Committee on Graduate Education and Academic Programs
Draft Recommendations
Submitted June 18, 2009
Introduction
The University currently offers 56 graduate degree programs, organized across 21
departments. The UML Factbook reported Fall 2008 headcounts of 509 doctoral degree
students, 1438 Master’s degree students, and 904 nondegree graduate students. Over the
past five years, since 2004, the number and percentage of graduate students has grown by
31.2%, from 2172, to the current level of 2851. Graduate students now represent 28.3% of
the total student body. The numbers of Master’s degree and Certificate students,
especially online, have been growing, while the number of doctoral students has remained
relatively level.
To be recognized as a world-class university, U. Mass. Lowell must attract and produce a
substantial number of outstanding scholars across many disciplines. To accomplish this
2020 vision, the current graduate programs must be strengthened, in quality and
quantity, and new graduate programs must be developed. Understanding this endeavor,
the 2020 Strategic Planning Committee on Graduate Education and Academic Programs
embraced a University-wide mission statement for graduate education: “Building
internationally recognized graduate programs one student at a time”. The phrase “one
student at a time” intends to convey, not a sense of cautious gradualism in growth, but
rather attention to the care and nurturing that must be invested in successfully
recruiting, educating, graduating, and reaping alumni support for each student.
To achieve this mission the following draft statement aims to recognize the essential
diversity across disciplines, while formulating recommendations that can improve
coordination of efforts throughout the University. The Committee drafted a general “onepage” academic plan, as a template from which every department was invited to draft its
own preliminary document; the respective departmental drafts are attached as appendices
to this brief report; they portray the perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats of the individual graduate programs. It is important to note that most of these
drafts are “placeholders” for further work, not consensus statements.
The academic plans now serve as the framework from which faculty can coordinate efforts
in building curriculum and new graduate research initiatives as well as the broad range of
student related support services within every department. Offering the opportunity for
positive change through this method of interdepartmental exchange, departments will be
encourage to review and modify their academic plans annually as their graduate programs
evolve and grow.
This report reflects the collective efforts of our 24 member committee. We met five times
as a total group and each person took responsibility for preparing and reacting to drafts.
We also invited submissions from departments not represented on the Committee, to
afford all departments an opportunity to present ideas for the future of graduate
education. Having identified the objectives and strategies detailed in the Committee’s
1
academic plan on the following page, the committee members itemized the plans for
implementation and discussed the details necessary to achieving these plans as outlined
in this draft report.
During the fall semester, we anticipate conducting a number of additional meetings to
elaborate on recommended plans and review the entire document before submitting a final
report in December 2009.
A “One-Page” Academic Plan
Building internationally recognized graduate programs one student at a time
Vision
To identify strategies for becoming internationally recognized for the quality of our
graduate programs. To review and analyze the core measures of success for academic
programs such as student enrollment, scholarly activity, professional accreditations and
AQAD.
Mission
Building internationally recognized graduate programs one student at a time
Objectives
• Improve public awareness of U. Mass. Lowell’s growing number of graduate programs
• Expand recruitment of domestic and international students
• Increase student enrollment in the Bachelor’s Plus One Master’s Programs
• Leverage existing academic activities to develop new interdisciplinary degree programs
• Prepare students to address regional, national and international issues in a global
society
• Further develop distinctive doctoral programs offering new academic opportunities to
students
Strategies
• Co-ordinate undergraduate advising to increase awareness of Plus One Master’s
Opportunities
• Develop a corporate, non-profit and public sector network for populating academic
programs
• Facilitate opportunities for faculty to organize new programs with administrative
support
• Host forums for departmental and interdepartmental dialog on graduate education
• Assess student learning, student satisfaction, and career placement
Plans
• Improve Web-based presence for all academic and graduate research programs
• Generate a graduate program’s profile catalog encompassing campus-wide activities
• Encourage the formation of corporate and philanthropic sponsored endowed fellowships
• Review and analyze existing academic programs measuring enrollment and scholarly
activity
2
• Expand support for departments addressing professional accreditations and AQAD
reviews
• Establish university-wide graduate faculty focus groups to unify programs, efforts and
activities
• Develop a student ambassador outreach program to raise admission levels
• Analyze workforce requirements in the profit, non-profit, and public sectors
• Survey students to acquire input on ways to improve their academic and campus
experience
A Summary of Discussions – “How Positive Change is Possible”
With a draft of the academic plan completed as exhibited on the prior page, the Committee
on Graduate Education and Academic Programs reached consensus that the two highest
priority Plans for strengthening Graduate Education programs were to improve the: 1)
Web presence and 2) print materials of each department. In preparation for this meeting,
members were asked to review web sites from other universities that they considered to be
models for us to emulate. We viewed and discussed several of these during our meeting.
The group derived eight principles that characterized the sites regarded as most effective.
1. A clear concise organization of information with an intuitive easily navigated
framework
2. A visually exciting appearance with photos of students and faculty
3. Consistency in appearance among frames with links between day school and continuing
ed.
4. Information that is relevant to the discipline with students who can explain the content
5. Coordinated content informing prospective students how to apply and obtain financial
aid, while equally valuable to current students seeking information on courses and current
events
6. an easily accessible current calendar of events in each department
7. any archived pages deleted to avoid students accessing outdated policies and
information.
8. An FAQ section addressing Financial Aid and job opportunities along with Admissions
and International Student issues.
When discussing the requirement for printed materials, it was agreed that the “Graduate
Profiles” book is not a good use of funds. Much of the information was outdated before the
thousands of printed copies arrived. Rather, one-page inserts that provide accurate,
current information about each department should be available and the pertinent pages
could be chosen and inserted into a UML Graduate Programs folder depending on the
nature of the event. All printed and Web-based materials should take into consideration
recommendations from the 2020 Branding and Marketing Committee
At a subsequent meeting, the Committee reconvened to finish its initial discussions on
their academic plan. First as special topic focus groups and then reporting back to the
entire assembly of members for open discussions, the Committee addressed the Plans
while the individual comments were recorded for generating this summary. While the
Committee recognized that a range of issues were involved for attracting and retaining
3
high quality graduate students, financial support and outreach seemed central to their
discussions. The following three avenues of financial support were identified.
1) Encourage the formation of corporate and philanthropic sponsored endowed fellowships
by identifying alumni and corporate/private entities to participate. Administrative
support staff could be expanded to free up Deans and Chairs to solicit industry and
develop alumni ties for recruiting and fundraising. Companies could provide fellowship
and internship opportunities.
2) Increase the funding for graduate Teaching and Research Assistantships (TAs and
RAs) to expand availability for University-wide programs while increasing the stipend
levels to be competitive nationally.
3) Tie into Career Service Resources to develop co-ops and internships with active faculty
participation and attendance at Career Fairs
During discussions on expanding the University’s outreach to prospective students, the
Committee believed both visibility and rankings should be improved through better Web
presence and careful attention to ranking metrics such as class size and faculty/adjunct
ratios. The committee also discussed expanding personal interactions through alumni
involvement with student recruiting by adding alumni profiles on departmental websites
and keeping alumni active through departmental magazines, newsletters and annual
invitational events such as banquets and receptions. Additional comments on raising
admission levels included developing a student ambassador program and student survey
to acquire input on their impression of the academic and campus experience.
Strengthening graduate education at the University, the Committee recommends review
and analysis of existing academic programs measuring enrollment and scholarly activity.
The Admissions Office already collects a wide range of admissions and enrolled student
data regarding acceptance and denial including: test scores, GPA, previous education,
gender, ethnicity, etc. The Committee believes there is a need for more administrative
support to effectively utilize this data for improving University programs
Committee members also discussed the usefulness of collecting more qualitative data
regarding why students chose UML, which will help us understand the ambassadorship of
faculty and students as well as the effectiveness of advertising campaigns. Qualitative
data could be collected through departmental review of statement of purpose letters,
references, and during in-take interviews. This would also require support of designated
faculty, additional grad coordinator responsibilities, or administrative support.
Directing the outcome of the gathered information with similar-tier schools as
comparisons, enrollment data could be analyzed by program and type of degree. Regional
and local trends along with shifts could be identified and measured. Additional staff or
faculty release to conduct exit interviews would provide the qualitative information. For
quality outcome assessments, a report should be developed summarizing student
involvement in professional organizations and peer-reviewed activities such as
publications, conference presentations, and documented service to community. Where
appropriate, data should be collected for standardized professional measures, such as the
4
MTEL for teacher certification and the state-board of nursing licensure exam should be
included. Access to Alumni Office and administrative support to collect data regarding
post-grad professional placement would also be considered critical data. All suggestions
would require additional resources.
Critical to the growth of every graduate program, the Committee discussed expanding
support for departments addressing professional accreditations and AQAD reviews. While
the web-based tools provided by the University are helpful, the Committee suggested
forming an AQAD Task Force comprised of individuals who have experience with the
process. These individuals would be able to assist departments by explaining the process,
making suggestions and providing insight on past successes; saving faculty time.
Acknowledging that professional accreditations are more work, the Committee felt
additional support would be required when departments are going through the
accreditation review. For this process, there should be a faculty coordinator, who has been
given a reduced course load, for organizing the data along with designated clerical support
during the process. There needs to be a single, coordinated data reporting side of the
house. Currently some graduate data needs to be produced in Graduate Admissions, some
is available from Institutional Research – There is more data collection relative to
undergraduates than there is at the graduate level.
Post-review support is critical in order to follow-up on recommendations and action items.
In examining previous reviews, often the same recommendations are made and the same
deficiencies are pointed out. There aren’t sufficient resources to bring about change. We
need to be strategic about our efforts and link to the percent that each measure will affect
rankings.
The Committee suggested establishing university-wide faculty focus groups to unify the
academic programs, efforts and activities. These groups of faculty could look at curricula
across the University and assess where it makes sense to share resources. (Then
implement it.) Tapping into libraries, IT and the Faculty Development Center, knowledge
regarding what’s available and how to best utilize resources could be shared for evolving
entire graduate programs.
Understanding that the best outcome for students is driven by employment opportunities,
the Committee has recommended that the University analyze workforce requirements in
the profit, non-profit and public sectors. Achieving this goal, the Committee discussed
gathering information available from the President’s Office (Data on Biotech and Life
Sciences), Donahue Institute, Office of Economic Development (state level) and US Bureau
of Labor Statistics (federal/national). Focus groups with Advisory Board members and
Industry Partners could review what skills are required and how we can train our
graduates to meet those needs? It was recommended that every department should have
an active Advisory Board to insure academic programs match targeted growth to job
projections (“jobs of the future”). The Advisory board could work collaboratively with
Career Services to establish a feedback loop with employers (co-ops, internships and job
placements) along with non-profit, public and business associations such as the Mass Biotech Council and Mass Software Council. A University support staff person would be
5
required to conduct research on industry/employment trends and keep current
information.
6