Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
Evaluation Committee Report
Year Seven Comprehensive Evaluation
Brigham Young University-Idaho
Rexburg, Idaho
April 28-30, 2014
A Confidential Report Prepared by the
Evaluation Committee for the
Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. EVALUATORS .......................................................................................................................................... 1
II. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1
III. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................................................. 2
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 2
INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS ................................................................................................................... 2
SCALE AND SUSTAINABILITY......................................................................................................................... 3
IV. STANDARD ONE: MISSION, CORE THEMES AND EXPECTATIONS ................................................ 3
MISSION (STANDARD 1.A) ........................................................................................................................... 3
CORE THEMES (STANDARD 1.B) .................................................................................................................. 3
V. STANDARD TWO: RESOURCES AND CAPACITY ............................................................................... 4
GOVERNANCE, GOVERNING BOARD, LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT (STANDARDS 2.A.1. TO 2. A.11) ........... 4
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES (STANDARD 2.A. 12 TO 2.A.30) ........................................................................ 6
HUMAN RESOURCES (STANDARD 2.B) ......................................................................................................... 8
EDUCATION RESOURCES (STANDARD 2.C) ................................................................................................... 9
STUDENT SUPPORT RESOURCES (STANDARD 2.D) ..................................................................................... 12
LIBRARY AND INFORMATION RESOURCES (STANDARD 2.E) ......................................................................... 15
FINANCIAL RESOURCES (STANDARD 2.F) ................................................................................................... 17
PHYSICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE (STANDARD 2.G) .......................................................... 18
VII. STANDARD THREE: PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................. 20
INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING (STANDARD 3.A) ................................................................................................ 20
VIII. STANDARD FOUR: THEME PLANNING, ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT ........................... 20
CORE THEME PLANNING (STANDARD 3.B) .................................................................................................. 21
ASSESSMENT (STANDARD 4.A) .................................................................................................................. 23
IMPROVEMENT (STANDARD 4.B) ................................................................................................................ 25
IX. STANDARD FIVE: MISSION FULFILLMENT, ADAPTATION AND SUSTAINABILITY .................... 26
MISSION FULFILLMENT (STANDARD 5.A)..................................................................................................... 26
ADAPTATION AND SUSTAINABILITY (STANDARD 5.B) .................................................................................... 26
VIII. SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 27
X. COMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 28
I. Evaluators
Dr. Steven G. Olswang, Provost, City University of Seattle (1A Mission, 1B Core Themes, 2A 111, 3A Institutional Planning, 5A Mission Fulfillment, 5B Sustainability)
Dr. William O’Shea, Director, Institutional Research and Assessment, Pacific University (1A
Mission, 1B Core Themes, 2A 1-11, 3A Institutional Planning, 5A Mission Fulfillment, 5B
Sustainability)
Dr. Paul Presson, Associate Provost for Academic Support and ALO, Westminster College (1A
Mission, 1B Core Themes, 2A 1-11, 3A Institutional Planning, 5A Mission Fulfillment, 5B
Sustainability)
Dr. Mark Smillie, Associate Professor, Carroll College (2C Educational Resources, 2A 12-14,
2A 27-29, 2A 21-26, 4A Assessment, 5A Mission Fulfillment, 5B Sustainability)
Ms. Susan Hopp, Vice President of Student Affairs and Athletics, Linfield College (2B Human
Resources, 2D Student Services, 2A 15-17, 2A 18-20, 5A Mission Fulfillment, 5B
Sustainability)
Ms. Sue Kopp, Director of Library Services, Warner Pacific College (2E Library, 5A Mission
Fulfillment, 5B Sustainability)
Mr. Carl B. Vance, Vice President for business and Finance/Treasurer, Lewis and Clark College
(2F Financial Resources, 2G Physical and Technological Infrastructure, 5A Mission Fulfillment,
5B Sustainability)
Dr. Pamela J. Goad, Vice President, Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
(Liaison)
II. Introduction
Brigham Young University-Idaho (BYU-Idaho) is a private four year college owned and
operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Located in Rexburg, Idaho, the
campus offers programs leading to the 18 different Associate degrees and 70 Bachelor’s degrees.
The institution delivers its instruction currently in three modes, face-to-face, hybrid, and online.
BYU-Idaho currently serves over 13,000 full time equivalent students.
BYU-Idaho has been a member of the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
since 1936, originally as Ricks College. In 2000, the Board of Trustees directed the college to
transition from a two year school to a baccalaureate institution, and changed its name to Brigham
Young University-Idaho. In 2001, the Commission granted BYU-Idaho candidacy as a
baccalaureate institution, and the institution underwent a full scale review in 2004 and was
thereafter accredited as a baccalaureate granting institution. Since 2004, the institution submitted
1
several required reports, including its Year One Report in 2011, and it's Year Three Report in
2012. The revised accreditation schedule meant that BYU-Idaho underwent this Year Seven
Evaluation Visit in 2014.
Brigham Young University-Idaho prepared a Comprehensive Year Seven Self-Evaluation Report
and provided it to the Evaluation Committee in a timely fashion. The Self Study was structured
following the revised Standards of the Commission. The Evaluation Committee found these
materials to be accurate in describing the University, and useful in its assessment of the
institution. While the report was quite descriptive, the Evaluation Committee found it did not
possess the kind of data it needed in full to do its assessment, and the Evaluation Committee had
to cull through materials and request many additional materials once it was on campus to fully
understand the nature of the resources available for the University to fulfill it self-reporting
requirements. The University prepared a team room which was supplied with the some of the
backup documentation necessary to support the analysis in the Self Evaluation and the
University staff graciously provided the additional materials the Evaluation Committee members
needed in the process of review when it was requested.
The Evaluation Committee met with administration, faculty, staff, and students of the institution
and the Commissioner of the Church Education System, to which BYU-Idaho belongs, the
Secretary of the Board, and representatives of the Board of Trustees via teleconference during its
on-campus visit on April 28-30, 2014. The Evaluation Committee roster precedes this
introduction. The Committee was impressed with BYU-Idaho, its efforts with compliance with
accreditation standards and its commitment to students. The Evaluation Committee is
appreciative of all the courtesies and graciousness extended to it by the staff of BYU-Idaho in the
course of its visit.
III. Eligibility Requirements
Student Achievement
BYU-Idaho identifies and publishes the expected learning outcomes for each of its degree and
certificate programs. BYU-Idaho engages in regular and ongoing assessment to validate student
achievement of these learning outcomes
Institutional Effectiveness
BYU-Idaho systematically applies clearly defined evaluation and planning procedures, assesses
the extent to which it achieves its mission and core themes, uses the results of assessment to
effect institutional improvement, and periodically publishes the results to its constituencies.
Through these processes BYU-Idaho regularly monitors its internal and external environments to
determine how and to what degree changing circumstances may impact the institution and its
ability to ensure its viability and sustainability.
2
Scale and Sustainability
BYU-Idaho, with the continued support of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
demonstrates that its operational scale (e.g., enrollment, human and financial resources and
institutional infrastructure) is sufficient to fulfill its mission and achieve its core themes in the
present and will be sufficient to do so in the foreseeable future.
IV. Standard One: Mission, Core Themes and Expectations
Mission (Standard 1.A)
The BYU-Idaho mission unambiguously provides a clear sense of purpose and direction for the
institution:
“BYU-Idaho is affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Its
mission is to:
(1) Build testimonies of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and encourage living its
principles.
(2) Provide a quality education for students of diverse interests and abilities.
(3) Prepare students for lifelong learning, for employment, and for their roles as
citizens and parents.
(4) Maintain a wholesome academic, cultural, social and spiritual environment.”
Core Themes (Standard 1.B)
Consistent with the Mission, the institution has established four core themes. The core themes
are derived directly from the mission statement, and each core theme is a set of key institutional
objectives.
3
BYU-Idaho has defined the fulfillment of its mission by its success in meeting the stated
outcomes associated with key institutional objectives. A set of outcomes has been established
for each of these objectives. And associated with each of these outcomes is a set of indicators of
achievement. The indicators of achievement are the specific performance metrics associated with
a given outcome.
The movement towards fulfillment of its mission is ascertained through a review of the
University Report Card. The University Report Card is the top layer of a web-based environment
for reporting the results of institutional assessment activity. The University Report Card is a
compilation of the results of institutional assessment activity over the past several years. It
provides a series of dashboards for the various outcomes, an area for key data and reports, and
summary notes on the results of assessment activity. It is a dynamic: updates and improvements
posted regularly. The evaluation committee was impressed with the "Report Card" as a means to
display the institution’s program effectiveness information and to foster access and discussion of
the status of the education offered and its outcomes.
V. Standard Two: Resources and Capacity
Governance, Governing Board, Leadership and Management (Standards 2.A.1. to 2. A.11)
BYU-Idaho is one of four institutions within the Church Education System (CES). The three other
institutions of higher education within CES include Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, BYUHawaii, Laie, Hawaii, and LDS Business College, Salt Lake City, Utah.
There is a single Board of Trustees over the system, and even though each of the four entities is legally
separate and accredited, the Board meets at one time to address the business of CES and each institution.
The Board Secretary then parses out the items specifically related to each institution and those become the
minutes of the individual institution.
4
The Board exercises oversight of all University activities. It adopts the mission of the University,
approves major institutional policies, appoints and reviews the president, determines all major programs
of study and the operating and capital budgets. With the close connection of CES and the Board members
to the Church, adequate and stable funding has been provided over the years for the operation and growth
of the University.
The Board of Trustees consists of members of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints and other prominent Church leaders who are appointed by the First Presidency and
ratified by the Board. Members of the board and its officers have no contractual, employment or financial
interest in the University. An Executive Committee of the Board is appointed to engage in more detailed
reviews of matters concerning the governance of the University. The full Board of Trustees meets
monthly except in July. The Executive Committee of the Board also meets monthly except in July. The
Executive Committee rotates its meetings so it meets periodically at the BYU-Idaho campus.
The CES has two primary officers. The Commissioner fills the role of coordinator for the Board, and
while President Clark reports to the CES Board, his system operational contact is through the
Commissioner. In addition, there is a Secretary to the Board, who is responsible for support of the Board,
and plays the important role of ensuring the Board actions and Minutes are recorded systemically and
separately for each of the CES institutions.
The chief executive officer of BYU-Idaho is Dr. Kim B. Clark, who serves as the full-time President of
the University. Serving since 2005, President Clark was formerly Dean of the Harvard Business School.
The President’s Council consists of the President, the four Vice Presidents and key members of each of
the areas for which the Vice Presidents are responsible. The President’s Council is supported by four
councils each headed by a vice president. The President’s Council and the Vice Presidents’ councils are
supported by key advisory councils, including the University Council and the Campus Leadership Forum.
The University Council, convened monthly, assembles a wide variety of campus leaders and experts who
represent the various campus constituencies and perspectives. The Campus Leadership Forum, convened
three times each year, brings the entire campus leadership together to review proposals and initiatives
being considered. A number of other committees and councils are involved in ongoing institutional
planning and decision-making as well.
Governance of BYU-Idaho is highly structured, with decisions made through the departments, through
Chairs, to Deans, and to the central administration. With the approach to leadership used at BYU-Idaho,
with most faculty in their career rotating through an administrative role, it is presumed that all faculty are
given the opportunity to participate in governance. Indeed, Faculty members may also join the Faculty
Association, an organization of faculty-elected representatives, but this body has no formal role in the
governance of the University. Members of the staff participate in governance within their respective areas
administered by the Vice Presidents. Staff members are also members of the Campus Leadership Forum
and the University Council.
The President has a monthly open question and answer session which all personnel may attend, but data
discloses these are not well attended. So despite the intentions of governance participation, it is stifled by
the strict organizational conformity and hierarchy and, in turn, the collective faculty view on many
academic issues is not able to be expressed. The evaluation committee recommends that BYU-Idaho
implement an opportunity for meaningful consideration of the views of the faculty.
5
The University makes a conscious effort to ensure that student involvement occurs by assigning students
to many of the major councils and committees which serve to operate the institution. Student
representatives sit on the President’s Council, Academic Council and various student services councils.
Students are given significant responsibility on the Honor Code Council in the enforcement of standards
relating to conduct and appearance. Students play a major role in the adjudication of campus parking
violation appeals. There probably are no happier or more involved students at any institution in the
Northwest region than those at BYU-Idaho.
The affiliation of the University with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provides further
opportunities for student involvement in leadership and governance through church service and
responsibilities. There are many local ecclesiastical units in which students are the primary members.
Church opportunities enable students to grow socially and spiritually as leaders, in harmony with the
Mission and core themes of BYU-Idaho.
Policies and Procedures (Standard 2.A. 12 to 2.A.30)
The typical types of academic policies are included in the college Catalog and on the BYU-Idaho
webpages. These include policies for student records, student status, credit requirements, class
absences, GPA requirements for extracurricular activities, electronic devices in the classroom,
sexual harassment, confidentiality of student records, academic standards, and policies on
academic records. Policies regarding access to and use of library and information resources are
published on the library’s webpage. These include policies on use of library materials, types of
collections, process for challenging inappropriate library materials, use of cell phones, library
approved programs, copyright law, and food in the library.
Transfer evaluation is covered separately in the Catalog, and according to the Dean, articulation
agreements exist, or continue to be articulated. Satisfaction with results of the transfer process
was generally good, though some students said not everything transferred as they hoped it would.
All of the policies related to, and describing, students’ rights and responsibilities are readily
available and accessible. Because of BYU-Idaho’s relationship to the Church and its requirement
that students meet faith-based standards, there are clearly defined expectations for student
conduct, personal grooming and dress, student living and ethics. There is a clear understanding
and commitment among students that the Honor Code is a defining statement describing how
they are to live their personal and academic lives at BYU-Idaho. The orientation process, Office
of the Honor Code, Student Support Office, and Dean of Students Office all reinforce the
message about standards.
Staff and faculty are nurturing and encourage students who violate any one of the codes to
change behavior, recommit to the principles of the University and learn from their mistake.
There is a clearly defined process to be re-admitted to the University following a dismissal.
Additionally, all students must be reviewed through a continuing endorsement process. The Dean
of Students Review Council process is explained in print and electronically and there are
displays bearing the Honor Code prominently on campus. The University Catalog clearly
contains all policies and explains due process and procedures students should follow for
complaints or grievances. The standards by which students are expected to conduct themselves
6
are reinforced by Church related activities as each student also belongs to a Church ward. The
University does an exemplary job of combining student rights and responsibilities with Church
expectations and requirements and is to be recognized for the excellent communication to
students about the campus culture.
The admissions requirements and policies are published in the Catalog and are consistent with
the mission and values of access and the education of disciple-leaders of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints. The process for ecclesiastical endorsement is clear and easy to follow
and the assignment of students to a track (schedule of academic courses) is clear. Assignment to
an enrollment track is based upon student desires and institutional capacity.
BYU-Idaho has an exemplary student activities program that fosters the personal, interpersonal
and leadership development of students within the faith-based tradition and culture of the
campus. The budget that was previously allocated to intercollegiate sports at Ricks College is
now used to support an active 12 month student leadership, athletic and activities program at the
institution. The programs are well publicized and students report a high degree of satisfaction
with the level of support and variety of activities available. The programs are regularly evaluated
and assessed and are connected to the core themes and mission of the University with regard to
practicing disciple leadership, providing a wholesome living environment and, where applicable,
preparing students for future roles. The BYU-Idaho Learning Model is replicated in the cocurricular programs. Students reported that it would “be impossible” not to know of all
opportunities for engagement and appreciate that all students are eligible for all activities. BYUIdaho has plans to use ecclesiastical and Church units throughout the nation to replicate as many
activities and leadership opportunities for on-line students as face-to-face students.
BYU-Idaho specifically identifies with the highest ethical standards associated with the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. A review of the University’s commitment to academic
integrity is accomplished through its review of the Academic Honesty policy. A working student
complaint process is available to students.
Faculty procedures for grievances are outlined in the Faculty Guide. Conflict of Interest policies
exist for the faculty and are published in the Faculty Guide, and similar policies exist for staff
employees and the Governing Board. Faculty and staff must sign a Conflict of Time
Commitment Disclosure Statement annually. Typical conflicts of interest are identified in the
policy. The Honor Code further specifies standards expected in the lives of all students, faculty,
and employees, and the Code includes defined standards for academic honesty, student life, dress
and grooming, ecclesiastical endorsement and church attendance. Students and employees must
receive an endorsement from their ecclesiastical leader certifying they are living in accordance
with these guidelines. Faculty make a voluntarily commitment to the principles of the Honor
Code, as a condition of employment, and must be worthy of a temple recommend. Faculty losing
the temple recommendation are dismissed; however, there is an appeal process. The University
makes explicit commitments however, both in writing and verbally, to the success of its faculty.
The University has an Intellectual Property Policy which clarifies ownership of intellectual
property, granting that ownership to originators of any work created, made, or originated by that
person. It gives the University the right to license these works. However, when created at the
7
University’s “request,” the university owns the intellectual work, which raises a concern because
it could conceivably include any course material which a faculty member is asked to create, etc.
This may be inconsistent with national standards on intellectual property. The University may
want to consider reviewing the language in this policy.
The institution publishes and adheres to a policy on Academic Freedom which commits the
University to the free pursuit and dissemination of knowledge consistent with the school’s
mission statement. Faculty are entrusted with “individual academic freedom” and encouraged to
pursue truth according to appropriate methodologies in their field. However, in the Policy, the
University reserves right to protect the University’s essential identity and mission as an LDS
institution: Faculty are free to discuss and analyze Church doctrine, but they may not engage in
“expression” privately or publically that knowingly contradicts or opposes Church doctrine.
Though the distinction made here can raise a concern about the specific difference between
“discuss/analyze” versus “express”, the commission has accepted the policy in its action last
year. The Committee was not informed of any incidents where this policy was tested, nor did
any member of the Committee hear any complaints from faculty or administration.
BYU-Idaho is very open and specific about its relationship with the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints, and this affiliation provides for consistency among its announcements,
statements and publications. Faculty, staff and students are endorsed members of the Church
and all show explicit awareness of the mission of the University. Academic goals and objectives
are explicitly aligned with the mission and the University’s religious commitments. University
standards are designed to support and strengthen the Honor Code, which all faculty, staff, and
students must support in one-way or another. Faculty, staff and students require yearly
endorsements from ecclesiastical leaders, which attest to the moral and spiritual integrity of each
individual, which the University refers to as wholesomeness.
Human Resources (Standard 2.B)
BYU-Idaho has experienced very rapid student enrollment growth for several consecutive years,
with the exception of the last year which was caused by a change in the age of eligibility for
Mission service. Expectations are that enrollment will significantly increase in the next few
years as these students return to school. As a result, there is a significant strain on hiring and
recruitment processes. The University initiative to create as many student employee positions as
possible has further resulted in reduced full-time professional and support staff. This has had a
benefit in providing student work opportunities and had a detrimental impact on the quality of
service provided to students in some instances.
In many areas, there is a well-defined training program to prepare student employees for their
work responsibilities. Examples were observed in the HR office, in the auditing functions where
students assume responsibility for project-based work that is connected with their academic
programs and in all student activities and leadership areas. In other areas, it was reported that
staff are struggling to keep up with the training needs of students and the turnover of student
employees. The development of the Student Leadership Guidebook is evidence that the
University understands the challenges associated with student employment. The growth in the
use of student employees is to be complimented in terms of student learning and connection to
the core theme of preparing students for future roles. However, the University will need to
8
continually focus on providing quality training for supervisors of student employees and work to
recognize areas where student employment may not be in the best interest of students or
departments. The University has recognized the need for high-quality training of supervisors and
has recently hired a full-time person in Human Resources whose sole role is training managers
and supervisors.
Position descriptions are accurate and updated regularly, and employees believe (as stated in
conversations and interviews) that they have adequate input with supervisors and managers to
address and concerns over position descriptions.
Faculty, staff and administrators in key leadership positions recognize the difficulties the
University faces in the recruitment of qualified personnel and faculty. There is a limited pool of
applicants who are qualified professionally and who meet the faith-based requirements. It
appears to be particularly challenging to find women applicants. Faculty mentioned several
strategies that could be employed to find qualified male and female applicants and staff
mentioned that it is important to expand the hiring network. As the University grows it will be
increasingly important to hire highly qualified personnel to meet its professional needs. An
interesting note is that several departments reported intentional development of “next generation
leaders” and actively seek to identify staff/administrators who are capable of assuming key
leadership and management positions.
Administrators and staff who participated in interviews reported that they are evaluated
regularly, and that the evaluation process is fair and consistent. The consistent use of stewardship
reviews, where evaluation and budgeting is done on an annual basis, is part of the institutional
culture and feeds in to the planning and budgeting process in a logical manner. All stewardship
reviews analyzed showed clear analysis of need based upon data (often several years’ worth),
logical budgeting and targeted performance feedback.
BYU-Idaho has staff development programs, generous tuition remission benefits and
departmental budgets for both in-house training and development where subject experts are
brought to campus, as well as for off-campus professional development. There is a commitment
to promoting talented staff to new responsibilities and identified methods of transition from one
position to another.
Education Resources (Standard 2.C)
University academic programs appear to meet general content standards. Faculty have the
appropriate degrees in their fields. On-line courses are normally developed by regular faculty to
fit learning objectives in face-to-face courses, though there is some concern that not all online
courses match the learning outcomes of similar courses offered in face-to-face mode.
University outcomes are published in the Catalog, but not all program or course learning
outcomes are included there. Course outcomes are typically included in course syllabi, but there
is no institutional effort to collect and review syllabi, nor does the institution publish any uniform
directions about the content of those syllabi, specifically about including learning outcomes and
how those learning outcomes should be written. Program outcomes have been designated by
programs for outcomes and assessment purposes, and these outcomes have been analyzed
9
assessed and reviewed as part of that process for the last several years. Many of these program
or department outcomes are published in the department webpages, but this is not unilaterally the
case. The University should ensure uniform consistency among all departments and programs in
this area.
Degree programs show understandable and coherent design. Courses are sequenced in a logical
manner, moving from introductory courses emphasizing breadth, to more in depth upper level
courses. With the advent of the Foundations courses, which take up approximately a third of the
credits required for graduation, some programs are moving away from introductory survey
courses in their disciplines.
Faculty are generally involved in the design, creation and revision of curriculum, but must have
all curricular changes approved by a Curriculum Committee consisting of Associate Deans for
each of the six colleges and a representative from the Foundations program. As Associate Deans
are appointed on rotating, three-year appointments from BYU-Idaho faculty, the University
considers this entire process is faculty directed.
In the case of on-line courses, the situation is a little different with the on-line teaching working
as a separate college. Teaching faculty initially provided (2008) only the content for the course,
which was created and designed by online designers. Campus faculty were not always even the
faculty teaching in these courses, and often the courses continued on without the input from
campus faculty, precluding the ability to edit or change online courses to keep up with changes
made in parallel face to face classes. There have been recent steps by the new Dean of Online
Education to rectify this situation; currently faculty teaching online courses have the ability to
edit those courses, and courses created several years ago are being reviewed and updated on an
ongoing basis.
Faculty with teaching responsibilities take collective responsibility for fostering and assessing
student achievement through their own courses and, with their chairs, the learning outcomes of
their department or program. Several persons asserted that faculty are considered the owners of
their courses, and given autonomy for designing, implementing, revising and assessing their
success. The University adopted a Learning Model, a program developed in 2007, aimed at
learning success for BYU-Idaho students; it was created initially by the faculty at large, and used
by all faculty in their courses. This is an “active” learning model, encouraging and requiring
student involvement in their learning, with explicit religious-inspired principles brought to bear
on the learning process. It champions spiritual preparation, individual preparation, teaching one
another, and pondering/proving. Student feedback about the learning model was positive.
The Faculty play a meaningful, though not final, role in the selection of new faculty. Faculty
committees, created after the approval of new positions, draft job announcements and review
applications, select the top candidates for campus visits, and conduct the interviews. As part of
this on-campus visit process, candidates also interview with college administration, including the
Academic Dean and Associate Deans, the President, and ecclesiastical representatives, and teach
a day in an existing scheduled class where they are observed by departmental faculty. Faculty
committees, Associate Deans, Deans, representatives of the Human Resources Department, and
10
the Academic Vice President all make recommendations to the President who makes the decision
about who to hire.
For faculty of online courses, applications, which include CVs, resumes and transcripts, are
solicited through the Online Learning department. These are forwarded to department chairs for
review and approval. The top candidates are given a 2 week on-line course from the online
learning department. If they fail, the next candidate is given the course. If they are successful,
they must participate in 18 (for BYU-Idaho faculty) to 40 hours (non-BYU-Idaho faculty) of
training, which is effectively paid orientation. If they pass the training, they are offered a
position to teach. Their performance is monitored by web analytics and reviewed by the Online
Dean. In the case of deficiencies, online Faculty are contacted and development plans are
determined, or in the case of serious deficiencies, further contracts are not offered. Campus
faculty have very little role in the decision-making for these faculty, and are sometimes not
involved in the process at all.
Librarians interact with faculty in all departments, and customized research instruction sessions
have been created as well as research guides (called “LibGuides”) for assignments and courses.
Currently, the University grants credit for prior experiential learning in languages; 12 credits are
granted after the completion of a 300 level language class for students who speak the language in
question (usually as the result of a completed two year mission trip to another country). The
University has begun to offer “competency” courses online, which operate on a kind of “three
strikes” principle—failure of three of the required tests results in closing of the course without
credit. These courses are few in number currently, and no limits have been placed on the amount
of credit a student can earn through these courses. This issue is recognized by the Associate
Dean of Online Education and a policy is being developed.
Transfer evaluation is the responsibility of BYU-Idaho, and according to the Dean, articulation
agreements exist, or continue to be articulated. Satisfaction with results of transfer process was
generally good, though some students said not everything transferred as they hoped it would.
The General Education component of undergraduate programs at BYU-Idaho is called
Foundations, which is a relatively new program, in place since 2008. With the Learning Model,
Foundations was introduced at the instigation of then newly appointed President Clark, and
enjoys the attention and support of the President. Foundations offers liberal arts courses which
are separate from other courses offered at the University (no attempt is made to create “area”
requirements for General Education), and the courses are designed by interdisciplinary teams of
faculty, who then teach individual sections of the courses (there is no “team-teaching” in
Foundations). The Learning Model has been heavily integrated into the Foundations course
delivery; and faculty have been trained and mentored in its application. The Learning Model
stresses student-centered, active learning, on the model of what is now being called the “flipped”
classroom, with the clear objective to increase student learning. Program principles emphasize
courses that develop breadth and depth in student thinking, and self-learning, and these
principles have been mapped into the University Outcomes which stress leadership, lifelong
learning, critical thinking, effective communication, and engaged citizenship. Program
assessment doesn’t indicate thresholds or college goals for its outcomes, and these should be
identified quickly to improve assessment.
11
BYU-Idaho does not offer graduate programs or continuing education and non-credit courses.
Student Support Resources (Standard 2.D)
Overall, BYU-Idaho should be recognized for its clear and unwavering commitment to student
success and the provision of support services to meet the needs of individual students, in cocurricular areas that focus on leadership, understanding and practice of faith-based commitments,
and in curricular areas. Every meeting and conversation with staff, faculty and students echoed
this commitment and many exemplary programs were described, with outcomes data supplied to
support the claims. Students believe that faculty and staff go to extraordinary lengths to make
sure that each student knows how to connect with resources and has every opportunity to utilize
them. Students indicated that faculty and staff assist students in making connections between inclass and out-of-class educational experiences. One student summed up the comments of many
when he said “Learning is everywhere at BYU-I.”
Of particular note, BYU-Idaho is committed to maintaining the BYU-Idaho “stamp” for on-line
students, and the stated goal is replicate the student experience at various locations where on-line
students are located. For example, it is expected that in the future there may be 2,000 on-line
students in Riverside, CA. The University will make use of its extensive ecclesiastical unit and
Church organizational structure to provide the types of student support structures that are best
delivered face-to-face, and plans to develop on-line “self-help” tools for other support services.
Because BYU-Idaho has at the center of its mission the education of students in preparation for
life-long learning, employment and lives of disciple-leadership, the University has created
student support systems that address traditional academic support needs and social, emotional
and developmental support services for student success.
BYU-Idaho has experienced rapid growth in both on campus enrollment and enrollment in online programs. Rapidly changing student demographics requires flexible and effective student
support services. The rapid growth of on-line learning will require a flexible and adaptive model
to provide appropriate academic and support student services for that student population. There
is clear evidence that these systems are being developed with the BYU Learning Model and
support services fully considered. The departments that provide support services for students are
knowledgeable of the challenges students face and provide very professional and best-practice
student services that also incorporate ecclesiastical requirements and honor code expectations.
There is adequate career counseling available for students and the University is committing
resources to assist students with internships. Faculty are very involved with internships and many
take students on exploratory trips to connect academic programs with employment opportunities.
The Academic Discovery Center uses peer advisors to assist with career support and there is
equivalent support available for on-line students. Disability services are provided in an
appropriate manner and consistent with federal guidelines. BYU-Idaho has experienced
challenges in the growth of these services and has addressed this by re-allocating staff and
increasing the number of student employees. The Counseling and Health Services are staffed
well, but are also experiencing challenges in meeting the needs of all students due to the health
and wellness challenges more students are bringing with them. The tutoring services deserve
12
special mention as, even with rapid growth from year to year, students stated overwhelmingly
that there were always tutors available and that they were aware of how to access tutoring for
each of their classes. The use of on-line registration for tutoring sessions was praised and several
students cited the Student Learning Model as effective pedagogy.
The University publishes the required annual Clery Report and it is available on line and by
request. The Clery Report is well-written, clear and documented as required, noting reportable
crimes. The University has developed protocols for sexual misconduct and is in the process of
developing protocols for responding to the requirements of the Campus SAVE Act. There is also
a well-publicized safety campaign for students and the Office of Student Living works with
University approved landlords to certify that student living apartments meet required safety
standards. Inspections of apartments are done on an annual basis.
BYU-Idaho has developed a model of Campus Safety that relies substantially on student
employment, and like other departments on campus, has focused on training the student staff and
providing the tools to teach students to respond effectively. The Dean of Students reported that
the University has an excellent relationship with the police department of Rexburg and this,
combined with the demographics of Rexburg, allows the University to effectively staff Campus
Safety with a large contingent of student employees.
The recruitment and admission process for both domestic and international students is clearly
consistent with the mission and core themes of the university. The college has a demonstrated
belief in open access, recruiting students who have demonstrated either academic success, or the
potential to be successful academically, who meet the faith-based requirements of admission via
recommendations from ecclesiastical units and/or Churches, and who have demonstrated
leadership in non-academic areas. The Academic Discovery Center and the Student Support
Office work closely with Admissions and other support staff to ensure that students know what
to expect, understand the basis of the Foundation courses, are oriented to the University and that
the Honor Code is understood.
There are policies in place for student completion of programs/degrees that will be discontinued.
There is evidence that the policies are acceptable and workable for enrolled students,
demonstrated by written policies and the University Catalog. There was no evidence in the data
provided or conversations with students that the policies were problematic, had not been
communicated, or were inadequate for enrolled students.
BYU-Idaho informs students in a clear manner via written publications and on-line information
about its mission, core themes, academic policies and rules, and financial practices, Students are
informed where to locate the full text of policies not explicitly contained in the Catalog.
Students reported that faculty and advisors were knowledgeable about program and licensure
requirements, where applicable.
The office of Records Management and Retention is managed by the Special Collections and
Archives office under the direction of the Library. All departments follow the records retention
schedule; the policy is reviewed and updated regularly. The University utilizes a document
management system for secure storage and retrieval of records.
13
Policies related to confidentiality of student records, FERPA, etc. are published in the catalogue
and appeared to be well understood by staff, faculty and students. With respect to the Student
Affairs and Services staff, there is evidence that all trends, patterns and external requirements
that do not conflict with the Church mission are considered when developing programs and
policies that affect and benefit students. Examples of this are Title IX requirements for sexual
misconduct policies and programs related to providing service for students with disabilities.
There is evidence that the financial aid policies and programs work well for students as
demonstrated by the very low student default loan rate (below 1%) and by the low frequency of
complaints regarding financial aid packaging. The Financial Aid Office has been challenged by
the rapid growth of students as about 75% of students qualify for assistance. Additionally, the
12-month enrollment patterns provide added complexity. Financial Aid policies are well
publicized, on the web and in print and students reported that they are satisfied with the level of
financial assistance. BYU-Idaho is to be recognized for its extraordinarily low tuition, and
generous financial aid, made possible by donor and Church support. Students we met with are
aware of this and very grateful for the support. The Church support is remarkable as there is
funding from the Church to support almost 5,000 student employees working up to 20 hours a
week, without utilizing federal work-study programs
Reflective of its commitment to student learning, BYU-Idaho has an effective academic advising
system, beginning with the Foundation courses and transitioning to advising within majors and
programs. The Academic Discovery Center (Academic Affairs) and the Student Support Office
(Student Affairs) work very collaboratively to ensure that advising is done in a holistic and
consistent manner. Students expressed high satisfaction with all levels of advising and stated that
faculty will do everything they can to assist, advise and create academic schedules that allow
students to graduate on time. The track system makes this more complicated, but students
reported that advisors were knowledgeable and information they needed was available
electronically. They also reported being able to contact their advisors easily in person or
electronically and received communications quickly in response. The only concern has to do
with the increased use of student employees in the Advising Office who may not be adequately
knowledgeable about the complexity of academic programs: and some students reported
concerns with the quality of peer advising.
BYU-Idaho has developed an exemplary co-curricular program of student activities, athletic and
wellness programs, leadership development and church supported programs. They are all offered
at no cost or a very low cost. Students and survey data report a very high level of satisfaction
with the wide range of activities offered, especially with the athletic programs and facilities. The
BYU-Idaho Student Leadership Model encourages a degree of community service and this
message is re-enforced through Church teachings and ward membership. All co-curricular
programs reinforce student learning that support the core themes of developing disciple-leaders,
maintaining a wholesome environment, and when applicable, prepare students for future roles.
The policies and procedures for managing and governing these programs are clear, include a
high degree of student involvement and are funded through the Stewardship Review process.
14
BYU-Idaho does not participate in inter-collegiate athletics but, in keeping with its mission, has
an extremely sophisticated intramurals athletics program. Compliance with athletically related
governance bodies such as the NCAA is not required.
Auxiliary services consist of University Food Services, The University Store and University
Print Services, a few residence halls that will be converted to offices in the future and the Health
Center. The operations of these areas are very consistent with the University mission and
support the learning environment. In fact, it was difficult to distinguish any difference between a
self-supporting operation and one which was centrally funded. There are advisory boards and
opportunities for staff, faculty and students to serve and to provide input to these operations.
All BYU-Idaho single students under the age of 30 are required to live in BYU-Idaho Approved
Housing and only BYU-Idaho students live in housing with this relationship to the University.
The University has agreements with developers who build and maintain student housing
according to standards set by the University and who agree that the policies of the Student Living
Office form the governance of student life in the off-campus apartments. The University
mitigates landlord-tenant issues via the Housing Office.
BYU-Idaho has effective policies and procedures in place to ensure student identity and to
protect privacy of student identity. The University communicates these policies through written
communication, on-line information and orientation programs prior to matriculation and after
enrollment.
The Committee was unanimous in its appreciation for the commitment to student support, and
congratulates BYU-Idaho for its central concern for the well-being of its students and for the
personal care and concern it expends on each student’s human, spiritual, and educational
development, and especially admires the thoughtful strategies employed by BYU Idaho to
replicate the BYU-Idaho experience for its online students.
Library and Information Resources (Standard 2.E)
The David O. McKay Library at BYU-Idaho is a comfortable, well used facility where students
study and make good use of the collection. The librarians and staff are very dedicated to student
learning, as well as following the University model and core themes of training a large number
of students with future job skills. As elsewhere on campus, students come first and other job
responsibilities are lower priority.
The library’s collection covers all subject areas in appropriate currency, depth, and breadth in
support of the institution’s mission, core themes, and programs. This is especially true of the
electronic collection, funded through the Church Consortium of Libraries and Archives which
also provides a contracted ILL processing service through BYU in Provo. Librarians have been
involved with many of the online courses being developed, but they should be consulted on all
courses so they may prepare resource support for the courses. This may include an electronic
LibGuide and/or information literacy tutorials, assignment development with electronic
databases, and a contact name for online students seeking additional help in finding and using
information.
15
Librarians have involved faculty in weeding the collection in preparation of a building remodel
that will displace 39,000 books from their current location in the Library by the fall of 2014.
Along with weeding older and non-circulating books, a good number of books will be placed in
closed, compact shelving in the basement. Future access to this collection will be through the
staff fetching the requested items by request, eliminating the browsing aspect of information
retrieval. In addition, librarians have devised a form asking faculty input on curriculum program
descriptions in order to assist future collection development and the updating of the collection
development policy. OCLC collection age data, LibQual Surveys, and system analytics are
regularly used in assessing the collection.
The Library’s role in the Pathway program is still under development. Because these are nonmatriculated students, they do not have access to the proprietary online resources; and due to the
variety of locations, including international, they may not have access to local services.
Information literacy is a crucial aspect of pathway student preparation as they enter their lifelong
learning and future higher education. The Library provides a large number of online tutorials,
orientations, in class instruction, and librarians regularly roam the Library in order to be
available for student questions. A commons area within the Library was restructured so students
would have one place they could go for help with questions relating to library resources,
tutoring, and other services.
The staff is very dedicated; however staffing is an issue. Librarians are scheduled for all hours
the library is open which cause disjointed schedules for collaboration within the Library as well
as with Faculty. Often librarians pull double shifts due to regular hour commitments. Because
much time is spent on training and supervising library student workers, and serving students,
liaison work with the Faculty and other professional responsibilities take a lower priority. In
addition, Librarians may be assigned liaison roles with departments in which they have no
expertise.
It is a concern that except for two recent hires within the past year, none of the librarians or staff
have documented job descriptions other than a generic document in HR to which the University
Librarian has not had access. In addition, library employees have not been formally evaluated for
over a decade. Although Library employees are apprised verbally, a consistent interpretation of
job duties and written job descriptions that would guide annual employee review documentation
should be implemented by the University Librarian.
The University Librarian was appointed in November of 2013, formerly serving in the leadership
role of Special Collections. Following the campus model, she will serve for a specified period of
time, and then another librarian will be appointed. Unfortunately she was not trained to lead a
large unit on campus with regard to legal, supervisory, budget, or other aspects of such a
responsible position, and she does not have a formal job description outlining expectations, nor
goals and objectives that would be included in an annual review process. In addition, there are no
criteria identified in selecting and pre-training the next possible successor.
The Academic VP indicated that academics are not a top down model and that he encouraged
collaboration and retreats with faculty in order to eliminate silos; and he also indicated that the
librarians are included in this concept. Unfortunately, communication with the librarians has
16
been lost and they are no longer invited to the Curriculum Council, so they are unable to keep up
with supporting the curriculum, especially new programs, and are not supported in “bringing
along” new leadership within departments.
The Library is a wonderful place with strong, knowledgeable leadership and employees who
celebrate the students who attend the University and who fully support the institutional values. It
does appear that it has become isolated administratively and understaffed with professionally
trained and credentialed personnel.
Financial Resources (Standard 2.F)
The institution demonstrates financial stability with sufficient cash flow and reserves to support
its programs and services. Financial planning reflects available funds, realistic development of
financial resources, and appropriate risk management to ensure short-term solvency and
anticipate long-term obligations, including payment of future liabilities.
The institution is highly dependent upon financial and staffing subsidies from the Church.
Benefit plan administration, investment management and fund raising functions for BYU-Idaho
are provided by separate Church operated businesses.
At present, the Church is funding
approximately 60% of the institution’s expenses. Without these considerable subsidies, it is
unclear whether the institution would be able to demonstrate financial stability. There is no
official contract between the Church and the University that commits the Church to future levels
of funding. The entire funding relationship is based upon an ecclesiastical relationship between
the Church and the University. The Church approves institutional budgets annually each
December for the fiscal year beginning January 1, so there is very little time for the institution to
adjust if the budget is not fully approved by the Church. However the Church maintains reserves
equal to one year of expenditures for all its programs in case there is an unexpected revenue
shortfall.
Aside from the Church funding, the institution has a detailed resource planning process and
model for projecting non-tuition revenue sources. The Church funding allocation follows a
detailed well-defined process, but the final decision could be highly variable. A recent example
was the Church’s decision to lower the minimum age for mission work. This decision
announced in October 2012 reduced the institution’s 2013 tuition revenues by $7 million. It must
be noted that the Church protected BYU-Idaho from the financial impact and granted the
University a supplement to its 2014 budget approximate to the unanticipated 2013 tuition
revenue shortfall.
There is a detailed defined budget process called the Stewardship Review, which allows
departments to request and document budget needs in writing and then meet with university
leadership to discuss those needs. This annual process is data driven and exacting, holding the
units accountable for the resources requested and appropriated.
While BYU-Idaho currently receives satisfactory financial reporting through its accounting
system, the administrative software system is more than 25 years old and discussions are
underway towards identifying a replacement. Internal controls are monitored by an internal audit
17
staff supplemented by fifteen different student auditors and aided by compliance templates
provided by BYU’s Office of Compliance and Audit.
The institution utilizes a detailed Capital Needs Analysis plan for both buildings and equipment,
which minimizes deferred maintenance. Indeed, the Committee was stunned to see virtually no
buildings with deferred maintenance, a major accomplishment for any University. Long range
capital planning follows a Church-developed methodology that looks at budget projections five
years into the future. The Church pays 100% of the cost for academic capital construction, and
lends money to the institution for capital projects related to auxiliaries. The debt level ($42
million) for BYU-Idaho is low for an institution of its size and the interest rate on its debt is
between 2% and 3%.
There is a clear budgetary distinction between general operations and auxiliary operations. Net
revenues from auxiliary operations are used to support auxiliary operations.
Annual outside audits are conducted by PWC, but distribution of the audit results is tightly
limited. There have been no management letters issued by PWC for the past three years.
BYU-Idaho’s relationship to Latter-day Saints Philanthropies and Financial Services is unusual.
LDS Philanthropies and Financial Services is the sole organization through which BYU-Idaho
raises funds, and BYU-Idaho is served by a dedicated group of staff at LDS Philanthropies and
Financial Services. That said, the BYU-Idaho group constitutes a small percentage of the total
Philanthropies staff, who support not only the BYU sister institutions, but also the LDS Church’s
other fundraising activities, which include global humanitarian efforts. BYU-Idaho staff and
LDS Philanthropies and Financial Services staff were unable to identify a written agreement that
clearly defines its relationship with LDS Philanthropies and Financial Services.
This lack of documentation is symptomatic of the close almost undifferentiated relationship
between the Church and the University, and also is reflected in the confidential climate of the
institution. The degree of information secrecy at BYU-Idaho made it more difficult for the
Evaluation Committee to complete its assessment during its visit to campus. While the
Committee believes it was eventually given access to all of the documents it needed to review,
but it would be very difficult for any faculty or staff to see all of the information that was shared
with the Evaluation Committee. The Evaluation Committee was able to witness that this level of
secrecy complicates many faculty and staff functions.
Despite the unusual funding system, there is clear evidence over the long history of the
Institution that it can rely on the Church to provide sufficient revenues for BYU-Idaho to
continue to serve the growing number of students it seeks to educate.
Physical and Technological Infrastructure (Standard 2.G)
BYU-Idaho’s campus in Rexburg is the model for what every university’s physical facility
should be. It is beautiful and extremely well maintained. It presents a wonderfully aesthetic
learning environment for its students. BYU-Idaho staff does an excellent job maintaining the
physical facilities on campus. Further, the institution exercises great foresight in facilities
planning into the future.
18
Utilizing its comprehensive Capital Needs Analysis program, BYU-Idaho has identified and
received approval from the Church for its five-year facilities construction funding. The plan is
reviewed and updated annually as needs change.
The university has an up-to-date set of hazardous materials policies and procedures published on
its website.
There is a detailed capital equipment report that shows the price and departmental priority for
items costing as little as $100. In 2014, the approved budget includes $720,000 for capital
equipment compared to requests totaling $990,000. This is the smallest equipment budget in the
past three years during which capital equipment funding has been as high as $1,451,000.
Current institutional bandwidth is sufficient to operate existing technology dependent programs.
However, the commitment to expand online instruction will require a significant investment in
the IT infrastructure. An RFP to increase the campus bandwidth from 1 Gigabit to 10 Gigabit is
underway. Many of the administrative systems are also in need of updating. The financial aid
system is at the top of this list, which also includes accounting and HR systems.
Support for faculty providing online instruction is quite good. Extensive training opportunities
are also provided for new software systems. But the administrative training support for new and
continuing employees is not adequate to keep up with employee turnover. As a result current
employees, who only learned part of the systems and procedures from a prior employee, train
new employees. This training problem has been amplified by the recent decision to increase
student staffing with even higher levels of turnover in administrative staff functions. To the
Institution’s credit, it has recently engaged a staff member to be in charge of Training.
Technology staff and user constituencies are consulted about infrastructure planning. The degree
of consultation varies across an institution the size of BYU-Idaho.
The level of technology improvement has not kept pace with the rapid on-campus and online
enrollment growth. As a result there are no standard protocols for routine IT questions. The new
chief information officer has identified a set of IT Guiding Principles that focus on increasing the
quality of the student experience, serving more students, and lowering the relative cost of the
BYU-Idaho experience. Among its numerous objectives are decreasing IT segregation,
increasing communication about IT throughout the university, increasing organizational
effectiveness and establishing common standards.
In sum, the facilities are excellent and well maintained. Systems need upgrading to some degree,
and the University has plans or initiatives in place to evaluate or replace these. Technology is
currently an area that needs further work.
19
VII. Standard Three: Planning and Implementation
Institutional Planning (Standard 3.A)
BYU-Idaho engages in hierarchical and systematic planning across all units, both academic and
non-academic, and that planning has a direct input into the budget process. Every year, academic
and support units conduct a Stewardship Review guided by common templates and common data
provided through the University Report Card. These unit reviews culminate in goals, plans, and
resource requests for the next five years. The goals and plans are expected to be carried out and
to be assessed in the next review.
This broad based planning process seems to provide opportunities for input and access through
the unit and the feedback provided to the unit. It is less clear how higher level planning is shared
more comprehensively and receives input outside the most senior level administration. One
frequently cited venue for sharing the outlook of the University is the President’s Q&A session.
However, this Q&A session was described as having a relatively low attendance. Considering
the lack of collective participation by faculty and staff into decisions, it raises some concern
about the distribution of and input into any university comprehensive plan.
The Stewardship Review process and templates call for particular assessment and outcomes data
to be analyzed. The University and Department Report Cards were cited as central sources for
some of the data in the reviews. Examples of these reviews suggest that analysis of the Report
Card or other data then becomes the basis for any requests in the upcoming budgets. The same is
clear in University level planning where operational and outcomes assessment serve as key
drivers behind major areas of focus such as growth and academic quality.
The University’s Ten Year Vision Plan is clearly compelled by the mission, and the action items
of the Vision Plan are framed in service of the mission. However, while the Vision Plan and
Stewardship Review Process are described and can be seen taking into account the University
Outcomes and Core Themes, they do not appear to provide an explicit evaluation of mission
fulfillment. If would be good for the University to identify objective measures that define
mission fulfillment in its planning processes.
The University Emergency Operations Plan is described in the Self-Evaluation Report and on the
University website as providing preparedness planning. Continuity and recovery are
responsibilities of “each dean, director, and senior administrator.” This appears guided in part by
a Department Recovery Plan form provided on the university website. However, it is not clear
how these department level plans are coordinated across the University.
VIII. Standard Four: Theme Planning, Assessment and Improvement
Core Theme Planning and Assessment
The University seems to recognize the importance of clearly articulating outcomes and then
developing measures in order to assess progress on core theme achievement. However, by their
own admission, some faculty and administrators perceive this process as an accreditation
20
requirement rather than an ongoing process designed to improve student learning and therefore
institutional effectiveness.
BYU-Idaho collects a large amount of data relative to student learning and institutional
effectiveness. However, by their own admission much of the data is never analyzed or used.
Also, while many programs have identified outcomes and assessment measures for their
programs, some are still working on the process. Given that effective planning relies on
articulating outcomes and collecting appropriate data to evaluate achievement of those outcomes
across the institution, there is still work to be done by the University to ensure achievement of
core themes.
Core Theme Planning (Standard 3.B)
Planning for core themes occurs at many levels within the institution. The Self-Evaluation
Report describes venues for core theme review and provides examples of Report Card data for
each core theme, but does not clarify how these pieces come together in a cohesive planning
process nor who is directly or broadly involved in this process.
BYU-Idaho’s comprehensive plan seems to direct the pursuit of its mission through three
imperatives: “1) to enhance the quality of the student; 2) to make the BYU-Idaho education
available to many more Church members; and 3) to lower the relative cost of education.” These
imperatives are not explicitly linked to the mission themes in the available documents.
Nonetheless, the planning imperatives and mission themes do not seem incompatible.
Core themes and indicators are prominent in the University Report Card which is widely
identified as the source for core theme indicator data. The “Report Card" is a wonderful means to
display its program effectiveness information and to foster access and discussion of the status of
the education offered and it's outcomes. The University Report Card was also often identified as
the input to various planning processes described above. There could be more documentation of
the use of these data for planning in the indicated forums.
BYU-Idaho’s Self Evaluation Report addresses most of the inputs to core theme planning. The
institution needs now to focus on how these inputs will shape future activities in pursuit of these
mission themes. While there is some description on “Providing a Quality Education” that appears
to be in the right direction, greater attention to providing similar treatment of the other themes
and the action items are required to connect previously provided data or other evidence.
CORE THEME # 1: DEVELOP DISCIPLE-LEADERS
BYU-Idaho exudes great care for the spiritual life of students. However, the practice of planning
for the development of programs to support students in pursuit of this theme was not clear. The
Self-Evaluation Report outlines the involvement of several offices to help students to strengthen
their testimonies of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and more faithfully live in harmony with
its teachings. However, it is not clear how these offices and programs will scale to provide the
distinctive BYU-Idaho experience to a growing population of students as is expected.
Objective two, to provide significant opportunities for students to provide service and develop
their leadership abilities, is presented as a part of the student employment model. However, plans
21
for the further expansion of the student employment model do not provide a clear explanation for
how this will purposefully affect participating student leadership abilities.
Similarly, pursuit of objective three, to provide significant opportunities for students to develop
socially and spiritually, is linked with housing and volunteer initiatives. While it seems that
students are involved in housing and volunteer programming, the link to this core theme or how
they are linked seems underdeveloped in the materials provided.
CORE THEME # 2: PROVIDE A QUALITY EDUCATION
Providing a quality education in the conditions of expected growth is a clear point of focus in the
Vision Plan and the Learning Model and is described as a key strategy. As such, the institution’s
attention to applying the BYU-Idaho Learning Model to help students become lifelong learners,
creative and critical thinkers, and effective communicators seems well positioned. The
President’s Council appears to receive regular progress reports on adoption of the Learning
Model across the institution.
This objective seems to consist of two parts: 1) to apply the Learning Model and 2) to develop
students as learners, thinkers, and communicators. As currently presented, the “apply the
Learning Model” part seems more of an input than an outcome. The learner, thinker, and
communicator part is a fitting connection with the university learning outcomes. As these
outcomes are relatively new, the planning around these outcomes may also be in early stages.
The Self-Evaluation Report described some faculty engagement with these outcomes that will
hopefully continue.
The self-evaluation report seems to provide little coverage of planning to provide resources and
opportunities for faculty to develop as teachers, as professionals in their disciplines, and as BYUIdaho employees. While descriptions of existing faculty conferences, development programs,
conference support, and annual review are provided, there doesn’t seem to be indications of how
these inputs are strategically planned and evaluated. The annual review template seems to
provide a useful structure for development planning but it is not clear how requests are
prioritized and funded across the institution, for example.
CORE THEME # 3: PREPARE STUDENTS FOR FUTURE ROLES
BYU-Idaho’s approach to preparing students for employment or further education as skilled
professionals, is described in terms of the academic program, which is some cases is professional
accredited, as well as existing and new opportunities for internships and mentored
research/scholarship experiences. The development of the College of Faculty Development and
Mentored Research seems to be a substantial step to advance research opportunities to the benefit
of students and faculty. However, it is not clear how these apparently worthwhile practices and
initiatives are coordinated to impact this theme.
The Self-Evaluation Report describes a couple courses that provide the primary preparation of
students for their future roles as parents and engaged citizens occurs. These outcomes seem less
developed compared to other themes. The results provided from the parenting course offer selfreported gains in learning. The Self-Evaluation narrative regarding Engaged Citizens described
inputs in terms of students’ incoming characteristics instead of how citizenship would be
22
developed. The Foundations course assessments suggest a rich array of experiences and efforts to
affect citizenship in a variety of ways. However, these appeared to be raw material too in need of
development to yield a more cohesive university effort.
CORE THEME # 4: MAINTAIN A WHOLESOME ENVIRONMENT
The experience of the BYU-Idaho campus seems to provide evidence of the care that goes in the
learning environment. In addition, the descriptions of the university approved housing program
were impressive. These suggest that the institution is attentive to enhancing the physical and
student living environment. What is less clear is how the institution plans to scale or extend this
care as the number of students grows or increasingly engages online. For example, what does
this objective mean for online students?
The second objective, to deliver high quality student services, seems to be addressed in the SelfEvaluation Report in terms of participation in activities and perceptions of the levels of “personal
honor” involved in services. The treatment of this objective in the Report seemed to be the least
developed and should be better addressed in the future. In addition, it seems that there is the
potential that the increased employment of students who provide services to their peers may
negatively impact this outcome if a high level of service cannot be reached and maintained.
Assessment (Standard 4.A)
BYU-Idaho has a culture of assessment. The University regularly and systematically collects
assessment data for program-level defined outcomes, analyzes that data, and uses this analysis to
formulate improvement plans and provide evidence for budget requests in its Stewardship plans.
The data is assembled on a web-based, university “Report Card,” which is planned to include, at
some future point, colored indicators (red, green, yellow) to indicate satisfactory, excellent, and
improvement needed areas. Nearly 95% of departments and programs have assessment plans,
and 60-70% of the same are providing data for these assessment plans. These report cards would
be of even more benefit if they were more widely accessed by the public or students.
The “culture” of assessment at BYU-Idaho is very positive. Administrators and faculty talked
about it avidly, and welcomed its effect on the educational efforts. Voluntary participation is
high, and the messages about assessment are positive and improvement focused. The
improvement of learning and the personal improvement of faculty as teachers are highlighted,
the positive results for students are stressed, and requirements for accreditation are downplayed
as a primary reason for assessment. With regards to the Learning Model, best practices are
highlighted on the website. All outcomes have been mapped to University Outcomes, and to
Core Themes.
One indication of effectiveness is the level of participation within the University. All
departments and programs participate in outcome creation and assessment; educational programs
are evaluated by faculty in each department or program through the department chairs. Specific
target goals for program outcomes do not appear to have been set; it looks like a previous
University report card did include these, with colored indicates to signal meeting and missing
targets but these type of indicators are not included on the current program assessment reports.
23
All department and program outcomes that are available are published in the college Catalog.
There is not full compliance in this, however, and hopefully the University will quickly move to
100% program participation in its outcome setting and assessment process.
BYU-Idaho maps articulated program outcomes “down” to individual course goals, and up to
University goals and Core Themes. Program goal assessment forms the basis for yearly
stewardship planning, and so financial and strategic planning is integrated and correlated with
core theme objectives. Program goal review is often rolled into the assessment process itself by
faculty leaders. The assessment office has recently reviewed the process and is currently
updating the reporting process for the entire university.
CORE THEME # 1: DEVELOP DISCIPLE-LEADERS
BYU-Idaho has articulated what students must do in order to demonstrate mastery of this core
theme. Students must “understand and commit to live the principles of the restored gospel of
Jesus Christ” and “demonstrate leadership skills and the ability to cooperate with others.” The
university has collected and published on the University Report Card data relative to student
performance on these expectations. The institution interprets these results as a strong indication
that their students are “committed to the principles and standards of the gospel of Jesus Christ”
and therefore the institution is achieving this core theme. However, the majority of the data is
obtained from indirect measures such as student surveys and NSSE items. There is nothing
concerning about using indirect measures but the university should work on developing more
direct measures of student achievement of this core theme in order to validate the accuracy of the
current indirect ones.
The University does a good job of providing opportunities for students to provide service and
develop their leadership abilities. A student employment model has been implemented across the
institution in order to give students an opportunity to experience working with fulltime
employees. Objective data regarding student employees and student survey results indicate that
the institution is making significant progress on meeting this core theme.
CORE THEME # 2: PROVIDE A QUALITY EDUCATION
The key aspect of this core theme is the application of the BYU-Idaho Learning Model campuswide. The university has identified four outcomes intended to evaluate the achievement of this
objective: (1) Faculty members know the processes and principles of the learning model, (2)
Faculty members adopt and apply the principles of the Learning Model, (3) Students know the
processes and principles of the learning model, and (4) Students adopt and apply the principles of
the Learning Model. The University uses a number of measures designed to evaluate mastery of
these outcomes. The data suggests an increase in the use of the Learning Model across the
University as well as an increase in its impact on student learning. Most of the evidence is
obtained from indirect measures such as survey responses and NSSE results. To their credit,
BYU-Idaho also employs the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) which is a direct measure
of critical thinking and writing skills but given the importance of this core theme it is suggested
that the university develop additional direct measures in order to ensure the validity of the
current indirect ones. It is encouraging that the University has plans for addressing this issue.
The newly appointed Dean of the College of Faculty Development and Mentored Research plans
24
to sponsor faculty development efforts designed to obtain more direct evidence of the impact of
the Learning Model on student learning.
CORE THEME # 3: PREPARE STUDENTS FOR FUTURE ROLES
Across the institution students are learning program specific skills that can be applied to various
career paths. In addition students are given the opportunity to participate in internships,
externships, community-based work opportunities, on-campus work opportunities and faculty
mentored research. The College of Faculty Development and Mentored Research was established
to coordinate faculty development and student opportunities to engage in mentored research
activities. Curriculum requirements are designed to prepare students for their future roles as
parents and engaged citizens. In addition to data regarding post-graduation employment and
graduate school acceptance, the university relies heavily on self-reported data from surveys and
NSSE responses. The institution is meeting this core theme but it is suggested that the college
develop some direct measures that will validate their current indirect ones.
CORE THEME # 4: MAINTAIN A WHOLESOME ENVIRONMENT
BYU-Idaho has identified two institutional objectives are associated with this core theme: 1)
Enhance the physical and student living environment and 2) Deliver high quality student
services. The university measures achievement of these objectives primarily on the basis of
standards of student housing and student participation in programs organized under the principles
of the LDS Church and standards of the BYU-Idaho Honor Code. Decisions about institutional
effectiveness relative to this core theme are based mainly on self-reported data obtained from
student surveys. The University is to be applauded for the number of opportunities to participate
in programs provided to students on a regular basis. A discussion should be started as to whether
or not students’ self-reports are the best indicators of core theme achievement. Since the
institution has defined what constitutes a wholesome environment, perhaps there should be less
subjective measures of achievement developed. To their credit, the University does track
violations of the BYU-Idaho Honor Code as a behavioral indicator of core theme achievement.
Improvement (Standard 4.B)
In terms of programs and services, the link between the use of currently available data and
planning is facilitated by the Stewardship Review and Outcomes and Assessment templates and
processes. Examples show a consideration of the data assembled on these templates as the basis
for course, program, and unit development. However, there is still some work to be done in these
areas where data or departmental participation is lacking.
Planning and improvement by core themes was not fully developed in the Self Evaluation
Report. Providing a quality education is clearly a top concern for the University as it plans for
the future. There is also evidence of planning and activities to direct resources in ways that are
consistent with improving along the line of the mission themes. Based on the accessibility of the
Outcomes and Assessment and pages of the various Report Cards, it appears that results are
being shared.
25
IX. Standard Five: Mission Fulfillment, Adaptation and Sustainability
Mission Fulfillment (Standard 5.A)
BYU-Idaho engages in regular and systematic assessment of its accomplishments, and can
support its claim to substantially fulfill its mission. Even with its imperative to serve more
students, and its current growth, BYU-Idaho is making the infrastructure changes to support this
growth, both in its physical plant and in personnel. The University is aware of the costs of this
growth, and has shown some progress in its desire to lower annual costs per student.
BYU-Idaho’s use of the University Report Card in its annual assessments, evaluations, and
planning is both impressive and commendable. The results of these assessments are reported to
the community on a web-based “report card.” The report card is an excellent and accessible
manner of reporting, that provides “snapshots” of various programs and initiatives, as various
levels of reporting—university wide, college wide, and program. All units participate in regular
planning, assessment and evaluation, which occur at the department and program level, a level
that allows for appropriate reflection on the process and can be responsive to needs, changes, and
rising challenges in programming and course delivery.
All program outcomes are mapped into core themes and University outcomes, which themselves
are integrated and mapped into the mission of the University. In addition to outcomes data and
the University Report Card, an analysis of the Stewardship Review reports indicates that the core
themes and mission are reflected in program planning and resource allocation.
The University Report Card is used to report data and communicate progress with internal and
external constituencies. Data in alumni surveys, the NSSE survey and program assessment tools
indicate that the University is fulfilling its mission of preparing students for lifelong learning, for
employment and does this within a wholesome academic, cultural, social and spiritual
environment. Data, oral reports, interviews and the evaluation team visit indicated that the goals
and programs of the student affairs areas were extremely congruent with the mission and core
themes of the University.
There is evidence that BYU-Idaho engages in systematic evidence-based assessment of student
learning and accomplishments related to its core themes and mission. Surveys, outcomes
assessment and other evaluative processes indicate that there is on-going review of programs and
policies and that assessment data is utilized in a continuous improvement cycle.
BYU-Idaho’s definition of mission fulfillment is, however, still in need of further refinement and
specification. Benchmarks for fulfillment still need to be set. Also, the effectiveness of programs
should be measured in more direct terms in addition to the indirect information gathered from
surveys. In this area of measurement, the University lags behind the more “financially”
measureable aspects of its goal assessment and planning.
Adaptation and Sustainability (Standard 5.B)
BYU-Idaho processes demonstrate diligence and quality in its regular evaluation of resources,
capacity, and effectiveness of operations. Financial and strategic planning occurs at the
26
University-wide level, and is informed by evaluation and assessment of outcomes at the program
level. Administrators provided a good sense of goals for the next few years, and a sense of the
means they will use to achieve them. In addition to its own short term planning, BYU-Idaho as
ready to assume new or increased demands “should the Board and the Church Education System
so direct.” BYU-Idaho identifies the factors that can easily lead to increased growth, the
problems it faces both with more students coming to the University, with maintaining quality in
its programs, and the difficulties of maintaining costs. It also proposes several sensible and clear
possibilities to deal with the growth, some, like the Learning Model, already successfully in
place, while others need more reflection and development. With the combined efforts of the
entire University community, united in the support for the goals of increased student numbers,
quality and low cost programs, the University stands a good chance of success, as long as it can
remain sensitive to changes and flexible in its planning.
One of BYU-Idaho’s strengths is its highly centralized command system which allows for what
looks like quick implementation of strategic plans and initiatives. Church culture may support
this type of organization, though dissatisfaction over the minimal amount of individual and
communal input in strategic planning needs to be addressed.
BYU-Idaho has learned from the challenges and the opportunities presented by rapid enrollment
growth and has used evaluation and assessment of programs in Student Services to manage this
growth and serve students. There is clear evidence that both a thoughtful and analytic approach
using data has been used to reallocate resources according to student needs and student
demographics. A similar process is also being used to determine how to provide student support
services for on-line students. “Self-help” portals are being developed and local Church units are
being engaged in order to provide the BYU-Idaho student experience to on-line students. The
institution needs to recognize and address the challenge it confronts with its increase in the area
of student employment. While the University is to be recognized for its commitment to using
student employment in a way that furthers student learning and the core theme of preparing
students for lives of productive employment, sustaining the training and supervision of student
employees was cited as a concern by staff, and students note that service in some areas suffers
because of the lack of regular and knowledgeable employees. Better strategies need to be
developed to provide the support structure required to manage a large number of student
employees.
The culture of assessment at BYU-Idaho is strong, but University outcomes and Core Themes
developed for accreditation can look at times like two separate tracks of evaluation. BYU-Idaho
expresses the desire to align these efforts more fully and is encouraged to continue efforts to
integrate of these standards into its current planning models.
VIII. Summary
Brigham Young University-Idaho is a fantastic place for men and women connected to The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to get an undergraduate education. The University is
clear about its mission of teaching, and focuses its resources and efforts to provide students and
environment that allows them to grow educationally, spiritually, and in a manner consistent with
27
the moral and ethical values of the Church. It sits in a glorious valley surrounded by 3 mountain
ranges; the environment itself is reflective of the wholesomeness of the institution.
The strength of the University lies in its people and their commitment to the mission and to the
students. As with any large organization, there are areas of improvement and this report by its
nature highlights those organizational and structural concerns the Evaluation Committee believes
if addressed will make the institution stronger. But though there are areas where improvement is
needed, this review should not in any way be read as to diminish the overarching good this
University provides in educating the next generation of Disciple leaders consistent with its first
core theme. BYU-Idaho is a fine institution of higher education, and the CES Board of Trustees
and Church support is well repaid by the graduates turned out at BYU-Idaho.
X. Commendations and Recommendations
Commendations
The evaluation committee commends the faculty and staff of BYU-Idaho for the shared sense of
purpose, the dedication to the mission and core themes, and devotion to the success of the overall
enterprise.
The evaluation committee commends BYU-Idaho for its concern for the well-being of its
students and for the personal care and concern it expends on each student’s human, spiritual, and
educational development, and especially admires the thoughtful strategies employed by the
University to replicate the BYU-Idaho experience for online students.
The evaluation committee commends BYU-Idaho for providing an accessible and affordable
higher education and for its agenda to expand that access through online learning.
The evaluation committee commends BYU-Idaho for the wonderful and aesthetic physical and
learning environment it has created for its students, and for its foresight in facilities planning and
maintenance into the future.
The evaluation committee commends BYU-Idaho for its "Report Card" as a means to display its
program effectiveness information and to foster access and discussion of the status of the
education offered and its outcomes.
Recommendations
As provided in Standard 2.B.1, "The institution employs a sufficient number of qualified
personnel to maintain its support and operations." Further, Standard 2.E.2 provides that
"Planning for library and information resources is guided by data that include feedback from
affected users and appropriate faculty, staff, and administrators." In addition, 2.D.1 states:
"Consistent with the nature of its educational programs and methods of delivery, the institution
creates effective learning environments with appropriate programs and services to support
student learning.” With the growth of the student body over the years and the agenda to
significantly increase access to online education at BYU-Idaho, the evaluation committee
28
recommends that the staffing level of professional librarians be increased to fully provide the
support and guidance required to sustainably assist faculty and students at the institution with the
resources needed to fulfill the instruction it commits to offer.
Standard 2.B.4 states that "Consistent with its mission, core themes, programs, services, and
characteristics, the institution employs appropriately qualified faculty sufficient in number to
achieve its educational objectives, establish and oversee academic policies, and assure the
integrity and continuity of its academic programs, wherever offered and however delivered."
Further, Standard 2.C.5 provides in pertinent part: “Faculty, through well-defined structures and
processes with clearly defined authority and responsibilities ... have an active role in the
selection of new faculty.” In its initiative to expand access to students, on campus and online,
BYU-Idaho has inconsistent application of its faculty selection process, particularly as it relates
to the employment of adjunct and online faculty, often times not including regular faculty in the
process. Further, the increased use of adjunct and online faculty appears sometimes to be at the
expense of hiring regular faculty, and produces additional taxing burdens on the regular faculty
for additional supervision, training, and course and program coordination. Though new
leadership structures are beginning to address this issue, the evaluation committee recommends
that BYU-Idaho establish and implement consistent adjunct and online faculty employment
systems that engage the regular faculty in the selection process to ensure qualified faculty teach
at BYU-Idaho in all delivery modes.
Standard 2.A.1 provides "The institution demonstrates an effective and widely understood
system of governance with clearly defined authority, roles, and responsibilities. Its decisionmaking structures and processes make provision for the consideration of the views of faculty,
staff, administrators, and students on matters in which they have a direct and reasonable
interest." Further, Standard 2.C.5 provides in relevant part: "Faculty, through well-defined
structures and processes with clearly defined authority and responsibilities, exercise a major role
in the design, approval, implementation, and revision of the curriculum..." Though the
administrative structure through department chairs, deans, vice presidents, to the President is
clear, and individual faculty perspectives are accepted, the collective faculty view on many
academic issues is not able to be expressed. The evaluation committee recommends that BYUIdaho implement an opportunity for meaningful consideration of the views of the faculty.
Standard 2.F.8 states: "All institutional fundraising activities are conducted in a professional and
ethical manner and comply with governmental requirements. If the institution has a relationship
with a fundraising organization that bears its name and whose major purpose is to raise funds to
support its mission, the institution has a written agreement that clearly defines its relationship
with that organization." The evaluation committee recommends that a formal agreement
documenting the relationship between LDS Philanthropies and Financial Services and the BYUIdaho Advancement Office be executed.
29