects the "guiding questions" for leadership
programs from the International Leadership Association, and describe how BALOS
courses, objectives, and activities related to leadership reflect the “21st Century”
perspective.
 Move “virtual faculty lounge” to Moodle
 Seek faculty input on adequacy of current approaches for instructor evaluation
 Schedule meeting with Little Brown Handbook publisher rep regarding student support
for writing mechanics
 Schedule faculty development meeting with Library staff to learn more about possible
links to library sources. Explore adding additional links to Library sources (as suggested
in Library Review)
Long-term (12-24 months)
 Seek to include full-time undergraduate and graduate faculty to teach BALOS courses
 Seek a full-time faculty position in the Leadership Studies Programs by FY 2014 to teach
in both the BA and MA programs and to participate in the faculty governance and
planning in LSP.
 As part of the ongoing integration of BALOS, the MA in Leadership, and MA in
Leadership for Social Justice, and MA, the three academic chairs (Annalee Lamoreaux,
Jennifer Pigza, and Marguerite Welch respectively) and Leadership Studies Programs
director Ken Otter meet monthly to discuss to discuss program issues and to share
expertise and experience with an eye for better support and integration.
 In addition, we have plans for full- and part-time faculty to teach across each program,
which will help in the integration, as well as help diversify the BALOS faculty.
 Specifically regarding ethnically diversifying BALOS faculty, the plan for FY2013 and
beyond, when new teaching assignments are needed we will identify and place a high
value on qualified candidates representing different ethnicities, some of whom may be
already part of the part-time faculty pool in the MA program.
 We understand and support faculty diversity of many kinds. (One manifestation of that
is our policy that no instructor can teach more than two courses to any given cohort, so
students experience different viewpoints.) We have a faculty pool for instructors who
do not have a course assignment. For faculty in the pool, the opportunities to teach are
infrequent because BALOS is a small program with only one new cohorts starting each
year until there is more demand. The pool currently has one lecturer, and we see the
benefit in expanding it; however, because assigned lecturers are experienced and
performing well, because other aspects of the program need the Chair’s time and
attention, developing the faculty pool has not been a high priority. We will explore
27
having one combined faculty pool for the Leadership Studies Programs with some
instructors who can teach courses in both the BA and MA programs.
Recruiting and Administration (Director LSP responsible to initiate)
Immediate (3-6 months)
 In FY2011, largely due to the various overlaps of the BALOS program with the Master of
Arts in Leadership (MA) program, Associate Dean for Graduate and Professional Studies
Christopher Sindt initiated the joining of the two programs, to form one dpeartment,
the Leadership Studies Programs (LSP). The integration of these two programs as part
of LSP has been in progress for two years. In FY2012, a social justice concentration was
added to the MA program, which in effect results in three distinct degree programs,
along with the Leadership Center, encompassing LSP.


Since FY2011, each year the LSP staff and full-time faculty assess and plan for on how to
continue to make progress in this integration. LSP staff and faculty have begun the
process for this assessment and planning for FY2013. Some of the plans for the better
integration of the three programs include: more streamlining of administrative and
operation functions; increased centralized marketing strategy and tactics; more
interaction and work planning among academic chairs and faculty; more coordinated
online technology support and instructional design; attention to curricular cohesion and
shared language regarding leadership theory, as well as better articulation of the
relevant distinctions among them; more integrated web design and text.
Create a logical path on the SMC website for prospective degree completion students to
find and learn about the BALOS program.
Establish a regular place for recruitment events (e.g., Open House) in a space
appropriate for recruiting prospective students.
Short-term (6-12 months)
 Create a more effective integration of BALOS with MA programs in LSP, more attention
on how to integrate functions and allocate responsibilities among staff. Create
increased staff time for both recruiting and advising degree-completing students by
moving process related to determining credit at admission and individual degree plans
to dedicated administrative staff to handle.
Long-term (12-24 months)
 Seek office space that allowed better integration of LSP staff; in the interim,
IT Resources (responsibility to initiate to be determined)
Immediate (3-6 months)
 Explore and acquire additional functions for Moodle, including an effective wiki function
 Investigate and acquire access to video conference calling and related technology to
allow meetings among students and instructors between on-campus class meetings, and
to allow faculty meetings to include faculty who can’t attend in person
28
VII. REFERENCES
Bolden, R., Hawkins, J., Gosling, B., & Taylor, S. (2011). Exploring leadership: Individual,
organizational, and societal perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
Day, D.V. (2012). The nature of leadership development. In D.V. Day & J. Antonakis
(Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 108-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
International Leadership Association. (n.d.). Directory of Leadership Programs. Retrieved from
http://www.ila-net.org/Resources/LPD/index.htm
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Rational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership
and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654-676.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2011). Relational leadership and gender: From hierarchy to relationality. In P.H.
Werhane, M. Painter-Morlands (Eds.), Leadership, gender and organizations. Issues in
Business Ethics, Volume 27, Part 3, 65-74, doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-9014-0_6.
Wren, J.T. (2009). Reinventing the liberal arts through leadership. In J. T. Wren, R.E. Riggio, &
M.A. Genovese (Eds.), Leadership and the liberal arts: Achieving the promise of a liberal
education (pp. 13-36). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
1
APPENDIX D: Enrollment
Enrollment (i.e. attended first course) since beginning of program
114 students in eight cohorts
20 withdrew or dropped and did not re-enroll
Cohort
Start date
ULD01
ULD02
ULD03
ULD04
ULD05
ULD06
ULD07
ULD08
TOTAL
May 2009
Sept 2009
Jan 2010
May 2010
Sept 2010
May 2011
Jan 2012
Sept 2012
Initial
enrollment
Completion
date
15
14
13
10
10
18
14
20
114
April 2011
Aug 2011
Dec 2012
April 2012
Aug 2012
April 2013
Dec 2013
Aug 2014
Completed*
or currently
enrolled
11*
11*
8*
7*
9*
13
14
19
89
Graduates (from the first 5 cohorts)
46 students completed Program
38 students have graduated = 83% graduation rate
6 students actively working to complete remaining requirements
Age, Gender, Ethnicity (all cohorts, n=89)
Age:
average 38.9 years
Gender:
47 women (53%)
42 men (47%)
Ethnicity:
66% White
18% Hispanic
14% African American
4% Asian
2
APPENDIX D: BALOS Cohort and Course Schedule May 2009 – June 2013
Summer
Trimester 1
‘09
LDSH100
Cohort
#1
2009-2010 Fiscal Year
Cohort
#1
Cohort
#2
Cohort
#3
Cohort
#4
Summer
Trimester -2
‘09
LDSH 101
Fall
Trimester – 1
‘09
LDSH 102
Fall
Trimester – 2
‘09
LDSH 103
Winter
Trimester – 1
‘10
SEM 109
Winter
Trimester – 2
‘10
LDSH 104
Summer
Trimester -1
‘10
LDSH 106
LDSH 100
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 100
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
LDSH 100
2010-2011 Fiscal Year
Cohort
#1
Cohort
#2
Cohort
#3
Cohort
#4
Cohort
#5
Cohort
#6
Summer
Trimester -2
‘10
LDSH 105
Fall
Trimester – 1
‘10
LDSH 107*
Fall
Trimester – 2
‘10
SEM 163
Winter
Trimester – 1
‘11
LDSH 108*
Winter
Trimester – 2
‘11
LDSH 110
Summer
Trimester -1
‘11
LDSH 104
LDSH 106
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
SEM 163
LDSH 108
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 104
LDSH 106
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 104
LDSH 106
LDSH 100
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 100
3
2011-2012 Fiscal Year
Cohort
#2
Cohort
#3
Cohort
#4
Cohort
#5
Cohort
#6
Cohort
#7
Summer
Trimester -2
‘11
LDSH 110
Fall
Trimester – 1
‘11
Fall
Trimester – 2
‘11
Winter
Trimester – 1
‘12
Winter
Trimester – 2
‘12
SEM 163
LDSH 108
LDSH 110
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
LDSH 104
LDSH 101
Summer
Trimester -1
‘12
SEM 163
LDSH 108
LDSH 110
LDSH 106
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
SEM 163
LDSH 108
LDSH 102
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 104
LDSH 106
LDSH 100
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
Summer
Trimester -1
‘13
2012-2013 Fiscal Year
Cohort
#5
Cohort
#6
Cohort
#7
Cohort
#8
Summer
Trimester -2
‘12
LDSH 110
Fall
Trimester – 1
‘12
Fall
Trimester – 2
‘12
Winter
Trimester – 1
‘13
Winter
Trimester – 2
‘13
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
SEM 163
LDSH 108
LDSH 110
LDSH 103
SEM 109
LDSH 104
LDSH 106
LDSH 105
LDSH 107
LDSH 100
LDSH 101
LDSH 102
LDSH 103
SEM 109
4
APPENDIX E: FACULTY
Summer 2009 – Summer 2011
Fall 2011 through Fall 2012
Tenure track: 2*
Adjuncts: 1
Lecturers: 10
Tenure track: 0
Adjuncts: 1
Lecturers: 11
2 tenure track : 11 non-tenure
track
0 tenure track : 12 non-tenure
track
Ethnic diversity of
faculty
12 white, 1 black
10 white, 2 black
Gender distribution of
faculty
7 female, 6 male
5 female, 7 male
7 doctorates
6 masters
(including 2 MBAs and 1 MPH)
6 doctorates
6 masters
(including 2 MBAs and 1 MPH)
Number of faculty –
tenure track, adjuncts,
lecturers
Ratio of tenure track to
non-tenure track
Academic qualifications
of faculty
*one retired, the other no longer teaches in BALOS
Faculty participation in Seminar and Jan Term
Other than the two tenured faculty who no longer teach in BALOS, one Lecturer teaches
Seminar and the Academic Chair of BALOS has taught in Jan Term once.