University of Phoenix®
Phoenix and Southern Arizona Campuses
CACREP Interim Report
March 30, 2012
CACREP On-Site Visit Team Report for University of Phoenix:
Phoenix and Southern Arizona Campuses – May 2009
Unmet Standard 1
Standard I.W.5.b. The academic unit has faculty resources of appropriate quality and sufficiency to
achieve its mission and objectives. The academic unit has an identifiable core faculty who meet the
following requirements: 5. Engage in activities of professional organizations, including all of the
following: b. research and scholarly activity.
Standard I.W.5.b. Conditions: Provide evidence that program faculty engage in counseling research and
scholarly activity. It should be noted that the CACREP Standards expect core faculty members to
contribute to the counseling profession through engagement in research and scholarly activity. Since
many program faculty at the University of Phoenix are hired for their activities as counseling
practitioners, it currently appears that few faculty engage in research and scholarly activity. In order for
program faculty to fully engage in research and scholarly activity, it will be important for the institution
to provide encouragement and support for such engagement (Standard I.D), as well as access to
appropriate learning resources (Standard I.E) and technical support appropriate to faculty research
endeavors (I.F).
Statement of Compliance
University of Phoenix recognizes the ongoing need to promote and support scholarship and research
among the faculty. To meet Standard I.W.5.b., University of Phoenix at both Arizona Campus locations
and at the Institutional level took specific and directed steps to ensure the criteria for meeting the
Standard are not only satisfied, but are incorporated as an ongoing element of maintaining a consistent
and strong research component at the Arizona Campus locations.
Institutional Support
1. The University of Phoenix faculty research grant program is designed to provide financial
support to University of Phoenix faculty engaged in independent research projects. Proposals
from applicants are considered on the methodological rigor, potential for scholarly contribution,
and practical research merit for $1,000, $5,000, or $10,000 grants. Additional funding is
available in the amounts of $500 for publication in peer-reviewed journal and $200 for
publication in other scholastic venues. Applications are reviewed on a competitive, ongoing
basis by the Office of Scholarship Support (Exhibit A).
2. University of Phoenix College of Social Sciences created the position of Campus Research
Director for CACREP accredited campuses. Both Arizona Campus locations have a Campus
Research Director. These individuals serve to promote, facilitate, and mentor faculty research
initiatives. This strategic initiative places a professional researcher at each campus location who
advocates to “…promote research and scholarship as an essential component of professional
development for faculty...” The positions represent an annual institutional commitment to the
Arizona Campus locations campus of $24,000 for this initiative.
Arizona Campus Support
1. Both campus locations promote regular, ongoing research and scholarship activities (as
indicated in the Institutional Response) in the form of workshops and symposiums. The
Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics has been in place since 2008; however, the
First Annual Research and Scholarship commenced on March 3, 2012 for the Phoenix Campus
location and on March 10, 2012 for the Tucson Campus location (Exhibit B).
2. Both campus locations have documented over $72,000 allocated for research and scholarship
initiatives, which includes over $43,000.00 paid out for publications, presentations, professional
conference attendance, professional association dues, and scholastic symposiums from March
2009 to March 2012. Core Faculty at the Arizona campuses have completed, or have in process,
numerous research initiatives since March 2011 (Exhibit C).
3. Seven Core Faculty are currently engaged in empirical research activities, which includes one
member seeking grant support and one seeking IRB approval. Dr. Kerstner, Campus College
Chair for the Phoenix campus, and Dr. Mosher, Campus College Chair for the Tucson campus,
have initiated student research teams at each campus location; topics range from professional
identity, ethics, faculty advising, and counseling competencies (Exhibit C).
4. The Arizona Campus supports Core Faculty at Professional Conferences. Since March of 2010
Arizona Faculty members have facilitated over 50 presentations and been involved in 19
professional activities (Exhibit C).
Compliance Measures Overview
During the period of March 2010 through March 2012 the Arizona Campus has supported over 70
research and/or scholarly activity initiatives, two Campus Research Workshop/Symposiums, and paid
out over $42,000 for these efforts. University of Phoenix has developed an Institutional Research Grant
program. Additionally, the Institution is funding a Campus Research Director position (part-time) with
over $24,000 committed in 2011-12 for both campus locations for an ongoing research initiative
designed to maintain the Standard and promote a consistent research component in Arizona.
Expenditures for the research and scholarly initiatives exceed $72,000 to date with expectations for
ongoing activity with campus and institutional support. This snapshot is representative of previous,
untracked scholarship and research involvements by Core Faculty. Additionally, University of Phoenix
and constituents at the Arizona Campus locations are committed to documenting increased efforts and
funding for these measures in the years to come.
Unmet Standard 2
Standard U. The academic unit has made systematic efforts to recruit, employ, and retain a diverse
faculty.
Standard U Conditions: Provide evidence that a plan for the systematic recruitment, employment, and
retention of a diverse faculty has been implemented. It was noted in the Institution’s Response to the
Visiting Team Report that a plan has been devised, but not yet implemented.
Statement of Compliance
Since August 2011, faculty recruiting strategies (Exhibit D) within the University of Phoenix, and at both
Arizona Campus locations, have included both national and local efforts. These strategies were
implemented to attract diverse populations (e.g., diversity of age, ethnicity, gender, etc.) of
professionals who are qualified to become faculty members within the program (e.g., Doctorate in
Counselor Education and Supervision, or closely related field). Advertisements for Core Faculty have
been placed in national (e.g., Counseling Today) and local (e.g., Arizona Counseling Association
newsletter) media (Exhibit E).
Between March 2010 and March 2012, both Arizona Campus locations recruited two African American
women, two Hispanic/Latino men, and two individuals who openly identify as LGBTQ (Exhibit F). The
Core Faculty, totaling 17, consist of: 13 Caucasians (76.5%); 1 African American (5.8%); 1 Asian (5.8%); 1
Native American (5.8%); 1 Hispanic (5.8%); and 4 (23.5%) members of the LGBTQ community. One
faculty member (5.8%) also identifies as ADA-qualified.
Unmet Standard 3
Standard AA.6. Program faculty members engage in continuous systematic program evaluation
indicating how the mission, objectives, and student learning outcomes are measured and met. The
plan includes the following: 6. Distribution of an official report that documents outcomes of the
systematic program evaluation, with descriptions of any program modifications, to students
currently in the program, program faculty, institutional administrators, personnel in cooperating
agencies (e.g., employers, site supervisors), and the public.
Standard AA.6 Conditions: Provide evidence that an official report documenting outcomes of the
systematic program evaluation, with descriptions of any program modifications, is developed and
disseminated. Simply making the report available on a website is not sufficient. The program needs to
develop a mechanism to notify students currently in the program, program faculty, institutional
administrators, and personnel in cooperating agencies (e.g., employers, site supervisors) of the
availability of the report.
Statement of Compliance
The most recent edition of the program evaluation, the Employer/Alumni Report 2008-2011 (Exhibit G),
was completed in January 2012; the report analyzes the results of program evaluations completed by
alumni and employers from 2008- 2011. Data in this report is compared and contrasted, with trends
noted, to the 2008, 2005, and 2001 reports using identical questions and analyses for comparison of
results.
The report was sent electronically to Dr. Chad Mosher, Campus College Chair, and to Dr. Mark Vitale,
Director of Academic Affairs, in Southern Arizona, for distribution to their faculty, staff, students, and
campus administration for their location. The report was printed, bound, and distributed to core faculty
and faculty advisors on February 16, 2012 and was also sent electronically to core faculty and faculty
advisors to send to their students. The electronic version of the report was also sent to noncore faculty.
Dr. Jenny Simon, Clinical Director, emailed the report to all internship site supervisors affiliated with the
University of Phoenix/Southern Arizona location. Exhibit H documents the distribution of the report to
required recipients.
At the Phoenix Campus, the report was printed, bound, and distributed to core faculty and faculty
advisors on February 11, 2012 and was also sent electronically to core faculty and faculty advisors to
send to their students. The Campus College Chair, Dr. Patricia Kerstner, sent the electronic version of the
report to noncore faculty and Phoenix Campus administration, including David Fitzgerald, the Campus
Director, Dr. Dallas Taylor, the Director of Academic Affairs and Jason Kimmel, the Director of
Enrollment. Dr. Sheila Babendir, Clinical Director, emailed the report to all internship site supervisors
affiliated with the University of Phoenix/Phoenix location. Exhibit H documents the distribution of the
report to required recipients.
The report was also sent to the Dean’s office and was distributed via email to University of Phoenix
President, Dr. Bill Pepicello, and Provost, Dr. Alan Drimmer. Acknowledgment of receipt and review of
the report by the President and Provost is included as Exhibit I.
The report has also been made available for public viewing via the University of Phoenix website,
www.phoenix.edu. The following verbiage and link are currently available on the site (Exhibit J):
The Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) awards
programmatic accreditation to the Master of Science in Counseling program at the Phoenix Main
and Southern Arizona campuses of University of Phoenix for meeting specific professional and
educational standards.
Link: http://www.phoenix.edu/colleges_divisions/social-sciences.html
Exhibit A
A vision for faculty
scholarship at UOPX
Office of Scholarship Support 2012
We teach.
And, we engage scholarship in a way that sharpens our teaching.
Throughout University of Phoenix’s 35 years of existence, our faculty members have focused their attention,
resources, and imagination on two critical processes: teaching and learning. And, we have incredible
achievements to show from these efforts:
•
•
•
The development an adult learning model that met and anticipated the needs of entire generations of students,
many of whom doubted their ability to return to school
The establishment of an online system that simultaneously brought unparalleled access and powerful learning
experiences to a geographically and culturally diverse student body
The creation of programs – from associate to doctoral – that advance our students’ professional aspirations and
personal growth
These powerful examples of what we have accomplished, and many other events in our University’s history,
could not have been realized without the skill, knowledge, and professionalism that characterize our faculty.
Our faculty members have consistently risen to the occasion as leaders in instructional and curricular
capacities, serving as Area Chairs, Subject Matter Experts, Academic Council Members, and creative and
progressive scholars. And, as we enter into the next phase of the University’s evolution, we again look to our
faculty as thought leaders in educational innovation and transformation.
Why Research and Scholarship is Important?
With the proliferation of faculty- and student-generated scholarship we’ve experienced since incorporating
doctoral degrees the School of Advanced Studies, we’ve been faced with an exciting question: as a
comprehensive institution of higher education, what kind of research do we do? Our answer is that we
conduct research that adds value to our core mission: teaching and learning. Throughout its history,
University of Phoenix has been and will continue to be a teaching institution, and we feel that the
advancements in the classroom are best discovered, understood, and shared via the inquiry process.
Perhaps one of the strongest elements of this approach is its deep connection to the ways in which our faculty
members already work. Throughout the University, faculty are constantly exploring the best ways to educate
the diverse learners we proudly serve – whether via ongoing revisions to their syllabi, the creation of new
classroom activities and assessments, the implementation of new technologies to stimulate learning, or simple
reflection on the successes and areas for growth in their latest class. These are the moments that provide the
basis and impetus for sustained scholarly inquiry, the times in which our faculty’s professional intuitions and
wisdom can flourish into rigorous, meaningful, and engaging research projects.
For questions and support regarding scholarship, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support.
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 2
What is Scholarship at University of Phoenix Scholarship?
Throughout the University, faculty and students are working on projects that expand the ways we know about
our world, foster new ways of approaching our social and work lives, and explore the best ways to educate
new generations of learners. We consider all of these valuable contributions as worthy of the same recognition
and prominence attached to research across academia. To align our processes with this perspective,
University of Phoenix adopted and adapted Ernest Boyer’s model of scholarship, which gives faculty and
students support and accolades for a wide variety of activities in the following categories:
•
Teaching - Systematically studying and improving teaching models and practices to achieve optimal measurable
learning outcomes, including the development of innovative instructional approaches based in emerging educational
theory. Because we are primarily a teaching institution, the majority of our University-wide efforts emphasize
scholarship of teaching and learning.
•
Discovery – The activities traditionally associated with academic work, such as presenting at conferences, publishing
in journals, and winning research grants.
•
Integration - Interpreting how knowledge might be used across disciplines, such as producing work that isn’t
necessarily research-driven, but that bridge gaps between two fields (e.g. curriculum development knowledge used in
managerial training course development).
•
Application - Aiding society and professions in addressing complex practical problems that fall outside of the
University’s traditional scope, such as research consultancy for organizations.
Collectively, we feel that these categories capture much of the original conceptualization of the University’s
mission and goals and applies those concepts to the work our community produces.
For questions and support regarding scholarship, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support.
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 3
Examples of Scholarship
The following table clarifies and provides examples for these different forms of scholarship.
Type of
Scholarship
Purpose
Examples
• Advancing learning theory through classroom
research
Teaching
Study teaching models and
practices to achieve
optimal learning.
• Developing and testing instructional materials
• Mentoring graduate students
• Designing and implementing a program-level
assessment system
• Publishing in peer-reviewed forums
Discovery
Build new knowledge
through traditional
research.
• Producing and/or performing creative work within
established field
• Creating infrastructure for future studies
• Preparing a comprehensive literature review
Integration
Interpret the use of
knowledge across
disciplines.
• Writing a textbook for use in multiple disciplines
• Collaborating with colleagues to design and deliver a
core course
• Serving industry or government as an external
consultant
Application
Aid society and professions
in addressing problems.
• Assuming leadership roles in professional
organizations
• Advising student leaders, thereby fostering their
professional growth
Adapted from Nibert, M. (n.d.). 2.5.1 Boyer’s model of scholarship. Retrieved October 7, 2011, from:
http://www.pcrest.com/PC/FGB/test/2_5_1.htm
For questions and support regarding scholarship, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 4
Getting Involved in Faculty Scholarship
The avenues described above provide faculty who wish to design and/or contribute their own scholarship on
teaching and learning with a variety of avenues for getting started or for finding means of expanding their work.
More detailed information on the Teaching and Learning Research Fellowship Program, Excellence in
Publication Awards, the Faculty Grants Program, and Faculty Honoraria can be found on the Office of
Scholarship Support webpage. The site also highlights ongoing research projects to provide models and
inspiration for potential applicants. Additionally, campus leadership can provide guidance on researchers and
research projects that may be occurring at their campus or in their surrounding region. We will also be
leveraging the PhoenixConnect platform to develop information repositories and discussion groups on these
ongoing research initiatives, as well as to provide faculty with a wide array of potential peer groups and
projects.
I hope you find the direction of our scholarship support programs as exciting and inspiring as I do. These are
the first steps into a new era for our University, and for higher education itself, as we rethink the relationship of
research to teaching in order to give our students unparalleled educational experiences.
For questions and support regarding scholarship, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 5
How Does University of Phoenix Promote and Support Research and Scholarship?
To foster and support the widespread development and propagation of scholarly contributions across the
Boyer model, we have implemented several University-wide funding and recognition programs. These
programs include the following:
•
The Teaching and Learning Research Fellowship Program – The University awards fellowships to faculty
working on critical examinations of teaching and learning within the University.
•
General Research Grants – The University offers competitively awarded grants, at several award levels,
designed to assist University of Phoenix faculty in developing high-quality research and publishing findings.
•
Publishing Awards – We offer awards for faculty whose scholarship is accepted to peer-reviewed journals
and/or other high-quality scholarly venues.
•
Faculty Honoraria – We offer financial recognition for University faculty to publish and present their findings at
academic and professional conferences.
•
Campus initiatives – Campuses foster scholarship in ways that respond to their faculty and student needs and
interests. As a University, we are engaged in a process of exploring and fostering the initiatives already being
undertaken by our campus leadership and finding the resources and partnerships they need to sustain and grow
scholarly activities.
Funding Eligibility
One of the most frequently asked questions regarding scholarship funding centers on who is eligible
to apply for each program. The following chart details the eligible group(s) for each award:
Program
Name
Eligible
Group(s)
Teaching
and
Learning
Fellowship
Qualified
faculty with
all levels of
research
experience
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
General
Research
Grant
Excellence
in
Publishing
Award
Faculty
Honoraria
SAS
Conference
Presentation
Awards
Qualified
faculty with
research
experience
Qualified
faculty
Qualified
faculty
SAS faculty,
students,
and alumni
Page 6
2012 Scholarship Support Programs
Programs Fostering Scholarship
Teaching and
Learning Research
Fellowship
Opportunity for up to
$10,000 in funding
Awarded to provided
funding and other
resources for
scholarship directly
focused on teaching
and learning within
University of
Phoenix
Awards offered on
rolling basis
General Grants
Program
Programs Promoting Scholarship
Excellence in
Publishing Award
Scholarship
Honoraria
Opportunity for up to
$5,000 in funding
Opportunity for $500
award
Opportunity for $200
award
Awarded to provide
funding for a wide
variety of scholarly
endeavors
Awarded to recognize
faculty contributions in
peer reviewed
publications
Awarded to
recognize faculty
scholarship in a wide
variety of venues
Awards offered on
rolling basis
Awards offered on
rolling basis
Awards offered on
rolling basis
Funding amount
determined via
project scope
Funding/support
amount determined
via project scope
For questions and support regarding scholarship, please contact the Office of Scholarship Support
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 7
Research and Scholarship Policies and Procedures
Committee on Research
When research is conducted that involves University of Phoenix, our students, faculty, staff or processes, a
formal proposal must be made to the Committee on Research (COR). If you would like to conduct a formal,
academic inquiry, you must submit a request to the COR if
•
•
You have no active affiliation with University of Phoenix
You are faculty or staff in the University but conducting research and disseminating research results are
not part of your normal responsibilities
• The research results will be provided to a person, organization or audience that is external to the
University
Approval Standards
When the COR receives a request, they evaluate three critical factors before approving a request:
•
The impact of the research on the University’s functions, particularly those related to teaching and
learning
• The legal fidelity of the research
• The potential risk to the University’s proprietary knowledge and systems.
Requests are reviewed by the COR on an on-going basis. If you’d like to conduct research involving University
of Phoenix, please submit a Proposal to Conduct Research Form.
If you need more information about whether you should submit a request to COR, please send an inquiry to
OSS@phoenix.edu.
Institutional Review Board
All studies that involve using human research subjects and are supported by the University must be submitted
to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) for approval.
The guidelines the IRB uses in evaluating studies are based upon the Belmont Report Regulation and Ethical
Guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. The evaluations involve consideration of the
following:
1. Informed consent by subject participants
2. Assessment of risks and benefits to those participating
3. Ethical procedures and outcomes when it comes to the selection of research subjects.
The IRB applies the principles above to the research review process, as they approve, disapprove or modify all
research studies that involve human subjects in the University of Phoenix community.
For more information on the IRB at University of Phoenix please visit University of Phoenix Institutional Review
Board.
University of Phoenix Academic Affairs
Office of Scholarship Support
Page 8
Exhibit B
THANKS! THANKS!
THANKS! THANKS!
THANKS! THANKS!
We want to especially thank all the volunteers who offered to help with the
organization of this event!
Thank you to
Southwestern Schools for Behavioral Health Studies
for the door prize donation.
First Annual
RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP SYMPOSIUM
University of Phoenix
College of Social Sciences
University of Phoenix
College of Social Sciences
Research and Scholarship Symposium Steering Committee
Dr. Sheila Babendir, Clinical Director
Dr. Carol Gegenheimer, Campus Research Director
Dr. Tony Floda, Program Manager
Dr. Patricia Kerstner, Campus College Chair
Saturday, March 3 | 9:00 am to 2:00 pm
Fountainhead Campus
1625 W. Fountainhead Pkwy.
Tempe, AZ 85282
8:00 – 9:00
Onsite registration
Room 401
9:00 – 9:15
Welcome and Introductions
9:15-10:00
Keynote Speaker, Dr. Rob Olding
10:00 – 10:15
Break
10:15 – 11:00
Breakout sessions
Room 401:
Sex, lies, and case notes: An analysis of the
Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Exam
iners Adverse Actions Reports from 2005 to
2010. Basso, A., Mitchell, B., Smith, E. L., Timmermans, L.,
& Kerstner, P.
Learning Objective:
Develop a comprehension of violations and sanctions for AZBBHE licensed behavioral
health professionals;
Analyze trends and common areas within violations;
Examine gender differences among sanctions.
Abstract: The role of state licensing boards is to protect the public by examining all
reported accusations against mental health professionals and imposing sanctions
against those who are found to be in violation. Beginning in 2004, The Arizona Board of
Behavioral Health Examiners (AzBBHE) instituted mandatory licensure for Social
Workers, Professional Counselors, Marriage and Family Therapists, and Substance
Abuse Counselors. This presentation is based on the analysis of violations and sanctions
listed in the AzBBHE Adverse Action reports for the years 2005-2010. The violations
were divided into the following categories: record keeping & documents, impairment,
dual relationships, misrepresentations, and other. The purpose of this research is to
determine the relationship between gender differences and sanctions.
Room 402:
Mini presentations
Speaker 1
A literature review: Effective parenting styles
with differing levels of attention deficit hyperac
tivity disorder symptomatology. Ahia, T.
Learning Objective:
Summarize the Baumrind’s theory of parenting styles;
Explore history of parenting styles;
Describe current concerns of effective parenting skills that influence ADHD symptoms;
Abstract: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly
diagnosed childhood disorders of modern times. This literature review addresses existing literature and establishes the necessity to continue research that identifies, describes
and promotes a greater understanding of the influence parenting styles may have on
levels of symptoms in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. This review
shows a gap in current literature regarding how parenting styles relate to the level of
symptoms of children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Dr. Carol Gegenheimer, is the Campus Research Director for the University of Phoenix, Phoenix Campus and Core Faculty for the College of
Social Sciences, Master of Counseling Program. Dr. Gegenheimer is a
University of Phoenix alumnus from the Master in Counseling/Marriage,
Family, and Child Counseling program and received her PhD from
Capella University in General Psychology. She also has an Advanced
Graduate Certificate in the Treatment of Trauma, Abuse, and Deprivation from Ottawa University. Her research interests are in the areas of
resilience and trauma treatment. Dr. Gegenheimer served as the Clinical
Manager of Adult Services for LaFrontera/EMPACT-Suicide Prevention Services until
August 2011. Dr. Gegenheimer is also in private practice in Glendale, AZ.
Dr. Tony Floda has a Master's in Counseling from South Dakota State
University and a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology from Walden University. He is a National Certified Counselor (NCC) and a Certified Professional in Healthcare Quality (CPHQ). He has over 22 years of experience
in the behavioral health field, including having been a clinical director in
residential and outpatient settings, a director of clinical training, and a
director of quality improvement. He has taught at UOP for the last 14
years, was a Campus Research Director and Area Chair, and currently is the Program
Manager and a Core Faculty/Faculty Advisor in the College of Social Sciences. Dr.
Floda's research/clinical interests include solution-focused therapy, adolescent and adult
psychopathology, differential treatment effectiveness, clinical supervision, the therapeutic
use of metaphor, and clinical outcome studies.
Dr. Patricia Kerstner is the Campus College Chair /College of Social
Sciences, University of Phoenix, Phoenix Campus for 20 years. The
College houses a CACREP-accredited counseling program, undergraduate human services, and graduate and undergraduate psychology. An Arizona licensed psychologist and a national certified counselor; she is active in the American Counseling Association (ACA),
and the Association for Counselor Education and Supervision
(ACES). She is past co-executive director of Arizona Counselors Association (AzCA) as
well as past-president of the Western Region ACES, which includes California, Oregon,
Washington, Hawaii, Arizona and Australia/New Zealand. She served a term as elected
secretary of the Association of Counselor Education and Supervision, a national office.
She is trained as a CACREP team reviewer and has presented on ethics in many venues,
including regional and national conferences and the Southwest School of Behavioral
Health Studies.
MEET THE FACULTY
Ms. Tra Ahia, M. Ed., has been a faculty instructor with University of
Phoenix since 2011. For the past 4 years Tra Ahia has been working to
complete her Ph. D. degree in Health Psychology with a concentration in
counseling psychology. She has a Masters degree in Educational Administration. She has been involved in several research projects during her
time as an undergraduate student at the University of North Carolina in
Chapel Hill. Some projects involved animal research, for the most part she worked closely
with social psychologists that conducted research aimed at understanding human interaction
in various settings.
Dr. Sheila Babendir, Clinical Director for the Master of Science in Counseling program at the Phoenix campus. Dr. Babendir holds a doctorate
from Argosy University/Orange County in Counseling Psychology (EdD)
and a Master of Science from University of Wisconsin Madison’s
CACREP accredited counselor education program. Dr. Babendir’s undergraduate degree from Marian College in Wisconsin is a Bachelor of Business Administration degree with a concentration in public relations. Dr.
Babendir is a Licensed Professional Counselor in Arizona, a member of the American
Counseling Association, and the Association for Counseling Education and Supervision.
She has published her research on pediatric bipolar disorder in VISTAS 2010, an ACA
produced publication of peer reviewed research articles. She has presented her research at
the National Alliance on Mental Illness national conventions in 2007, 2008, and 2009. As a
national speaker for PESI, a leading organization for continuing education for the mental
health industry, she presents on the topics of psychosocial treatment for youth diagnosed
with bipolar disorder and psychosocial and educational strategies with children on the autism spectrum. Dr. Babendir has held the position of clinical coordinator for LaFrontera/
Empact providing clinical supervision for a staff of therapists, interns, case managers, and
family support partners. A member of the CACREP core faculty, Dr. Babendir also owns
and operates a private practice that provides therapy for individuals, couples and families.
In her spare time, Dr. Babendir enjoys being with her spouse and children, traveling and
reading.
Dr. Melissa Burton-Williams received her Bachelor’s Degree in General
Studies from the University of Michigan, with a focus in sociology and
diversity. She obtained her Master of Arts degree in Social Work from the
University of Chicago, with a concentration in Social Service Administration. It was at this time her focus shifted from direct client services to how the public sector
agencies and administrations function. Having worked for various elected and appointed
officials, her experiences helped establish her post graduate work. At the University of
Phoenix, Dr. Williams’ dissertation addressed the experiences and perceptions of employees who work for popularly elected leaders as managers. Dr. Williams looks to continue her
research and provide support and guidance to public sector administrations focused on
improving performance and efficiency.
Speaker 2
The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management. Burton-Williams, M.
Learning Objectives:
Discuss the impact of elected officials’ management processes on public sector agencies;
Assess considerations and further research.
Abstract: The study of management has focused increasingly on the specific and unique
demands of the government/public sector. Government agencies function in political turmoil most experienced by those career employees, the staff who remain despite changing
administrations. Using a qualitative phenomenological research design, a study was conducted to understand and explain the experiences of government employees working under
the management of elected leaders at various Offices of the Attorney General. Ten staff
ranging from assistant attorneys general to administrative assistants completed interviews
to provide their perceptions on being managed by a popularly elected leader. Data collection resulted in four themes regarding the need for consideration of the government employee management experiences including clear communication of management, an Attorney
General active and accessible to the entire staff, consistent management implementation
throughout the agency, and management focused on agency progress. The discoveries
included recommendations for elected leaders to assist in the management of government
employees: (a) by increasing transition communication, (b) maintaining regular communication directly with the agency, and (c) supporting a management program for current and
potential managers. The study offers a new perspective regarding the challenges elected
leaders face when beginning to lead, and the frustrations the employees have in knowing
what the elected leader is doing.
Room 403
Round Table
Bridging the gap: The integrative role of counselors with
in neuroscience. Mackins, A. C.
11:00 – 11:45
Breakout Session
Room 401:
Non-traditional does not equal non effective: An
analysis of 10 years of national counselor ex- amina
tions for masters in counseling students at the Univer
sity of Phoenix, Phoenix campus. Floda, T. & Kerstner, P.
Learning Objectives:
Describe the importance of the National Counselor Examination
Compare and contrast UOPHX scores to CACREP and Non-CACREP scores
Abstract: While the assessment of student learning objectives is important for all educational institutions, it is particularly important for nontraditional, for-profit institutions in
the current climate of governmental concerns about the academic effectiveness and rigor of
for-profit colleges and universities. A particularly effective way to assess the learning outcomes of UOPX’s Master of Science in Counseling students is to analyze student results on
the National Counselor Examination (NCE), which is the most widely utilized professional
examination of the learning outcomes of graduate counseling students in the US. The NCE
results for the 2001-2010 time period for UOPX/Phoenix Campus counseling students will
be analyzed and compared to (1) all other CACREP programs, (2) National programs, and
(3) non-CACREP programs. Being able to analyze and apply student results from a 10
year time span to inform teaching and curriculum delivery creates a viable performance
improvement loop thereby enhancing future student learning outcomes.
Room 402:
Mini presentations
Speaker 1
Understanding Boyer’s model of scholarship.
Abstract: The University of Phoenix has adopted Boyer’s Model of Scholarship as a guide
to demonstrate scholarly activity at the university. Core Faculty are required, under
CACREP standards, to demonstrate scholarly activity. This presentation will assist faculty
in understanding how they can meet this requirement and begin faculty/student collaborative research interests.
The mind body connection. Babendir, S.
Learning Objectives:
Round Tables
Effective parenting styles with differing levels of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptomatology. Ahia, T.
The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management. (Round-table Discussion). Burton-Williams. M. B.
11:45 – 12:30
Room 407 - Lunch
12:30 - 1:00
Room 402/403 - Poster Session

PANDA: A psychosocial treatment program. Babendir, S.
(2012).

The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management.
Burton-Williams, M. (2012).

Analysis of suicide risk reduction at EMPACT suicide prevention center. Floda, T. (2012).

Forming scar tissue: A comparison of community-based
EMDR and DBT treatment effectiveness with PTSD clients.
Floda, T. (2012).

Cultivating mindfulness. Mackins, A. C. (2011).

Counseling services for the 50 plus lesbian and bisexual
community. Van Gorder, L. (2011).

The effectiveness of HIV/AIDS prevention and awareness
education Wynn, J. D. (2011).
Gegenheimer, C.
Learning Objectives:
Participants will learn the 4 types of scholarship represented in Boyer’s Model of Scholarship
Participants will learn ways that they can contribute to scholarly activity based on Boyer’s
Model
Speaker 2
Room 403:
1:15 – 2:00
Trauma-informed care: How are we doing?
Gegenheimer, C.
Learning Objectives:
Gain a deeper appreciation for the connection between thoughts, beliefs, physical health,
spiritual purpose and overall wellness.
Participants will learn the definition of Trauma Informed Care
Participants will learn how to distinguish trauma informed care from trauma specific treatment
Participants will be learn what they can do to progress the community in this philosophical shift.
Abstract: The mind body spirit connection is about creating a balance in life. For clinicians it is about teaching clients how to think holistically and become aware of the physical, emotional and spiritual components of their being. The focus of this approach is to
learn how to manage each area of one's life effectively to create purpose and direction with
intention and authenticity.
Abstract: Federal, state, and local government and private entities have recognized the need for
trauma-informed care. Too often those seeking treatment find that the experience of seeking
help is re-traumatizing. The shift from ‘what is wrong with you?’ thinking to ‘what has
happened to you?’ changes the experience of the individual seeking assistance. This
presentation will inform participants on their role in helping move our community forward
in becoming trauma-informed.
1st Annual Research & Scholarship Symposium
Tucson, AZ
March 10, 2012
9:00-9:30:
Welcome, Introduction to Scholarship at the University of Phoenix
9:30-9:50:
Arizona’s Medical Marijuana Law: Your Rights as an Employer
Ashley K. Randall, Campus Research Director
Thom Cope, Associate Faculty
10:00-10:20: A Jungian Glimpse of Grief: Its Impact in the Classroom
Lindsey Knowles-Jackman, Associate Faculty
10:30-10:50: Logical Positivism: Influence on Child Psychology
Jenny Simon, Clinical Director
11:00-11:20: Senses and Sensibilities
Ron Dankowski, Lead Faculty/Area Chair – Counseling
11:30-11:50: Developing a Successful Business
Lauren Levy, Counseling Faculty
12:00-1:00:
Lunch & Poster Session
Patrick Cote, Associate Faculty
Ruth Davey, Lead Faculty/Area Chair - Criminal Justice
Christina Breman, BA, MSC Candidate
1:00-1:20:
1:30-1:50:
1:50-2:00
The Use of Idiographic Research in Education
Jolene Oppawsky, Counseling Faculty
Desperately Seeking Approval: Navigating the Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Chad Mosher, Campus College Chair – Social Sciences
Closing Remarks
“Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.”
~Dr. Carl Sagan, Scientist
Thom Cope
ABSTRACTS
In 2010, Arizona voters approved the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes in The Arizona
Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA), effective in the spring of 2011. To date the Arizona Department of
Health has issued 19,430 medical marijuana cards. Services. Only eight people have been turned
down! By far the greatest qualifying condition has been “chronic pain”(87%), followed by “muscle
spasms” (14%) and “nausea” (12%). The largest age group issued cards is the18-30 group (24%),
followed closely by 51-60 year olds (23%).
Employees, who are in the prime of their working years, are securing cards and they are working
for you! Therefore it is critical that you understand both your rights and your responsibilities. First
it is important to understand that you may not treat cardholders differently just because they have
cards. In fact, you are prohibited from asking because to do so would violate both the AMMA and
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The conditions for which one may get a card (glaucoma,
cancer, aids, seizures, Alzheimer’s, HIV, chronic pain, etc), are qualifying conditions under the ADA
and therefore you cannot inquire into the specifics of any medical condition unless it is specifically
related to performing the essential functions of the job.
Second the law prohibits you from discriminating or treating any employee or applicant differently
just because they have a card or fail a drug test. If an employee fails the drug test, and they have a
card, they may not be disciplined unless they were “impaired” on the job site. You may have to give
reasonable accommodation to a person that qualifies for it under the ADA.
Now for the good news! No employee may use or possess marijuana on any worksite, employer
premises, or customer/vendor premises. Nor may any employee be impaired by marijuana on the
employer’s property or a customer’s premises, even if they ingested it before coming to work. You
have the right to discipline (up to termination) an employee for violating these rules: If you have a
“good faith” belief that any of the above has occurred. Good faith is defined as “observed conduct,
behavior or appearance; electronic or verbal statements from a reliable “snitch” (witness); visual
confirmation of possession of paraphernalia, etc. “Impairment” is defined as diminished capacity
for: speech, walking, standing, physical dexterity, agility, coordination, etc, Also you may use body
odor, or irrational or bizarre behavior as indicators of impairment. Since these are subjective, it is
always best to have another manager confirm your observations. Remember!!! Just failing the drug
test is not an indication of impairment!
Finally, you may designate certain jobs as “safety sensitive.” These are ones where the employee
may be operating a motor vehicle, machinery or handing food or medicine.
The key to protecting your business is having a strong employee drug use/medical marijuana policy
in your handbook. An attorney familiar with the area should draft it.
Lindsey-Knowles Jackman
Death of a loved one begins the process of grief. Which includes various experiences and feelings:
sadness, anger, shock, loss of meaning, loss of identity, loneliness, and physical pain or discomfort.
The depth of the grief and the level of its impact on the individual lies on a continuum from
profound to minimal. The healing and resolution from grief includes processing the reconciling of
the opposites. The process means finding ones way to weave the pain and experience in to the
fabric of who we are, transcending the pain and suffering in to a more dynamic individual.
Jenny Simon
There are three major movements that informed the field of child psychology: evolutionary theory,
Unity of Science/logical empiricism, and behaviorism/social engineering. Child psychology was
founded upon logical empiricist methods of behaviorism with intent for social engineering. The
current evidence-based movement is an echo of psychology’s inception. Unfortunately, for the
children, the 100-year-old methodology is a legacy that continues to view them as objects. This
presentation will argue that the main tenets of child psychology were and are to reduce, observe,
predict, and control behavior. Further, it argues that it is time to observe children under a broader
lens, namely that of a pluralistic worldview.
Ron Dankowski
The population of those over age 65 in 21st century America will grow from 12% in 2000 to a
projected record high 20% in 2030. Lack of recognition of decreased sensory capacity by the elder
and others can lead to misunderstandings, frustration, and potentially dangerous consequences.
The presenter will describe the changes in the senses and help the audience identify issues
associated with the changes. Delirium presents a special challenge for older adults and the
presenter will describe the delirium, how to screen for it, and discuss the consequences of not
treating delirium.
Lauren Levy
On October 1, 2009, the Tucson Center for Counseling and Psychotherapy opened its doors to the
public. Its purpose is to provide high quality, affordable counseling while providing intensive, post
graduate training and supervision to Master’s level counselors (LAC, LASAC, LMSW) who are
working towards their independent licenses (LPC, LISAC, LCSW).
This presentation will describe the process of transforming an idea into a business. Topics will
include the development of a business plan, implementing the design, ongoing modification to meet
unexpected needs, a few funding ideas, and marketing. There will also be a discussion about the
personal and professional demands of establishing a business.
Patrick Cote
The author, Patrick Cote provides an in depth analysis of police departments as seen through his 30
years of law enforcement experiences including trials and tribulations. Having been a police chief
for 11 years in three states including Somersworth, New Hampshire; Florence, Arizona and Fort
Lupton, Colorado, he provides detailed examples of management practices through observation and
life experiences. Avoiding the pitfalls and achieving success in managing a police agency is the goal
of this book for anyone in the criminal justice profession. He is currently a criminal justice faculty
member for the University of Phoenix and a licensed private investigator in the state of Arizona.
Ruth Davey
The Court Appointed Special Advocate (“CASA”) program was created on a local, state and national
level to train and support lay volunteers to advocate for the best interests of foster children in
dependency proceedings. In 2012 there are almost 1000 CASA programs throughout the country,
and almost 7000 trained volunteers. There is a need to recruit and train more CASAs since a child
in the foster care and child welfare system is more likely to be adopted and have a plan for
permanency. Additionally, children with CASA volunteers spend less time in foster care, do better
in school and are less likely to be bounced from home to home. There are not enough volunteers to
serve the children, and less than 20% of cases have a CASA.
Jolene Oppawsky
Education of students using only UOPX’s syllabi, reading suggestions, library, and mandatory
textbooks is not good enough to form students who are budding professionals into peers. These
materials must be augmented by up-to-date information, current research, and introductions to
professional trends and developments as well as be augmented by demonstrations of “real life”
clinical practices by the faculty. Fusing teaching, research, and clinical practice equals “best
practices” in the classroom. This presentation is on fusing idiographic research, clinical practice,
“hot topics” in the field of behavioral health science with mandatory classroom objectives and
reading materials to offer “best practices” in teaching.
Chad Mosher
Conducting original research is a creative process. The process begins with the creation of a
research question, and often ends in the dissemination of findings. Seeking approval for research
can often be seen as an onerous, mysterious, or difficult task. The purpose of this presentation is to
demystify the process of obtaining approval to conduct research according to the standards set
forth by the University of Phoenix. Participants will be exposed to the areas assessed by review
boards, including which documents to include within the proposal, and become aware of where
essential resources are for completion of research proposals.
Exhibit C
Arizona Campuses Faculty Research and Scholarship Report 2009 - Present
Boyer Model Location
Publications
Payment
Category
Staff
Responsibilities
Payment
Amount
$
200.00
Mosher, C. (2011). Book review for Oppawsky, J. (2011). Sexual Abuse: Therapy for Children and
Adolescents. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris, Corp.
Babendir, S. M. (2010). Effectiveness of a psychosocial treatment program for pediatric bipolar
disorder in improving self-esteem and reducing problematic behaviors. VISTAS 2010
Coats, V. E. (2011, in press). A rubric for use in training and evaluating empathy skills. Arizona
Journal of Counseling & Development.
Goulet, W. (2011). Holy abomination! Guest Commentary. Echo Magazine . September 1, 2011.
Available at www.echomag.com.
Goulet, W. (2012). Nature: It's good for the soul. Guest Commentary. Echo Magazine . March 1, 2012.
Available at www.echomag.com.
Mosher, C., Beischel, J., & Boccuzzi, M. (under review). The potential benefit of mediumship readings
in the treatment of grief.
Mosher, C. Lease, S. H., & McGhee, R. (under review). Discussing differences: Clients' perspectives
of addressing cultural dissimilarity with their counselors.
Oppawsky, J. Vampirism, Clinical Vampirism, and Renfield's Syndrome. Annals of the American
Psychotherapy Association, 13(4), 58-63.
Oppawsky, J. (2011). Sexual Abuse: Therapy for Children and Adolescents. Bloomington, IN:
Xlibris, Corp.
Oppawsky, J. (2010). Depression School: A Three-Session Group Crisis Stabilization Intervention.
Annals of the American Psychotherapy Association.
Oppawsky, J. (2009). Grief and Bereavement: A How-To Therapy Book for Use with Adults and
Children Experiencing Death and Loss. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris, Corp.
Simon, J. D. (2010). The cost of logical empiricism from inception to present for child psychology.
(Doctoral dissertation, California Institute of Integral Studies) Available from ProQuest Dissertations
and Thesis database. (AAT 3432451)
Application
Tucson
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Ahia, T. (2012). Effective parenting styles with differing levels of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
symptomatology. Round-table Discussion. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium,
University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Basso, A., Mitchell, B., Smith, E. L., Timmermans, L., & Kerstner, P. (2012). Sex, lies, and case
notes: An analysis of the Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Examiners Adverse Actions Reports
from 2005 to 2010. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix,
College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Babendir, S. (2009) “Effective strategies for working with Asperger’s and Autism” workshop to provide
educators and clinicians with behavioral strategies to regulate behavioral outbursts and increase
functioning in children with autism spectrum disorders.
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Presentations
Babendir, S. (2010) "PANDA: Positive Alternatives to Negative and Destructive Attitudes" This study
was to design and test a comprehensive treatment program for children affected by pediatric bipolar
disorder.
Babendir, S. (2011) "Put on Your Own Oxygen Mask First" Address counseling needs of parents first
in order to be able to address and follow through with their children with autism spectrum disorders,
mental illness and other brain disorders. Learn techniques that every “special needs” parent should
know to manage their own stress levels.
Babendir, S. (2012). The mind, body connection. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium,
University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Babendir, S. (2012). PANDA: A psychosocial treatment program. Poster Presentation. First Annual
Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix,
AZ. March 3, 2012.
Brya, P. (2010, April). Beyond CIT: Meaningful collaboration-The Phoenix experience. American
Association of Suicidology. Presentation. American Association of Suicidology, Phoenix, AZ. April 22.
Application
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2010, July). Beyond CIT: Meaningful collaboration-The Phoenix experience. The Summer
Institute, Sedona, AZ, July 22.
Brya, P.(2011, July). Follow-up with high risk callers. National Lifeline Suicide Prevention Conference,
Baltimore, MD, July 26.
Burton-Williams, M. (2012). The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management. Poster
presentation. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of
Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Burton-Williams, M. (2012). The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management. First Annual
Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix,
AZ. March 3, 2012.
Burton-Williams. M. B. (2012). The employee perspective of elected leaders’ management. Roundtable Discussion. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College
of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Coats, V. E. (August, 2010).The lost art of empathy. Professional Presentation for the Annual
Conference, Southwestern School for Behavioral Health Studies, Tucson, Arizona.
Coats, V. E. (February, 2010). Professional development ; Southwest School of Naturopathic
Medicine, Tempe, Arizona.
Coats, V. E. (May, 2010) Beyond the bubble bath: Self-care for professionals ; Day Retreat, Cave
Creek, Arizona.
Coats, V. E. (May, 2011) Self-care for professionals. Workshop for Arizona Bar Association, Phoenix,
Arizona.
Dankowsi, R. (2009-Present): Annual memory screening day training and consultation. Alzheimer's
Prevention and Education Foundation.
Dankowski, R. (2012). Senses and sensibility. Presentation given at the 1st Annual Research and
Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Floda, T. (2012). Analysis of suicide risk reduction at EMPACT suicide prevention center. Poster
presentation. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of
Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Application
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Integration
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Application
Tucson
Integration
Tucson
Discovery
Phoenix
Honorarium
submitted
$
200.00
Floda, T. (2012). Forming scar tissue: A comparison of community-based EMDR and DBT treatment
effectiveness with PTSD clients. Poster presentation. First Annual Research and Scholarship
Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Discovery
Phoenix
Floda, T. & Kerstner, P. (2012). Non-traditional does not equal non effective: An analysis of 10 years
of national counselor examinations for masters in counseling students at the University of Phoenix,
Phoenix campus. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College
of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3, 2012.
Gegenheimer, C. (2010). Resilience: A lifespan perspective. Workshop presented at Central Arizona
Chapter EAP Association, Phoenix, AZ. June 4, 2010.
Gegenheimer, C., Chipman, L., & Wonsowicz, J. (2011). Creating a trauma-informed organization.
Poster presentation. 43rd Annual Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ.
August 23.
Gegenheimer, C. (2012). Trauma informed care: How are we doing? First Annual Research and
Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3,
2012.
Gegenheimer, C. (2012). Understanding Boyer’s model of scholarship. First Annual Research and
Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, College of Social Sciences, Phoenix, AZ. March 3,
2012.
Goldman, G. (2010 - present). Ran focus groups for attorneys; organized mock trials; conducted data
analysis on trials.
Goldman, G. (2011). Issues in Jury Selection. Pima County Bar Association.
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Honorarium
$
200.00
Application
Phoenix
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Phoenix
Integration
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Honorarium
submitted
Contract
Obligation
$
200.00
$
250.00
Goldman, G. (2011). Issues in Jury Selection. Pima County Public Defenders Office.
Tucson
Goldman, G. (2011). Issues in Jury Selection. Arizona Bar Association.
Discovery
Phoenix
Application
Phoenix
Integration
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Mosher, C. & Thompson, T. (April, 2012). An Unexpected Closet: Responding to Same-Sex
Domestic Violence. Workshop presented at the LGBTQ Behavioral Health Conference. Tucson, AZ.
Application
Tucson
2 Honorariums
submitted
$
400.00
Mosher, C. & Thompson, T. (March, 2012). Navigating public tragedy: Counselor responses to
disaster mental health and the tragedy in Tucson. American Counseling Assocaition. San Francisco,
CA.
Application
Tucson
2 Honorariums
submitted
$
400.00
Kerstner, P., Olding, R., Mosher, C, & Outlaw, J. (2011, October). Counselor identity: A five-year
review of dissertation countent as indicators of counselor identiy. Poster Acceptance American
Counseling Association, Nashville, TN, October 2011.
Kerstner, P; Babendir, S. (2011) "Ethics of Supervision" Workshop addresses ethical practices and
concerns in the process of supervision as key components of effective risk management practices.
Babendir, EdD, LPC
Levy, L. (2012). Developing a successful business. Presentation given at the 1st Annual Research
and Scholarship Symposium. University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
McKenna, M. (2011). Motivational Interviewing. Presented at the Counseling Program Series on
Professional Topics: Counseling Skills and Techniques, University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Mosher, C. (2012). Desperately seeking approval: Navigating the Institutional Review Board (IRB).
Presentation given at the 1st Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium. University of Phoenix,
Tucson, AZ.
Mosher, C. Lease, S., & McGhee, R. (2011). Discussing differences: Clients' perspectives of
addressing cultural dissimilarity with their counselors. Poster presented at the American Psychological
Association. Washington, D.C.
Mosher, C. , Beischel, J., & Boccuzzi, M. (2010). The potential therapeutic benefit of mediumship
readings in the treatment of grief. Poster presented at Toward a Science of Consciousness. Tucson,
AZ.
Nixon, J. A. (2010, June). Clinical supervision in the HIPAA age. Presentation sponsored by the
University of Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, November 20, 2010, and Las Vegas, NV, June 11, 2011.
Application
Tucson
Staff responsibility
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Honorarium
$
200.00
Discovery
Tucson
Conference Fees
$
250.00
Integration
Phoenix
Nixon, J. A. (2010, November). From servers to cloud computing: One journey to adopting a
practicum clinic digital video recording and practice management solution. Presentation sponsored by
the Western Association of Counselor Educators and Supervisors, Sacramento, CA, November 5,
2010.
Oppawsky, J. (2012). The use of idiographic research in education. Presentation given at the 1st
Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium. University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Oppawsky, J. (March, 2010). Gangs in Tucson. Presented in conjunction with the Tucson Gang Police
Unit, Counseling Mini-Conference, Tucson, AZ.
Simon, J. (2012). Logical positivism: Influence on child psychology. Presentation given at the 1st
Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Simon, J. (2012): Sandtray: Theory and application. Staff training presented at Canyon Ranch.
Application
Phoenix
Discovery
Tucson
$
200.00
Integration
Tucson
$
265.00
Integration
Tucson
Honorarium
submitted
Contract
Fulfillment
Staff responsibility
$
200.00
Application
Tucson
Simon, J. D. (2011). EMDR and Trauma Techniques. Presented at the Counseling Program Series
on Professional Topics: Counseling Skills and Techniques, university of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Application
Tucson
Staff responsibility
$
275.00
Simon, J. D. (2008-2009). Strengthening Dendritic Pathways, Life Maps and
Genograms, Passion, Worldview, Embracing Conflict, Radiating Beauty from the Inside out, Travel as
Transformation, Self-awareness an Extraordinary Journey I and II, Where’s the Joy, Take Home Tools,
Spirituality and Health, Yourself Behaving, Unbound, Energy and Relationships, Archetypes, Rituals
for Healing and Change, Rest and Rejuvenate, Turning Point, Women’s Journey I and II, To Change
or Not to Change, Centering Circle, Money vs. Meaning, Spiritual Coffee House, Finding Inner Peace
in Times of Chaos and Change. Guests at Canyon Ranch . Tucson, AZ.
Application
Tucson
Combs, A., & Simon, J. D. (2010, April 12). Transforming Consciousness. Preconference workshop
organizers. Toward a Science of Consciousness, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
Stromee, V. (2009). 4 hour Ethics training for Staff of Jewish Children and Family Program
Discovery
Tucson
Integration
Tucson
Stromee, V. (2009). 2 day training on Supervision for CPSA Provider Network
Integration
Tucson
Thompson, T. A. (2010). Social justice workshop (for students). University of Phoenix.
Application
Tucson
contract
$
250.00
Thompson, T. A. (2010). Trauma healing workshop. Presented at the Counseling Program Series on
Professional Topics: Counseling Skills and Techniques, University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
Application
Tucson
Dankowski, R. (2009-Present): Design and implement programs for Counseling, Child Welfare, Case
Management, Senior Nutrition, and Refugee Resettlement. Secure multi-million dollar funding to
support these programs.
Dankowsi, R. (2009-Present): Design, implement, and analyze surveys for Catholic Community
Services of Southern Arizona, Inc. (Employee Satisfaction; Client Satisfaction; Donor Questionnaire)
Application
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Doss, S. M. (in progress since 2010). Counseling students' comfort level in addressing sexuality
issues in counseling through coursework in human sexuality.
Mosher, C. (in progress). (1) Counseling Research Team: Developing and researching sexuality
competences in Counselors; (2) Gender and Transgender men; (3) Faculty advising and professional
identity; and (4) Preferences for learning in counseling programs.
Mosher, C. (2008-Present). Windbridge Institute: Volunteer research and presentation expertise in the
area of qualitative methodology, counseling research, child and family therapy, and psychological
principles. The team investigates grief and loss, and children’s understanding of loss, in addition to
complimentary therapies and studies of consciousness. We discuss research progress weekly and
prepare for national and international conferences.
Discovery
Phoenix
Discovery
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Simon, J. (2009-Present): Conducted a needs assessment regarding depression and college-aged
students (2000 students surveyed). Collaboration with SAMHSA, Frances McClelland Institute at the
University of Arizona, and UA Campus Health Service.
Stromee, V. (in progress). Evaluating the impact of faculty advisors on graduate students in a master's
of counseling program.
Stromee, V. (in progress). Strategic planning process for two local agencies
Discovery
Tucson
Integration
Tucson
Integration
Tucson
contract
$
250.00
Research in
Progress
Grant application
in process
IRB application in
process
Conference
Attendance
Babendir, S. (2010, March). American Counseling Association, Pittsburgh, PA
Phoenix
Babendir, S. (2010, March). US Journal Training, Inc. Counseling Skills and Advances, Las Vegas, NV
Tucson
Brya, P. ( 2010, July). Summer Institute, Sedona, AZ
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2010, April) American Association of Suicidology, Orlando, FL
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2010, July). Statewide Symposium in Support of Military Families, Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2010, October). Arizona Suicide Prevention Coalition Conference, Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2011, August). IHS/BIA/BIE/SAMSHA Action Summit for Suicide Prevention, Scottsdale, AZ
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$654.40
Brya, P. (2011, August). Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2011, June). Statewide Symposium in Support of Military Families, Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix
Brya, P. (2011, Ocotober). Az Suicide Prevention Coalition Conference, Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix
Coats, V. E. (2010, August). Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ
Phoenix
Coats, V. E. (2011, October) Buddhism and Psychology: The Art of Counseling, FACES Conference,
San Diego, CA
Dankowsi, R. (2010). Catholic Charities USA.
Phoenix
Floda, T. (2010, October). Western Association for Counselor Education and Supervision,
Sacremento, CA
Gegenheimer, C. (2010, August). Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ
Phoenix
Gegenheimer, C. (2012, March). American Counseling Association, San Francisco, CA
Phoenix
Goldman, G. (2011). Association for Treatment of Sex Abusers.
Phoenix
Kerstner, P. (2010, August). Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ
Phoenix
Kerstner, P. (2010, March). American Counseling Association, Pittsburgh, PA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$1,191.69
Kerstner, P. (2009, March). American Counseling Association, Charlotte,NC
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$1,259.72
Kerstner, P. (2009, October). Association for Counselor Education and Supervision, San Diego, CA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$230.20
Tucson
Reimbursed
$345.00
Reimbursed
$395.00
Phoenix
$0.00
Kerstner, P. (2011, August). Southwestern Schools for the Behavioral Sciences, Tucson, AZ
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$335.46
Kerstner, P. (2011, March). American Counseling Association, New Orleans, LA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$947.67
Kerstner, P. (2011, October). American Counseling Association - ACES, Nashville, TN
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$1,462.11
Levy, L. (2010). American Counseling Association. Pittsburgh, PA
Tucson
Reimbursed
Mosher, C. (April, 2010). Toward a Science of Consciousness. Tucson, AZ.
Tucson
registration fee
Mosher, C. (June, 2009). 13th Annual Institute of Noetic Sciences Conference. Tucson, AZ.
Tucson
registration fee
Mosher, C. (March, 2010). American Counseling Association. Pittsburgh, PA.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
1,675.00
Mosher, C. (March, 2011). American Counseling Association. New Orleans, LA.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
1,200.00
Mosher, C. (March, 2012). American Counseling Association. San Francisco, CA.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
1,700.00
$
1,555.00
accounted
below
$
250.00
Mosher, C. (May, 2011). First Annual Afterlife Awareness Concerence. Phoenix, AZ.
Tucson
Nixon, J. A. (2010, March). American Counseling Association, Pittsburgh, PA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$1,201.95
Nixon, J.A. (2009, March). American Counseling Association, Charlotte, NC
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$737.47
Nixon, J.A. (2010, November). Western Association for Counselor Education and Supervision,
Sacramento, CA
Nixson, J. (2011, March). American Counseling Association, New Orleans, LA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$556.19
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$881.97
Snyder, C. (2010, March). American Counseling Association, Pittsburgh, PA
Tucson
Reimbursed
$830.40
Thompson, T. (2010). Ben Franklin Institute Summit for Clinical Excellence.
Tucson
Thompson, T. (March 2012). American Counseling Association. San Francisco, CA.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
1,700.00
Thompson, T. (March, 2011). American Counseling Association. New Orleans, LA.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
1,200.00
Zarchy, G. (2011, March). American Counseling Association, New Orleans, CA
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$627.00
Babendir, S. (2009, July). American Counseling Association
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$220.00
Dankowsi, R. (February, 2010). American Counseling Association and ACES
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
220.00
Dankowsi, R. (February, 2011). American Counseling Association and ACES
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
224.00
Dankowsi, R. (March, 2012). American Counseling Association and ACES
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
224.00
Dankowski, R. (September, 2011). National Certified Counselor reactivation.
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$
Doss, S. (2009, June). Association for Counselor Education and Supervision
Phoenix
Reimbursed
$65.00
Doss, S. (2010, February). American Counseling Association
Tucson
Reimbursed
$220.00
Ellsworth, J. (2011). California Board of Behavior Sciences: Exam Construction, LPC. Sacramento,
CA.
Ellsworth, J. Arizona School Counselor Association, Vice President, Higher Education (2010-2012).
Tucson
Ellsworth, J. National Board for Certified Counselors.
Phoenix
Gegenheimer, C. (2012, March). Western Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$40.00
Goldman ,G. Association for Treatment of Sex Abusers.
Phoenix
Goulet, W. (2009, October). American Counseling Association
Tucson
Reimbursed
$220.00
Levy, L. (October 2011). National Board of Cetified Counselors.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
87.50
Levy, L. (September 2009 - present) American Counseling Association/ACES.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
672.00
McKenna, M. (October, 2011). American Counseling Association.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
161.00
Mosher, C. (February 2010 to prresent). American Counseling Association (Divisions: Association for
Counselor Education and Supervision; LGBT Issues in Counseling; Counselors for Social Justice)
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
918.00
Mosher, C. (June 2010 to present). Arizona Counseling Association (University Representative).
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
100.00
Oppawsky, J. (July 2012 to present). National Board of Certified Counselors/NCC and ACS.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
605.00
Sadowsky, J. (December 2009 to present). American Counseling Accosiation.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
475.00
Sadowsky, J. (September, 2011). National Board of Certified Counselors/NCC
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
100.00
Snyder, C. (2010, April). American Counseling Association
Phoenix
Stromee, V. (December 2011). National Board of Certified Counselors/NCC
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
137.50
Stromee, V. (September 2009 to present). American Counseling Association/ACES.
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
664.00
Tanita, G. (2009, September). American Counseling Association
Phoenix
Professional Dues
and Fees Paid:
2009-2012
130.00
Tucson
$220.00
$220.00
Thompson, T. (February 2000 to present). American Counseling Association/ACES/ALGBTIC
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
503.00
Thompson, T. A. American Society of Experiential Therapists.
Tucson
Thompson, T. A. International Association of Trauma Professionals.
Tucson
Thompson, T. A. National Board of Certified Counselors.
Tucson
Weismann, A. (2010,September). American Counseling Association
Phoenix
Reimbursed
Wiggins, F. (September 2009 to present). American Counseling Association/ASERVIC
Tucson
Reimbursed
$
780.00
Cano, J.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Estes, T. K.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Faitlson, K.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Frazier, S.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Hubbard, A.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Kappler, G.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Rojas, L.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Tolhurst, L.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
$220.00
Student
Memberships Paid:
2010-2012
Wilhoit, J.
ACA
Apr-10
$
81.50
Anda, O.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Brady, J.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Chavez, A.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Cozzens, J.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Curren, D.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Fernandez, A.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Foglesong, S.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Green, S.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Hendrickson, M.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Nunez, V.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Owens, N.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Roberts, L.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Scozzarella, V.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Trejo, K.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Wells, S.
ACA
Oct-10
$
81.50
Bender, G.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Daniel, M.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Dunne, D.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Harryman, W.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Lopez-Escobar, L.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
McBrine, C.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
McCollum, J.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Mell, A.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Pennington, D.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Recher, H.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Rossinski, M.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Shaughnessy, M.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Skinner, H.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Tudisco, J.
ACA
Apr-11
$
81.50
Boston, L.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Campoy, M.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Capanna, T.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Garcia, K.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Gilmore, G.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Hammond, M.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Mihelish, T.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Sautter, J.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Carillo, M.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Codner, R.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Cooper, A.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Crawshaw, K.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Dominguez, S.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Gerdes, S.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Krepps, D.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Miceli, J.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Peterson, P.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Serrano, G.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Vega, L.
ACA
Oct-11
$
92.00
Barkely, J.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Gabilondo, L.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Gomez, M.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Hill, J.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Lee, R.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Livingston, M.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Malanga, A.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Matyjasik, K.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
McAuley, P.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Miller, D.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
O'Neill, J.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Russell, K.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Thobe, D.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Ziccardi, E.
ACA
Jan-12
$
92.00
Professional Activities
Kerstner, P. (2008-2011). AZCA, Co-exective Director
Application
Phoenix
Kerstner, P. (2010). ACES Governing Council member, nominated by WACES
Application
Phoenix
Kerstner, P. (2011-present). Facilitate research team meetings with students. Research topics include
professional identity and ethics.
Mosher, C. (2010). Co-Chair/Co-Organizer for the Town Hall Meeting: Issues of Race, Peace, and
Social Jusrtice. Michael D'Andrea, Ph.D., Guest Speaker. October 2, 2010, Tucson, AZ.
Mosher, C. (2010-2011). Commissioner, City of Tucson LGBTQ Commission.
Discovery
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Discovery
Tucson
Integration
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Application
Tucson
Mosher, C. (2011-2012). Chair, Planning Committee for Pre-Conference Strategic Planning Meeting,
Tucson, AZ.
Mosher, C. (2011-2012). Member, LGBTQ Behavioral Health Coalition of Southern Arizona.
Mosher, C. (2011-2012). Member, Planning Committee for the LGBTQ Behavioral Health Conference,
Tucson, AZ.
Mosher, C. (2011-present). Campus Representative to the Arizona Counseling Association.
Mosher, C. (2011-present). Facilitate research team meetings with students. Research topics include
professional identity, counseling competencies, and CACREP standards.
Simon, J. (2009-Present): Consultation with outside organizations, and leadership roles in
professional organizations.
Simon, J. (2009-Present): Coordinator of Internships and Outreach for Division of Family Studies and
Human Development, University of Arizona.
Simon, J. (2009-Present): Mentored students on a variety of disciplines related to social sciences and
professional development.
Stromee, V. (2009-Present): CACREP site reviewer.
Stromee, V. (2009-Present): Consultatant for Pima Council on Aging, TuNidito, YMCA, Coalition on the
Homeless, Mobile Meals, Arizona School of Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine, Tucson Pima Arts
Council, Tucson Botanical Gardens, & Southern Arizona AIDS Foundation.
Application
Tucson
Stromee, V. (2009-Present): Crisis Consultant. Crisis Care Network and Supportive Solutions.
Integration
Tucson
Stromee, V. (2009-Present): NBCC Exam committee member (NCE and Clinical Exam).
Application
Tucson
Syder, C. (2012). Faculty advisor for Psi Omega Pi Chapter of Chi Sigma Iota
Application
Phoenix
Thompson, T. (2009-Present): Leadership role in IOP program for military members with alcohol
problems.
Integration
Tucson
Recognitions
Dankowsi, R. (2011). University of Phoenix: Outstanding Faculty in the College of Social Sciences.
Tucson
Levy, L. (2009-Present). Founder: Tucson Institute for the Advancement of Counseling and
Psychotherapy.
Thompson, T. A. (2011). University of Phoenix: Rookie of the Year.
Tucson
Tucson
Additional
Research Efforts at
each Campus
August, 2008. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Issues of Diversity and Gender in
Counseling. Guest Speakers from the Southern Arizona Gender Alliance.
April, 209. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Suicide Assessment and Counseling
Concerns. Guest Speaker, Michal Gorman, LPC.
June, 2010. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Counseling Skills and Techniques,
University of Phoenix, Tucson, AZ.
March, 2010. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Gangs in Tucson.
Tucson
$
1,045.00
Tucson
$
950.00
Tucson
$
1,100.00
Tucson
$
1,100.00
October, 2010. Town Hall Meeting: Issues of Race, Peace, and Social Jusrtice. Michael D'Andrea,
Ph.D., Guest Speaker.
May, 2011. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Professional Identity and Counseling
Associations. Guest Speaker, Gordon Gray, President Arizona Counseling Association.
Tucson
$
150.00
Tucson
$
520.00
October, 2011. Counseling Program Series on Professional Topics: Counseling Skills and Techniques
Tucson
$
1,045.00
March 10, 2012. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, Southern
Arizona Campus, Tucson, AZ.
March 3, 2012. First Annual Research and Scholarship Symposium, University of Phoenix, Phoenix
Campus, Phoenix, AZ.
Tucson
$
2,100.00
Phoenix
$2,100.00
Publications
$
1,000.00
Presentations
$
3,940.00
Conference Attendance
$ 20,936.23
Professional Dues and Fees Paid (Faculty)
$
7,426.00
Professional Dues and Fees Paid (Students)
$
6,133.00
Campuses Research Directors Annual Allocation
$ 24,000.00
Additional Efforts
$ 10,110.00
Grand Total
$ 72,545.23
Exhibit D
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Phoenix Campus Faculty Recruiting Plan
2011 – 2012 Academic Year
Revised 2-22-2012
07/11/2011
v2
- Page 1 of 14 -
Campus Names
Faculty Recruiting Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Faculty recruiting and selection are major components of ensuring academic
quality in the classroom at University of Phoenix. The goal of the recruitment
process is to identify candidates who not only meet the academic and
professional experience requirements, but who also demonstrate potential
success as facilitators of learning.
The faculty recruitment process involves the identification of currently
available faculty, assessment of future needs, and determination of gaps that
require recruitment of additional faculty.
The Director of Academic Affairs (DAA) has the overall responsibility for
maintaining a cadre of qualified faculty members to meet the campus needs.
The centralized faculty recruiting support team acts as a partner in the
process by providing various marketing strategies to supplement the local
campus recruiting efforts.
The centralized recruiting support team manages the initial intake,
interviewing, and qualifying of potential faculty leads. At the end of the
qualification process, potential faculty members are invited to a formal
assessment process at the campus (see the New Faculty Assessment SOP).
For those who successfully complete the assessment phase, the next steps
are faculty certification and mentorship (see New Faculty Certification SOP
and Mentorship SOP). Potential faculty are not invited to join the faculty
until these components are successfully completed.
GOALS OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS
The goals of the recruitment process are to identify the best possible
candidates, proceed with a careful selection process, and culminate with the
successful training and hiring of excellent faculty members. Specific goals of
recruiting are:
1. To have adequate faculty depth, by course, to ensure that no faculty
member is required to teach more than two courses concurrently.
2. To have sufficient teaching opportunities for faculty members so that
they remain engaged with the university.
3. To ensure that students have a diverse faculty pool from which to
learn. A diverse pool of faculty would include faculty from a variety of
professional, educational, ethnic and gender backgrounds.
Additionally, the campus is to be certain that each potential faculty member
is treated with the greatest respect. Some of the faculty candidates may not
be invited to finish the faculty recruitment process and this may be their only
exposure to the University. Many of these individuals serve in various
capacities in the community and they will more than likely share any
experience with the University of Phoenix, whether positive or negative. In
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 2 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
this regard, the faculty recruiting process should be recognized as an
important public relations strategy.
DETERMINING THE NEED
General Criteria
At a minimum, all faculty must have a Master’s degree from a regionally
accredited institution or international equivalent institutions of higher
education. [Insert higher requirements of your state, if applicable.] All
faculty are recruited to meet the accreditation standards set by Deans of the
respective colleges. Faculty qualifications for a content area may include both
educational requirements and/or practitioner requirements, which are
stipulated in each Content Area Request (CAR).
The DAA, with the support of the College Campus Chairs (CCC), must
evaluate the campus needs for the academic year based on a number of
criteria:
1. Examine concurrent course load – does the campus have faculty
who are at or above 2 courses concurrently?
2. Identify approved faculty, by course:
a. How many scheduling options does the campus have?
b. Are faculty approved for multiple courses/content areas?
c. Are there learning centers that provide travel constraints?
d. How many faculty candidates are currently in the pipeline
(certification or mentorship)?
3. Attend weekly group size meetings – attendance at the meetings
provides insight in the growth of each program.
4. Examine the course frequency – How frequently are courses
running at the campus (past, current, and future)?
5. Estimate student counts –How many instructors are needed for a
given class/program? Consider current and future projections.
6. Consider facets of new program rollout – Consider the course
sequence and how many students are enrolled for the program. It is
best to recruit in smaller batches as students’ progress through
program.
7. Ask for scheduler input – What are the most difficult courses to
schedule? How do multiple course approvals affect availability of
instructor?
8. Aim for a diverse pool of faculty –Focus on creating a broad
learning experience for students by incorporating a variety of faculty
throughout the course of a student’s program
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 3 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
9. Consider Learning Center Locations – Consider the geographic
realities of approved faculty to learning centers. Recruit to course and
location, as applicable
Specific Recruiting Needs Identified
College of Criminal Justice and Security
Content Area
Specific Course
Corrections
Research
Methods
Juvenile Justice
Policy Analysis
Policy Analysis
Capstone Course
CJA/234
CJA/334
13
11
CJA/403
CJA/463
CJA/464
CJA/484
11
9
9
0
Faculty
On-hand
3
3
Social Studies,
History
Mathematics
Arts
Health
Mathematics
Science
Health
Social Studies,
History
Arts
Specific Course
MTE/531
Progress
to Date
Need
to Hire
Progress
to Date
3
3
3
5
College of Education
Content Area
Need
to Hire
Faculty
On-hand
6
2
MTE/532
MTE/534
MTE/537
EED/415
EED/420
EED/425
EED/430
5
5
4
5
5
4
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
EED/435
4
2
College of Humanities and Natural Science
Arts: Music, Visual, Performing
Specific
Course
ARTS/340
Biology/General
Writing
Communication: Intercultural
Writing
Literature: Society and Culture
Writing
Literature: Society and Culture
BIO/101
COMM/215
COMM/315
ENG/221
ENG/301
ENG/340
ENG/437
Content Area
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 4 of 14 -
Faculty
On-hand
18
Need
to Hire
12
15
15
11
8
16
20
15
10
8
5
5
8
8
8
Progress
to Date
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Religion
HC Communication
HC Leadership and
Management
HC Finance
HC Economics
Health Care Organizations
Health Care Evaluation and
Quality
Healthcare Delivery
HC Human Resource
HC Disease Introduction
HC Marketing
Health Care Organizations
HC Information Systems
Healthcare Delivery
HC Disease Introduction
HC Ethics and Law
HC Leadership and
Management
HC Information Systems
Political Science
History: European
Critical Thinking
Media/Film
Communication/Mass
Communication
Humanities: Historical
Mathematics/General/Statistics
Mathematics
Mathematics
Critical Thinking
Ethics – Applied
Environmental
Science/General
Health Science
Health Science
Health Science
Environmental
Science/Law/Ethics
Physics/Astronomy
Sociology
Sociology
REL/134
HCS/320
HCS/325
8
9
11
3
8
8
HCS/405
HCS/440
HCS/446
HCS/451
5
2
7
9
6
8
5
10
HCS/235
HCS/341
HCS/245
HCS/490
HCS/449
HCS/483
HCS/212
HCS/245
HCS/335
HCS/475
6
5
5
6
5
6
5
6
6
9
4
6
9
6
6
6
8
8
5
6
HCS/533
HIS/301
HIS/458
HUM/114
HUM/150
HUM/186
5
9
9
18
14
10
6
10
10
8
12
12
HUM/266
MTH/212
MTH/213
MTH/214
PHL/251
PHL/323
SCI/256
8
10
4
4
20
15
8
12
6
6
6
4
4
12
SCI/220
SCI/163
SCI/100
SCI/362
12
14
13
6
8
10
10
12
SCI/151
SOC/262
SOC/315
3
3
12
15
8
8
College of Information Systems and Technology
Content Area
TECH PROJECT
02/10/2012
v 2.0
Specific Course
CMGT/410
Faculty
On-hand
- Page 5 of 14 -
9
Need
to Hire
6
Progress
to Date
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
MANAGEMENT
PROGRAMING
INTERNET
PROGRAMMING
DATA BASE
MANAGEMENT
PROGRAMMING
& OP SYSTEM
PRG/420
WEB/236
14
11
5
11
DBM/380
2
3
CSS/422
4
3
College of Nursing
Content Area
N/A
Psychiatric
Nursing
Nursing Public
Health
Specific Course
NRP/516
NUR/330
0
3
NUR/408
3
Faculty
On-hand
3
3
Need
to Hire
Progress
to Date
3
College of Social Sciences
Clinical Mental Health /CCMH
Counseling Practice
CCMH/535
Faculty
Onhand
N/A
Clinical Mental Heath/CCMH
Foundations
CCMH/520
N/A
Clinical Mental Health/CNSL/MFCCC
MFCC/566
N/A
Content Area
02/10/2012
v 2.0
Specific
Course
- Page 6 of 14 -
Need
to Hire
Progress
to Date
6 new
faculty –
new
programnew
course.
Need
doctorates
with a
practice
license
6 new
faculty –
new
programnew
course.
Need
counselor
education
doctorates
with a
practice
license
5 new
faculty –
new
program-
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Clinical Mental Heath/CCMH
Counseling Practice
CCMH/565
N/A
Clinical Mental Heath/CCMH
Counseling Practice
CCMH/544
N/A
Psychology/General Historical
PSY/ 310
N/A
Psychology/Industrial/Organizational
PSY/ 428
N/A
Psychology/Learning and Cognition
PSY/390
N/A
Content Area
02/10/2012
v 2.0
School of Business
Specific Course
Faculty
- Page 7 of 14 -
new
course.
Need
doctorates
with a
practice
license
6 new
faculty –
new
programnew
course.
Need
doctorates
in
counselor
education
6 new
faculty –
new
programnew
course
10 new
facultyCAR
change
eliminated
70 % of
current
faculty
8 new
facultyCAR
change
eliminated
70 % of
current
faculty
6 new
facultyCAR
change
eliminated
50 % of
current
faculty
Need
Progress
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Bus: Accounting
Bus: Fin Control
& Risk Mgt
Bus: Fin Control
& Risk Mgt
Bus: law
Bus: Mgmt
Bus: Mgmt
Bus: Mgmt
Bus: Org
Behavior/Dev
Bus: Org
Behavior/Dev
Bus: Strat
Analysis & Plan
Bus: Strat
Analysis & Plan
Bus: Strat
Analysis & Plan
On-hand
to Hire
12
8
ACC/561
FIN/571
32
39
ECO/561
23
10
LAW/531
MGT/521
OPS/571
GBM/380
LDR/531
27
75
38
11
46
5
10
10
6
6
HRM/531
27
6
STR/581
33
8
MKT/571
27
8
QNT/561
28
10
to Date
The School of Business faculty needs estimated for this plan includes student
population, faculty attrition, and new and continued program offerings at the
Phoenix Campus.
FACULTY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
Equal Employment Opportunity
University of Phoenix is a subsidiary of Apollo Group, Inc. (‘Apollo’). Apollo
and its subsidiary companies are committed to being Equal Employment
Opportunity (‘EEO’) and Affirmative Action (‘AA’) employers. As a federal
government contractor, we are obligated by the U.S. Department of Labor
(Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs) to comply with Executive
Order 11246 and establish Affirmative Action Plans as set forth in the Code of
Federal Regulations (41 CFR Chapter 60). Our complete EEO Policy
Statement is published in the Apollo Group, Inc. Employee Handbook as well
as on Apollo’s careers’ page
(http://www.apollogrp.edu/careers/diversity.aspx).
It is the objective of Apollo and, therefore, University of Phoenix to provide
equal opportunity for employment. Through the recruitment and retention of
a competitive diverse workforce, we can leverage our diversity and better
understand our students’ needs as well as enhance the communities we
serve. We believe our faculty diversity strengthens our competitive
advantage. Our Academic Annual Report contains faculty demographic data
that corroborates our strength in diversity
(http://www.phoenix.edu/about_us/publications/academic-annualreport.html).
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 8 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Questions regarding our Affirmative Action Plans should be addressed with
the Office of Diversity (diversity.inclusion@apollogrp.edu).
Marketing and Engagement
All faculty recruiting strategies are lead generation strategies and are of two
types – national (centralized) and local. The purpose is to engage and create
interest among diverse populations (e.g., diversity of age, experience,
education, ethnicity, gender, etc.) of professionals who are qualified to
become faculty members.
The faculty selection process is always based on choosing the best faculty
from among the most qualified candidates. To reiterate, all faculty recruiting
strategies focus on creating an interest in teaching from among diverse
populations.
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 9 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
National (Centralized) Lead Generation
A centralized recruiting support team utilizes a third-party marketing partner
to engage various marketing sources and strategies to generate lead flow to
http://www.phoenix.edu/faculty/become_a_faculty_member.html, our
phoenix.edu recruiting website.
Some of the marketing vendors have included Monster, CareerBuilder,
LinkedIn, Inside Higher Ed, Google, and Direct Employer. Faculty recruiting
advertisements are also placed with several diversity partners (online job
boards which cater to diverse populations) by adding diversity keywords for
generating interest nationally and by specific marketplace where the campus
is located.
The centralized recruiting support team also maintains the area of interest
lists for each campus on phoenix.edu for individuals to express an interest in
becoming a faculty member.
Local Campus Lead Generation
College of Nursing
The College of Nursing recognizes that the local nursing community is quite
small. This presents challenges in the recruiting process. With this small
community, we have found one of the best ways to visibly recruit new faculty
is by becoming a community partner with local organizations and sponsoring
activities within these groups. For 2012, some of the activities we plan to
sponsor include:
•
•
•
•
•
Hosting
Hosting
Hosting
Hosting
Hosting
meetings for the Arizona Nurse Practitioner Council quarterly
Simulation Society Meetings annually
an FNP Review Course for area FNPs biannually
Quarterly Community Advisory Meeting
Quarterly Grand Rounds Lunch period
College of Criminal Justice and Security
The College of Criminal Justice and Security faculty recruiting initiative
involves meeting with the command staff of local police agencies, seeking
managers and specialists to become managers.
The goal is to host on this campus, a recruitment and faculty introduction
event. The CCC will identify prospective faculty, then bring them here, give
them a tour, talk about what we do, have a FM and LFAC do a presentation
on what is involved in being a faculty member, and providing an opportunity
for them to ask questions.
Additional Opportunities
Attending Trade Shows/Business Expos
Chambers of Commerce
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 10 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Hosting an Event at the Campus
Job Fairs
Joining Corporate Education Liaisons as appropriate
Local Advertising
Local Business Journals
Local Businesses and State Offices
Professional Ethnic/Cultural Groups
Professional Organizations
Trade Journals
University websites
Word-of-Mouth Referrals from current UOPX Faculty
Note: University of Phoenix alumni will not be accepted or solicited as faculty
candidate applicants without written approval of the DAA or ADAA.
Centralized Faculty Recruiting will automatically decline all alumni applicants
that do not originate from the CCC with DAA or ADAA written approval (i.e.
e-mail). The DAA or ADAA will only approve alumni candidates in rare
circumstances where all other resources as noted in this Faculty Recruitment
Plan have been exhausted. This will be in place until the Phoenix campus
alumni ration falls below 8%.
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 11 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
PROCESS and RESPONSIBILITIES
The following section describes the faculty recruiting process and the
responsible parties for each task. The centralized recruiting team moves the
potential faculty member through the initial qualifying steps. The local
campus makes the decisions about which potential faculty progress through
the steps of assessment, certification, and mentorship.
Campus Responsibilities Prior to Faculty Assessment:
1. Completes faculty needs form
a. CCCs compile lists of needs for their specific college
b. DAA compiles entire list and sends to centralized recruiter
1. Communicates any changes in needs to recruiter
2. Monitors Weekly Update report on Friday to ensure correct
course/content needs are being targeted
Centralized Recruiter Responsibilities Prior to Faculty Assessment:
1. Receive leads from Faculty Center (FC), instructor, staff, manager,
CareerBuilder, LinkedIn or other lead generation.
2. Request/review resume
3. Conduct Initial Interview(s)
4. Invite to the Application Process
a. Official transcripts/certificates collected
b. University email account is created
c. Faculty Profile is completed
d. Content Area Request solicited
e. Content Area Request is approved by Faculty Records
5. Prepare faculty candidate for assessment
6. One week prior to assessment, send resumes, online interviews, and
interview rating sheets for candidates tentatively scheduled to attend
the upcoming assessment to the campus.
7. 24 hours prior to assessment, send the “Final Roster/Assessment
Results” form to campus.
Responsibilities Post-Assessment:
1. Local Campus conducts faculty assessment.
2. Local Campus notifies centralized faculty recruiting team of
assessment results.
3. DAA/CCCs schedule conference call with centralized recruiter and
recruiting manager to discuss results and feedback from assessment.
4. Recruiter will reassign candidates who have been selected to continue
forward to Local Campus designee OR “Academic Affairs staff”.
Recruiter will send out “Decline” emails immediately following
assessment to those candidates not selected
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 12 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
5. Local Campus will move candidates from “Invited to Assessment”
queue to “Ready for Certification” queue in Faculty Center.
6. Local Campus will send congratulations email and certification
instruction email within 72 hours of the assessment
7. Submit OLS requests for new faculty candidate certification
8. Contact candidates via phone or email 72 hours prior to first night of
certification to again obtain confirmation of their attendance
Campus Responsibilities during Certification (Academic Affairs staff)
1. Monitor faculty candidate progress throughout certification
2. Reschedule candidates for a future certification who have scheduling
conflicts and cannot attend current dates
3. Inactivate candidates who do not wish to continue in selection process
or who do not pass certification (select the reason declined in Faculty
Center).
Campus Responsibility Post-Certification (Campus College Chair)
1. Academic Affairs staff should re-assign candidates who have passed
certification to the appropriate CCC.
a. This step will ensure that when the candidate has New Hire
Paperwork (NHP) complete, he/she will show up in the correct CCC’s
queue to be scheduled for mentorship
2. CCC should advance candidate from “Certification” to “Ready to Collect
HRP Paperwork”
3. When NHP is complete, candidate will be moved by Payroll to the
CCC’s “Ready to Schedule Mentorship” queue
4. CCC should release targeted courses in Faculty Center
5. CCC should contact candidate to discuss upcoming mentorship and
course
6. Once mentorship has been successfully completed and approved by
the DAA, the CCC should advance faculty candidate to Faculty Status
in FC. CCC can solicit additional CARs as needed
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE
The following schedule has been set for New Faculty Assessment for
the academic year.
Activity
Date
Time
Location
Orientation
01/25/2012
6:00 – 8:00 pm
Fountainhead
02/10/2012
v 2.0
- Page 13 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Assessment
Certification
Orientation
Assessment
Certification
Orientation
Assessment
Certification
Orientation
Assessment
Certification
02/10/2012
v 2.0
01/31/2012
02/01/2012
02/15/2012
02/22/2012
02/29/2012
03/07/2012
03/21/2012
03/27/2012
03/28/2012
04/11/2012
04/18/2012
04/25/2012
05/02/2012
05/16/2012
05/22/2012
05/23/2012
06/02/2012
06/09/2012
06/16/2012
06/23/2012
09/25/2012
10/02/2012
10/03/2012
10/16/2012
10/23/2012
10/30/2012
11/06/2012
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 8:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 8:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
8:00 am –
12:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 8:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
6:00 – 10:00 pm
Fountainhead
- Page 14 of 14 -
Campus Name
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Southern Arizona Faculty Recruiting Plan
2011 – 2012 Academic Year
Created 9/4/11
Revised 2/16/12
10/28/11
v 1.2
- Page 1 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Faculty recruiting and selection are major components of ensuring academic
quality in the classroom at University of Phoenix. The goal of the recruitment
process is to identify candidates who not only meet the academic and
professional experience requirements, but who also demonstrate potential
success as facilitators of learning.
The faculty recruitment process involves the identification of currently
available faculty, assessment of future needs, and determination of gaps that
require recruitment of additional faculty.
The Director of Academic Affairs (DAA) has the overall responsibility for
maintaining a cadre of qualified faculty members to meet the campus needs.
The centralized faculty recruiting support team acts as a partner in the
process by providing various marketing strategies to supplement the local
campus recruiting efforts.
The centralized recruiting support team manages the initial intake,
interviewing, and qualifying of potential faculty leads. At the end of the
qualification process, potential faculty members are invited to a formal
assessment process at the campus (see the New Faculty Assessment SOP).
For those who successfully complete the assessment phase, the next steps
are faculty certification and mentorship (see New Faculty Certification SOP
and Mentorship SOP). Potential faculty are not invited to join the faculty
until these components are successfully completed.
GOALS OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS
The goals of the recruitment process are to identify the best possible
candidates, proceed with a careful selection process, and culminate with the
successful training and hiring of excellent faculty members. Specific goals of
recruiting are:
1. To have adequate faculty depth, by course, to ensure that no faculty
member is required to teach more than two courses concurrently.
2. To have sufficient teaching opportunities for faculty members so that
they remain engaged with the university.
3. To ensure that students have a diverse faculty pool from which to
learn.
4. To meet the geographic constraints of the campus, specifically the
Tucson, Yuma and Nogales learning centers.
Additionally, a goal of the campus is to be certain that each potential faculty
member is treated with the greatest respect. Some of the faculty candidates
may not be invited to finish the faculty recruitment process and this may be
their only exposure to the University. Many of these individuals serve in
various capacities in the community and they will more than likely share any
experience with the University of Phoenix, whether positive or negative. In
this regard, the faculty recruiting process should be recognized as an
important public relations strategy.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 2 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
DETERMINING THE NEED
General Criteria
At a minimum, all faculty must have a Master’s degree from a regionally
accredited institution or international equivalent institutions of higher
education. Faculty teaching in the Nurse Practitioner Program must hold a
current Nurse Practitioner license from the State of Arizona. Faculty
teaching in the Master of Science Mental Health Counseling program must
hold a doctorate in the counseling discipline. All faculty are recruited to meet
the accreditation standards set by Deans of the respective colleges. Faculty
qualifications for a content area may include both educational requirements
and/or practitioner requirements, which are stipulated in each Content Area
Request (CAR).
The DAA, with the support of the College Campus Chairs (CCC), must
evaluate the campus needs for the academic year based on a number of
criteria:
1. Examine concurrent course load – does the campus have faculty
who are at or above 2 courses concurrently?
2. Identify approved faculty, by course:
a. How many scheduling options does the campus have?
b. Are faculty approved for multiple courses/content areas?
c. Are there learning centers that provide travel constraints?
d. How many faculty candidates are currently in the pipeline
(certification or mentorship)?
3. Attend weekly group size meetings – attendance at the meetings
provides insight in the growth of each program.
4. Examine the course frequency – How frequently are courses
running at the campus (past, current, and future)?
5. Estimate student counts –How many instructors are needed for a
given class/program? Consider current and future projections.
6. Consider facets of new program rollout – Consider the course
sequence and how many students are enrolled for the program. It is
best to recruit in smaller batches as students’ progress through
program.
7. Ask for scheduler input – What are the most difficult courses to
schedule? How do multiple course approvals affect availability of
instructor?
8. Aim for a diverse pool of faculty –Focus on creating a broad
learning experience for students by incorporating a variety of faculty
for the different classes throughout the course of a student’s program
9. Identifying qualified local faculty at the Yuma Learning Center
10. Identifying qualified local faculty at the Nogales Learning Center
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 3 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
Specific Recruiting Needs Identified
College of Criminal Justice and Security
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State Requirements
Tucson
CJA/224
CJA/234
CJA/304
CJA/314
CJA/334
CJA/324
CJA/354
CJA/374
CJA/384
CJA/394
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
CJS
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
2
2
Yuma
Nogales
2
2
2
2
2
2
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
College of Education
No recruiting needs in the College of Education at this time.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 4 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
College of Humanities
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State
Requirements
COM/170
COM/170
COM/172
COM/285
FP/120
HIS/110
HUM/114
HIS/145
HUM/150
HUM/186
PHL/251
PSY/211
REL/133
REL/133
SOC/105
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
HUM
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per Car
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Tucson
Yuma
Nogales
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
College of Information Systems and Technology
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State
Requirements
BIS/219
BIS/220
POS/410
POS/420
POS/430
POS/440
PRG/420
WEB/236
IST
IST
IST
IST
IST
IST
IST
IST
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per Car
Per Car
Per Car
Per Car
Per CAP
Per CAR
Tucson
Yuma
Nogales
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 5 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
College of Natural Sciences
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State
Requirements
BIO/101
MTH/208
SCI/163
SCI/220
SCI/256
SCI/362
HCS/483
HCS/490
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per Car
Per Car
Tucson
Yuma
Nogales
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
College of Nursing
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State Requirements
Tucson
HCS/504
NRP/507
NRP/510
NRP/516
NRP/522
NRP/540
NRP/550
NRP/545A
NRP/560
NRP/566
NUR/550
NUR/464PN
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
NUR
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
Per CAR + NP
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
CAR + (NP, Midwife OR CNS)
Per CAR
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 6 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
College of Social Sciences
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State Requirements
Tucson
BSHS/351
BSHS/381
BSHS/451
BSHS/461
CCMH/504
CCMH/506
CCMH/510
CCMH/515
CCMH/520
CCMH/525
CCMH/535
CCMH/540
CCMH/544
CCMH/548
CCMH/561
CCMH/565
CCMH/566
CCMH/568
CCMH/578
CCMH/581
CCMH/592
PSY/310
PSY/340
PSY/360
PSY/390
PSY/400
PSY/410
PSY/435
PSY/460
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR + Doctorate
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Yuma
Nogales
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 7 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
School of Business
SPECIFIC CLASS
DESIRED
College
State
Requirements
Tucson
Yuma
Nogales
ACC/280
ACC/290
BUS/415
BUS/415
ECO/212
ECO/365
ECO/372
LAW/421
QNT/561
RES/341
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
Per CAR
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
Recruiting is necessary for this college due to a combination of factors,
including programmatic growth in outlying areas, reduced ability to
compensate non-local faculty with teaching stipends, and attrition of current
faculty.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 8 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
FACULTY RECRUITING STRATEGIES
Equal Employment Opportunity
University of Phoenix is a subsidiary of Apollo Group, Inc. (‘Apollo’). Apollo
and its subsidiary companies are committed to being Equal Employment
Opportunity (‘EEO’) and Affirmative Action (‘AA’) employers. As a federal
government contractor, we are obligated by the U.S. Department of Labor
(Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs) to comply with Executive
Order 11246 and establish Affirmative Action Plans as set forth in the Code of
Federal Regulations (41 CFR Chapter 60). Our complete EEO Policy
Statement is published in the Apollo Group, Inc. Employee Handbook as well
as on Apollo’s careers’ page
(http://www.apollogrp.edu/careers/diversity.aspx).
It is the objective of Apollo and, therefore, University of Phoenix to provide
equal opportunity for employment. Through the recruitment and retention of
a competitive diverse workforce, we can leverage our diversity and better
understand our students’ needs as well as enhance the communities we
serve. We believe our faculty diversity strengthens our competitive
advantage. Our Academic Annual Report contains faculty demographic data
that corroborates our strength in diversity
(http://www.phoenix.edu/about_us/publications/academic-annualreport.html).
Questions regarding our Affirmative Action Plans should be addressed with
the Office of Diversity (diversity.inclusion@apollogrp.edu).
Marketing and Engagement
All faculty recruiting strategies are lead generation strategies and are of two
types – national (centralized) and local. The purpose is to engage and create
interest among diverse populations (e.g., diversity of age, experience,
education, ethnicity, gender, etc.) of professionals who are qualified to
become faculty members.
The faculty selection process is always based on choosing the best faculty
from among the most qualified candidates. To reiterate, all faculty recruiting
strategies focus on creating an interest in teaching from among diverse
populations.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 9 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
National (Centralized) Lead Generation
A centralized recruiting support team utilizes a third-party marketing partner
to engage various marketing sources and strategies to generate lead flow to
http://www.phoenix.edu/faculty/become_a_faculty_member.html, our
phoenix.edu recruiting website.
Some of the marketing vendors have included Monster, CareerBuilder,
LinkedIn, Inside Higher Ed, Google, and Direct Employer. Faculty recruiting
advertisements are also placed with several diversity partners (online job
boards which cater to diverse populations) by adding diversity keywords for
generating interest nationally and by specific marketplace where the campus
is located.
The centralized recruiting support team also maintains the area of interest
lists for each campus on phoenix.edu for individuals to express an interest in
becoming a faculty member.
Local Campus Lead Generation
The Southern Arizona Campus engages several community strategies to
recruit qualified faculty including networking with the various community
chambers of commerce, professional organizations and affiliations with other
University organizations. The campus works closely with the Workforce
Solutions Advisors at the campus in the areas of healthcare and social
services to identify qualified members of the community who may be
interested in becoming faculty.
In addition, the Academic Affairs department has partnered with the various
Campus departments to develop a series of local events at the campus
designed to attract new students and faculty candidates within a specific
discipline. The first event is scheduled in May 2012 focusing all colleges.
Subsequent events will be scheduled in both Tucson and Yuma based on the
success of the first initiative.
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 10 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
PROCESS and RESPONSIBILITIES
The following section describes the faculty recruiting process and the
responsible parties for each task. The centralized recruiting team moves the
potential faculty member through the initial qualifying steps. The local
campus makes the decisions about which potential faculty progress through
the steps of assessment, certification, and mentorship.
Campus Responsibilities Prior to Faculty Assessment:
1. Completes faculty needs form
a. CCCs compile lists of needs for their specific college
b. DAA compiles entire list and sends to centralized recruiter
2. Communicates any changes in needs to recruiter
3. Monitors Weekly Update report on Friday to ensure correct
course/content needs are being targeted
Centralized Recruiter Responsibilities Prior to Faculty Assessment:
1. Receive leads from Faculty Center (FC), instructor, staff, manager,
CareerBuilder, LinkedIn or other lead generation.
2. Request/review resume
3. Conduct Online Interview
4. Invite to the Application Process
a. Official transcripts/certificates collected
b. University email account is created
c. Faculty Profile is completed
d. Content Area Request solicited
e. Content Area Request is approved by Faculty Records
5. Prepare faculty candidate for assessment
6. One week prior to assessment, send resumes, online interviews, and
interview rating sheets for candidates tentatively scheduled to attend
the upcoming assessment to the campus.
7. 24 hours prior to assessment, send the “Final Roster/Assessment
Results” form to campus.
Responsibilities Post-Assessment:
1. Local Campus conducts faculty assessment.
2. Local Campus notifies centralized faculty recruiting team of
assessment results.
3. DAA/CCCs schedule conference call with centralized recruiter and
recruiting manager to discuss results and feedback from assessment.
4. Recruiter will reassign candidates who have been selected to continue
forward to Local Campus designee OR “Academic Affairs staff”.
Recruiter will send out “Decline” emails immediately following
assessment to those candidates not selected
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 11 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
5. Local Campus will move candidates from “Invited to Assessment”
queue to “Ready for Certification” queue in Faculty Center.
6. Local Campus will send congratulations email and certification
instruction email within 72 hours of the assessment
7. Submit OLS requests for new faculty candidate certification
8. Contact candidates via phone or email 72 hours prior to first night of
certification to again obtain confirmation of their attendance
Campus Responsibilities during Certification (Academic Affairs staff)
1. Monitor faculty candidate progress throughout certification
2. Reschedule candidates for a future certification who have scheduling
conflicts and cannot attend current dates
3. Inactivate candidates who do not wish to continue in selection process
or who do not pass certification (select the reason declined in Faculty
Center).
Campus Responsibility Post-Certification (Campus College Chair)
1. Academic Affairs staff should re-assign candidates who have passed
certification to the appropriate CCC.
a. This step will ensure that when the candidate has New Hire
Paperwork (NHP) complete, he/she will show up in the correct CCC’s
queue to be scheduled for mentorship
2. CCC should advance candidate from “Certification” to “Ready to Collect
HRP Paperwork”
3. When NHP is complete, candidate will be moved by Payroll to the
CCC’s “Ready to Schedule Mentorship” queue
4. CCC should release targeted courses in Faculty Center
5. CCC should contact candidate to discuss upcoming mentorship and
course
6. Once mentorship has been successfully completed and approved by
the DAA, the CCC should advance faculty candidate to Faculty Status
in FC. CCC can solicit additional CARs as needed
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 12 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
2011 New Faculty Assessment
Southern Arizona Campus
All Assessments Occur at the Tucson & Yuma Learning Centers
Spring
Month
Day
Date
January
Friday
1.28.11
Friday
1300
1330
2.18.11
February
Schedule
1430
1435
1545
Summer
Fall
Date
May
Wednesday
5.11.11
Friday
1700
1730
6.17.11
02/12/2012
v 2.0
6.15.11
Welcome
Presentations
Break
Leaderless Group
Wrap-Up
1430
1435
1545
Day
Date
Sept.
Friday
9.16.11
Friday
1300
1330
1430
10.21.11
1435
1545
Closing
Date
Time
17002000
13001600
1300
1330
Month
Oct.
Schedule
Time
13001600
13001600
Williams
Centre
Yuma
x
x
x
x
Williams
Centre
Yuma
x
x
x
x
Williams
Centre
Yuma
x
x
x
x
Break
Leaderless Group
Wrap-Up
Day
1930
1945
2000
1.21.11
2.11.11
Welcome
Presentations
Month
June
Schedule
Closing
Date
5.11.11
Closing
Date
9.14.11
10.19.11
Welcome
Presentations
Break
Time
13001600
13001600
Leaderless Group
Wrap-Up
- Page 13 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
2012 New Faculty Assessment
Southern Arizona Campus
All Assessments Occur at the Tucson & Yuma Learning Centers
02/12/2012
v 2.0
New Faculty Assessment
Month
Date
Day
January
1.11.12 Wednesday
February
2.10.12 Friday
Winter
Assessments
Start
End
6:00pm 8:00pm
2:00pm 4:00pm
New Faculty Assessment
Month
Date
Day
April
4.11.12 Wednesday
May
5.11.12 Friday
Spring
Assessments
Start
End
6:00pm 8:00pm
2:00pm 4:00pm
New Faculty Assessment
Month
Date
Day
July
7.11.12 Wednesday
August
8.10.12 Friday
Summer
Assessments
Start
End
6:00pm 8:00pm
2:00pm 4:00pm
New Faculty Assessment
Month
Date
Day
October
10.03.12 Wednesday
November 11.07.12 Friday
Fall Assessments
Start
End
6:00pm 8:00pm
2:00pm 4:00pm
- Page 14 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
2011 New Faculty Certification
Southern Arizona Campus
All Certification Courses Occur at the Tucson & Yuma Learning Centers
Class
Spring
Date
Day
Workshop
Campus
3.23.11
Wednesday
1
River Road / Yuma
3.30.11
Wednesday
2
River Road / Yuma
4.06.11
Wednesday
3
Williams Centre / Yuma
4.13.11
Wednesday
4
Williams Centre / Yuma
Time
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
Schedule Candidate's Mentorship Course between May 23 and Aug. 27, 2011
Summer
7.27.11
Wednesday
1
River Road / Yuma
8.03.11
Wednesday
1
River Road / Yuma
8.10.11
Wednesday
3
Williams Centre / Yuma
8.17.11
Wednesday
4
Williams Centre / Yuma
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
Schedule Candidate's Mentorship Course between Sept. 19 and Dec. 10, 2011
Fall
11.09.11
Wednesday
1
River Rd / Yuma
11.16.11
11.23.11
Wednesday
Holiday Week
2
River Rd / Yuma
11.30.11
Wednesday
3
Williams Centre / Yuma
12.07.11
Wednesday
4
Williams Centre / Yuma
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
1730 2130
Schedule Candidate's Mentorship Course between Jan. 23 and March 30, 2012
02/12/2012
v 2.0
- Page 15 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Faculty Recruiting Plan
2012 New Faculty Certification
Southern Arizona Campus
All Certification Courses Occur at the Tucson & Yuma Learning Centers
Workshop
1
2
3
4
Workshop
1
2
3
4
Workshop
1
2
3
4
Workshop
1
2
3
4
02/12/2012
v 2.0
Date
3.7.12
3.14.12
3.21.12
3.28.12
Date
6.06.12
6.13.12
6.20.12
6.27.12
Date
9.05.12
9.12.12
9.19.12
9.26.12
Date
11.27.12
12.04.12
12.11.12
12.18.12
Day
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Spring Class
Start
End
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
Dinner
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
Day
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Sumer Class
Start
End
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
6:00pm 10:00pm
Dinner
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
Day
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Fall Class
Start
6:00pm
6:00pm
6:00pm
6:00pm
End
10:00pm
10:00pm
10:00pm
10:00pm
Dinner
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
Day
Tuesday
Tuesday
Tuesday
Tuesday
Winter Class
Start
6:00pm
6:00pm
6:00pm
6:00pm
End
10:00pm
10:00pm
10:00pm
10:00pm
Dinner
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
5:30pm
- Page 16 of 16 -
Southern Arizona
Exhibit E
Advertisement for Core and non-core faculty
Master of Science in Community Mental Health Counseling program
University of Phoenix, Phoenix or Tucson campus
JOB DUTIES: Core faculty-- teach a minimum of 18 credits per year. Advise an average of 25 students.
Serve on committees and engage in scholarship.
REQUIREMENTS: Earned doctoral degree in Counselor Education and Supervision or a closely related
field.
Licensed, or license-eligible Professional Counselor in state of Arizona (LPC) or National Certified
Counselor (NCC) certification.
Evidence of ability to teach core courses in a graduate counseling program, for example
psychopathology, community counseling, counseling theories and techniques, tests and measures,
biological basis of behavior, group counseling, human development, or career counseling.
Demonstrated, or substantial promise of effectiveness as a teacher and mentor at the graduate level.
Ability to work constructively with members of the University community. Evidence of work with diverse
populations.
Basic Knowledge of MS Word 2007, Basic Knowledge of MS Excel 2007
Excellent interpersonal, organizational and communication skills
Must be able to treat confidential and sensitive information appropriately
The University of Phoenix is an Equal Opportunity Employer and does not discriminate against persons
on the basis of age, disability, disabled veteran or Vietnam-era veteran status, gender, marital status,
national origin, race, religion, or sexual orientation.
Exhibit F
ARIZONA FACULTY DIVERSITY STATISTICS FY 12
Core
#
%
Non Core
#
%
Total
%
Male
7
41%
Male
5 33%
12 37.5%
Female
10 59 % Female
10 67 %
20 62.5%
TOTAL
17
15
32
3%
1
0
1
African American
5.8% African American
0
6%
1
1
2
Native American
5.8% Native American
6%
Caucasian
13 76.5% Caucasian
14 94%
27
85%
Asian
1 5.8 % Asian
0
0
1
3%
Hispanic
1 5.8% Hispanic
0
0
1
3%
LGBT
4 23.5% LGBT
7 47 %
11
34%
ADA
1 5.8 % ADA
0
0
1
3%
Candidates
Male
Female
# %
1 17%
5 83%
6
33%
African American 2
0
Native American 0
Caucasian
2 33%
Asian
0
0
Hispanic
2 33%
LGBT
0
0
ADA
0
0
Exhibit G
Alumni and Employer Survey
College of Social Sciences
January 2012
Prepared by: Tony Floda, PhD, NCC
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. 2
Executive Summary and Key Findings............................................................................................ 5
Phoenix Key Findings ...................................................................................................................... 6
Tucson Key Findings ....................................................................................................................... 8
Background and Purpose ................................................................................................................. 9
Changes Since the Last Survey ........................................................................................................ 10
Phoenix Campus .............................................................................................................................. 10
Methods and Procedure…………………………..……………………………………… ......... 10
Respondent Pool .......................................................................................................................... 11
Alumni Findings .......................................................................................................................... 12
Participation ................................................................................................................................. 12
Employment ................................................................................................................................. 12
Employment Affiliation ............................................................................................................... 13
Licensing Status ........................................................................................................................... 14
Clinical Core Skills ...................................................................................................................... 15
Alumni Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills................................................................ 16
Alumni Ratings of Effectiveness of University of Phoenix
in Development of Clinical Core Skills ....................................................................................... 18
Individual Counseling Skills ........................................................................................................ 20
Career Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................. 21
Group Counseling Skills .............................................................................................................. 22
Family Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................. 22
Client Appraisal, Assessment & Diagnosis Skills ....................................................................... 23
Documentation and Treatment Planning……………………………………………………… . 23
Case Management Skills .............................................................................................................. 24
Work Behavior Skills................................................................................................................... 25
Professional Involvement and Community Skills........................................................................ 25
Supervision Skills ........................................................................................................................ 26
Research Skills ............................................................................................................................. 26
Ethical Decision Making Skills ................................................................................................... 27
Other Skills ................................................................................................................................... 27
Recommending UOP .................................................................................................................... 27
Strengths of the University of Phoenix Counseling Program ....................................................... 28
Recommendations for Improving the UOP Counseling Program ................................................ 29
Other Programs .............................................................................................................................. 29
Alumni Advisory Board ................................................................................................................. 29
Employer Findings ......................................................................................................................... 30
Employers ...................................................................................................................................... 30
Employee Status............................................................................................................................. 30
Competitor Status .......................................................................................................................... 32
Awareness of UOP Program .......................................................................................................... 32
Hiring Preferences ......................................................................................................................... 33
2
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Licensure Preferences .................................................................................................................... 33
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills .............................................................. 34
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates ...................................... 35
Individual Counseling Skills .......................................................................................................... 36
Career Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 37
Group Counseling Skills ................................................................................................................ 37
Family Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 38
Client Appraisal, Assessment & Diagnosis Skills ......................................................................... 38
Documentation and Treatment Planning………….………………………………………...… ... 39
Case Management Skills ................................................................................................................ 39
Work Behavior Skills..................................................................................................................... 39
Ethical Decision Making Skills ..................................................................................................... 40
Professional Involvement and Community Skills.......................................................................... 40
Supervision Skills .......................................................................................................................... 41
Research Skills ............................................................................................................................... 41
Strengths of the University of Phoenix Counseling Program ........................................................ 42
Recommendations for Improving the UOP Counseling Program ................................................. 42
Need for Hiring New Counselors .................................................................................................. 42
Need for Re-Training Employees as Counselors ........................................................................... 43
Interest in UOP BSHS degree ........................................................................................................ 44
Employer Advisory Board ............................................................................................................. 44
Tucson Campus ............................................................................................................................... 45
Tucson Summary and Key Findings ................................................................................................ 45
Alumni Findings ............................................................................................................................ 45
Participation ................................................................................................................................... 45
Employment ................................................................................................................................... 45
Employment Affiliation ................................................................................................................. 46
Licensing Status ............................................................................................................................. 47
Clinical Core Skills ........................................................................................................................ 48
Alumni Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills.................................................................. 48
Alumni Ratings of Effectiveness of University of Phoenix
in Development of Clinical Core Skills ......................................................................................... 50
Individual Counseling Skills .......................................................................................................... 53
Career Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 54
Group Counseling Skills ................................................................................................................ 54
Family Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 55
Client Appraisal, Assessment & Diagnosis Skills ......................................................................... 55
Documentation and Treatment Planning…………….………………………………………… .. 56
Case Management Skills ................................................................................................................ 56
Work Behavior Skills..................................................................................................................... 57
Professional Involvement and Community Skills.......................................................................... 58
Supervision Skills .......................................................................................................................... 58
Research Skills ............................................................................................................................... 59
Ethical Decision Making Skills ..................................................................................................... 59
3
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Recommending UOP ..................................................................................................................... 60
Strengths of the University of Phoenix Counseling Program ........................................................ 60
Recommendations for Improving the UOP Counseling Program ................................................. 61
Other Programs .............................................................................................................................. 61
Alumni Advisory Board ................................................................................................................. 62
Employer Findings ......................................................................................................................... 62
Tucson Employers ......................................................................................................................... 62
Employee Status............................................................................................................................. 62
Competitor Status .......................................................................................................................... 64
Awareness of UOP Program .......................................................................................................... 64
Hiring Preferences ......................................................................................................................... 64
Licensure Preferences .................................................................................................................... 65
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills .............................................................. 65
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates ...................................... 66
Individual Counseling Skills .......................................................................................................... 68
Career Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 68
Group Counseling Skills ................................................................................................................ 68
Family Counseling Skills ............................................................................................................... 69
Client Appraisal, Assessment & Diagnosis Skills ......................................................................... 69
Documentation and Treatment Planning…………….……………………………………...…… 70
Case Management Skills ................................................................................................................ 70
Work Behavior Skills..................................................................................................................... 71
Ethical Decision Making Skills ..................................................................................................... 71
Professional Involvement and Community Skills.......................................................................... 71
Supervision Skills .......................................................................................................................... 72
Research Skills ............................................................................................................................... 72
Strengths of the University of Phoenix Counseling Program ........................................................ 72
Recommendations for Improving the UOP Counseling Program ................................................. 73
Need for Hiring New Counselors .................................................................................................. 73
Need for Re-Training Employees as Counselors ........................................................................... 74
Interest in UOP BSHS degree ........................................................................................................ 74
Employer Advisory Board .............................................................................................................. 75
4
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Executive Summary and Key Findings
Summary
Alumni who graduated from 2008 to early 2011 were asked to respond to a questionnaire.
Questions pertained to demographics, a set of clinical core skills, and the level of preparedness
of University of Phoenix graduates. At the Phoenix campus, a total of 123 surveys were e-mailed
to alumni. Eleven were returned as undeliverable, leaving a potential sample of 112 respondents,
and 56 alumni e-mailed back completed surveys. The resulting 50% response rate is fairly
consistent with response rates for such surveys and is believed to be a representative sample of
the graduates of the University of Phoenix (UOPX) Master of Science in Counseling program in
Phoenix, Arizona.
At the Tucson campus, a total of 138 surveys were mailed to alumni. Twenty-six were returned
as undeliverable, leaving a potential sample of 112 respondents, and 27 alumni sent back
completed surveys. The resulting 24% response rate is fairly low for such surveys, which makes
it difficult to know if this was a representative sample of the graduates of the UOPX Master of
Science in Counseling program in Tucson, Arizona.
Employers currently employing UOPX Master of Counseling graduates were mailed a survey
with the request to evaluate their perception of the UOPX Master of Counseling program. In
order to ensure that the most appropriate person at the workplace completed the survey, it was
sent to the supervisor(s) of the graduate. Supervisors of interns from the program also received a
survey. Including the site supervisors of interns seemed appropriate because these workplaces
are potential employers of graduates. In Phoenix, 23 employers participated in the survey. In
Tucson, four employers participated in the survey.
This report of the survey results will be made available to administrators, academic leadership,
faculty, and students of University of Phoenix. Original data will be kept and made available on
request.
5
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Phoenix Key Findings
Alumni
-
The majority of the University of Phoenix graduates reported that they passed the
National Counselor Exam (NCE) on the first attempt.
-
Almost three quarters of UOPX graduates are working at least part time in the field of
counseling. The overwhelming majority work in human service organizations.
-
Alumni value the clinical core skills they developed at University of Phoenix. The
highest ratings in importance were given for ethical skills, documentation and
treatment planning skills, individual counseling skills, and clinical appraisal skills.
-
Even the traditionally least valued skills (e.g., career and research) were rated
significantly higher than in the 2008 survey.
-
The graduates rated University of Phoenix as effective to very effective in helping
them develop most of the 12 clinical core skills. The highest ratings for the
university’s effectiveness were given for individual skills, ethical skills, client
appraisal skills, and documentation and treatment planning skills.
-
The clinical core skill aggregate effectiveness scores significantly improved between
2008 and 2011.
-
There was a 75% reduction in reported category problems (e.g., curriculum or
instruction) from 2008 to 2011.
-
There was a 50% reduction in the number of courses with reported problems.
-
Over 85% of the graduates would feel comfortable recommending University of
Phoenix to others. The major issues that sometimes concern them are the high price
and the Learning Team format.
-
Many graduates made positive comments about the UOPX practitioner faculty, the
curriculum, the Learning Team experiences, and the practicum–internship courses.
-
The graduates recommended that instructors do more demonstrations of specific
therapy techniques, increase the amount of training in providing services to children,
and communicate more clearly about salary expectations for newly graduated
counselors.
-
More than half of the alumni would be interested in serving on an Alumni Advisory
Board.
6
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Employers and Site Supervisors
-
Employers are very aware of the UOPX Master of Counseling program.
-
Employers are as willing to hire graduates from University of Phoenix as from
universities with national reputations for excellence.
-
Employers assess UOPX graduates as being at least as well prepared as graduates
from other universities, with more than half rating UOPX graduates as better prepared
than students from other schools.
-
Employers reported that they valued ethical decision making skills, documentation
and treatment planning skills, individual counseling skills, work behavior skills,
group counseling skills, and client appraisal skills as highly important in the
employees they hire. Career and research skills were rated as having low importance.
-
For most of the fundamental counseling skills identified by employers as moderately
or highly important, employers tended to find counselors similarly prepared
regardless of the school from which they graduated. Regardless of skill area, UOPX
graduates were never rated as less prepared than graduates from other schools
-
Employers reported that the strongest aspects of the UOPX Master of Counseling
program were the maturity of the students and their ethical behaviors in the
workplace. In addition, employers valued the strong focus on clinical skill
development, the diversity of the coursework, and the Learning Team model that the
university employs. Last, they appreciated the clear expectations of the internship
course and the opportunity for site-supervisor involvement in the students’
professional development.
-
The most common recommendation made by employers for improving the UOPX
Master of Counseling program was offering additional training on the realistic
demands of documentation in community behavioral health centers.
-
Phoenix employers indicated plans to hire between 63 and 92 counselors in the next
12 to 18 months, and to retrain between 25 and 30 employees into counseling
positions during the same time period.
-
Half of the employers would be interested in hiring graduates of the UOPX Bachelor
of Science in Human Services (BSHS) degree program.
-
Over 30% of employers indicated an interest in participating in an Employer
Advisory Board for the UOPX Master of Counseling program.
7
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Tucson Key Findings
Alumni
-
Over 90% of the University of Phoenix graduates reported that they passed the
National Counselor Exam (NCE) on the first attempt.
-
More than three quarters of the graduates are working at least part time in the field of
counseling. The majority work in human service organizations.
-
Alumni value the clinical core skills they developed at University of Phoenix. The
highest ratings in importance were given for ethical skills, individual counseling
skills, documentation and treatment planning, work behavior skills, and client
appraisal skills.
-
The graduates rated University of Phoenix as effective to very effective in helping
them develop most of the 12 clinical core skills. The highest ratings for the
university’s effectiveness were given for ethical skills, work behavior skills, client
appraisal skills, documentation and treatment planning skills, and individual
counseling skills.
-
Almost three quarters of the graduates would feel comfortable recommending
University of Phoenix to others. The major issues that sometimes concern them are
the high cost of the program and the perception that for-profit school graduates are
not as respected as public university graduates.
-
Numerous graduates made positive comments about the UOPX practitioner faculty,
the curriculum, and the practicum–internship courses.
-
The graduates recommended that University of Phoenix make the clinical classes
longer, that the clinical classes come at the end of the program, and that the career
counseling course be dropped.
-
More than half of the alumni would be interested in serving on an Alumni Advisory
Board.
Employers and Site Supervisors
(Note: Given the extremely small sample size for this section, N = 4, it is very difficult to
generalize these results to the population of employers and site supervisors.)
-
Employers are highly aware of the UOPX Master of Counseling program.
-
Employers are as willing to hire graduates from University of Phoenix as from
universities with national reputations for excellence.
8
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
-
Employers assess UOPX graduates as being as well prepared as graduates from other
universities.
-
Employers reported that they valued work behavior skills, documentation and
treatment planning skills, group counseling skills, and client appraisal skills as highly
important in the employees they hire. Research skills were rated as having no
importance.
-
For most of the clinical core skills identified by employers as moderately or highly
important, employers tended to find counselors similarly prepared, regardless of the
school from which they graduated. The one exception was client appraisal, which
employers rated as having high importance, where they rated UOPX graduates as
being less prepared than graduates from other schools.
-
Employers reported that the strongest aspects of the UOPX Master of Counseling
program were the maturity of the students and their ethical behaviors in the
workplace. In addition, they valued the strong focus on clinical skill development in
the program.
-
The most common recommendations made by employers for improving the UOPX
Master of Counseling program focused on improving students’ knowledge of the
public behavioral health system.
-
Tucson employers indicated plans to hire four counselors in the next 12 to 18 months,
and to retrain one employee into a counseling position during the same time period.
-
Two thirds of the employers would be interested in hiring graduates of the UOPX
Bachelor of Science in Human Services (BSHS) degree program.
-
Three quarters of employers indicated an interest in participating on an Employer
Advisory Board for the UOPX Master of Counseling program.
Background and Purpose
University of Phoenix, founded in 1976, is an educational institution that aims to help working
adults to achieve their educational goals. Subscribing to a paradigm of lifelong learning and the
adult learning model, the university strives to be sensitive and responsive to the needs of the
workforce and employers. Many employers reimburse a percentage of employees’ educational
expenses because they realize that such investments give them competitive advantages in today’s
market.
A challenge for all concerned is effective cooperation. In order to fulfill its educational mission,
the university must establish functional and mutually constructive working relationships with
9
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
employers.
This survey was conducted to gather information about how graduates from the Master of
Counseling program are evaluating their educational experience and how employers perceive
these graduates.
Specifically, the survey attempts to respond to the following questions:
1.
Is the Master of Counseling program meeting the needs of the graduates, and are they
acquiring the skills needed to assume positions of responsibility in the counseling field?
2.
Is the Master of Counseling program meeting the needs of workplaces that employ
counselors, and do employers feel that graduates are adequately prepared to assume
positions of responsibility in the counseling field?
3.
Can strengths and weaknesses be identified to aid in the development and enhancement
of the curriculum of the Master of Counseling program?
Changes Since the Last Survey
There have been no changes in either the Master of Counseling curriculum or the survey
instruments themselves since the 2008 surveys.
Phoenix Campus
Methods and Procedures
The survey questionnaires were developed based on a structured interview protocol utilized by
InterEd for University of Phoenix in 1998. After reviewing the interview protocols, and after
assessing the needs of the College of Health and Human Services at the Tucson campus, the
academic leadership decided to employ surveys rather than structured interviews. This
methodology was used for its cost effectiveness and ease of data collection, and in order to limit
any possible interviewer bias. The surveys consist of several demographic items, items with
rating scales, and open-ended questions. This item composition was used in order to strike a
balance between quantifiable data and qualitative data.
All prospective participants of the survey were contacted by either e-mail (alumni) or mail
(employers). No follow-up or second mailings of the survey were employed to increase the rate
of return. The surveys were e-mailed to a total of 123 graduates with an attached letter outlining
the purpose of the study. Eleven of the e-mailed surveys were returned as undeliverable,
resulting in a pool of 112 potential participants. Of these, 56 returned completed questionnaires.
10
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Respondent Pool
Alumni:
All alumni from the UOPX Master of Counseling program were contacted by email with the request to complete a survey evaluating their education at
University of Phoenix.
A letter was included explaining the purpose of the study and outlining how
previous study results had been used.
No compensation was offered in any way, and graduates were informed that
completion of the survey would take little time.
Employers:
Employers currently employing UOPX Master of Counseling graduates were
mailed a survey with the request to evaluate their perception of the UOPX Master
of Counseling program. In order to ensure that the most appropriate person at the
workplace completed the survey, it was sent to the supervisor(s) of the graduate.
Supervisors of interns from the program were also sent a survey. Including the
interns’ site supervisors seemed appropriate because these workplaces are
potential employers of graduates.
In order to enhance the return rate of the employer and site supervisor surveys,
alumni were asked in the graduate survey to submit the most appropriate contact
person at their work site. Alumni were assured that the employers and supervisors
surveyed would not be asked about specific graduates, but only about the
perception of the academic and professional preparation of the UOPX Master of
Counseling students in general.
The requests to complete the surveys included a letter outlining the purpose of the
study and a brief explanation of how previous findings have helped the university
to enhance the program and meet employer and internship site needs. No
compensation was offered in any way, and respondents were informed that the
survey would take no more than 15 to 20 minutes to complete.
11
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Phoenix Alumni Findings
Participation
Of the 123 surveys e-mailed to alumni who graduated between 2008 and 2011, 11 surveys were
returned as undeliverable, resulting in 112 potential respondents. Fifty-six alumni returned
completed surveys, which resulted in a response rate of 50%.
Employment
The alumni were asked to identify their employment status in the counseling field. Their
responses are summarized below.
Current Employment Status
Full time
Number of alumni
38
Percent
68%
Part time
2
4%
Not employed in counseling
10
18%
Not employed
6
11%
Almost three quarters of the alumni are employed full time or part time in the counseling field.
Ten alumni are employed outside of the counseling field, and six individuals are not employed.
The reasons given by individuals not employed in the counseling field fit into one of these
categories: (1) counseling does not pay enough (the most frequent answer by far), (2) my current
career pays more, but what I learned at University of Phoenix helps me be more effective there,
and (3) I have moved to another state and will look for a counseling position after I get settled.
Not one of the non-counseling-employed alumni believed that their educational experiences at
University of Phoenix affected their employment status.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Employment Status Results
12
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Year
2001
2005
2008
2011
Percentage of alumni in part-time and/or
full-time employment in the counseling field
88%
78%
78%
72%
While a slightly greater percentage of alumni were working full or part time in the counseling
field between 2005 and 2008, the reasons alumni gave for not working in the counseling field
have remained basically the same since 2005. It is hypothesized that the significant drop between
2001 and 2005 occurred because Arizona became a “licensure” state in 2004. This resulted in a
much more rigorous process to obtain and maintain the right to practice counseling in the state.
Employment Affiliation
The alumni were asked to identify the type of organization they work for. The following is a
summary of the 34 alumni who responded.
Current Organizations
Number of alumni
6
Percent
18%
For-profit human service organization
8
24%
Not-for-profit human service
organization
14
41%
Public educational institution
0
0%
Private educational institution
2
6%
Self-employed
4
12%
Other: private practice
0
0%
Local, state, or national government
agency
The majority of the alumni are employed in human service organizations (65%), with almost two
thirds of those respondents working in not-for-profit organizations. Six alumni work in local,
state, or national government agencies and no alumni work in public educational institutions or
in private practice.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Organization Results
13
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
2008
2011
0%
18%
Organization
Local, state, or national
government agency
2001
15%
2005
11%
For-profit human service
organization
32%
21%
23%
24%
Not-for-profit human service
organization
Public educational institution
38%
43%
73%
41%
9%
8%
0%
0%
Private educational institution
3%
0%
2%
6%
Self-employed
11%
11%
2%
12%
Other: private practice
0%
7%
0%
0%
By far, the most dramatic change in employment settings from 2001 to 2011 concerns the
variance of the human services field as the primary work setting for alumni. From 2001 to 2005
an average of 67% of alumni worked in human services, spiking up to 96% from 2005 to 2008,
and now returning to almost the exact same ratio (65%) as from 2001 to 2005. The most
probable reason for this recent reduction is the recession’s effect on publically funded human
service agencies.
Licensing Status
Alumni were asked to indicate their licensing status. Their responses are summarized below.
Current Licensing Status
Passed the NCE the first time
Taken the NCE but not passed
Planning to take NCE in next
6–12 months
Planning to take NCE in
next 12–24 months
Not planning to take the NCE
Number of alumni
38
6
0
83%
13%
0%
Percent
0
0%
2
4%
Arizona requires LPCs to take and pass the NCE (or a comparable nationally accepted exam) in
order to pursue licensure. The 83% pass rate for first-time takers of the exam is considerably
above what would be expected given national pass rates. This is an excellent indicator of the
quality of the students, faculty, and program at the Phoenix Campus. Being able to pass the NCE
the first time is especially important now that Arizona is a “licensure” state and individuals are
not allowed to practice professional counseling without having a license (or being supervised by
someone with a license).
14
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Comparison of 2005–2011 NCE Pass Rates
Year
Percentage of alumni passing NCE on first attempt
2005
96%
2008
90%
2011
83%
While it looks like there has been a steady decline from 2005 in first-time NCE pass rates, it
must be remembered that this data comes from a restricted sample (i.e., the graduates who
responded to requests to complete alumni surveys, versus all graduates who have taken the
NCE). In addition, the Phoenix Campus cohort who took the NCE in April 2010 had unusually
low scores, with only 50% (6 out of 12) passing the examination. This is the primary reason that
the 2011 result is significantly lower than the 2008 one. Despite this, however, an in-depth
analysis of all NCE scores of UOPX alumni from 2001 to 2011 shows that approximately 90%
of Phoenix Campus students have passed the NCE during this 10-year time period. (Note: These
results cannot be compared to 2001 pass rates, as that information was not gathered at the time.)
Forty-two respondents indicated how well they felt University of Phoenix prepared them for the
licensing examination. Every individual who responded to this question stated that University of
Phoenix prepared them “very well” or “well” for the licensure examinations.
Comparison of 2005–20011 NCE Preparation Adequacy
2005
2008
Prepared “very well” or “well”
97%
97%
Preparation was “barely adequate” or “inadequate”
3%
3%
2011
100%
0%
Alumni have consistently rated NCE preparation at an extremely high level and clearly believe
that the university is doing an outstanding job in preparing them to take and pass this extremely
important examination. (Note: The 2001 survey data cannot be assessed because that information
was not gathered at the time.)
Clinical Core Skills
The alumni were asked to rate a number of skills typical in the counseling profession in several
ways. First, they were asked to rate the overall importance of a set of 12 core skills for
counselors in general on a 4-point scale (from high in importance to not important). Respondents
were asked to rate the effectiveness of the University of Phoenix program in helping them
develop these 12 core skills. Possible ratings were very effective, effective, and less than
effective. If graduates rated University of Phoenix as less than effective in helping them develop
any of these 12 core skills, they were also asked to identify whether they believed the deficiency
was a result of the curriculum, instruction, internships, other reasons, or a combination of those.
The alumni were also asked to list any core skills not mentioned and to rate them accordingly.
Alumni Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Respondents evaluated a set of 12 clinical core skills and rated their importance for their own
15
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
work in the counseling field. The following is a summary of the ratings.
Note. Ratings are based on a 4-point scale where 4 = high importance, 3 = moderate importance,
2 = low importance, and 1 = not important.
The respondents rated ethical and individual skills as equally important, closely followed by
documentation and treatment planning skills. Client appraisal, assessment, and diagnosis; case
management; and family counseling skills were also rated as very important skills (≥ 3.50). The
rest of the skills were all rated as having moderate to low importance. The fact that career
counseling skills and research skills are perceived as less important may be due to the fact that a
majority of alumni indicated an interest in clinical workplaces. Supervision skills may not seem
as important at the beginning of graduates’ professional career; however, this skill may become
increasingly important to graduates as they assume supervisory responsibilities.
One encouraging change regarding the three lowest rated skills is that the scores have
dramatically improved from 2008. The following table summarizes this data.
Skill
Supervision
Research
2008 rating
2.64
2.14
2011 rating
2.95
2.86
Difference
+0.31
+0.72
16
Career
2.07
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
+0.74
2.81
Even more encouraging is the fact that the range between the highest and lowest rated skills has
been significantly reduced, skewing toward higher ratings. The following table summarizes this
data.
2008
3.90
2.07
1.83
Highest rating
Lowest rating
Range
2011
3.95
2.81
1.14
Difference
0.69
The difference of only 1.14 points between the highest and lowest scores in 2011 shows that
there has been a 38% reduction (.69/1.83) in range for alumni perceptions of the importance of
even the “least” valued skills. One explanation for this might be that UOPX instructors
(particularly those teaching research and career courses) have been especially effective in
communicating the reasons these classes are important and are a part of the educational
development of future professional counselors.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Clinical Core Skills Importance
Top 4 in
2001
Individual
counseling
Work
behavior
Group
counseling
Client
appraisal
Rating
(1-4)
n/a
Top 4 in
2005
Ethical
Rating
(1-4)
3.89
Top 4 in
2008
Ethical
Rating
(1-4)
3.90
Ethics
n/a
Individual
3.80
Documentation
3.88
Individual
n/a
(tie)
n/a
(tie)
Client
appraisal
Case
management
3.78
Individual
counseling
Work behavior
3.86
Documentation
3.62
Client
appraisal
3.62
Top 4 in 2011
Rating
(1-4)
3.95
(tie)
3.95
(tie)
3.86
3.82
Note. The 2001 survey used a different rating system, so only the rank order is shown for those
survey results.
Ethical skills and individual counseling skills have been assessed as among the most important
skills in every survey. (Note: “Ethical decision making” was not an option in the 2001 survey).
The 2008 survey was the first one to assess documentation and treatment planning skills, and it
is quite apparent that alumni consider it a very important skill. Otherwise, the vast majority of
the most highly rated skills are clinically oriented.
Alumni Ratings of Effectiveness of University of Phoenix in Development of Clinical Core
Skills
Alumni rated the effectiveness of University of Phoenix in helping them develop the set of 12
clinical core skills. Respondents indicated whether they believed the university was “very
effective,” “effective,” or “less than effective” in furthering these skills. The following is a
17
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
summary of the findings.
Note. Ratings are based on a 3-point scale where 3 = very effective, 2 = effective, and 1 = less
than effective.
The graduates indicated that University of Phoenix was very effective (≥ 2.50 ) in aiding in the
development of individual counseling, ethical, client appraisal, documentation/treatment
planning, work behavior, and group counseling skills. Respondents rated the university as being
at least effective with all of the other skills. This is an improvement over the 2008 survey, when
family counseling was rated as less than effective (1.78). In fact, that skill has made impressive
progress in the rankings, now being the 7th out of 12 most effectively taught.
Even more encouraging is the fact that the range between the highest and lowest effectiveness
scores has significantly reduced, skewing toward higher ratings. The following table summarizes
this data.
Highest effectiveness rating
Lowest effectiveness rating
Range
2008
2.85
1.78
1.07
2011
2.87
2.48
0.39
Difference
.68
18
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
The difference of only 0.39 points between the highest and lowest rated skills shows that there
has been a 64% reduction (.68/1.07) in range for alumni perceptions of UOPX effectiveness. A
likely explanation for this is that UOPX instructors have been especially effective in teaching
these core CACREP-focused skills to their students. This hypothesis is supported by the
extremely high NCE preparation scores, the high percentage of alumni who pass the NCE the
first time, and the qualitative feedback from alumni on the professionalism and knowledge of
their practitioner faculty.
Alumni were also asked to judge the primary reasons the lowest rated skills were not effectively
delivered. They were able to choose from (1) curriculum, (2) instruction, (3) internships, and (4)
other. The following is a summary of the findings.
Reasons for Poor Skill Development
Curriculum Instruction
Family counseling
Career counseling
Group counseling
Total problems
per category
2
1
0
3
0
1
0
1
Internships
Other
# of
problems
per course
1
1
0
2
0
0
1 (class size)
1
3
3
1
Alumni reported that problems with the curriculum were the primary factor most of the time,
closely followed by internships. Curriculum problems occurred most often in the family
counseling skill area. When comments were provided, alumni usually stated that too much was
expected in the class, or that the class needed to be longer. Problems with internships were the
next highly rated problem area, but because neither respondent wrote down any information
about the specific nature of the problem, it is difficult to assess how to improve in this area.
There has, in fact, been a significant reduction since the 2008 survey in reports of course or
category problems. The following table summarizes the data.
19
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
There has been a 50% reduction in the number of courses that have been identified as having
problems, and there has been a 76% reduction in the number of category (i.e., curriculum,
instruction, internships, other) problems reported. This is especially encouraging given the fact
that there were more alumni participants in 2011 (N = 56) than in 2008 (N = 52).
Comparison of 2001–2011 UOPX Effectiveness Ratings
Top 4
Rating Top 4
Rating( Top 4
Rating
in 2001
(1–4)
in 2005
1–3)
in 2008
(1–3)
Client
appraisal
n/a
Ethical
Individual
n/a
Individual 2.71
2.90
Ethical
2.85
Individual 2.71
Top 4
in 2011
Rating
(1–3)
Individual
2.91
Ethics
2.87
(tie)
2.87
(tie)
Professional
Client
Client
Client
n/a
2.62
2.61
involvement
appraisal
appraisal
appraisal
Work
Work
Work
n/a
2.54
2.59
Documentation 2.70
behavior
behavior
behavior
Note. The 2001 survey used a different rating system, so only the rank order is shown for those
survey results.
The same three skills (ethics, individual counseling, and client appraisal) have appeared as the
top three in every survey in which they were available to choose. Alumni appear to believe that
20
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
these skills are consistently taught very well at University of Phoenix. (Note: Ethical decision
making was not a category in the 2001 survey.)
The following section presents results for each core skill separately. Percentages in tables may
not total 100% because of rounding.
Individual Counseling Skills
Forty (95%) of the respondents rated individual counseling skills as high in importance to their
work as counselors. Two respondents (5%) ranked individual counseling skills as moderately
important, and none of the respondents reported such skills as being of low importance or not
important.
All of the respondents rated University of Phoenix as very effective or as effective in helping
them develop these skills. The distribution between very effective and effective ratings was
skewed strongly toward the very effective rating, with 38 of the alumni rating the university as
very effective and 6 rating the university as effective. No alumni rated the university as less than
effective.
Individual Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
38
Effective
6
Less than effective
0
Percent
86%
14%
0%
The 2011 survey results are at the same high effectiveness levels as the 2005 and 2008 surveys.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Individual Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
89%
96%
100%
or very effective
2011
100%
Career Counseling Skills
Ten (24%) of the alumni rated career counseling skills as high in importance, 14 individuals
(33%) rated them as moderate in importance, and 18 (43%) rated them as low in importance.
None indicated that career counseling skills are not important related to the counseling
profession.
Forty-two of the alumni assessed that the university is effective or very effective in promoting
career counseling skills. Two individuals rated the university as being less than effective in
helping in the development of these skills.
Career Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
21
Very effective
Effective
Less than effective
10
32
2
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
23%
73%
4%
Comparison of 2001–2011 Career Counseling Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
70%
82%
56%
96%
or very effective
These ratings improved dramatically from 2008 to 2011. It would probably be helpful for the
college to conduct an analysis to uncover the reasons for this improvement and ensure that it is
sustained.
Group Counseling Skills
Twenty-six alumni (59%) ranked group counseling skills as highly important in their profession,
12 (27%) as moderate, six (14%) as low, and none as not important.
University of Phoenix was rated by 40 alumni as either very effective or effective in helping in
the development of group skills. Four individuals felt the university was less than effective in
aiding the development of these skills.
Group Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
24
Effective
16
Less than effective
4
Percent
55%
36%
9%
These effectiveness ratings have remained fairly stable during the last three survey periods.
Comparison of 2001-2011 Group Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
77%
94%
89%
or very effective
2011
91%
Family Counseling Skills
Thirty alumni (68%) rated family counseling skills as being high in importance for a counselor.
Twelve (27%) rated family counseling skills as moderate in importance for their positions, and
two alumni (5%) rated those skills as having low importance.
Twenty-four alumni rated the university as very effective in developing family counseling skills,
with 14 alumni rating the university as effective. Six alumni rated University of Phoenix as less
than effective.
22
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Family Counseling Skills
Very effective
Effective
Less than effective
Number of alumni
24
14
6
Percent
55%
32%
14%
The effectiveness scores in this area have been steadily improving since 2001.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Family Counseling Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective or very
39%
54%
75%
87%
effective
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills
Thirty-eight respondents (86%) rated these skills as high in importance in their own work, four
(9%) as moderate, and two as low (5%). None rated these skills as low in importance.
Overall, the alumni rated the university as being very effective in teaching client appraisal and
assessment skills. Thirty-six individuals rated University of Phoenix as being very effective,
eight as effective, and none stated that the university is less than effective in the development of
these skills.
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
Very effective
36
82%
Effective
8
18%
Less than effective
0
0%
It is apparent that alumni continue to assess that University of Phoenix provides very effective
instruction in client appraisal, assessment, and diagnosis skills.
Comparison of 2001-2011 Client Appraisal Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
94%
97%
95%
or very effective
2011
100%
Documentation and Treatment Planning Skills
Forty respondents (90%) rated documentation and treatment planning skills as high in
importance in their own work, while two individuals (5%) ranked these skills as moderate in
importance. Two (5%) suggested that such skills are of low importance or not important.
The alumni rated the university as being very effective in teaching documentation and treatment
planning skills. Thirty-two individuals rated University of Phoenix as being very effective in
23
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
aiding in the development of these skills, and 14 rated the university as being effective.
Documentation and Treatment Planning Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
32
Effective
14
Less than effective
0
Percent
70%
30%
0%
It is apparent that alumni continue to assess that University of Phoenix provides very effective
instruction in documentation and treatment planning skills.
Comparison of 2008–2011 Documentation and Treatment Planning Ratings
2008
2011
Rated as effective or very
100%
100%
effective
Note: These results can only be compared to 2008, as that was the first survey to assess this skill.
Case Management Skills
Thirty-six alumni (82%) rated case management skills as high in importance in their work, two
(4%) rated these skills as moderate, and six (14%) as low in importance.
Twenty of the respondents rated University of Phoenix as very effective in helping in the
development of case management skills, 22 as effective, and four reported that the university is
less than effective in facilitating the acquisition of case management skills.
Case Management Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
20
Effective
22
Less than effective
4
Percent
43%
48%
9%
Case management effectiveness ratings have been high since 2005, with a dramatic rise between
2001 and 2005.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Case Management Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
45%
84%
95%
or very effective
Work Behavior Skills
2011
91%
Twenty-six individuals (59%) rated work behavior skills as high in importance in their work as
counselors, 12 alumni (27%) ranked these skills as being moderate in importance, and six (14%)
rated them as having low importance.
24
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Twenty-two alumni found University of Phoenix to be very effective in teaching these skills,
with the remaining 22 respondents perceiving the university to be effective.
Work Behavior Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
22
Effective
22
Less than effective
0
Percent
50%
50%
0%
There has been steady progress in this skill area since 2001.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Work Behavior Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
85%
96%
100%
or very effective
2011
100%
Professional Involvement and Community Skills
Professional involvement and community skills were ranked as high in importance by 18 (41%)
respondents and as moderate by 22 (50%). The remaining four respondents (9%) suggested that
professional involvement and community skills are low in importance in the work of a counselor.
Sixteen respondents believed University of Phoenix to be very effective in furthering these skills.
A majority of the respondents (22 individuals) rated the university as being effective. Eight
alumni believed that the university was less than effective in developing these skills.
Professional Involvement and Community Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
Very effective
16
35%
Effective
22
48%
Less than effective
8
17%
It is unclear why these ratings have returned to 2001 survey levels (see below). While the
effectiveness levels are still relatively high, it is suggested that the college initiate an internal
assessment to uncover the reasons for the reduced effectiveness ratings. Performance
improvement plans could then be conducted as needed based on the nature of the assessment
results.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Professional Involvement Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
85%
90%
95%
or very effective
2011
83%
25
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Supervision Skills
Supervision skills were valued as being high in importance by 16 respondents (36%), and 12
(27%) attributed moderate importance to the development of those skills. Fourteen respondents
(32%) attributed low importance to the skills, and two (5%) rated them as having no importance.
Sixteen alumni indicated that University of Phoenix is very effective in developing supervision
skills. Twenty-eight respondents rated the university as effective, and two suggested the
university is less than effective.
Supervision Skills Effectiveness
Very effective
Effective
Less than effective
Number of alumni
16
28
2
Percent
35%
61%
4%
Even though alumni do not rate supervision skills as being particularly important, they do
believe that it is being effectively taught.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Supervision Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
84%
84%
92%
or very effective
2011
96%
Research Skills
Twelve alumni (27%) rated these skills as being high in importance, 16 (36%) rated them as
moderate, 14 (32%) as low, and two (5%) as not important.
In these current results for the university’s effectiveness in developing research skills, 22 alumni
rated the university as being very effective, 22 rated it as effective, and two individuals rated it
as less than effective.
Research Skills Effectiveness
Very effective
Effective
Less than effective
Number of Alumni
22
22
2
Percent
48%
48%
4%
There has been a significant increase in importance ratings from 2008 (28% high or moderate
importance) to 2011 (63% high or moderate importance), and the effectiveness ratings have
consistently remained high.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Research Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
26
Rated as effective
or very effective
94%
91%
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
92%
96%
Ethical Skills
Forty-two respondents (95%) rated these skills as being high in importance in their work, while
the remaining two alumni (5%) rated them as being moderately important.
Thirty-six alumni rated University of Phoenix as being very effective, while the remaining eight
alumni rated it as effective.
Ethical Skills Effectiveness
Very effective
Effective
Less than effective
Number of alumni
36
8
0
Percent
82%
18%
0%
This has been among the most highly rated of any of the core skills for the last three surveys.
Comparison of 2005 to 2011 Ethical Effectiveness Ratings
2005
2008
Rated as effective
100%
100%
or very effective
2011
100%
Note: No comparisons can be made to 2001, as this category was not assessed in 2001.
Other Skills
Alumni mentioned these additional skills as ones that they would like to have had training in at
University of Phoenix: (1) crisis intervention, (2) additional substance abuse training, and (3)
additional cultural diversity training.
Recommending University of Phoenix
Alumni were asked if they would recommend the University of Phoenix counseling program to
others. Possible responses were yes – unqualified, yes – with reservations, and seldom or never.
Those graduates who responded yes – with reservations or seldom or never were also asked to
share the reasons for their reservations to recommend the program.
Thirty-eight alumni reported that they would recommend University of Phoenix without
reservation, while six alumni stated that they would recommend it with reservations. The
following table summarizes the 2008 and 2011 responses.
UOPX Recommendations
Yes – with no reservations
2008
15 (83%)
2011
38 (86%)
27
Yes – with reservations
3 (17%)
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
6 (14%)
These results have been quite high and consistent since 2008. When students recommend “with
reservations,” the reasons are always that the university “costs too much.” There has never been
a response that University of Phoenix is not providing quality education (which is supported by
the high effectiveness ratings and qualitative analysis of the strengths of the program).
Strengths of the UOPX Counseling Program
The graduates were asked to identify three (or more) aspects of the counseling program they
liked in particular or found most useful. In order to analyze this qualitative data, these comments
were categorized, with the following categories emerging: (1) curriculum, skills taught,
practicum, and internship; (2) instruction and instructors; and (3) in-class activities and Learning
Teams.
Most positive comments were made about the first category: curriculum, skills taught, practicum,
and internship. Students highly valued the ethical training and focus on interventions they
received. They liked taking only one class at a time. Numerous students also listed several
classes they enjoyed in particular (classes focusing on clinical assessment, individual and group
counseling, and ethics). Alumni repeatedly commented that they appreciated the quality of the
supervision they received during practicum and internship courses, and the emphasis on proper
documentation that occurred in the clinical classes.
The second most frequently made comments concerned the instruction and instructors. Alumni
appreciated the diverse faculty and the fact that faculty members all work in the field.
Recognition was given to the wealth of experience and knowledge along with the high standards
and genuine encouragement provided by the faculty. Respondents identified specific faculty
members they considered to be outstanding in the classroom, including Drs. Kerstner (ethics),
Nixon (group), Weissman (clinical assessment), and Floda (research).
In-class activities and Learning Teams have also been frequently listed as positive aspects of the
University of Phoenix program. Alumni indicated that their team-working skills greatly
improved. Similarly, many felt that the required class presentations aided them to develop highly
valued presentation skills. Further, graduates liked the camaraderie developing over the course of
the program and the challenge to work in a group.
Recommendations for Improving the UOPX Counseling Program
Similar to strengths, alumni were asked to identify up to three aspects of the University of
Phoenix counseling program they found unsatisfactory or in need of improvement. For these
comments, two categories emerged: curriculum and skills taught, and instruction issues.
The vast majority of the comments were made about the curriculum and skills taught. Several
students recommended the following changes: (1) focus more on the salary realities for newly
graduated professional counselors, and (2) increase training in working with children and on
28
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
specific therapy techniques.
Instruction issues were also mentioned. Comments were made about (1) decreasing the number
of required presentations, (2) improving preparation of students for professional licensing
(licensing process), and (3) expanding Port 2 preparation.
Other Programs
The questionnaire included one item asking graduates what other programs they would like the
university to offer. Alumni were asked whether University of Phoenix should offer continuingeducation programs and what other programs, if any, would be beneficial to the graduates.
Twenty-eight alumni answered this question, and the following suggestions were made: (1)
develop a doctoral program in clinical/counseling psychology, and (2) offer more continuing
education units (CEU) trainings.
Alumni Advisory Board
The University of Phoenix counseling program is interested in maintaining good and effective
cooperation with the graduates of the program. As can be seen from the results of this report,
alumni are an excellent resource for ideas on how to improve the program and its educational
value for both students and employers. Therefore, alumni were asked whether they would be
willing to serve on an Alumni Advisory Board.
Nine respondents indicated they would be willing to serve on an Alumni Advisory Board, and
six graduates indicated they would not be willing.
Alumni Advisory Board
Response
Willing to be on an advisory
board
Not willing to be on an
advisory board
Alumni
9
Percent
60%
6
40%
These results have been fairly consistent since 2001.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Alumni Advisory Board Ratings
Response
2001
2005
2008
Willing to be on an advisory
58%
66%
56%
board
Not willing to be on an
42%
34%
44%
advisory board
2011
60%
40%
Phoenix Employer Findings
29
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Employers currently employing UOPX Master of Counseling graduates were mailed a survey
with the request to evaluate their perception of the UOPX Master of Counseling educational
program. In order to ensure that the most appropriate person at the workplace completed the
survey, the survey was sent to the supervisor(s) of the graduate. Supervisors of interns from the
program were also sent a survey.
In order to enhance the return rate of the employer and site supervisor surveys, alumni had been
asked in the graduate survey to submit the most appropriate contact person at their work site.
Alumni were assured that the employers and supervisors surveyed would not be asked about
specific graduates, but only about the perception of the academic and professional preparation of
UOPX Master of Counseling students in general.
The requests to complete the surveys included a letter outlining the purpose of the study and a
brief explanation of how previous findings have helped the university to enhance the program
and meet employer and internship site needs.
No compensation was offered in any way, and respondents were informed that completion of the
survey would take no more than 15 to 20 minutes.
Phoenix Employer Responses
A total of 23 employers responded to the survey requests. The following table summarizes the
number of employer responses since 2001.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Employer Responses
2001
2005
Employer
15
23
responses
2008
18
2011
23
Employee Status
Employers were first asked to report on how many employees and counselors currently worked
in their organizations. They were then asked to indicate the approximate number of employees
who were enrolled or planned to enroll in counseling courses. The tables below indicate the
approximate number of employees, the approximate number of employees attending or planning
to attend counseling courses, and the approximate number of counselors employed with their
organizations.
Note: Percentages in tables may not total 100% because of rounding.
Number of Employees
Number of employees in the
organization
0–25
26–50
Number of responding
organizations
4
1
Percent
17%
4%
30
51–75
76+
3
15
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
13%
65%
In this survey there are many more organizations with 76 or more employees than there are with
smaller numbers of employees. These results are significantly different from the 2008 survey,
where only 28% of the employers had 76 or more employees. (Note: These results cannot
readily be compared to the 2001 results because the earlier survey asked for estimates of total
numbers of employees, versus the current use of a category range.)
Number of Counselors
Number of counselors in the
organization
0–10
11–20
21–30
31–40
41+
Number of responding
organizations
10
3
1
3
6
Percent
43%
13%
4%
13%
27%
This table shows that there are fewer than 20 counselors in most organizations. Thirty percent of
these organizations employ between 11 and 40 counselors, while six large organizations employ
41 or more counselors. These results are different from 2008, when a larger majority of
organizations (78%) employed 20 or fewer counselors.
Employers were also asked how often they encouraged employees to return to school to study
counseling. Almost half of them (46%) said they did so occasionally, with 35% doing so often.
Slightly less than 10% said they never encourage employees to return to school.
Employers were asked how many employees were enrolled or planned to enroll in counseling
courses. Of the 12 employers who answered this question, half (50%) indicated that they had
fewer than four employees who either were enrolled or planned to enroll in a counseling course.
These results are different from the 2008 surveys, where 88% of employers had fewer than four
employees enrolled or planning to enroll in a counseling course. (Note: These results cannot be
directly compared to the 2001 results, as the form of the question was significantly different.)
Employees Enrolled or Planning to Enroll in a Counseling Course
Employees in organization
Number of responding
Percent
enrolled/planning
organizations
0–1
3
25%
2–4
3
25%
5–7
2
17%
8–10
4
33%
Competitor Status
Employers were asked to list local colleges and universities that their employees currently
31
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
attended. Results are summarized by institution name and the number of times each was
mentioned.
Most Frequently Mentioned Local Colleges and Universities Attended by Employees
College or university
Mentions
Arizona State University
14
University of Phoenix
8
Ottawa
8
Argosy University
4
Northern Arizona University
3
Grand Canyon University
2
Scottsdale Community College
1
University of Arizona
1
Rio Salado
1
Arizona State University was mentioned most frequently in this survey, followed by University
of Phoenix and Ottawa. These results are different from what was seen in 2001 to 2008, where
University of Phoenix was the most frequently mentioned university. The reason for this change
is not readily apparent, as the survey instrument does not trigger the employers to explain their
answers. One possibility is that there are more doctoral students from ASU who are working on
their Doctor of Behavioral Health (DBH) degree; therefore the employers are thinking more
about ASU than they have in the past.
Awareness of UOPX Counselor Education Program
Employers were asked if the UOPX Master of Counseling program came to mind when they
thought specifically about counselor education programs. Twenty-two employers (96%)
responded affirmatively. The single employer who did not think of University of Phoenix
reported thinking of ASU and Argosy instead. These results have remained at similarly high
levels throughout the entire survey period (2001–2010).
Hiring Preferences
Employers were next asked whether they preferred to hire counselors who graduated from one
college over those who graduated from another. Twenty employers (87%) had no specific hiring
preference. Two of the three remaining employers (9%) indicated that they preferred to hire
counselors from University of Phoenix, while the remaining employer (4%) preferred to hire
University of Phoenix or Arizona State University graduates. These results are consistent with
the 2001–2008 surveys and clearly demonstrate the high regard that University of Phoenix
graduates have earned in the workplace.
Hiring Preferences
Prefer graduates from one
college over another
Number of responding
employers
Percent
32
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
No
Yes
20
3*
96%
4%
* Of those who reported a preference, 2 preferred UOPX and 1 preferred UOPX and ASU.
Licensure Preferences
Employers were asked whether they preferred to hire counselors who hold (or are working
toward) one mental health license over another. Nine employers (39%) indicated that they had
no licensure preference, while 14 employers (61%) did report a preference. When asked to
identify their preferences, the employers rated the identified licenses as follows (from most
preferred to least preferred):
1.
2.
3.
4.
LPC (Licensed Professional Counselor)
LCSW (Licensed Clinical Social Worker)
LMFT (Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist)
LISAC (Licensed Independent Substance Abuse Counselor)
The LPC was the overwhelming first choice. These results are consistent with the 2001–2008
survey results.
Preparedness of UOPX Graduates
Twenty-three employers rated the UOPX Master of Counseling program on the preparedness of
counselors from the program in comparison to counselors from other schools. Eleven employers
(48%) rated the preparedness of counselors who graduated from University of Phoenix as about
the same compared with graduates from other schools, while 12 employers (52%) rated UOPX
graduates as better than most compared to other graduates. No employers rated UOPX graduates
as less than most when compared to other graduates. These results have remained fairly
consistent since 2001.
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Employers were next asked to rate common counseling skills desirable in the counselors they
hire. First, employers were asked to rate the importance of the various skills as high, moderate,
low, or not important, and also to offer any other skills not mentioned that they deemed
important for entry-level counselors to possess. For the skills rated high or moderate in
importance, participants were then asked to judge the preparedness of University of Phoenix
counselors with respect to those skills by rating the UOPX graduates as less than, about the
same, or better prepared than counselors who graduate from other schools.
The employers rated ethical decision making skills as most important, closely followed by
individual counseling skills; documentation and treatment planning skills; work behavior skills;
group counseling skills; and client appraisal, assessment, and diagnosis skills.
33
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
The following were rated in the moderately important (< 3.50) category: case management skills
and family counseling skills.
Professional involvement, supervision, research, and career skills were all rated relatively low in
importance. The fact that career counseling skills and research skills are perceived as less
important may be due to the fact that the majority of alumni are employed in clinical workplaces.
Similarly, supervision skills may not seem as important at the beginning of the graduates’
professional careers, though these skills may become increasingly important to employers when
graduates assume supervisory responsibilities. It is unclear why professional involvement skills
were rated so poorly, as employers did not give any further clarification for the relatively low
score.
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Note. Ratings are based on a 4-point scale where 4 = high importance, 3 = moderate importance,
2 = low importance, 1 = not important.
These results were consistent with the 2001–2008 surveys.
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates
Employers rated the preparedness of University of Phoenix graduates as compared to graduates
of other schools in the demonstration of 12 core clinical skills. Employers indicated whether
34
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
UOPX students were prepared less than, the same as, or better than graduates from other
schools. The following is a summary of the findings.
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates
Note. Ratings are based on a 3-point scale where 3 = better prepared, 2 = prepared the same,
and 1= less prepared.
The employers indicated that University of Phoenix graduates are best prepared in the areas of
individual counseling, work behavior, documentation and treatment planning, and client
appraisal skills. This was closely followed by ethics, group, and family skills. The remaining
skills were all judged to be at least at the same level as graduates from other universities. This
shows improvement from the 2008 survey, where family counseling and career counseling were
rated as less prepared. Aside from those improvements, these results are basically consistent with
the 2001–2008 surveys.
35
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
The following section presents results for each core skill separately.
Individual Counseling Skills
Eighteen employers (82%) rated individual counseling skills as highly important in counselors
they hire, while three employers (14%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. None rated
them as low or not important.
Nine employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to individual counseling skills. Twelve employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and none rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared
than counselors who graduated from other schools. These scores are higher than the ones in the
2005 and 2008 surveys.
Employer Assessment of Individual Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
9
43%
Same as other graduates
12
57%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Career Counseling Skills
One employer (4%) rated career counseling skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
One employer (4%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, while 12 employers (46%)
rated these skills as low in importance. Twelve employers (46%) rated these skills as not
important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to career counseling skills. All 14 employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as graduates of other universities. These results are
consistent with the 2001–2008 results.
Employer Assessment of Career Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
14
100%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Group Counseling Skills
Thirteen employers (59%) rated group counseling skills as highly important in counselors they
hire. Seven employers (32%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, while two employers
(9%) rated these skills as low in importance. None of the employers rated them as not important.
36
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Three employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to group counseling skills, while 16 employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same. No employers rated UOPX counselors as less well
prepared. These scores have improved since the 2008 survey, where only 6% of the employers
evaluated UOPX alumni as better prepared.
Employer Assessment of Group Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
3
16%
Same as other graduates
16
84%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Family Counseling Skills
Eight employers (36%) rated family counseling skills as highly important in counselors they
hire. Ten employers (45%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, while four employers
(18%) rated these skills as low in importance.
Two employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to family counseling skills. Nineteen employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and no employers rated UOPX counselors as less well
prepared. These results are better than those from the 2008 survey, where 17% of employers
rated alumni as less prepared.
Employer Assessment of Family Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
2
10%
Same as other graduates
19
90%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills
Sixteen employers (73%) rated client appraisal skills as highly important in counselors they hire,
and the other four employers (18%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. Two employers
(9%) rated these skills as low in importance.
Six employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to client appraisal skills. Thirteen employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and one rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared
37
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are similar to the 2001–2008
surveys.
Employer Assessment of Client Appraisal Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
6
30%
Same as other graduates
13
65%
Less than other graduates
1
5%
Documentation and Treatment Planning Skills
Sixteen employers (73%) rated documentation and treatment planning skills as highly important
in counselors they hire, while six employers (27%) rated these skills as moderate in importance.
No employers rated them as low in importance.
Five employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to individual counseling skills. Fifteen employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and no one rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared
than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are similar to the 2008 survey
(which was the first survey to assess this skill).
Employer Assessment of Documentation and Treatment Planning Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
5
25%
Same as other graduates
15
75%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Case Management Skills
Eight employers (36%) rated case management skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
Eleven employers (50%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, and three employers
(14%) rated these skills as low in importance. No one rated these skills as not important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to case management skills, while 20 employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX counselors
as less well prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are
similar to the 2008 survey results.
Employer Assessment of Case Management Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Percent
0%
38
Same as other graduates
20
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
100%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Work Behavior Skills
Seventeen employers (81%) rated work behavior skills as highly important in counselors they
hire, and four (19%) rated them as being moderately important. None rated them as low or not
important.
Eight employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to work behavior skills. Twelve employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX counselors
as less well prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are
significantly higher than those from 2008, where better prepared received a 17% response
compared to 40% for this survey.
Employer Assessment of Work Behavior Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
8
Same as other graduates
12
Less than other graduates
0
Percent
40%
60%
0%
Ethical Decision Making Skills
Twenty-two employers (100%) rated ethical decision making skills as highly important in
counselors they hire; no employers rated these skills as moderate or low in importance.
Four employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to ethical decision making skills, while 17 employers judged
UOPX counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX
counselors as less well prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. These
results are similar to the 2005 and 2008 surveys. (Note: These results cannot be compared to
2001 since this category was not assessed at that time.)
Employer Assessment of Ethical Decision Making Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
4
19%
Same as other graduates
17
81%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Professional Involvement and Community Skills
39
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Four employers (18%) rated professional involvement skills as highly important in counselors
they hire. Ten employers (45%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, and seven
employers (32%) rated these skills as low in importance. One employer (5%) rated these skills as
not important.
Two employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to professional involvement skills, while 17 employers judged
UOPX counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. One employer rated UOPX
counselors as less well prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. These
results are similar to those from the 2005 and 2008 surveys.
Employer Assessment of Professional Involvement and Community Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
2
10%
Same as other graduates
17
85%
Less than other graduates
1
5%
Supervision Skills
Two employers (9%) rated supervision skills as highly important in counselors they hire. Eight
employers (36%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, 10 (45%) rated them as low in
importance, and two (9%) rated them as not important.
No employers who answered this question judged University of Phoenix counselors as prepared
better than graduates from other universities; 16 rated them as prepared the same. These results
are similar to 2001–2008.
Employer Assessment of Supervision Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Same as other graduates
16
Less than other graduates
0
Percent
0%
100%
0%
Research Skills
No employers rated research skills as highly important in counselors they hire. Five employers
(23%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, while 14 employers (64%) rated these skills
as low in importance. Three employers (13%) rated these skills as not important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to research skills. Sixteen employers judged UOPX counselors
as prepared about the same. No employers rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared than
counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are similar to the 2001–2008
40
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
surveys.
Employer Assessment of Research Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Same as other graduates
16
Less than other graduates
0
Strengths of the Master of Counseling Program
Percent
0%
100%
0%
Employers were asked to list three things that they especially liked about the University of
Phoenix Master of Counseling program. The responses have been organized into three
categories:

Students: Employers reported that the students are of high quality, are willing and able
to address tough issues, and are mature, professional, and independent thinkers. They
specifically stated that they appreciated the fact that many students had worked in
behavioral health for years in a variety of positions, and that they have a more realistic
understanding of public behavioral health system standards.

Curriculum and Faculty: The employers commented that the counselors are well
trained, that CACREP accreditation is important, and that UOPX graduates are more
well-rounded than graduates from other institutions. Employers also commented that they
appreciate that UOPX faculty are community practitioners in the real world of practice,
and that they teach practical skills. It was also repeatedly voiced that the Learning Team
format helped the students work better with their colleagues in the work environment.

Internship and Practicum Structure: Employers stated that the length of the internship,
the clear expectations given to the students, and the practicum course were all positive
aspects of the program. They also mentioned that the practicum experience resulted in
strong skill development for the alumni.
This feedback was consistent with feedback given in the 2001–2008 surveys.
Recommendations for Improving the UOPX Program
Employers were next asked to offer any recommendations that would make the University of
Phoenix Master of Counseling program more useful to their organizations. The vast majority of
the recommendations focused on offering additional training in the realistic demands of
documentation in the public behavioral health sector, providing training in additional areas (e.g.,
sex offenders, grief and loss, crisis, and death and dying), and increasing knowledge about the
public behavioral health system.
Employers also recommended that UOPX internship faculty increase their contact with site
supervisors, establish clearer learning objectives, and give the site supervisors more feedback on
41
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
the particular strengths and weaknesses of the intern prior to the start of the internship.
This feedback was fairly consistent with the 2001–2008 surveys.
Need for Hiring Counselors
Employers were asked to estimate the number of counselors they planned to hire in the next 12
to 18 months. Twelve employers were able to estimate the number of potential new hires.
Responses are included in the table below.
Expected Number of Counselors to Be Hired in the Next 12–18 Months
# of counselors
to be hired
# of agencies
0
1–3
4–6
7–9
10+
Totals
Percent
2
4
2
1
3
12
Minimum # of
new hires
17%
34%
17%
8%
24%
100%
0
9
10
9
35
63
Maximum #
of
new hires
0
11
12
9
60
92
A slight majority of employers (51%) are planning to hire between zero and three counselors in
the next 12 to 18 months. Less than a quarter of the employers are expecting to hire between four
and six counselors during this time period. The most significant shift in the 2011 survey is that
24% of the agencies surveyed indicated their plan to hire 10 or more counselors in the next 12to18-months.
Need for Retraining Employees as Counselors
Employers were also asked to quantify their needs for retraining current employees into
counselor positions. Thirteen of the employers were able to estimate a number of potential
employees for retraining. Responses are included in the table below.
Expected Number of Employees to Be Retrained Into Counselor Positions in the Next 12–
18 Months
Expected number
Number
Percent Total estimated Total estimated number
of
of
number of
of employees
employees to be
employers
employees
(Maximum)
retrained
(Minimum)
0
5
45%
0
0
1–5
3
27%
3
5
6–10
1
9%
10
10
11–15
2
19%
12
15
42
Totals
11
100%
25
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
30
Slightly less than half of the employers are not planning to retrain employees into counselor
positions within the next 12 to 18 months. More than half are planning to retrain between one
and 15 employees into counselor positions within 12 to 18 months. These results are similar to
the 2001–2008 surveys.
Interest in UOPX Bachelor’s Degree in Human Services
Employers were informed that University of Phoenix offers a bachelor’s degree in human
services (BSHS) and that this program is designed to develop individuals with general
organizational and support skills in the human services field. They were asked if graduates of
this program would be of interest to their organizations. Twenty-one employers responded to this
question. Results are included in the table below.
Employers’ Interest in BSHS Degree Graduates
Employer response
Number of employers
Yes
No
Uncertain
7
4
10
Percent
33%
19%
48%
Seven of the employers stated that they would be interested in employees with a BSHS degree
from University of Phoenix, while four employers stated that they were not interested. This
suggests that the university might consider increasing market awareness of the nature and
strengths of this degree in order to increase employer interest. These results were similar to the
2005 and 2008 surveys. (Note: These results cannot be compared to 2001 because the program
had not yet graduated any students at that time.)
Interest in an Employer Advisory Board
When asked if they or another member of their company would consider serving on an Employer
Advisory Board for the University of Phoenix Master of Counseling Program, seven employers
indicated that they would be interested, four stated that they would not be interested, and 10
stated that they were uncertain about their interest. Responses are included in the table below.
These results are similar to the 2005 and 2008 surveys.
Employers’ Interest in an Employer Advisory Board
Response
Number of employers
Yes
7
No
4
Uncertain
10
Percent
33%
19%
47%
43
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Tucson Campus
Summary and Key Findings
Alumni who graduated since 2008 were asked to respond to a questionnaire. Questions pertained
to demographics, a set of clinical core skills, and the level of preparedness of University of
Phoenix graduates. A total of 138 surveys were mailed to alumni. Twenty-six were returned as
undeliverable, leaving a potential sample of 112 respondents, and 27 alumni sent back completed
surveys. The resulting 24% response rate is somewhat lower than response rates for similar
surveys, and it is difficult to know if the sample is representative of the graduates of the
University of Phoenix Master of Counseling program in southern Arizona.
Employers currently employing UOPX Master of Counseling graduates were mailed a survey
with the request to evaluate their perception of the UOPX Master of Counseling program. In
order to ensure that the most appropriate person at the workplace completed the survey, it was
sent to the supervisor(s) of the graduate. Supervisors of interns from the program also received a
survey. Including the site supervisors of interns seemed appropriate because these workplaces
are potential employers of graduates. Four employers out of 40 (10%) participated in the survey.
This response rate is quite low, and it is difficult to know if the small sample is representative of
UOPX alumni employers and supervisors.
Tucson Alumni Findings
Participation
Of the 112 surveys successfully mailed to alumni who graduated between 2008 and 2011, 27
were returned completed. This resulted in a response rate of 24%.
Employment
The alumni were asked to identify their employment status in the counseling field. Their
responses are summarized below.
Current Employment Status
Full time
Number of alumni
15
Percent
56%
Part time
6
22%
Not employed in counseling
3
11%
Not employed
3
11%
44
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
A little over three quarters of the alumni (78%) are employed full time or part time in the
counseling field. Three alumni are employed outside of the counseling field, and three
individuals are not employed. The reasons given by individuals not employed in the counseling
field included the following: (1) no jobs being available, (2) needing to speak Spanish in order to
get a job, and (3) the licensing process being very long and discouraging. None of the noncounseling-employed alumni believed that their educational experiences at University of
Phoenix affected their employment status.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Employment Status Results
Year
Percentage of alumni in part-time and/or full-time
employment in the counseling field
2001
81%
2005
77%
2008
72%
2011
78%
There was a slight increase since the 2008 survey in the percentage of alumni who are employed
in the counseling field, but the overall employment rates have remained fairly stable since 2001.
Employment Affiliation
The alumni were asked to identify the type of organization they work for. The following is a
summary of their responses.
Current Organizations
Number of Alumni
3
Percent
13%
4
17%
Not-for-profit human service
organization
Public educational institution
13
57%
0
0%
Private educational institution
0
0%
Self-employed
1
4%
Other: private practice
1
4%
Local, state, or national governmental
agency
For-profit human service organization
45
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
The majority of the alumni are employed in human service organizations (74%), with most of
those respondents working in not-for-profit organizations. Three alumni work in local, state, or
national government agencies, one is self-employed, and one works in private practice. No
alumni work in public or private educational institutions.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Organization Results
Organization
Local, state, or national government agency
For-profit human service organization
2001
8%
33%
2005
11%
23%
2008
11%
33%
2011
13%
17%
Not-for-profit human service organization
25%
50%
22%
57%
Public educational institution
17%
5%
22%
0%
Private educational institution
0%
0%
0%
0%
Self-employed
Other: private practice
17%
n/a
7%
5%
11%
0%
4%
4%
The most dramatic changes in employment settings from 2008 to 2011 concerns the significant
increase in the number of alumni who work in not-for-profit human service agencies, and the
decrease in those who work in public educational settings.
Licensing Status
Alumni were asked to indicate their licensing status. Their responses are summarized below.
Current Licensing Status
Passed the NCE the first time
Taken the NCE but not passed
Planning to take NCE in next
6-12 6–12 months
Planning to take NCE in
next 12–24 months
Not planning to take the NCE
Number of alumni
20
1
1
Percent
91%
5%
5%
0
0%
0
0%
Arizona requires LPCs to take and pass the NCE (or a comparable nationally accepted exam) in
order to pursue licensure. The 91% pass rate for first-time takers of the exam is excellent given
what would be expected from national pass rates. Being able to pass the NCE the first time is
especially important because Arizona is a “licensure” state, and individuals are not allowed to
practice professional counseling without having a license (or being supervised by someone with
a license).
46
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Comparison of 2005–2011 NCE Pass Rates
Year
Percentage of alumni passing on first attempt
2005
78%
2008
78%
2011
91%
The pass rates on the first attempt for the NCE significantly improved in comparison to the 2005
and 2008 results.
Twenty-four respondents indicated how well they felt University of Phoenix prepared them for
the licensing examination. Twenty-two of the individuals responding to this question (92%)
stated that University of Phoenix prepared them “very well” or “well” for the licensure
examinations, while two (8%) reported feeling “barely adequately” prepared for the NCE. Those
two reported that the following would have prepared them better for the NCE exam: (1)
reviewing topics that were on the exam and concentrating more on theory and (2) ensuring that
the topics covered on the exam were covered in class.
Comparison of 2005-2011 University NCE Preparation Adequacy
2005
2008
Prepared “very well” or “well”
81%
58%
Preparation was “barely adequate” or
19%
43%
“inadequate”
2011
92%
8%
There was significant improvement in this area since the 2008 survey, and that improvement also
seems to be reflected in the significantly higher first-time NCE pass rates. (Note: This question
was not asked in the 2001 survey.)
Clinical Core Skills
The alumni were asked to rate a number of skills typical in the counseling profession in several
ways. First, they were asked to rate the overall importance of a set of 12 core skills for
counselors in general on a 4-point scale (from high in importance to not important). Respondents
were asked to rate the effectiveness of the University of Phoenix program in helping them
develop these 12 core skills. Possible ratings were very effective, effective, and less than
effective. If graduates rated University of Phoenix as less than effective in helping them develop
any of these 12 core skills, they were also asked to identify whether they believed the deficiency
was a result of the curriculum, instruction, internships, other reasons, or a combination of those.
The alumni were also asked to list any core skills not mentioned and to rate them accordingly.
Alumni Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Respondents evaluated a set of 12 clinical core skills and rated their importance for their own
work in the counseling field. The following is a summary of the ratings.
47
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Note. Ratings are based on a 4-point scale where 4 = high importance, 3 = moderate importance,
2 = low importance, and 1 = not important.
The respondents rated ethical and individual skills as the most important, closely followed by
documentation and treatment planning skills and client appraisal, assessment, and diagnosis
skills. The rest of the skills (except for career counseling and research) were all rated as having
moderate importance. The fact that career counseling skills and research skills are perceived as
less important may be due to the fact that a majority of alumni indicated an interest in working in
clinical settings. On the positive side, however, supervision skills were rated as moderately
important in 2011, whereas it was rated as low in importance (2.22) in 2008.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Clinical Core Skills Importance
Top 4 in 2001
Rating Top 4 in 2005 Rating Top 4 in 2008
(1-4)
(1-4)
Rating
(1-4)
Top 4 in
2011
Rating
(1-4)
Individual
Counseling
Professional
Involvement
Client Appraisal
n/a
Ethical
3.90
Ethical
4.00
Ethics
3.95
n/a
Individual
Counseling
Client
Appraisal
Case
Management
3.89
3.89
Individual
3.87
3.78
Individual
Counseling
Documentation
3.89
Documentation
3.78
3.62
Group Counseling
3.78
Client Appraisal 3.65
n/a
Group Counseling n/a
Note. The 2001 survey used a different rating system, so only the rank order is shown for those
48
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
survey results.
Ethical and individual counseling skills are consistently assessed as the most important skills in
all of the surveys. (Note: Ethical decision making was not an option in the 2001 survey.)
Alumni Ratings of Effectiveness of University of Phoenix in Development of Clinical Core
Skills
Alumni rated the effectiveness of the University of Phoenix in helping them develop the set of
12 clinical core skills. Respondents indicated whether they believed the university was “very
effective,” “effective,” or “less than effective” in furthering these skills. The following is a
summary of the findings.
Note. Ratings are based on a 3-point scale where 3 = very effective, 2 = effective, and 1 = less
than effective.
The graduates indicated that University of Phoenix was very effective in aiding in the
development of ethical, individual, and work behavior skills. Respondents rated the university as
being effective in developing the rest of the skills, with family counseling, career counseling,
and research being rated the lowest of the skills.
Alumni were also asked to judge the primary reasons why the lowest rated skills were not
effectively delivered. They were able to choose from (1) curriculum, (2) instruction, (3)
49
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
internships, and (4) other. The following is a summary of the findings.
Reasons for Poor Skill Development
Skill areas
Curriculum Instruction Internships Other
Case management
Career counseling
Professional involvement
Family counseling
Work behavior
Documentation
Client appraisal
Group counseling
Supervision
Research
Total problems for category
3
2
3
2
1
1
0
1
1
2
16
0
3
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
8
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
6
Problems/
skill area
4
8
4
5
2
2
1
1
2
5
Alumni reported that problems with the curriculum were the single primary factor 47% of the
time. This was most apparent in the case management and professional involvement skill areas.
Problems with instruction were the next highly rated problem area. This was only most evident
in the career counseling and research skill areas. The career counseling course had far and away
the most identified problems.
There was a significant increase in reports of course and category problems in the 2011 survey
versus the 2008 survey. The following table summarizes the data.
50
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
There was over a 100% increase in the number of courses that have been identified as having
problems and in the total number of category (i.e., curriculum, instruction, internships, other)
problems reported. However, it is very difficult to assess the meaning of these significant
increases given that the 2011 alumni effectiveness scores are actually higher than the 2008
alumni effectiveness scores.
In the 2008 survey, alumni rated University of Phoenix as less than effective in four skill
domains (case management, career counseling, other skills, and family skills), while in 2011
even the lowest ranked skills were rated as effective. One possibility is that these particular
alumni have higher exceptions for the university than the 2008 alumni, and they therefore
reported more problems in spite of the fact that they obviously assess University of Phoenix as
generally quite effective in skill building.
51
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Comparison of 2001–2011 UOPX Effectiveness Ratings
Top 4 in
2001
Individual
counseling
Client
appraisal
Group
counseling
Work
behavior
Rating
(1–3)
n/a
Top 4 in
2005
Ethical
Rating
(1–3)
2.90
Top 4 in
2008
Ethical
Rating
(1–3)
3.00
Top 4 in 2011
Ethical
Rating
(1–3)
2.83
n/a
Individual
counseling
Client
appraisal
Work
behavior
2.71
Group
counseling
Work
behavior
Client
appraisal
2.56
Individual
2.83
2.44
Work behavior
2.52
2.33
Appraisal
2.48
(tie)
2.48
(tie)
n/a
n/a
2.62
2.54
Documentation
Note. The 2001 survey used a different rating system, so only the rank order is shown for those
survey results.
Ethical, work behavior, and client appraisal skills have appeared in all of the surveys. (Note:
Ethical decision making was not a category in the 2001 survey.) Alumni apparently believe that
these skills are consistently taught very well at University of Phoenix.
The following section presents results for each core skill separately. Percentages in tables may
not total 100% because of rounding.
Individual Counseling Skills
Twenty (87%) of the respondents rated individual counseling skills as being high in importance
to their work as counselors. Three respondents (13%) ranked individual counseling skills as
moderately important. None of the respondents rendered such skills as low in importance or not
important.
All respondents (100%) rated University of Phoenix as very effective or as effective in helping
them develop these skills. The distribution between the very effective and effective ratings was
highly skewed toward the very effective rating, with only three of the alumni offering the
effective rating. No alumni felt that the university was less than effective in promoting these
skills.
Individual Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
20
Effective
3
Less than effective
0
Percent
87%
13%
0%
There was a significant increase in this effectiveness score in comparison to the 2005 and 2008
surveys.
52
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Comparison of 2001–2011 Individual Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
100%
90%
89%
100%
or very effective
Career Counseling Skills
Two (10%) of the alumni rated career counseling skills as high in importance, and eight
individuals (38%) rated these skills as moderate in importance for their work. Eleven alumni
(52%) indicated that career counseling skills are low in importance related to the counseling
profession.
Seventeen of the graduates assessed that the university is effective or very effective in promoting
career counseling skills. Six individuals rated the university as being less than effective in
helping in the development of these skills.
Career Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
7
Effective
10
Less than effective
6
Percent
30%
43%
26%
Comparison of 2001–2011 Career Counseling Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
75%
49%
56%
73%
or very effective
These ratings have been steadily improving since 2005, now matching the 2001 ratings.
Group Counseling Skills
Eleven of the alumni (48%) ranked group counseling skills as highly important in their
profession, with nine respondents (39%) identifying the skills as moderate in importance. Two
alumni (9%) rated them as low, and one (4%) rated them as not important.
University of Phoenix was rated as very effective in helping in the development of group skills
by 10 alumni, and as effective by 12 alumni. One individual felt the university was less than
effective in aiding the development of group counseling skills.
Group Counseling Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
Very effective
10
43%
Effective
12
52%
Less than effective
1
5%
There was an increase in perceived effectiveness from the 2008 to 2011 surveys.
53
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Comparison of 2001–2011 Group Skills Effectiveness Ratings
Rated as effective
or very effective
2001
100%
2005
95%
2008
89%
2011
95%
Family Counseling Skills
Thirteen alumni (57%) rated family counseling skills as being high in importance for a
counselor, while six (26%) rated them as moderate. Four individuals (17%) rated these skills as
being low in importance for their positions. No one rated these skills as having no importance.
Six alumni rated the university as very effective, and 13 alumni rated the university as effective,
in developing family counseling skills. Four stated that University of Phoenix was less than
effective in developing these skills.
Family Counseling Skills
Number of alumni
Very effective
6
Effective
13
Less than effective
4
Percent
26%
57%
17%
Comparison of 2001–2011 Family Counseling Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
38%
49%
33%
95%
to very effective
There was dramatic improvement in this skill area. In fact, it showed the greatest gains by far in
comparison to all the other skills.
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills
Sixteen respondents (70%) rated these skills as high in importance in their own work, while six
(26%) rated them as moderate in importance. One person (4%) rated these skills as low in
importance.
Overall, the alumni rated the university as being very effective in teaching client appraisal and
assessment skills. Twelve individuals considered University of Phoenix to be very effective in
aiding in the development of these skills. Another 10 individuals rated the university as being
effective, and one stated that the university is less than effective.
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
Very effective
12
52%
54
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Effective
Less than effective
10
1
43%
4%
It is apparent that alumni continue to believe that University of Phoenix provides very effective
instruction in client appraisal, assessment, and diagnosis skills. There was significant
improvement from 2008 to 2011.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Client Appraisal Skills Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
100%
90%
88%
or very effective
2011
96%
Documentation and Treatment Planning Skills
Eighteen respondents (78%) rated these skills as high in importance in their own work, while
five individuals (22%) ranked documentation and treatment planning skills as moderate in
importance. None of the alumni suggested that such skills are not important.
Twelve individuals rated University of Phoenix as very effective in aiding in the development of
documentation and treatment planning skills. Ten individuals rated the university as effective,
and one believed that the university was less than effective.
Documentation and Treatment Planning Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
12
Effective
10
Less than effective
1
Percent
52%
43%
4%
Comparison of 2005–2011 Documentation and Treatment Planning Effectiveness Ratings
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
90%
77%
96%
or very effective
There was significant improvement between 2008 and 2011 in this category. (Note: This
category was not assessed in 2001.)
Case Management Skills
Fifteen of the alumni (65%) rated case management skills as high in importance in their work,
while six (26%) rated them as moderate in importance. The other two individuals (9%) rated
these skills as low in importance in the work environment of a counselor.
Seven alumni rated the university as being very effective in helping in the development of case
management skills. Thirteen of the respondents rated University of Phoenix as effective, and
three respondents reported that the university is less than effective in facilitating the acquisition
55
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
of case management skills.
Case Management Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
7
Effective
13
Less than effective
3
Percent
30%
57%
13%
There was a significant increase in these effectiveness ratings from the 2008 survey to the 2011
survey, resulting in the highest ratings ever in this category. This is quite encouraging because
the majority of these alumni work in human service settings, where case management activities
are usually a significant portion of the work load. This is especially true in public behavioral
health agencies, where case management activities are generally valued even more than
traditional counseling activities.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Case Management Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
33%
78%
68%
or very effective
2011
87%
Work Behavior Skills
Sixteen individuals (70%) rated work behavior skills as high in importance in their work as
counselors, while four (17%) ranked them as having moderate importance. Three alumni (13%)
ranked these skills as being low in importance.
Fourteen alumni found University of Phoenix to be very effective in teaching these skills, with
seven respondents perceiving the university to be effective. Two respondents assessed the
university as less than effective in this category.
Work Behavior Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
14
Effective
7
Less than effective
2
Percent
61%
30%
9%
While there was a reduction in these scores from 2008 to 2011, they still remain at very high
levels and demonstrate a strong perception that University of Phoenix is successfully teaching
these important skills.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Work Behavior Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
66%
99%
100%
or very effective
2011
91%
56
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Professional Involvement and Community Skills
Professional involvement and community skills were ranked as high in importance by six alumni
(26%). Twelve respondents (52%) suggested that these skills are moderate in importance, while
five (22%) reported that these skills were low in importance in the work of a counselor. These
ratings are higher than what was seen in the 2008 survey, where 56% of the alumni rated this
category as being low in importance.
Two respondents believed University of Phoenix to be very effective in furthering these skills. A
majority of the respondents (14 individuals) rated the university as being effective. The
remaining three alumni believed that the university is less than effective in developing these
skills.
Professional Involvement and Community Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Percent
Very effective
6
26%
Effective
14
61%
Less than effective
3
13%
There was a significant increase in perceived effectiveness from 2008 to 2011.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Professional Involvement Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
2011
Rated as effective
78%
90%
78%
87%
or very effective
Supervision Skills
Supervision skills were valued as being high in importance by seven respondents (30%). Nine
alumni (40%) attributed moderate importance, and seven respondents (30%) attributed low
importance to this skill. There was significant improvement in this area given that only 11% of
2008 alumni rated this skill as being of moderate or high importance, while 70% did in the 2011
survey.
Seven alumni indicated the University of Phoenix is very effective in developing supervision
skills. Thirteen individuals rated the university as effective, and two respondents suggested the
university is less than effective.
Supervision Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
7
Effective
13
Less than effective
2
Percent
32%
59%
9%
57
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Even though students usually rate supervision as less important than most of the other skills, they
clearly believe that they are receiving effective instruction in it.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Supervision Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
80%
67%
90%
or very effective
2011
91%
Research Skills
No alumni rated research skills as being high in importance, while eight (35%) rated them as
having moderate importance. Twelve alumni (52%) rated these skills as low in importance, and
three (13%) rated them as having no importance. This was a significant decrease in importance
scores compared to the 2008 survey results.
In the current results, five alumni rated the university as very effective in developing research
skills, 13 rated it as effective, and one individual rated it as less than effective.
Research Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
5
Effective
13
Less than effective
5
Percent
22%
57%
22%
There was a significant decrease in effectiveness scores in 2011, which is not surprising given
the number of problem issues (5) that this course generated.
Comparison of 2001–2011 Research Effectiveness Ratings
2001
2005
2008
Rated as effective
25%
72%
88%
or very effective
2011
79%
Ethical Skills
Nineteen of the respondents (95%) rated ethical skills as being high in importance in their work,
while one respondent (5%) rated them as having moderate importance.
Nineteen alumni indicated that University of Phoenix is very effective in developing these skills.
Four individuals rated the university as effective, and no respondents suggested that the
university is less than effective.
Ethical Skills Effectiveness
Number of alumni
Very effective
19
Effective
4
Percent
83%
17%
58
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Less than effective
0
0%
This skill is consistently rated as one of the most effectively taught of all 12 skills. (Note: This
category was not assessed in the 2001 survey.)
Comparison of 2005–2011 Ethical Effectiveness Ratings
2005
2008
Rated as effective
91%
100%
or very effective
2011
100%
Recommending University of Phoenix
Alumni were asked if they would recommend the University of Phoenix counseling program to
others. Possible responses were yes – unqualified, yes – with reservations, and seldom or never.
Those graduates who responded yes – with reservations or seldom or never were also asked to
share the reasons for their reservations to recommend the program.
Seventeen alumni (74%) reported they would recommend University of Phoenix without
reservations. Five individuals (22%) would recommend the program with reservations, and one
respondent (4%) would seldom or never recommend University of Phoenix. The respondents
who indicated they would recommend with reservations, or seldom or never recommend it,
stated that they (1) believed the program was too expensive, (2) believed an MSW is a more
employable degree than an MSC, and (3) believed that for-profit schools are not as well
respected as nonprofit (traditional) ones.
Strengths of the UOPX Counseling Program
The graduates were asked to identify three (or more) aspects of the counseling program they
liked in particular or they found most useful. In order to analyze this qualitative data, these
comments were categorized, with the following three categories emerging: (1) curriculum, skills
taught, practicum, and internship; (2) instruction and instructors; and (3) in-class activities and
Learning Teams.
The most frequently made comments concern the instruction and instructors. Alumni appreciated
the diverse faculty and the fact that they all work in the field. Recognition was given to the
wealth of experience and knowledge along with the high standards and genuine encouragement
provided by the faculty. Respondents also identified specific faculty members they considered to
be outstanding in the classroom, including Drs. Wiggins, O’Conner, and Goldman. Faculty
advisors were also identified as being great mentors who furthered students’ professional
knowledge.
Many positive comments were made about the curriculum, skills taught, practicum, and
internship. Students highly valued the ethical training and focus on interventions they received.
They liked taking only one class at a time. Numerous students also listed several classes they
enjoyed in particular (classes focusing on clinical assessment, individual and group counseling,
59
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
and ethics). Alumni also commented that they appreciated the quality of the supervision they
received during practicum and internship courses.
In-class activities and Learning Teams have also been frequently listed as a positive aspect of the
University of Phoenix program. Alumni indicated that their team-working skills improved
greatly. Similarly, many felt that the required class presentations helped them to develop highly
valued presentation skills. Further, graduates liked the camaraderie developing over the course of
the program and the challenge to work in a group, as well as the small student-to-faulty ratios.
Recommendations for Improving the UOPX Counseling Program
Similar to strengths, alumni were asked to identify up to three aspects of the University of
Phoenix counseling program they found unsatisfactory or in need of improvement. For these
comments, two categories emerged: curriculum and skills taught, and instruction issues.
The vast majority of the comments were made about the curriculum and skills taught. While
alumni did indicate their satisfaction with the skills they acquired, several comments reflected
the desire for more specialized training (e.g., counseling children). Alumni also stated that career
counseling was not needed in the program, that practicum prep “was a waste of time,” that
clinical courses should be lengthened (this in fact is occurring as the new clinical mental health
program is being rolled out), and that clinical courses should be placed last in the program.
Instruction issues were also frequently mentioned. Alumni reported that some instructors
appeared less knowledgeable and that some were very knowledgeable but were not good
teachers. Comments were also made about the need to decrease the number of presentations
required, and the need to better prepare students for professional licensing (e.g., exam prep and
clarification of licensing process). Last, students would like more role-plays and counseling
videos in the clinical courses (e.g., individual and group counseling classes), and would like to
have the instructors be more active in resolving Learning Team issues.
Overall, these comments were similar to the ones that were collected in the 2005 and 2008
surveys.
Other Programs
The questionnaire included one item asking graduates what other programs they would like the
university to offer. Alumni were asked whether University of Phoenix should offer continuingeducation programs and what other programs, if any, would be beneficial to the graduates.
Twenty-two respondents answered this question, and the following suggestions were made: (1)
develop Opportunities to acquire Continuing Education Units (the most frequent suggestion by
far), (2) develop a doctoral program in counseling or clinical psychology, and (3) develop prep
classes for the NCE.
60
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Alumni Advisory Board
The University of Phoenix counseling program is interested in maintaining good and effective
cooperation with the graduates of the program. As can be seen from the results of this report,
alumni are an excellent resource for ideas on how to improve the program and its educational
value for both students and employers. Therefore, alumni were asked whether they would be
willing to serve on an Alumni Advisory Board.
Thirteen respondents indicated they would be willing to serve on an Alumni Advisory Board,
and 10 graduates indicated they would not be willing.
Alumni Advisory Board
Response
Willing to be on an advisory board
Not willing to be on an advisory board
Alumni
13
10
Percent
57%
43%
There was a significant increase in the percentage of alumni who agreed to serve on an advisory
board in 2011. In 2001 58% agreed and in 2005 64% agreed, but in 2008 only 38% agreed.
Tucson Employer Findings
Tucson Employer Responses
Forty employers were asked to complete mailed employer/supervisor surveys. Four (10%) of the
employers and supervisors responded to the survey requests. This continues a discouraging
trend of fewer employer surveys being completed each year (i.e., 23 in 2005, 10 in 2008, and 4
in 2011).
It is unknown how representative the following results are, given the extremely small sample
size.
Employee Status
Employers were first asked to report on how many employees and counselors currently worked
in their organizations. They were then asked to indicate the approximate number of employees
who were enrolled or planned to enroll in counseling courses. The tables below indicate the
approximate number of employees, the approximate number of employees attending or planning
to attend counseling courses, and the approximate number of counselors employed with their
organizations.
Note: Percentages in tables may not total 100% because of rounding
Number of Employees
Organization size by
number of employees
Number of responding
organizations
Percent
61
0–25
26–50
51–75
76+
0
0
2
2
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
0%
0%
50%
50%
In this survey there was an even split between organizations with 51 to 75 employees and those
with 76 or more employees. This differs from the 2005 survey, where there was an almost even
number of organizations with zero to 25 employees and those with 76 or more.
Number of Counselors
Number of counselors
0–10
11–20
21–30
31–40
40+
Number of responding
organizations
2
2
0
0
0
Percent
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
This table shows that there was an even split between organizations with 10 or fewer counselors
and those with 11 to 20 counselors. This differs from the 2005 survey, where 20% of the
organizations had 31 to 40 or more than 40 counselors.
Employers were also asked how often they encourage employees to return to school to study
counseling. Half of them (50%) said they do so occasionally, and the other 50% said they do so
often. Clearly the employers responding to this survey appear to value education and educated,
well-trained employees. These results were consistent with the 2001–2008 surveys.
Employers were asked how many employees were enrolled or planned to enroll in counseling
courses. Of the three employers who answered this question, all (100%) indicated that they had
fewer than seven employees who either were enrolled or planned to enroll in a counseling
course. These results were consistent with the 2005 and 2001 results.
Employees Enrolled or Planning to Enroll in a Counseling Course
Employees in organization
Number of Organizations
Percent
enrolled/planning
0–2
2
67%
1–3
0
0%
4–6
1
33%
7–10
0
0%
62
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Competitor Status
Employers were asked to list local colleges and universities that their employees currently
attend. Results are summarized by institution name and the number of times each was
mentioned.
Most Frequently Mentioned Local Colleges and Universities Attended by Employees
College or university
Mentions
University of Arizona
3
Arizona State University
3
Pima Community College
2
University of Phoenix
1
Prescott Community College
1
Argosy
1
The two largest public Arizona universities were mentioned most often, followed by Pima
Community College. These results are quite different from the 2001–2008 results, where
University of Phoenix was the most frequently mentioned university.
Awareness of UOPX Counselor Education Program
Employers were asked if the UOPX Master of Counseling program came to mind when they
thought specifically about counselor education programs. All four employers (100%) stated that
they were aware of the program. This result is consistent with what was reported in the 2001–
2008 surveys.
Hiring Preferences
Employers were next asked whether they preferred to hire counselors who graduated from one
college over those who graduated from another. Three employers had no specific hiring
preference, while one employer (25%) indicated a preference to hire counselors from University
of Phoenix or University of Arizona. These results are consistent with what was reported in the
2001–2008 surveys.
Hiring Preferences
Prefer graduates from one
college over another
No
Yes
Number of responding
employers
3
1
Percent
75%
25%
Licensure Preferences
63
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Employers were asked whether they had a preference to hire counselors who hold (or are
working toward) one mental health license over another. Three employers (75%) indicated that
they had a licensure preference, and one employer (25%) did not have a preference. When asked
to identify their preferences, the employers rated the identified licenses as follows:




LPC (Licensed Professional Counselor) – 2 mentions
LCSW (Licensed Clinical Social Worker) – 2 mentions
LISAC (Licensed Independent Substance Abuse Counselor) – 2 mentions
LMFT (Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist) – 0 mentions
These results are different from the 2005 and 2008 surveys, where the majority of employers did
not have a license preference. (Note: This question was not asked in 2001.)
Preparedness of UOPX Graduates
Four employers rated the UOPX Master of Counseling program on the preparedness of
counselors from the program in comparison to counselors from other schools. Three employers
(75%) rated the preparedness of counselors who graduated from University of Phoenix as about
the same compared with graduates from other schools, while one employer (25%) rated UOPX
graduates as better than most compared to other graduates. No employers rated UOPX graduates
as less than most when compared to other graduates. These ratings are consistent with the 2001–
2008 survey results.
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Employers were next asked to rate common counseling skills desirable in the counselors they
hire. First, employers were asked to rate the importance of the various skills as high, moderate,
low, or not important, and also to offer any other skills not mentioned that they deemed
important for entry-level counselors to possess. For the skills rated high or moderate in
importance, participants were then asked to judge the preparedness of University of Phoenix
counselors with respect to those skills by rating the UOPX graduates as less than, about the
same, or better prepared than counselors who graduate from other schools.
There was a four-way tie (3.50 on a 4-point scale, with 4 = high) for the most important skills:
work behavior, documentation and treatment planning, client appraisal and assessment, and
group counseling skills.
In the moderate importance category were case management, family counseling, individual
counseling, and ethical decision making.
Supervision, career, professional involvement, and research skills were all rated low in
importance. The fact that career counseling skills and research skills are perceived as less
important may be due to the fact that the majority of alumni are employed in clinical workplaces.
Similarly, supervision skills may not seem as important at the beginning of the graduates’
professional careers, though these skills may become increasingly important to graduates as they
assume supervisory responsibilities.
64
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Employer Ratings of Importance of Clinical Core Skills
Note. Ratings are based on a 4-point scale where 4 = high importance, 3 = moderate importance,
2 = low importance, and 1 = not important.
These results were consistent with the 2001–2008 surveys, except for the much lower rating for
professional involvement (which received a 3.10 rating in 2008).
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates
Employers rated the preparedness of University of Phoenix graduates as compared to graduates
of other schools in the demonstration of 12 core clinical skills. Employers indicated whether
UOPX students were prepared less than, the same as, or better than graduates from other
schools. The following is a summary of the findings.
65
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Employer Ratings of Preparedness of University of Phoenix Graduates
Note. Ratings are based on a 3-point scale where 3 = better prepared, 2 = prepared the same, and
1 = less prepared.
The employers indicated that University of Phoenix graduates are best prepared in the areas of
work behavior, case management, family counseling, group counseling, and individual
counseling skills. The following skills were assessed to be at the bare edge of the prepared the
same category: professional involvement, ethical decision making, documentation and treatment
planning, and career counseling skills. The following three skills were rated less prepared: client
appraisal, research, and supervision skills. These results are lower than those in the 2008 survey,
where there were no less prepared scores for any of the skills.
The following section presents results for each core skill separately. (Note: These results cannot
be compared to 2005 because these categories were not analyzed in the 2005 Tucson survey).
Individual Counseling Skills
One employer (25%) rated individual counseling skills as highly important in counselors they
hire, while three employers (75%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. No one rated
them as low importance or not important.
66
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
One employer stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to individual counseling skills. Three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and no one rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared
than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are consistent with 2008
ratings.
Employer Assessment of Individual Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
1
25%
Same as other graduates
3
75%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Career Counseling Skills
No employers rated career counseling skills as highly important in counselors they hire. One
employer (25%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, while three employers (75%) rated
these skills as low in importance. No employers rated these skills as not important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to career counseling skills. All three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as graduates of other universities. These results are
consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Career Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
3
100%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Group Counseling Skills
Two employers (50%) rated group counseling skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
Two employers (50%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. No employers rated them as
being low or not important.
One employer stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to group counseling skills, while three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same. No employers rated UOPX counselors as less well
prepared. These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Group Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
67
Better than other graduates
Same as other graduates
Less than other graduates
1
3
0
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
25%
75%
0%
Family Counseling Skills
One employer (25%) rated family counseling skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
Three employers (75%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. No employers rated them as
low or not important.
One employer stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to family counseling skills. Three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same, and no employers rated UOPX counselors as less well
prepared. These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Family Counseling Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
1
25%
Same as other graduates
3
75%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Client Appraisal, Assessment, and Diagnosis Skills
Two employers (50%) rated client appraisal skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
Two employers (50%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. No employers rated these
skills as low or not important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to client appraisal skills. Three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same. One employer rated UOPX counselors as less well
prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. These results are consistent with
2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Client Appraisal Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
3
75%
Less than other graduates
1
25%
68
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Documentation and Treatment Planning Skills
Two employers (50%) rated documentation and treatment planning skills as highly important in
counselors they hire, while two employers (50%) rated these skills as moderate in importance.
No one rated them as low or not important.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to individual counseling skills. Three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same. No one rated UOPX counselors as less well prepared.
These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Documentation and Treatment Planning Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
3
100%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Case Management Skills
One employer (25%) rated case management skills as highly important in counselors they hire.
Three employers (75%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. No employers rated these
skills as low or not important.
No employer stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to case management skills, while three employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX counselors
as less well prepared. These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Case Management Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Same as other graduates
3
Less than other graduates
0
Percent
0%
100%
0%
Work Behavior Skills
Two employers (50%) rated work behavior skills as highly important in counselors they hire,
and two others (50%) rated them as moderately important.
One employer stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to work behavior skills. Two employers judged UOPX
counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. These results are slightly higher than
those from the 2008 survey, where 10% of employers believed that UOPX graduates were less
69
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
prepared in this category.
Employer Assessment of Work Behavior Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
1
Same as other graduates
2
Less than other graduates
0
Percent
33%
67%
0%
Ethical Decision Making Skills
One employer (25%) rated ethical decision making skills as highly important in counselors they
hire, and two employers (50%) rated these skills as moderate in importance. One employer
(25%) rated them as low or not important. These results are slightly different from the ones in
2008, where no employers rated ethical decision making skills as having low importance.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to ethical decision making skills, while three employers judged
UOPX counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX
counselors as less well prepared.
Employer Assessment of Ethical Decision Making Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
3
100%
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Professional Involvement and Community Skills
No employers rated professional involvement skills as highly or moderately important in
counselors they hire. All four employers (100%) rated these skills as low in importance. No
employers rated these skills as not important. These results are quite different from the 2008
survey, where 90% of employers rated these skills as having moderate to high importance.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to professional involvement skills, while two employers judged
UOPX counselors as prepared about the same as other graduates. No employers rated UOPX
counselors as less well prepared. These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
Employer Assessment of Professional Involvement and Community Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
Percent
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
0%
Same as other graduates
2
100%
70
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
Less than other graduates
0
0%
Supervision Skills
No employers rated supervision skills as highly important in counselors they hire. One employer
(25%) rated these skills as moderate in importance, and three employers (75%) rated these skills
as low in importance. No employers rated these skills as not important. These results are
consistent with 2008 ratings.
One employer who answered this question judged University of Phoenix counselors as prepared
about the same as graduates from other universities, while the other employer judged UOPX
graduates as less prepared than other graduates. The effectiveness results in this survey are lower
than those in the 2008 survey.
Employer Assessment of Supervision Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Same as other graduates
1
Less than other graduates
1
Percent
0%
50%
50%
Research Skills
No employers (0%) rated research skills as highly or moderately important in counselors they
hire. Three employers (75%) rated these skills as low in importance. One employer (25%) rated
these skills as not important. These results are consistent with 2008 ratings.
No employers stated that University of Phoenix counselors are better prepared than graduates
from other schools with respect to research skills. One employer who answered this question
judged UOPX counselors as prepared about the same, and one employer rated UOPX counselors
as less well prepared than counselors who graduated from other schools. The effectiveness
results in this survey are lower than those in the 2008 survey.
Employer Assessment of Research Skills Preparedness
Preparedness level of UOPX
Number of employers
graduates
Better than other graduates
0
Same as other graduates
1
Less than other graduates
1
Percent
0%
50%
50%
Strengths of the Master of Counseling Program
Employers were asked to list three things that they especially liked about the University of
Phoenix Master of Counseling program. The responses have been organized into two categories:
71
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey

Students: Employers reported that the students are of high quality, motivated and
devoted, and usually older and more experienced with a wealth of life experiences. The
employers also stated that UOPX students behave in highly ethical ways.

Curriculum and Faculty: The employers commented that the counselors are well
trained in a variety of techniques and modalities. Employers also commented that they
appreciate that UOPX faculty are community practitioners in the real world of practice,
and that they teach and model professionalism and provide significant networking
opportunities for students.
This feedback was consistent with the 2001–2008 surveys, except that there was no mention in
the current survey of the strengths of the University of Phoenix internship–practicum structure.
Recommendations for Improving the UOPX Program
Employers were next asked to offer any recommendations that would make the University of
Phoenix Master of Counseling program more useful to their organizations. One internship site
supervisor stated that the interns needed more preparation to work effectively at his site. Other
employers stated that graduates needed a greater understanding of the pubic behavioral health
system and more diagnosis and group therapy training.
Need for Hiring Counselors
Employers were asked to estimate the number of counselors they planned to hire in the next 12
to 18 months. Eight employers were able to estimate the number of potential new hires.
Responses are included in the table below.
Expected Number of Counselors to Be Hired in the Next 12–18 Months
# of counselors
# of agencies
Percent
Minimum # of Maximum # of
to be hired
new hires
new hires
0
0
0%
0
0
1–3
2
100%
4
4
4–6
0
0%
0
0
7–9
0
0%
0
0
10+
0
0%
0
0
Totals
2
100%
0
0
Two employers (100%) are planning to hire between one and three counselors in the next 12 to
18 months. These results are much smaller than those in past surveys, given that only two
72
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
employers answered this survey question.
Need for Retraining Employees as Counselors
Employers were also asked to quantify their needs for retraining current employees into
counselor positions. One respondent estimated the number of potential employees for retraining.
This response is included in the table below.
Expected Number of Employees to Be Retrained Into Counselor Positions in the Next 12–
18 Months
Expected number of
employees to be
retrained
Number
of
employers
Percent
Total estimated
number
of employees
(Minimum)
Total estimated number of
employees
(Maximum)
0
1-5
0
1
0%
100%
0
1
0
1
Totals
1
0%
1
1
These results are much smaller than those in past surveys, given that only one employer
answered this survey question.
Interest in UOPX Bachelor’s Degree in Human Services
Employers were informed that University of Phoenix offers a bachelor’s degree in human
services (BSHS) and that this program is designed to develop individuals with general
organizational and support skills in the human services field. They were asked if graduates of
this program would be of interest to their organizations. Three employers responded to this
question. Results are included in the table below.
Employers’ Interest in BSHS Degree
Employer responses
Number of employers
Yes
2
No
0
Uncertain
1
Percent
67%
0%
33%
These results are higher than what was seen in the 2008 survey.
Interest in an Employer Advisory Board
When asked if they or another member of their company would consider serving on an Employer
Advisory Board for the University of Phoenix Master of Counseling Program, three employers
73
University of Phoenix
Alumni & Employer Survey
indicated that they would be interested, while one indicated no interest. Responses are included
in the table below. These results are higher than what was seen in the 2008 survey.
Employers’ Interest in an Employer Advisory Board
Employers
Number
Yes
3
No
1
Percent
67%
33%
74
Exhibit H
Phoenix Campus Email to Faculty
From: SMDOSS1211@aol.com [mailto:SMDOSS1211@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:12 PM
Subject: MESSAGE FROM FACULTY ADVISOR: Alumni Survey
Advisees,
Please read the attached Alumni/Employer program evaluation of our Master of Science in Counseling/
Community Counseling program. I think you will find the information provided interesting..
Sylvia M. Doss, Ph.D.
Lead Faculty/Lead Faculty Advisor
College of Social Sciences
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus Email to Non-core Faculty
From: Patricia Kerstner
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 12:32 PM
Subject: CACREP Employer/alumni survey -non- core faculty
Attached please find you electronic copy of the 2008-2011 Employer/ Alumni Survey results.
This email serves as my verification that you have had a copy distributed to you.
Patricia L. Kerstner, PhD, NCC
Campus College Chair- College of Social Sciences
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus, John Sperling Center for Educational Innovation
1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway | CF- S503 | Tempe, AZ 85282
direct 480.557.2179 | fax 480.643.3385
email patricia.kerstner@phoenix.edu| web phoenix.edu
Phoenix Campus Email to Faculty Advisors
From: Pilar Brya [mailto:pilar.brya@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:12 PM
Subject: Fwd: CACREP report to send to your advisees
Hello,
Please see the attached Alumni/Employer program evaluation of our Master of Science in Counseling/ Community
Counseling program. It is a CACREP requirement that UoP send this to you. Please let me know if you have any
questions.
Pilar Vargas
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Email to Site Supervisors
From: Sheila Babendir
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 3:47 PM
Subject: UOP counseling program CACREP report
Hello site supervisors,
I have attached a CACREP final 2011 report of our alumni and employer surveys. This is part of
our CACREP requirement to ensure that our partnership with each of you in the community is
productive and positive for everyone involved. At University of Phoenix we strive to graduate
students who are competent and capable to enter the workforce as counselors. Our program is
very grateful to have each of you and your organizations as a partner to provide professional
experience for our students. It is through these opportunities that our students grow and develop
in the counseling profession. It is our goal to grow and improve every year and we are excited to
continue our tradition of graduating students who are ready, willing and able to make a
difference in the counseling profession. As part of our vision to continue as a CACREP
accredited program, we want to maintain our positive communication with you and grow from
your feedback and ideas of how to improve for the future. Thank you again for supporting our
students and our program.
Sheila M. Babendir, EdD, LPC, NCC
Clinical Director- Master of Science in Counseling program
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus, John Sperling Center for Educational Innovation
1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway | CF- S503 | Tempe, AZ 85282
direct 602.557.8592 |fax (602) 794-4828| email sheila.babendir@phoenix.edu|
Phoenix Campus Administration Email
From: Patricia Kerstner
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:50:14 -0700
To: Joel Maier, Dallas Taylor, David Fitzgerald
Cc: Stephen Sharp
Subject: CACREP Report 2011 FINAL II (2).doc
Good morning- Attached you will find the CACREP program evaluation for the Arizona campuses for the period of
2008- 2011. The report is separated into Phoenix and Tucson location specific data and is required by CACREP
every 3 years. The results demonstrate the outstanding quality we provide to our students and communities.
This email also serves as my verification that I have distributed this report to you as campus academic
administration.
Phoenix Campus Email Acknowledgements
From: David Fitzgerald
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:39 PM
To: Patricia Kerstner
Subject: Re: CACREP Report 2011 FINAL II (2).doc
I have reviewed the attached report.
David Fitzgerald
Campus Vice President
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus | 4635 E. Elwood Street | Mail Stop CJ-A3404 | Phoenix, AZ 85040
direct 602.557.2387 | cell 602.284.5865 | fax 602.383.9717
email david.fitzgerald@phoenix.edu
From: Jason Kimmell
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:37 PM
To: Patricia Kerstner
Subject: RE: CACREP Report 2011 FINAL II (2).doc
Hi Dr. Kerstner,
I have received and read the Alumni/Employer report.
Jason Kimmell
Director of Enrollment
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus | 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway | Tempe, AZ 85282 | Mail Stop CF-S507
office: 602-557-2509 | cell: 602-714-0269 | fax 602-735-8508
email: jason.kimmell@phoenix.edu
From: Craig Bartholomew
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 2:32 PM
To: Patricia Kerstner
Subject: RE: CACREP Report 2011 FINAL II (2).doc
Hi Patricia,
I have received the CACREP report.
Craig Bartholomew, MBA
Territory VP / Arizona & Oregon Campuses
University of Phoenix
Phoenix Campus, John Sperling Center for Educational Innovation
1625 W Fountainhead Parkway | CF-S509 | Tempe, AZ 85282
office: 602-557-2078 | cell: 602-818-5800 | fax 602-735-8406
email: craig.bartholomew@phoenix.edu
Tucson Campus Email to Core and Non-core Faculty
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Attachments:
Chad Mosher
Thursday, February 16, 2012 2:12 PM
CACREP alumni and employer survey 2011
CACREP Report 2011 Tucson.doc
Dear colleagues,
Attached is the CACREP report completed by the Phoenix and Tucson campuses for the years
2008-2011. You will find information about our strengths, changes since the previous report,
and areas in need of improvement. Please read through the report and feel free to address any
concerns or questions to me directly. Hard copies will be made for you and placed in your
faculty mailbox in the faculty lounge at the William’s Center.
Also, please post the report in OLS for ALL students to read. If they have questions or comments
that cannot be answered directly by you, feel free to direct them my way.
Thank you again for all the hard work you put into student success. Without your dedication,
commitment, and enthusiasm, we would not have such a positive report. I am excited to see
you all soon, and inspired by this report to talk further about improvements and areas of
change.
Thank you all,
Chad
Tucson Campus Email to Faculty Advisors
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Attachments:
Chad Mosher
Thursday, February 16, 2012 2:15 PM
CACREP 2011 report
CACREP Report 2011 Tucson.doc
Dear Advisors,
Attached is the CACREP report completed by the Phoenix and Tucson campuses for the years
2008-2011. Please send to your student advisees and copy me on your message to them.
Thank you,
Chad
Chad M. Mosher, Ph.D., NCC
Campus College Chair
College of Social Sciences
University of Phoenix
Southern Arizona Campus | Academic Affairs
300 S. Craycroft Rd. | Mail Stop CU-A101 | Tucson, AZ 85711
direct 520.239.5208 | fax 520.514.0948
email Chad.Mosher@phoenix.edu
Exhibit I
From: Bill Pepicello
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:45 PM
To: Hal D. Morgan
Subject: RE: UOPX/CSS - CACREP Alumni & Employer Survey Report
Thanks, Hal. I have indeed received and reviewed the report.
Bill
From: Hal D. Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:11 PM
To: Bill Pepicello
Cc: Sandy Meyer
Subject: UOPX/CSS - CACREP Alumni & Employer Survey Report
Greetings Bill;
The attached alumni and employer survey report reflects completion of a recent program evaluation
conducted by the College of Social Sciences. Consistent with the CACREP programmatic accreditation
standards and common practices in higher education (i.e., CACREP accreditation specific), the College
must provide evidence that 1) the university president and provost have acknowledged receipt of the
report; and 2) the report has been made publically available to prospective students. At this juncture,
the report has undergone a complete copy edit and it has been appropriately branded for external
publication. Once we have an acknowledgement from each of you that you have in fact received the
report, I will be submitting it to Apollo Legal for a final review and request for approval at which time
the document will be made available on the College of Social Sciences pages of Phoenix.edu for
prospective student access.
If you have any questions or concerns, please don’t hesitate. Otherwise, your response acknowledging
receipt of the report would be appreciated.
Best regards,
HM
Hal D. Morgan
Director of Academic Initiatives
University of Phoenix
Academic Administration | 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway | MS:AA-S402 | Tempe, AZ 85282-2371
direct 480.557.1270 | cell 602.524.0092 | fax 602.794.4883
email Hal.Morgan@phoenix.edu
From: Alan Drimmer
Date: March 14, 2012 12:06:55 AM MST
To: Hal D. Morgan
Subject: Re: UOPX/CSS - CACREP Alumni & Employer Survey Report
I have acknowledged this report.
From: Hal D. Morgan
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:58:33 -0700
To: Alan Drimmer, Bill Berry
Cc: Aaron Lamont, Sandy Meyer, Michelle Winsor, Lee Finkel
Subject: UOPX/CSS - CACREP Alumni & Employer Survey Report
Greetings Alan and Bill;
The attached alumni and employer survey report reflects completion of a recent program evaluation
conducted by the College of Social Sciences. Consistent with the CACREP programmatic accreditation
standards and common practices in higher education (i.e., CACREP accreditation specific), the College
must provide evidence that 1) the university president and provost have acknowledged receipt of the
report; and 2) the report has been made publically available to prospective students. At this juncture,
the report has undergone a complete copy edit and it has been appropriately branded for external
publication. Once we have an acknowledgement from each of you that you have in fact received the
report, I will be submitting it to Apollo Legal for a final review and request for approval at which time
the document will be made available on the College of Social Sciences pages of Phoenix.edu for
prospective student access.
If you have any questions or concerns, please don’t hesitate. Otherwise, your response acknowledging
receipt of the report would be appreciated.
Best regards,
HM
Hal D. Morgan
Director of Academic Initiatives
University of Phoenix
Academic Administration | 1625 W. Fountainhead Parkway | MS:AA-S402 | Tempe, AZ 85282-2371
direct 480.557.1270 | cell 602.524.0092 | fax 602.794.4883
email Hal.Morgan@phoenix.edu
Exhibit J