PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT

Transcription

1 American University of Beirut PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT June 2014 Prepared for: Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Higher Education

2 GLOSSARY OF SELECTED ACRONYMS AAU ACPS AREC ASHA AUB AUBMC BOD BOT CTL DUIP EMU FAFS FAS FEA FHS FM GC GE HIP HIS HR KPI LO OIRA OSB OSM PLO REP SIS SPU HSON Academic Assessment Unit IT Academic Core Processes and Systems Agricultural Research and Education Center American Schools and Hospitals Abroad American University of Beirut American University of Beirut Medical Centre Board of Deans Board of Trustees Center for Teaching and Learning Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs Enrollment Management Unit Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences Faculty of Arts and Sciences Faculty of Engineering and Architecture Faculty of Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine Graduate Council General Education Health Insurance Plan Hospital Information System Human Resources Key Performance Indicator Learning Outcome Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Olayan School of Business Office of Strategy Management Program Learning Outcome Regional External Programs Student Information System Strategic Planning Unit Hariri School of Nursing 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section One: Executive Summary... 5 Section Two: Summary of Responses to Recommendations Section Three: Major Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities Section Four: Enrollment and Finance Trends and Projections Section Five: Assessment of Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness Section Six: Linked Institutional Planning and Budgeting Conclusion Appendices: List of Supporting Documentation A. AUB General Information Appendix A-1: 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan Appendix A-1a: Strategic Plan Process Roster Appendix A2: Majors and Program Offered at AUB (Fall 2013) Appendix A-3: Accreditation at AUB Appendix A-4: AUB Organizational Chart Appendix A-5: New and Revised Academic Policies Appendix A-6: Selected Interdisciplinary Educational Programs at AUB Since 2008 Appendix A-7: Academic Calendar Appendix A-8: AUBMC Vision 2020 B. Appendices to Section Two: Summary of Responses to Recommendations Appendix B-1: Inventory of Responses to Self-Study Recommendations Appendix B-1a: Periodic Review Committee members Appendix B-2: List of Self-Study Recommendations Discussed in Section Two Appendix B-3: General Education Program Information Appendix B-4: AUBMC Medical Staff Code of Conduct Appendix B-5: Tenure Task Force Appendix B-6: Updated Promotion Procedures Appendix B-7: Chairs Manual Appendix B-8: Recruitment and Compensation Policy for Chairs C. Appendices to Section Three: Major Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities Appendix C-1: Benchmarking with Peer and Aspirant Universities Appendix C-2: Research Expenditures at the Faculty Level Appendix C-3 Library Resources D. Appendices to Section Four: Enrollment and Finance Trends and Projections Appendix D-1: Trends for Applications Received, Acceptances, and Yield Rates Appendix D-2: Strategic Planning Report for Enrollment Management and Student Services Appendix D-3: IPEDS Financial Data AUB Periodic Review Report June

4 E. Appendices to Section Five: Assessment Appendix E-1: Institutional Assessment Committee Appendix E-2: CTL Workshops Supporting Learning Outcomes Assessment Appendix E-3: Faculty Perceptions of Learning Outcomes Assessment (Lily Conference Paper ) Appendix E-4 Examples of Annual and Three-Year Summary PLO Assessment Reports Appendix E-5: General Education Program Assessment and Improvement Plan Appendix E-6: General Education Course Certification Example (Social Sciences) Appendix E-7: Periodic Program Review (PPR) Policy and Guidelines Appendix E-8: Examples of PPR Action Plans and Annual Progress Reports Appendix E-9: OIRA Assessment Activities Appendix E-10: Advising Survey Summary and Survey Tool Appendix E-11: Graduate Student Survey Summary Appendix E-12: Assessment Survey Summary (OIRA) Appendix E-13: 2009 Strategic Plan Appendix E-14: Strategy Review 2011 F. Appendices to Section Six: Linked Institutional Planning and Budgeting Appendix F-1: Annual University Budgeting Cycle Appendix F-2: Benchmarking Report on Academic and Institutional Expenditures of Appendix F-3: AAU Streamlined Reporting Template AUB Periodic Review Report June

5 A. About the American University of Beirut EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The American University of Beirut (AUB) is a private, non-sectarian, non-profit university located in the capital city of Lebanon. It is the oldest and most respected private university in the Arab world. Originally known as the Syrian Protestant College, it was founded to provide the residents of Lebanon and the region with an independent, American-style institution of higher learning that offered medical training. Over the last century and a half, AUB has broadened its activities while remaining faithful to the vision of its founders. The University s mission statement, which was last revised in 2010, reads as follows: The American University of Beirut is an institution of higher learning founded to provide excellence in education, to participate in the advancement of knowledge through research, and to serve the peoples of the Middle East and beyond. Chartered in New York State in 1863, the University bases its educational philosophy, standards, and practices on the American liberal arts model of higher education. The University believes deeply in and encourages freedom of thought and expression and seeks to foster tolerance and respect for diversity and dialogue. Graduates will be individuals committed to creative and critical thinking, life-long learning, personal integrity, civic responsibility, and leadership. As articulated in the forthcoming 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan (Appendix A-1), the University envisions the advancement of its mission through achieving four strategic goals: 1) Deliver a World Class Student Experience/Develop Critical Thinkers & Ethical Leaders 2) Create Knowledge & Advance Quality Research/Promote Interdisciplinarity & Innovation 3) Maximize Impact for Positive Change in the Region 4) Invest in the Health of the Community and the Arab World In fall 2013, the University s total student population was 8379, including 6750 undergraduate, 1245 graduate, and 384 medical students. In comparison to U.S. institutions, a very high proportion of undergraduates are full-time students in degree programs. The University has been coeducational since 1922 and its student body is almost evenly composed of males (51 percent) and females (49 percent). Incoming students tend to have strong scholastic records, with 33 percent graduating in the top 10 percent of their secondary school classes and 86 percent in the top 50 percent. AUB s retention rate is 93 percent and the graduation rate is 89 percent. Students are extremely well-served by the University s 646 instructional (undergraduate) faculty, most of whom are full-timers (538 FTEs). The student-tofaculty ratio has decreased in recent years to 11.2:1. Most AUB students, faculty, and staff are Lebanese and constitute a representative cross-sample of the country s confessional mosaic. In addition to ensuring geographic and confessional diversity among Lebanese faculty, students, and staff, the University is committed to socio-economic and regional/international diversity within the student body. In , 23 percent of AUB students were international. AUB has emerged as a regional leader in international rankings, faculty productivity, and research quality and impact in the past decade. AUB is one of the highest rated universities in the Arab world and is in the top 15% of all international universities assessed by the QS 2013 World University Rankings. Its competitive advantages include its long history, faculty quality and research output, liberal arts foundation, strong professional education, location in Lebanon, and its dynamic and relevant research focused on innovation and interdisciplinarity. AUB offers one hundred twenty-seven programs leading to bachelor s, master s, PhD, and MD degrees through its six faculties/schools: Agricultural and Food Sciences; Arts and Sciences; Engineering and Architecture; Health Sciences; Medicine (including the Rafic Hariri School of Nursing); and the Suliman S. Olayan School of Business. With the reintroduction of PhD programs in eight specialties in , AUB became the first U.S.-accredited university in the Arab world to offer doctoral degrees. A ninth AUB Periodic Review Report June

6 PhD program in Biomedical Sciences was added in (See Appendix A-2 for a list of majors and programs offered in fall 2013.) Degrees awarded by the University are officially registered with the Ministry of Higher Education in Lebanon as well as the New York State Department of Education. AUB is accredited as an institution by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE); degree programs in four of its professional schools are accredited by specialized agencies in the United States (See Appendix A-3 for a list of AUB s institutional and faculty/program accreditations.) In configuration, AUB adheres to the American model of liberal education, which consists of a strong core curriculum, which exposes students to key areas of the liberal arts, and quality major programs which develop proficiency in specific disciplines. In terms of its academic programs and student interest, the University reflects a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine) profile, with most students majoring in related disciplines. Also favored are Arts and Sciences programs that are viewed as being pre-professional or professionally oriented. The majority of undergraduates enter the University (and specialized programs) as sophomores after obtaining the Lebanese or International Baccalaureate. 1 The University s General Education (GE) program seeks to broaden student knowledge and cultivate essential skills using a range of courses largely concentrated in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS). Although courses in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities are full and programs are active, the number of students majoring in humanistic disciplines is relatively low. B. Major Developments since AUB s 2008 Institutional Self-Study Many of the developments summarized below are discussed in greater depth in one or more sections of this report. Changes in Leadership and Administrative Organization (Standards 4 and 5) A new president, Dr. Peter Dorman, was appointed to lead the University in Since that time, AUB has undergone other changes in leadership and administrative organization. Provost: Dr. Ahmad Dallal of Georgetown University joined AUB as provost in July Shortly after taking office, he named Dr. Nesreen Ghaddar as associate provost. Deans: Also in 2009, Dr. Mohamed Sayegh of the Harvard Medical School was appointed Vice President for Medical Affairs and Raja N. Khoury Dean of the Faculty of Medicine; and Dr. Patrick McGreevy, director of AUB s Center for American Studies and Research, was named dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. In 2010, Dr. Talal Nizameddin, formerly associate dean of student affairs, was appointed dean after a formal search prompted by the retirement of his predecessor. In 2011, Dr. Makram Suidan of the University of Cincinnati joined AUB as dean of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture. A search is currently under way for the new dean of the Suliman S. Olayan School of Business. Administrative Reorganization: The University has restructured its administrative leadership structure since the last self-study. (Appendix A-4 shows the current organizational chart for the University.) The main change is the creation of a Chief Operating Officer (COO) position to manage day to day administrative operations of the University with the following direct reports: Chief Information Officer; Chief of Protection; and Directors of Facilities, Physical Plant, and Procurement and Contracts Administration. An international search is currently underway for the next COO. The VP Legal Affairs (i.e. General Counsel), and the VP Advancement (oversees development, communications, and alumni affairs) continue to report directly to the president. 1 1 Students completing 12 years of schooling and doing one of the following programs: Lebanese Baccalaureate, French Baccalaureate, Syrian Baccalaureate, Jordanian Tawjihi, German Abitur, Official Government Secondary School leaving Certificate, full IB Diploma or IGCSE/GCE (2 A levels or 4 AS levels) can apply directly to the sophomore level at AUB. AUB Periodic Review Report June

7 Strategic Planning (Standards 1, 2, and 7) In the heart of a region in transition, and in light of rapidly changing global developments economic, technological, social, political, environmental, and medical the University understands that there are new imperatives for excellence in education, research, and service. The 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan is close to finalization; many of the articulated initiatives are already being implemented; and key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are currently being developed. This strategic plan is the result of an inclusive process of investigation and dialogue in AUB s six faculties/schools, key administrative academic-support units, and task forces on diverse issues facing the University such as expanding graduate studies, reinstating tenure, revitalizing arts and humanities, strengthening STEM fields, and promoting interdisciplinary programs. This strategic plan will enable all members of the AUB community to play an active role in shaping the future of AUB and the region. Working towards this unified vision and investing University resources accordingly will enable AUB to sustain its regional leadership and contributions and achieve its aspirations for global excellence and impact. (See Appendix A-1 for the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan; it is also discussed in Sections Two, Three, and Five). Assessment of Student Learning, including General Education (Standards 12 and 14) Over the last five years, AUB has made significant strides in the development and use of organized and sustained processes to assess student learning, including in the GE Program, which was the subject of several recommendations in the 2008 Institutional Self-Study and the single recommendation in Middle States 2009 letter reaffirming the University s accreditation. The University s 2011 Monitoring Report was submitted and accepted by MSCHE. All academic programs and the GE Program now have developed Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) as well as PLO Assessment Plans to be implemented over threeyear cycles. Departments submit annual PLO Assessment Reports that include actions for improvement indicated by their assessments. In the third year, departments submit a three-year summary report and revise their PLO Assessment Plans for the next three years. Almost all undergraduate programs at AUB have completed the first three-year PLO assessment cycle, and the remaining handful will complete their first three-year cycle next year. Full details about the development and implementation of this process, including a summary of the 2011 Monitoring Report, are described in Section Five. Development of Policies and Procedures (Standards 4 and 6) The University has strengthened its foundation of policies for governance and accountability to help ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. In the last six years, 35 policies have been developed or refined, including those listed below (Appendix A-5). New and Revised Policies for Governance and Accountability ay AUB Ensuring Academic Excellence: 9 policies including those required to strengthen the faculty and streamline program assessments (PPR) in order to guarantee high quality undergraduate and graduate programs. Improving Students Educational Experience: 7 policies including the establishment of the Enrollment Management Unit, dual and joint degrees, and the Graduate Council. Facilitating Academic Governance and Administration: 14 policies including the Unified Faculty Bylaws that uphold values of shared governance. Promoting Institutional Integrity: 5 policies including Principles for Ethical Conduct and policies for integrity in research. Support for Interdisciplinary Education and Research (Standard 11) In order to tackle the complex challenges of today, the University is now reaching beyond the boundaries and frameworks of traditional disciplines with new interdisciplinary educational programs AUB Periodic Review Report June

8 and research. In 2013, AUB established the Department of University Interdisciplinary Programs, a new degree-granting academic unit, to serve as a governance structure to promote interdisciplinary graduate degree programs such as the MS in Energy Studies, the MS in Environmental Studies, and the MA in Public Policy and International Affairs. Other interdisciplinary undergraduate and graduate programs have been developed by two or more faculties (See Appendix A-6 for a list of AUB s interdisciplinary educational programs). An evolving AUB will prepare future generations of students and faculty to accelerate the pace of scientific discovery, unravel the complexities of developmental issues, and make meaningful contributions to their societies. Creation of New Academic Units: Academic Assessment Unit, Enrollment Management Unit, and Graduate Council (Standards 2, 7, 8, 9, 14) Three new units have been developed to improve student s educational experience and ensure institutional effectiveness. Most recently, the creation of the Academic Assessment Unit (AAU) in 2014 to coordinate all academic institutional assessment and planning activities represents a significant step in capitalizing on progress made and building stronger links between the assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness. AAU facilitates the following activities: Periodic Program Reviews (PPR), PLO assessment, GE PLO assessment, and Key Performance Indicator (KPI) tracking. AUB established the Enrollment Management Unit (EMU) in 2012 as an independent unit that coordinates with relevant administrative and academic units to strategically plan, assess, and implement initiatives to support student success by enhancing the effectiveness of the services and processes of admissions, registration, financial aid, course placement, and student support services. The Graduate Council was established in 2011 to support graduate studies and services. This unit works closely with faculty/school deans, the Board of Graduate Studies, and the Faculty Graduate Studies Committees to facilitate graduate education through uniform implementation of policies, deadlines, and the standards for quality control which govern graduate work at AUB. It also manages and coordinates the recruitment and admission of graduate students. Change in the Academic Year (Standard 11) AUB has changed its academic calendar to better synchronize with U.S. academic calendars and to institute a four-week January term. The change provides faculty with additional dedicated research time; allows for planning winter term educational programs including possible exchange programs; and facilitates student exchange throughout the year. (Appendix A-7 includes the AUB s academic calendar for ) This calendar change required a change in AUB s fiscal year; it should be noted that the fiscal year began on July 1, three months earlier than its usual October 1 start date. This necessitated a one-time adjustment in , when the duration of the fiscal year was nine months. AUB s fiscal year now runs from July 1 to June 30. C. PRR Highlights The remaining sections of this report focus on the following issues: Section Two: Summary of Responses to Recommendations AUB s 2008 Self Study presented 143 recommendations. Due to the large number of recommendations, many of which are interrelated, this section describes the responses that the University has made to the prioritized list of sixteen recommendations presented in the Executive Summary of the 2008 Self Study 2 in addition to other 2008 Self-Study recommendations that are intricately related to the prioritized recommendations and/or relate to strategic priorities for the University. Table 1 (page 12) provides a snapshot of the University s progress in relation to addressing the self-study recommendations and lists major actions or initiatives described in this section. AUB has made significant progress, including the establishment of structures, processes, and/or policies to achieve further improvements in relation to 2 As one of the final steps in the 2008 Institutional Self-Study process, the co-chairs of the eight working groups were asked to choose the two recommendations that they deemed the most important for the standard or standards that had been the focal points of their particular chapters. AUB Periodic Review Report June

9 Standard 1: Mission and Goals, Standard 6: Integrity, Standard 8: Student Admissions and Retention, Standard 9: Student Support Services, Standard 11: Educational Offerings, Standard 12: General Education, and Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning. Significant progress has been made, but further action is needed to fully address recommendations related to Standard 7: Institutional Assessment; Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal; Standard 4: Leadership and Governance; Standard 10: Faculty; and Standard 13: Related Educational Offerings. In relation to Standard 3: Institutional Resources and Standard 5: Administration, AUB has made progress in some areas and responses are still being developed in others. Section Three: Major Strengths Challenges and Opportunities Identifying AUB s major strengths, challenges, and opportunities was central to the development the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. The goals and critical enablers 3 of this plan are summarized in Table 6 (page 32). Benchmarking and assessment served as the starting point for the strategic planning process and revealed that AUB is the leading university in the region with realistic aspirations to global excellence and impact. The primary reasons identified for AUB s regional leadership are the University s strengths that lie in the quality and research of its faculty, excellent professional education, the liberal arts approach that has always been the foundation of education at AUB, and its dynamic and relevant educational programs and research with a focus on innovation and interdisciplinarity. These factors, coupled with AUB s location in Lebanon, have enabled AUB to continue to attract the brightest students in the region. Some of these strengths are the result of major achievements of the University in the last five years and/or efforts to improve on weaknesses related to the critical enablers. AUB s strengths and weaknesses in relation to the critical enablers are outlined in Table 7 (page 33). Tables 9-11 (pages 44-46) analyze major external challenges facing the University and relate them to opportunities which have been identified as AUB s strategic priorities. Section Four: Enrollment and Finance Trends and Projections This section reports that student enrollment and retention are strong despite economic and political instability in the region as well as increased regional competition. Moderate enrollment increases in the last five years have been accompanied by increases in full time faculty and improved facilities. Numbers of applications have increased while maintaining the acceptance rate; and the quality of AUB students remains high. The reintroduction of PhD programs has been met by student demand and enrollment in master s programs is also growing. As reflected in the audited financial statements and in the financial ratios, AUB s fiscal status remains sound and the University is positioned to take on the ambitious projects and initiatives outlined in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and the AUBMC 2020 Vision (See Appendix A-8). Section Five: Processes to Assess Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness This section summarizes AUB s responses to 2008 Self-Study recommendations in relation to assessing student learning (Standards 12 & 14), describes current structures and processes for assessment of student learning (Standard 14) and institutional effectiveness (Standard7), as well as challenges and future directions in assessment currently under consideration. This section highlights successes of the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) Assessment and Periodic Program Review processes and provides specific examples of the use of assessment findings for improvement from curricular changes to new policies and programs. The 2013 Assessment Survey conducted by OIRA and reported in this chapter shows how administrators, faculty and staff across the University are devoting greater energy and attention to assessment and improvement. Finally this chapter looks at AUB s strategic planning and assessment in relation to strategic plans, explaining that AUB has only been engaging in formal strategic planning for ten years and the University s processes for the assessment of overall institutional effectiveness and achievement of strategic planning goals are evolving based on these experiences. 3 Critical Enablers lay a necessary foundation for the achievement of the strategic goals. AUB Periodic Review Report June

10 Section Six: Linkage between Planning and Budgeting Processes Section Six reports on AUB s allocation of significant resources to meet strategic priorities which have been identified through assessment and strategic planning through: strategic capital projects budgeted for $152 million 4 including a new Engineering Complex (See Table 20 on Page 88), concrete mechanisms that link capital and operating budgets of academic units to PLO Assessment and the PPR process, and fundraising successes for scholarships and research based on strategic priorities. In recent years the Scholarship fundraising campaign raised $25 million from donors. Since 2007, AUB has been awarded major multi-year grants totaling $39 million to support full-scholarships and requisite academic support for economically disadvantaged students from across Lebanon and the region. In addition, AUB s external research awards increased from $5.6 Million in 2009 and to close to $13 Million in This section also discusses directions for improvement including developing alternative revenue streams to reduce tuition-dependency and developing a more systematic approach to budgeting that ensures fulfillment of the University s mission and achievement of strategic goals and also involves clearer communication and appropriate levels of transparency and input from all stakeholders. D. The Periodic Review Report Process AUB s Periodic Review Report was authored by the Office of the Provost 5 with significant contributions from the Academic Assessment Unit (Section Five) and the Chief Financial Officer (Section Four). This report could not have been written without the hard work and dedicated faculty, staff, and administrators whose efforts to continually improve our University s fulfillment of its mission are described in these pages. Each major section was validated through a process involving feedback from relevant faculty and administrators. The first task undertaken was to compile a detailed inventory of actions taken by the University in response to the 143 recommendations appearing in AUB s 2008 Institutional Self-Study (Appendix B-1) In 2013, the provost formed a Periodic Review Report (PRR) Committee to verify the findings of the detailed inventory of actions taken by the University in response to the 143 recommendations appearing in AUB s 2008 Institutional Self-Study and provide feedback on Section Two of the report. The PRR Committee was largely composed of faculty members and unit heads who had served on one of the 2008 Self-Study s eight working groups. Preference was given to the groups co-chairs, who had collectively made up the Self-Study Steering Committee. Some co-chairs had left the University, however, while others were on leave, and a few had administrative responsibilities directly related to the contents of this report. In such cases, the provost called on faculty and staff with Self-Study experience or special knowledge or skills which would inform the analysis. (See Appendix B-1a for a roster of PRR Committee members.) PRR Committee members were assigned MSCHE Standards, the related 2008 Self-Study chapters and recommendations, and the inventory of University actions in response to validate and revise. This inventory and the committee s feedback informed the drafting of Section Two which was then presented to the committee in a meeting in April 2014 for further feedback, which was incorporated into the final version of the report. Feedback and documentation was also gathered from faculty chairs and staff of units whose work is described in detail in Section Two (General Education Program, Writing Center, Enrolment Management Unit, and Graduate Task Force). The analysis in Section Three: Major Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities emerged from the strategic planning process for the Unified Academic Strategic Plan During this thorough and inclusive process each faculty/school developed a strategic plan. In addition, three university-wide strategic planning units were created for Enrollment Management and Student Services; Academic 4 Over the total timeline of all projects 5 Assessment Liaison Officer (ALO) Brooke Atherton El-Amine and Associate Provost Dr. Nesreen Ghaddar authored the Periodic Review Report in close coordination with the provost. (Preliminary work for the PRR was conducted by former ALO Debra Callaghan, including the development the Inventory of Self-Study Recommendations with the PRR Committee.) AUB Periodic Review Report June

11 Support; and Institutes, Centers, and Museums which also developed strategic plans. Following the development of these plans, the Academic Review Committee, chaired by the Provost and comprised of the deans of faculties/schools, the chairs of the three university-wide strategic planning units, and key administrators reviewed each strategic plan in light of the University s priorities. Other forms of assessment also contributed to the new plan, including external benchmarking, SWOT and data analyses conducted during the unit-level strategic planning process. The results of these evaluations and appropriate strategies to address them were thoroughly discussed during a series of Academic Review Team meetings which took place over six months resulting in the Unified Academic Strategic Plan The finance information in Section Four: Enrollment and Finance Trends and Projections was written by AUB s CFO; and the enrollment information was based on information provided by the Office of Institutional Planning and Assessment (OIRA), the Enrollment Management Unit (EMU), and the Graduate Council (GC). Section Five: Assessment of Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness was presented to the Institutional Assessment Committee (See Appendix E-1) in April 2014 for validation and feedback. The Faculty Chair and Assistant Director of General Education and Assessment of the AAU contributed a great deal to the section and provided extensive documentation of assessment processes at the University. Other members of the committee, in particular the directors of OIRA and the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) contributed and provided suggestions for revisions which were incorporated. Descriptions of current University practices in Section Six: Linkage between Planning and Budgeting Processes is based on information gathered from the Associate Provost, who coordinates the capital academic budget allocation process, the Chief Financial Officer, and the Office of University Advancement. The section about revising AUB s budget model and process is based on extensive Board of Deans discussions on this topic as well as town hall meetings held by the administration with students and faculty regarding the University budget. This inclusive PRR process engaged faculty broadly through the PRR Committee while also gathering information, documentation, and feedback from faculty and staff responsible for the units and/or initiatives whose work is most relevant to the report. The approach utilized ensures accurate reporting on the significant actions of the University to continue to meet MSCHE Standards. At the same time the PRR assessment process has already begun to instigate actions to achieve a higher fulfillment of the Standards. AUB Periodic Review Report June

12 SECTION TWO: SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATIONS The American University of Beirut underwent its last self-study in and the resulting Self- Study, Evaluation Team Report, and MSCHE action have served as both catalyst and foundation for the development of institutional and programmatic initiatives over the last five years, including AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan and 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan as well as the specific initiatives described in this chapter. The 2008 Self-Study was the culmination of work by over 100 people across campus faculty, administrators, and staff from various disciplines and many who had been involved in the AUB s original 2004 Accreditation Self-Study who participated in the Steering Committee or one of its eight working groups. The comprehensive self-study addressed the 14 standards from Characteristics of Excellence in eight chapters that grouped related standards. The evaluation team who visited AUB in March 2009 summarized their findings in their Evaluation Team Report: The team concluded that the American University of Beirut meets all fourteen standards for accreditation established by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. The American University of Beirut is commended for the quality and honesty of the Self-Study; for its strategic planning framework, which has often taken place in a challenging external framework; for prudent accounting and maintaining financial health; for its commitment to a more inclusive system of governance and to the necessary transparency that this will entail to ensure the vitality of the institution for the future; for the construction of the new athletic facility; for its commitment to increased diversity in the student body and the high rate of female enrolment; for its historic and continuing commitment to general education; for the completion and implementation of the fiveyear strategic plan for regional external programs, and for successfully exceeding its target levels in 2007; for the creation of a pilot Writing Center to support the academic writing skills of AUB undergraduate and graduate students; for the continuing efforts exerted to meet the recommendation of the previous self study and the suggestions of the accreditation report. The team also noted that AUB has made commendable progress since initial accreditation in assessing learning outcomes. (pp. 3-4) The Evaluation Team Report offered a number of commendations and suggestions but did not state any recommendations. On June 25, 2009, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) acted to reaffirm the University s accreditation and to request a monitoring report due in 2011 regarding assessment of student learning. AUB s 2011 Monitoring Report, submitted and accepted in 2011, summarized and documented the University s progress in the assessment of student learning. Since that time work has continued on the institutional and program level, including within the General Education Program, to continue this student learning outcome assessment and use it as a catalyst for improvements in teaching and learning. (A detailed description of the University s response to the MSCHE s action is detailed in Section 5 which focuses on Standards 7 and 14.) AUB s 2008 Self Study presented 143 recommendations which are listed along with University responses in Appendix B-1. Due to the large number of recommendations, many of which are interrelated, this section describes the responses that the University has made to the prioritized list of sixteen recommendations presented in the Executive Summary of the 2008 Self-Study 6 in addition to ten 2008 Self-Study recommendations that are intricately related to the prioritized recommendations and/or relate to strategic priorities for the University. A list of these 26 recommendations is included in Appendix B As one of the final steps in the 2008 Institutional Self-Study process, the co-chairs of the eight working groups were asked to choose the two recommendations that they deemed the most important for the standard or standards that had been the focal points of their particular chapters. AUB Periodic Review Report June

13 The order in which this section describes AUB s responses to these 26 recommendations is based on internal assessment of relative progress in addressing the recommendations, rather than the numerical order of the standards. Table 1 outlines the order in which this section will address the MSCHE Standards and 2008 Self-Study recommendations related to them as well as which other sections of the PRR will discuss the MSCHE Standards and related University initiatives. Table 1: Assessment of AUB Progress and Order of MSCHE Standards in Section Two Assessment of Progress Significant progress, including the establishment of structures, processes, and/or policies to achieve further improvements. Significant progress; further action needed to fully address recommendations. MSCHE Standard Topic Actions/Initiatives Taken in Response to Recommendations 14 Assessment of Student Learning Program Learning Outcomes Development and Assessment 12 General Education General Education Program Writing Center/Writing in the Disciplines 11 Educational Offerings Periodic Program Review Development of Course and Program Learning Outcomes New Educational Programs 8 Student Admissions Enrollment Management Unit and Retention Student Advising Assessment 9 Student Support and Improvement Initiatives Services Increasing Financial Aid Office Of International Programs Graduate Council 1 Mission and Goals Updated Mission Statements Unified Academic Strategic Plan Integrity Institutional Integrity Policies 7 Institutional Assessment 2 Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal Monitoring Mechanisms Periodic Program Review OIRA Activities Assessment and Benchmarking KPI Tracking (OSM, now AAU) Academic Strategic Plan 2014 KPI Tracking (OSM, now AAU) Linking Budget and Campaign Priorities to Strategic Plan Other PRR Sections Where Discussed Section 5 Section 5 Section 3 Section 5 Section 3 Section 5 Section 3 Section 6 Section 5 Section 6 Section 3 Section 5 Section 6 Progress in some areas; responses being developed in others. 4 Leadership and Governance Unified Faculty Bylaws New/Revised Policies and Procedures 10 Faculty Long Term Contracts Second Task Force on Tenure Chairs Manual and Related Policies Bottom-Up Initiatives 13 Related Educational REP Opportunities for Faculty Offerings 3 Institutional Continuing Education Resources Funding for Research and Scholarships Timely Reporting Prudent Management of Assets/Debt Steps to Increase Endowment Upcoming Capital Campaign 5 Administration Shared Governance Greater communication and transparency Section 3 Section 3 Section 4 Section 6 AUB Periodic Review Report June

14 I. Significant Progress Including Mechanisms to Achieve Further Improvements A. Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning Continue to support faculties in establishing processes to assess student learning outcomes when these processes do not yet exist. Faculties with student learning assessment processes should develop systems for the periodic evaluation and continuous improvement of these processes. (Recommendation 14. 1, prioritized) Accelerate the development of course and program learning outcomes and their assessment tools to ensure that educational offerings are adequately and regularly evaluated. Continue providing the CTL with the means and resources appropriate for the completion of the learning outcomes initiative coordinated by ULOCC. (Recommendation 11.1, prioritized; included here because of its relevance to Standard 14) Learning Outcomes Development and Assessment Over the last five years, AUB has made significant strides in the development and use of organized and sustained processes to assess student learning. All academic programs and the General Education (GE) Program have developed Program Learning Outcomes (PLO) as well as PLO Assessment Plans to be implemented over three-year cycles. Departments submit annual PLO Assessment Reports that include actions for improvement indicated by their assessments. In the third year, departments submit a threeyear summary report and revise their PLO Assessment Plans for the next three years. Full details about the development and implementation of this process are described in Section Five. B. Standard 12: General Education Review and assess AUB s general education program periodically. This should be the task of the Senate s new General Education Committee, which should also develop standards for the classification of general education courses; re-evaluate these standards periodically; oversee the classification process; and actively solicit the creation of new general education courses. The committee should also set university-wide standards for writing excellence. (Recommendation 12.1, prioritized) Designate general education courses more explicitly in the University catalogue and other promotional publications. Establish a GE website accessible through AUB s homepage. Publish the list of approved GE courses on this website (Recommendation 12.4; related) Strengthen the University s commitment to and implementation of the general education requirement (Recommendation 11.5; related and strategic priority) General Education (GE) Program The successful implementation of a comprehensive GE Program in the last five years lies at the heart of AUB s commitment to providing its undergraduate students with a rigorous curriculum in a liberal education model. AUB students are exposed to both an in-depth learning experience in their chosen field of specialization as well as breadth of knowledge in an array of intellectual experiences. The GE Program is that part of the curriculum which provides all AUB undergraduate students with fundamental skills and knowledge that should nurture their intellectual growth and guide them to become knowledgeable and well-informed graduates. General education at AUB provides students with essential skills in research and communication, familiarity with significant modes of thought and broad exposure to fields of learning in a diversity of areas cultural, societal, and scientific so that they better learn to think critically and analyze intellectual and social issues in their historical and contemporary contexts from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, and thereby, to enrich their lives by fostering problem-solving skills and promoting life-long learning, in a program that embraces the principles of student choice and active learning. AUB Periodic Review Report June

15 The GE Program achieves the above aims through an assortment of courses which are meant to contribute to the students' abilities to succeed in their chosen fields of study. In addition to courses in their academic majors and the opportunity to take minor concentrations in specific fields, since all AUB undergraduate students are expected to complete a minimum of credits of general education requirements distributed among Communication Skills, Humanities, Social Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Quantitative Thought. AUB students can now choose from over 400 general education courses that nurture their intellectual growth as critical thinkers. Starting in 2014, all undergraduate students are also required to take a 3-credit Writing in the Discipline course which is normally offered in the major. Prior to the year 2000, there was no clear GE program at the American University of Beirut (AUB), and different faculties had different requirements. In 2000, a first report which addressed general education (Academic Planning for AUB in the next decade, 2000) recommended that undergraduate students in all faculties complete a core liberal arts general education curriculum that consists of 36 credits. Upon recommendation of the 2004 Institutional Self-Study that was submitted to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), AUB established a General Education Strategic Planning Committee (GESPC) in late 2004 which produced a full report containing concrete recommendations which constitute the current GE requirements. The improved GE Program was endorsed by the University Senate and was scheduled to take effect for entering freshman and sophomore students in Fall In May 2008, the Senate approved the Academic Development Committee s recommendation that a new standing committee be established to oversee the university-wide implementation of the GE requirements. The GE Committee was elected and began its service in January Implementation of AUB s revised GE requirement, which took effect in Fall , was overseen by the Senate GE Committee (established in 2009), which developed measurable learning outcomes for the program; communication and writing skills; and four major disciplinary fields of learning (natural sciences, humanities, social sciences, and quantitative thought). The committee invited faculty to propose existing courses for GE designation and explain how they would meet GE LOs and assess student learning. By end March 2011, the committee had approved 279 courses, which were listed on the Registrar s website and clearly identified on Banner. In , the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) hired an assessment officer to assist the chair of the GE Committee, enhance the GE menu on AUB SIS, modify course attributes of approved GE courses on the Banner, as well as assist with workshops, in preparing rubrics, and in writing assessment reports. At the time of the 2011 Monitoring Report, the GE Committee was working with the CTL and the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) to prepare a program assessment plan, develop appropriate measures, and train selected committee members in assessment. The GE Program Three- Year Assessment was completed in The chair of the GE Committee of the Senate and the GE Officer coordinated the assessment process with faculty members from different disciplines and collected the assessment data. The assessment indicated program success in regard to many PLOs. In response to weaknesses indicated in the assessment an Improvement Plan was developed which recommended a number of changes to the GE Program, including governance changes. (Details regarding the GE Program Assessment are reported in Section 5). In February 2013, the GE Committee unanimously approved a new governance structure for the program, which was subsequently approved by the Faculty Senate and then the Board of Trustees in June The General Education Program is now administered by a director (Chair of the Academic Assessment Unit), an assistant director (the assessment officer formally based in the CTL), and the faculty GE Board. The director of the GE Program is a faculty member of professorial rank who is appointed by, and reports to, the provost, and also serves, by virtue of his appointment, as an ex-officio member of the Academic Development Committee of the Faculty Senate. The director coordinates all GE activities involving the GE Board, AUB s academic departments, the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Registrar s Office, IT/Banner staff, and other relevant units. They are responsible for AUB Periodic Review Report June

16 developing and maintaining the University s GE website and serving as a resource on best practices in general education. A major recent accomplishment of the General Education Program is the development of a new General Education website. The website serves an audience of students and faculty with the following features: Online advising tool for students and faculty advisers to help assess a student s GE requirements and choose GE courses to fit their path of study and expand their intellectual horizons. An explanation of GE requirements and regularly updated lists of all GE courses. Resources for faculty about how to develop and submit courses for GE designation, including the GE Learning Outcomes The Board of General Education is formed of full-time faculty members in the professorial rank who are representative of all faculties and all GE areas, and who are appointed by their deans for three-year terms. Board members oversee the quality of the GE program and GE courses by: 1. Evaluating/re-evaluating AUB courses and transfer courses for their suitability as GE courses; 2. Drafting GE policies for approval by the ADC; 3. Coordinating GE assessment; 4. Devising plans for the improvement of the GE program; 5. Undertaking GE related tasks as directed by the provost. To be able to include a course in the General Education category, a detailed course syllabus must be provided, and an application form showing how the course addresses the learning outcomes of a specific GE area, must be filled out and submitted by the course instructor or by the department s chairperson. This is done through an online process and the primary criterion is the correlation between course learning outcomes and GE program learning outcomes. A GE certification is given for one year, and re-certification is required at the end of the first year and every three-years. The evaluators examine the course portfolio that may include sample students assignments, presentations, projects, etc. Portfolios of 72 existing GE courses were reviewed in fall 2013 for GE re-certification for three additional years, and portfolios of 120 existing GE courses are under review in spring (More about this process is described in Section Five.) Further information about the GE Program is included in Appendix B-3. Determine the resources that the Writing Center will need to meet rising student demand. Recruit dedicated faculty to staff the Center in order to offset fluctuations in the number of available graduate students from the English department. (Recommendation 11.11, related; included under Standard Twelve because of its relevance to General Education) The Writing Center/Writing in the Disciplines Initiative The Writing Center, established in 2004, contributes to the mission and strategic objectives of AUB by helping to realize its liberal arts vision for undergraduate education; by promoting retention and academic success for students of diverse backgrounds; and by supporting the work of faculty members. The Writing Center aims to enrich the culture of writing at AUB by conducting research and by supporting writers and teachers of writing. The center promotes writing as a tool for thinking, a way to demonstrate learning, and a means of expression. The primary activities of the Writing Center include: Providing faculty development and tutoring support for writing courses in the majors. Offering free writing consultations to undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and staff. After the 2008 Self-Study, the Office of the Provost secured a four-year, $400,000 Mellon Foundation grant to support writing across he curriculum. In addition to the programmatic focus of developing writing-intensive classes, this grant also offered significant support for structural changes at the Writing AUB Periodic Review Report June

17 Center and the expansion of its services, including funding for a director and strategies to ensure a steady supply of tutors. In , the Writing Center moved out of the Department of English (where it had been housed since its establishment) and became one of Academic Support Units under the Office of the Provost. This shift reflects the Center s aim to serve all programs on campus and acknowledges an expanded role in helping to develop and support writing courses in undergraduate majors, as mandated by new General Education guidelines. The Center is now staffed by a director of professorial rank from the Department of English and tutors (Graduate Assistants in English and other departments, Instructors, and Assistant Instructors). During this transition, two visiting scholars contributed to planning and development: Vicki Russell, Director of the Thompson Writing Studio at Duke University; and Carol Peterson Haviland, Professor of English at California State University, San Bernardino. The Mellon Foundation grant provided support to prepare for the implementation of a new General Education requirement for undergraduate students to complete one additional 3-credit communication course, beyond the required core courses offered in the Department of English. The additional courses are located within each major. Departments have chosen existing courses in the curriculum to be designated as Writing in the Discipline (WRIN) and revised them in keeping with guidelines endorsed by the General Education Program and the Writing Center. Many WRIN courses have been piloted: 17 were offered in (involving 20 faculty members and 664 students), and 18 courses were taught in , involving 22 faculty members and 560 students. The General Education program will begin to implement the WRIN requirement for undergraduate students entering in fall The success of the program will depend on ongoing support for this initiative by the Writing Center, in collaboration with the Center for Teaching and Learning, the AUB Libraries, and other programs. Planned efforts include: ongoing faculty seminars and individualized consultation on the teaching of writing; faculty discussion groups within disciplinary areas; a network for communication among Writing Center, General Education, and faculty members; and specialized tutoring support. The Writing Center s previous experience in giving presentations and participating in faculty development activities on campus indicates it will be able to support this new initiative. In and the Writing Center made presentations to Final Year Project students in Engineering and Nutrition and Food Sciences. Faculty workshops offered through the Center for Teaching and Learning in the past three years include: Writing to increase student engagement; New ways of thinking about plagiarism; How can writing support the learning goals for my program?; and Journal writing to encourage student involvement; From the Writing Classroom to Writing in the Disciplines - Bridging the Gap. On a daily basis, the Writing Center provides free, thirty-minute to two-hour, one-on-one writing consultations to undergraduate and graduate students, faculty and staff. Students can bring in projects from any discipline to find support during any phase of the writing process. The tutors are not editors, and they clarify this to writers, and, as such, the writer remains the author of her/his work. Table 2: Hours of Individual Tutoring Provided by the Writing Center ,333 2,702 2,387 To create a reliable system for expanding the number and expertise of tutors, while continuing to rely on a core pool of Graduate Assistants from English, the Writing Center has hired part-time Instructors and Assistant Instructors, and has developed a program for recruiting undergraduate students through the university s Work Study Program. Tutors participate in a series of workshops to learn about tutoring practices and to widen their knowledge of writing processes and genres. Increasing the number of tutors has allowed the center to offer more than 1,000 additional tutoring hours annually compared to levels. Table 2 shows hours of tutoring provided. On average, 80% of tutoring hours serve AUB Periodic Review Report June

18 undergraduate students. A need for increased support for graduate student writers has become apparent, and is beginning to be addressed in cooperation with the Graduate Council and the University Libraries. C. Standard 11: Educational Offerings Develop University-wide policies and mechanisms for the periodic and systematic review of all educational offerings at AUB. (Recommendation 11.1, prioritized) Periodic Program Review In 2010, AUB implemented a process for the periodic review of academic programs which includes departmental self-studies, external reviews by disciplinary specialists, internal reviews by experienced administrators, and action plans with appropriate resource allocation. Undergraduate and graduate programs without professional accreditation are reviewed at least once every six years. Departments that review programs for professional accreditation by external boards, commissions, or other agencies follow the schedule and requirements of that body for their accredited programs. The program review process reaffirms the University s commitment to high quality academic programs that meet international standards, and provides a broader context and framework for the assessment of student learning. In Fall 2013, AUB entered the fourth year of its six-year review cycle. (Details about this highly successful program are presented in Section Five). Initiate more niche or regionally attractive programs in response to changes in the social, cultural, economic, and technological needs of the Middle East and to help AUB further distinguish itself from other institutions in the region (Recommendation 8.4.2, strategic priority; included under Standard 11 because of direct relevance to educational offerings) Sustain, improve, and expand PhD programs (Recommendation 8.3.2, strategic priority; included under Standard 11 because of direct relevance to educational offerings) New Educational Programs Developing and sustaining new educational programs in strategic fields at the undergraduate and graduate level is a major strategic thrust in the 2014 Strategic Plan. AUB is actively diversifying the curriculum to correspond to new trends in higher education and to the needs of the region. Since 2008, 9 Bachelor s, 18 Masters, and 9 PhD programs have been introduced (See Table 3). This strategy of educational program development is discussed in more detail in Section Three. Table 3: New Programs Introduced Since 2008* Bachelor s Degrees Masters Degrees BE Industrial Engineering* ME Biomedical Engineering* BLA Landscape Architecture MS/ME Chemical Engineering BS Medical Audiology Sciences* MA Clinical Psychology BS Medical Imaging Sciences MS Construction Engineering BA Media Communications MS Energy Studies* BS Agribusiness ME Applied Energy BS/BE Chemical Engineering MS Finance BS Construction Engineering MS Health Research Doctoral Degrees (PhD) MA Human Resource Management Arab and Middle Eastern History MA Islamic Studies* Arabic Language and Literature MA Media Studies (thesis and non-thesis) Biomedical Sciences MA Middle Eastern Studies (non-thesis) Biomedical Engineering* MS Orthodontics* Cell and Molecular Biology MA Public Policy and International Affairs* Civil Engineering MS Rural Community Development* Electrical & Computer Engineering MA Transnational American Studies Environmental and Water Resources Engineering Executive MS in Health Care Leadership* Mechanical Engineering Theoretical Physics Programs with an * have been approved, but will be launched in AUB Periodic Review Report June

19 D. Standards 8 and 9: Student Admissions and Retention and Support Services Establish a formal and robust enrollment management unit to improve fulfillment of AUB s mission and strategic enrollment goals. (Recommendation 8.2.1, prioritized) Enrollment Management Unit In Spring 2010, the provost appointed an Enrollment Management Task Force (EMTF) to evaluate and recommend improvements to admissions, registration, and financial aid processes; and to other student services provided by the faculties/schools (advising) and the Office of Student Affairs (new student orientation). As a direct result of this task force, a permanent Enrollment Management Unit (EMU) was established in 2012 to evaluate student services/programs and develop initiatives to facilitate enrollment of a diverse and highly qualified student body, support student success, and to enhance the effectiveness of the services and processes of admissions, registration, financial aid, course placement, and student support services such as advising and career placement. The EMU works in cooperation with the Admissions Office, the Financial Aid Office, the Registrar's Office, the Office of International Programs, the Office of Student Affairs, and the Office of Information Technology as well as the various faculties and schools. A guiding principle of the EMU is to promote a student-centered approach in all areas and connect various departments at AUB using Enrollment Management Coordinator model. Other accomplishments of the Enrollment Management Task Force and subsequent Enrollment Management Unit in the last five years include (many serve as responses to other recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study): Drafting a strategic plan for enrollment management and student services to fulfill the institutional mission and to inform the institutional strategic plan. Developing, testing, and implementing (starting ) a new and more qualitative method of evaluating the applications of freshman students. (Recommendation 8.1.1) Undertaking a comparative study of freshman and sophomore performance and acceptance into majors. (Recommendation 8.1.5) Evaluating the School Record Standardization (SRS) Method, which is a key process for evaluating applicants for admissions. The SRS method was evaluated by a subcommittee with faculty expertise in Statistics who found that this method is valid for evaluating undergraduate students who come from schools with a low number of applicants to AUB. Creating a course equivalencies database for students transferring into AUB from other institutions which is published on the Registrar website and supporting the development and adoption of a Transfer of Credit policy. (Recommendation 8.1.3) The establishment in 2012 of the University Committee on English Language to review, recommend, and facilitate the implementation of new policies that relate to AUB s English language proficiency requirements; undergraduate and graduate admissions; student placement in communications skills courses; and the subsequent academic performance of students in all faculties. Continually improving New Student Orientation (Recommendation 9.4.iii.1) based on student survey feedback, including enabling access to a temporary wireless network for new students during the orientation and registration period. Drafting a career services improvement proposal with the career services committee chaired by the Chair of EMU to foster collaborations across faculties, enforce university policies, and provide an improved experience for students across disciplines. One component of the proposal has been EMU s coordination with IT and the faculties/schools to implement a career service web application for all AUB students. (Recommendation 9.4) Improving course scheduling and registration processes to minimize course conflicts and maximize facility usage through facilitating better coordination between faculties/schools and using IT solutions. AUB Periodic Review Report June

20 Many of the EMU s accomplishments exemplify the use of assessment for process improvement, such as improvement to advising services described below; some of these accomplishments are crossreferenced in Section Five. Explore means to promote advising culture and improve advising load distribution and the advising process, including adviser training and assessment. One possibility is to appoint advising officers at the faculty level. (Recommendation 9.2.1, prioritized) Student Advising Assessment and Improvement Initiatives The EMU has worked closely with the faculties to improve the process of academic advising. A University-wide advising steering committee has been appointed to identify goals for effective academic advising and standards of good advising practices. EMU in coordination with OIRA and ACPS developed the university-wide Adviser Survey Evaluation which after revisions by Deans was launched to all undergraduate students in April Results of this survey will be used to inform the advising improvement initiatives of the EMU and the faculties/schools, including future adviser training and assessment. An Advising website subcommittee is developing an advising website in coordination with IT which includes common information for all AUB students as well as faculty/school specific information (general FAQs and students guides as well as faculty/school specific guides). The website will be interactive allowing students to request appointments with their advisers among other features such as Electronic Advising Notes and is intended to facilitate more effective adviser-student relationships. (The website will address Recommendation 9.2.2) Continue current efforts and new strategies to improve the socio-economic diversity and regional/international diversity of the student population (Recommendation 8.4.1, strategic priority) Increasing Financial Aid and Student Diversity Financial aid is closely connected to the University s strong commitment to diversity, particularly the socioeconomic and regional diversity of its student population. Although American students attending AUB can apply for US government grants, Lebanese and regional students do not have recourse to state funds when pursuing their educational goals. In most cases, it is the University s responsibility to provide assistance to economically disadvantaged students. In fall 2011, AUB implemented a number of changes aimed at increasing the size and distribution of financial aid awards, including fundraising (grants and donors), recalibrating the way tuition is calculated in relation to credits 7, as well as encouraging low-interest local bank loans to deserving students. As a result, AUB has doubled its annual financial aid awards from institutional resources to $26 million in from $13 million in Almost half of all undergraduate students received some form of financial aid in and the average financial aid award covered approximately 40 percent of tuition. The University has taken additional steps to increase financial aid and scholarships. In January 2013, the Development Office announced that a four-year Scholarship Initiative had raised an additional $25.5 million in endowed scholarship funds. Through benefactors and alumni, AUB now has 320 endowed scholarships to finance the education of deserving students. The University also actively pursues large grants specifically to provide multi-year full scholarships programs with support services for qualified but economically disadvantaged students from across the region and across Lebanon, boosting the 7 Prior to , student tuition covered the cost of 12 credits, but students could register for up to 19 credits. Now students pay for 15 credits and can register for up to 19 credits. This change effectively increased tuition to more accurately reflect instructional costs. To prevent this change from negatively impacting socio-economic diversity at the University a significant amount of the increased revenue is used for student financial aid while also revamping policies to increase average financial aid support per student. AUB Periodic Review Report June

21 socio-economic diversity of the student body. Currently the University is participating in the following grant programs: Middle East Partnership Initiative-USAID; University Scholarship Program-USAID; and the Mastercard Foundation Scholars. These programs share a similar goal of developing a cadre of university-educated leaders who are civic-minded, intellectually able, and professionally skilled, who will become the community, business, and national leaders of the future. In , there were 175 students enrolled on full-scholarships offered through these programs. Table 4 provides an overview of the total funding, duration, and numbers of students served by these programs. Table 4: Multi-Year Scholarship Programs Funded by Large Grants Scholarship Program Total Funding Duration of Funding Students Supported USP (USAID) $18.2 M MEPI (USAID) $10.8 M Mastercard Foundation $9 M In 2011, AUB had been considering ways to expand access to student loans when the Banque du Liban announced a new student loan program. Previously, AUB restricted loans to students in a limited number of professional programs (engineering, architecture, medicine, nursing, and business).the interest rates were as high as eight percent, and the University served as guarantor and used to pay the interest of the loans while the student was enrolled at AUB. When the Banque du Liban announced the new student loan program to be administered by participating Lebanese banks, AUB changed its local loan program to the new Banque du Liban program at the interest rate of 3% in local currency where AUB would be the guarantor while the student pays the interest provided that the students are on financial aid. The University s main role is to provide the low interest rate loan only to pre-qualified students through its financial aid vetting process (Aid awards often depend on home visits to assess the family s circumstances in the absence of a robust income tax mechanism in Lebanon.) The loan system is designed so that loans do not exceed 30% above the grant amount, so that students are not overburdened with loans on graduation, and the loans can be paid over ten years after graduation. AUB s new strategic plan focuses on further increasing financial aid in order to provide deserving students with an affordable education. Increasing financial aid is also addressed in Section 6. Promoting regional and international diversity within the student body is also a major goal of the University and has been a challenge in recent years due to political instability in Lebanon and the region. With the establishment of the Office of International Programs and the adoption of study abroad policies, the number of exchange students has been increasing despite political instability. The number of incoming students increased from 120 in to 150 in (a 25% increase). The number of signed mobility agreements with international universities in Europe and North America has also been increasing. The number of active agreements divided by region is: 21 agreements with European institutions; 36 agreements with North American institutions; 7 agreements in the region; and 38 European partners in Erasmus Mundus student exchange projects. An ongoing effort is required to continue to increase international student enrollment and retention given challenges of regional and local political instability and increasing regional competition, but the creation of the OIP, increased efforts to retain freshman (most freshman are international students), and new niche graduate programs will support the University in attaining this goal. Clarified understanding of strategies and challenges for increasing international student enrollment articulated in the The Enrollment Management Strategic Planning Unit Report (Appendix D-2) will aid the University continuing to increase the regional/international diversity of the student body. AUB Periodic Review Report June

22 Carry out comprehensive assessment of graduate student satisfaction with the clarity and dissemination of admissions information; the application process; graduate and or graduate-research assistantships; and the overall graduate experience at AUB. (Recommendation 8.3.1; strategic priority) Graduate Task Force/Graduate Council In Spring 2010, the provost assembled a four-member Graduate Task Force (GTF) to revise and improve admissions, financial aid, and academic policies and procedures for the University s graduate students, and to prepare a proposal for the establishment of a Graduate Council to oversee their implementation. The task force included representatives of FEA, which has the University s largest Master s and PhD populations, and FAS, which is AUB s biggest faculty and the only other one offering doctoral degrees at that time. Some of the GTF s main accomplishments included: Revised Graduate Admissions Policy/Procedures: After thorough review, the GTF revised and standardized the graduate admissions policies of faculties/schools, including the graduate application process. A year later, all graduate applications and admissions processes were automated and made accessible through the University s website. Unified Graduate Academic Rules and Regulations: The GTF next looked at AUB s academic rules and regulations for graduate students to ensure that they were consistent across faculties/schools and accorded with the University s minimum requirements. The task force introduced clear definitions and revised course loads for full-time Master s students; procedures for change of major and transfer of credit; probation and dismissal rules; requisites for thesis and non-thesis options; comprehensive examinations; thesis proposal, committee, and defense regulations; and uniform graduation requirements. It also revised PhD program requirements for both regular and accelerated tracks; and unified the language and basic requirements for all doctoral programs, covering most of the areas mentioned in relation to Master s programs. After input from faculty deans and graduate studies committees, a revised draft of the new rules was sent to the Board of Graduate Studies and then approved by the Senate in January Graduate Financial Aid Policies: The GTF also reconsidered existing policies for graduate assistantships, graduate research assistantships, graduate fellowships, and the graduate work-study program. It drafted a proposal for the allocation of full-time GAs across academic units based on need, and suggested changes to appointment processes, deadlines, and compensation (monthly stipend) for GAs and GRAs. The University is exploring options for increasing financial support to graduate students. In , the University signed an agreement with the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research, which will partially support the stipends of eight PhD students for three years; the number of students is expected to increase to 24 in the next three-year cycle. The GTF s work culminated in the establishment of a permanent Graduate Council (GC) to oversee and implement the new graduate policies and procedures. 8 Shortly after its establishment, the GC commissioned a special graduate student survey from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment which was sent to over 1,100 graduate students across AUB s faculties/schools. The results of this survey have helped in setting the GC s goals, objectives, and initiatives for the next few years. The creation of the GC and its initiatives are another example of the use of assessment for process improvement and the assessment and resulting efforts are described in detail in Section Five. In brief significant accomplishments include the launching of the Graduate Council website which provides an easy point of access to information on program admissions and requirements, policies, support services 8 Although the 2008 Self-Study also recommended the creation of a School of Graduate Studies (Recommendation 8.3.2), the GTF concluded that AUB does not yet have the critical mass of graduate students needed to justify the move given the complexity of governance that it would create. AUB Periodic Review Report June

23 for graduate students, and other relevant topics; the establishment of an independent Graduate Student Society (GSS) and providing support for other student-led initiatives; revision of the GTF s graduate assistantship policy proposal; and collaborating with the GSS and relevant units to establish an annual calendar of events related to research, thesis writing, and advisor/advisee relations. E. Standard 1: Mission and Goals Ensure that faculty and departmental mission statements are aligned with the mission of the University. (Recommendation 1.3, prioritized) Updated Faculty/School, Department, and Unit-level Mission Statements As part of the second cycle of strategic planning in , faculties/schools reviewed and in some cases revised their mission statements. By June 2009, all FAS and FAFS departments developed mission statements aligned with the University mission as a result of the University s Learning Outcomes Initiative (For details about this Initiative see Section Five). Most mission statements are categorized as such and posted online, although some FAS and FEA departments provide mission statements for programs rather than the department as a whole. The Periodic Program Review (PPR) guidelines specify that external reviewers should assess the alignment of individual programs with the missions of the University, the faculty, and the department so as departments undergo the PPR process more work may be done regarding department missions. In approval process for new degree programs through the New York State Department of Education, faculty champions articulate the relevance of the program to serving the University s mission. Many, but not all, non-academic departments/offices have a mission statement posted online. The CTL conducted an audit to determine which departments have not yet published their departmental mission statements online. The Academic Assessment Unit, which also oversees the PPR process, now monitors and follows up on this inventory. F. Standard 6: Integrity Raise faculty, student, and staff awareness of policies that address discrimination and harassment and of existing procedures to handle grievances. (Recommendation 6.5; strategic priority) Institutional Integrity Policies In November 2012, the Board of Trustees (BOT) approved new university policies and procedures on discrimination, discriminatory harassment (including sexual harassment and violence), and faculty, staff, and student grievances. The new policies were drafted by a university-wide committee chaired by the Provost and with membership from all constituencies across the University and Medical Center. The policies were benchmarked against two regional and 10 US universities. 9 Lebanese and US legal counsel reviewed the draft texts, with the latter advising the addition of a Title IX coordinator to ensure that the University remained in compliance with US law. These grievance policies, which are posted on AUB s Policies and Procedures website, proceed from the University s Principles of Ethical Conduct and form the nucleus for a suite of related policies which include policies for: Non-Discrimination Policies Concerning Sexual & Other Discriminatory Harassment, Duality or Conflict of Interest, Safe Reporting, Research Integrity and Misconduct, Arbitration of Authorship Dispute, and the Privacy Policy on Electronic Communications & Files. The grievance policies differ from earlier discrimination, discriminatory harassment, and grievance policies and procedures by: Separating the policies on discrimination and discriminatory harassment, which are related, but recognizing that discriminatory harassment cases, and especially those involving sexual harassment, 9 The committee especially used the models of the University of Chicago, which emphasizes freedom of expression; Georgetown University, which has a well-developed ethical code; and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which has a strong ombuds program. AUB Periodic Review Report June

24 require immediate attention and the maximum possible confidentiality; additionally detaching the policies from the procedures. Establishing informal and formal mechanisms for the resolution of sexual and other forms of discriminatory harassment. Informal: Ombuds, complaint advisors. Formal: Title IX coordinator (with provision for deputy Title IX coordinators in other areas of the University, such as the Medical Center). 10 Taking an incremental approach to handling allegations of discrimination that encourages resolution at the lowest possible level of authority before appeal to the president. Strengthening transparency and accountability in all employee grievance procedures. Elaborating full grievance procedures for faculty members and expanding the list of grievable issues. (Previously a faculty member appealed directly to the president to contest violations of the provisions of the member s letter of appointment or of university regulations. ) Providing students, for the first time, with a formal grievance procedure that includes clear deadlines for administrative responses. Actions like these help to demonstrate AUB s commitment to ethics and integrity, qualities which students are encouraged to emulate. They clarify that ethics permeate all aspects of University life. In many majors, the curriculum includes classes on professional ethics. Students engaged in social, behavioral, or scientific research are required to adhere to the standards established by the Institutional Review Board. Changes in the Faculty of Medicine (FM)/AUBMC also reflect the University s commitment to integrity and ethical conduct. The Impact Curriculum recently developed by FM addresses a number of ethical issues. Since 2011, all AUBMC physicians (including FM faculty) must sign the revised AUBMC Medical Staff Code of Conduct (Appendix B-5). Finally in March of 2014, the VP/Dean for Medical Affairs appointed an Institutional Task Force on Professionalism at FM and AUBMC with the charge of defining specific reliable metrics for the assessment of professionalism in teaching, research, and clinical care, and mechanisms for implementing systems of reward and remediation to assure institution-wide adherence to our mission and policies. In addition to the policies described above, in the last five years over 35 policies have been developed for governance and accountability to help ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. (See Appendix A-5 for a list of these policies; many of these policies are highlighted in other sections of this report.) Develop specific mechanisms to monitor adherence to AUB policies and procedures. In particular develop the software necessary to track violations of the revised Student Code of Conduct. (Recommendation 6.1; prioritized) Monitoring Mechanisms The development of new policies and procedures and revision of existing ones to create more standardization across the University and clarity has made responding to this recommendation easier, although further action is needed. What follows is a partial list of mechanisms which exist to monitor adherence to AUB policies and procedures: Institutional Review Board (IRB): The IRB originally focused on biomedical research, was expanded to monitor social and behavioral research as part of a broader Human Research Protection Program launched in November The IRB continues to monitor and enforce HRPP/IRB compliance. 10 These positions have been created but have not yet been filled. AUB has open searches to recruit qualified individuals to fill these challenging positions AUB Periodic Review Report June

25 Research Integrity Policy and Procedures to Address Allegations of Research Misconduct was drafted by a Risk Reduction and Management Committee and approved in June New grievance policies and procedures approved in November 2012 (detailed above) for faculty, staff and students will help to identify instances of non-adherence to other policies/procedures and to reduce their frequency. While the staff procedures are similar to those previously posted, faculty now have broader coverage and students have their first formal grievance procedures (beyond the faculty-level petitioning system). Positions have been developed and recruitment is under way for an University Ombuds, who will have an informal role in the implementation of the new institutional integrity policies and procedures, and an Institutional Integrity Officer, who will function formally as AUB's Title IX coordinator (for discrimination, discriminatory harassment, and sexual violence cases) and also as the provost's representative/advisor on institutional integrity and other policies. In the meantime, the Office of the Provost coordinates with the Office of the President to handle grievances raised based on this policy. Regarding violations of the Student Code of Conduct, faculty/school documentation (letter to student, action taken) is now copied to the Registrar's Office, which keeps a record (although only suspension/expulsion goes on transcript). The Office of Student Affairs (OSA) does not receive copies in all cases, depending on the faculty/school. OSA informs the registrar and relevant dean of non-academic violations and records the data on Excel sheets. More needs to be done to improve the tracking process (such as developing the recommended software or a database, as well as appropriate training) while ensuring confidentiality (determining levels of access). The Safe Reporting ('Whistleblower') Policy facilitates the identification of misconduct while protecting the identity and confidentiality of the reporter. II. Significant Progress with Further Action Needed A. Standard 7: Institutional Assessment; Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal 11 Strengthen and expand assessment efforts at the institutional level (strategic planning, BSC, OIRA assessment survey cycle) to support the development of a comprehensive university-wide assessment plan. (Recommendation 7.1; prioritized) Institutionalize the process of reviewing and monitoring implementation of strategic plans in faculties and major administrative units. (Recommendation 2.3; prioritized) Section Five addresses in detail the University s accomplishments and work still to be done in response to this recommendation. In brief, AUB developed a 2009 Strategic Plan and is close to finalizing the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Based on the experience of monitoring and assessing accomplishment of strategic goals in the 2009 Strategic Plan, KPIs and an assessment plan for the 2014 Unified Strategic Plan are currently under development with a focus on reducing the number of KPIs and the complexity of the assessment process to improve accessibility and usability of assessment data. Across the University, administration, faculty and staff are devoting greater energy and attention to the future direction of the University and its units; the initiatives devised to achieve common goals; the scope and pace of progress meeting those goals; and the resources needed to ensure that outcomes meet expectations. The systematic use of assessment to improve institutional effectiveness has been built into the Periodic Program Review (PPR) process for departments and is being used to improve student services. The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) continues to regularly administer surveys and standard tests for assessment purposes that support both assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness. The Academic Assessment Unit (AAU) under the umbrella of the Office of the Provost is positioned to capitalize on successes in the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) 11 These standards are grouped because the prioritized recommendations overlap significantly. AUB Periodic Review Report June

26 Assessment and PPR processes to develop mechanisms for assessing institutional effectiveness in achieving AUB s mission and strategic goals on a broader scale as well as linking planning, assessment and budgeting, especially in academic units and administrative academic-support units. Currently there is an open search for the University s Chief Operating Officer and it is expected that the individual who is hired will develop mechanisms for assessing institutional effectiveness for administrative units. B. Standard 4: Leadership and Governance Review and update all University Bylaws periodically. (Recommendation 4.1) Unified Faculty Bylaws Extensive efforts by the Office of the Provost and deans resulted in the integration and approval of Unified Faculty Bylaws in November The provost spearheaded this process by integrating the individual faculty bylaws and then gathering feedback from deans and chairs. The final version was approved by the Board of Deans, votes of faculty members in the individual faculties, the Senate, and the Board of Trustees. These bylaws are updated based on approved recommendations to the Faculty Senate which are then approved by the Board of Trustees. They were most recently amended in June 2014 and March (The Unified Faculty Bylaws also address Recommendation 4.7) The new bylaws incorporated the following: The unification across faculties of the names of faculty committees reflecting their functions. The separation of undergraduate curricular and graduate curricular committees. The clarification of the roles of the provost and deans in academic budgeting processes. The development of new procedures for establishing new departments. Senate Bylaws The Senate Bylaws are updated based on approved changes such as recent changes related to General Education Program and the dissolution of the GE Committee (2013), changes to the functions and composition for the Board of Graduate Studies and faculty graduate studies committees (2011), and changed functions of the University Research Board (2009). Corporate Bylaws The Corporate Bylaws were last updated in Reinstate tenure with appropriate safeguards to meet the needs of both faculty and the University. (Recommendation 4.5, prioritized) Long Term Faculty Contracts / The Second Task Force on Tenure Although tenure has not been re-instated, new faculty appointment, reappointment, and promotion procedures (Appendix B-5) have resulted in long-term faculty contracts for many faculty members. The norm is 7 year contracts and some full professors have 10 year contracts; now more than 220 of all AUB faculty members have long term contracts. Academic tenure was first introduced at AUB in the 1930s and later suspended during the Lebanese civil war. In Spring 2006, the Academic Affairs Committee of AUB s Board of Trustees commissioned Dr. Charles M. Vest, president emeritus of MIT, to study and report on restoring tenure at the University. Dr. Vest endorsed the move and proposed two possible systems, classic tenure, which he favored for AUB, and rolling tenure. Later that year, President John Waterbury appointed a faculty Task Force to consider the same question, and to propose guidelines for implementation, including the transition of in-post faculty to the new system. The Task Force s recommendations were presented to the Senate for discussion in 2008 and subsequently set aside when it became clear that a consensus on the issues, particularly the process and criteria for granting tenure to full professors, was not possible at that time. AUB Periodic Review Report June

27 In Spring 2011, President Peter Dorman appointed a Second Tenure Task Force and charged it with answering three questions: 1) What is the rationale for reinstating tenure at AUB? 2) Assuming the argument for tenure is persuasive and the grounds compelling, how would a contemporary system of tenure be constructed at AUB? 3) How should such a system of tenure be implemented? The Task Force was also asked to consider the financial feasibility of a tenure system at AUB. The Task Force met regularly for two years, did extensive research and benchmarking, and conducted a survey of AUB faculty regarding opinions about tenure and aspects of implementation. In Fall 2013, the Task Force completed its report. (See Appendix B-6 for the charge and composition of the Second Tenure Task Force.) Subsequently discussions have been help with the Board of Trustees (BOT) and with the Board of Deans. Discussions of the proposal with faculty are planned for Re-instituting tenure at AUB will require significant vetting, buy-in, and approval by the faculty community and by the BOT. C. Standard 10: Faculty Provide better training for chairs on the critical issues of faculty development, annual evaluation, and promotion. (Recommendation ; prioritized) Chairs Manual and Related Policies The development and documentation of policies and procedures related to faculty and academic functions of the University are a major achievement of the last five years. (For more details see Policies and Procedures below). The accessibility of these policies and procedures online on the Provost Office website as well as in the evolving Chairs Manual (Appendix B-7) is a significant improvement in supporting chairs (the manual is being updated on a regular basis to reflect changes in policies and procedures). The Chair's Manual is seen as a valuable resource to guide chairs in all of their duties, including those related to faculty development, annual evaluation, and promotion. Other specific guidelines, specifically in relation to promotion, have been disseminated widely. The Unified Faculty Bylaws, approved in 2011, also have clear description of chair responsibilities. In addition chairs can now tap into overhead recovery of teaching buyout from grants to use the funding for department initiatives. The chair appointment and compensation policy approved in 2010 has brought equity in compensation and offered incentive for chairs (Appendix B-8). Formal chair training has not yet been implemented, but the graduate council, EMU efforts, and the training offered by AAU for preparing assessment reports has addressed many academic issues for empowering the chair. The PPR process has also helped the chair to follow up on department action plans derived from the PPR. Administrative Committees meet frequently and the chair has access to needed support via other faculty. The Chair position has a high turnover (the term is for 3 years renewed once), so many faculty have served as chair and serve as resources for new chairs. Take serious steps to promote bottom-up initiatives in faculties and programs. (Recommendation ; prioritized) Bottom-Up Initiatives The provost is committed to supporting bottom-up initiatives in faculties and programs and established an Empowering Departments initiative which relates to many of the points discussed above in regards to departmental chairs. The faculty role in shared governance is clearer now with new promotion guidelines, the Chair's Manual, the Unified Faculty Bylaws, and other new policies. The provost also has open door policy of meeting with faculty members upon request. Many of the new academic programs developed since 2010 have been faculty and/or department initiatives rather than coming from the faculties; to name only a few: BA Media and Communications, BE Industrial Engineering, MS in Orthodontics, and the MS in Health Research. The PPR process is conducted by departments, and results in action plans determined by departmental faculty and then approved by the dean and provost. A dual master s degree was initiated by the environmental studies AUB Periodic Review Report June

28 program at DUIP. In addition the split of the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences was initiated by departmental faculty. Finally, many faculty members are initiating and conducting high profile research, organizing large conferences, and engaging in significant outreach activities. Many of these efforts receive various forms of institutional support including funding from deans discretionary funds and from institutes and centers endowed funds. A few examples of research and outreach activities include the work of the AUB Tobacco Control Research Group (AUB -TCRG), the Aerosol Research Lab, and the Nature Conservancy Center. Section Three will discuss faculty input into the 2014 Strategic Plan. Examples of a few of the major conferences initiated by faculty in the recent years include: An International Conference on Human Rights and the Humanities, was organized by the Department of English in spring The Center for American Studies and Research (CASAR) hosts international conferences every other year, most recently the CASAR Fifth International Conference: Transnational American Studies in 2014 and the Fourth International Conference: Shifting Borders: America and the Middle East / North Africa in The first year of AUB s Arts and Humanities Initiative (AHI) culminated on May 2013, with a two-day conference entitled Beyond Liberalism and Islamism: Homage to Albert Hourani covering translation studies, the historiography of modern Arab thought, the relationship between liberalism and Islam, and the many debates centering on the idea of an Arab liberalism. An impressive array of scholars from the United States, Europe, and Lebanon participated in AUB: A Century and a Half, a conference organized by professors in the Department of History and Archaeology and the Department of Arabic and Near Eastern Languages, May The conference Big Data, Big Computing and the Oil Industry: Opportunities for Lebanon and the Arab World was held in December 2013 at AUB s engineering department in collaboration with the University College London and on the sidelines of a three-day oil and gas summit in Beirut. It brought together international experts from the energy and IT sectors to discuss the significance of complex and vast data sets that are becoming increasingly important for oil and gas exploration, as the world s easy oil sites dry up. The January 2014 conference organized by faculty in FHS for the Beirut launch of The Lancet Series: Health in the Arab World: a view from within consisting of publications produced by an interdisciplinary team of researchers from the region, under the leadership of the American University of Beirut, the Bir Zeit University and The Lancet. Annual Organic Chemistry Competition organized by a faculty member in the Department of Chemistry which showcases creative and stimulating approaches to classroom learningand provides opporunties for international connections in the field of Chemistry. AUB s 2011 Organic Chemistry Competition was the first of its kind in the world. E. Standard 13: Related Educational Offerings Encourage deans to support members of their faculties in the identification of REP projects that draw on their expertise, thus widening faculty involvement in REP activities. (Recommendation 13.1, prioritized) The Regional External Programs (REP) office consolidates the academic and professional experience of the University s faculty and staff to provide rigorous consulting and technical assistance throughout the Middle East and North Africa in agriculture/food sciences, business, education, engineering/ architecture, management consulting, and medical/health sciences. REP continues to encourage deans in individual and BOD meetings to assist in the identification of REP projects. REP contracts for internal consultants were initiated in September 2011 after consultation with the BOD. Contracts will clarify the scope of consultants' work and the person-days involved, and ensure that consultants are familiar with relevant AUB policies and procedures. Developments at REP in 2012 which encouraged deans to support faculty involvement in REP projects included: new policies that clarify limitations on consulting person-days for academic and non-academic staff and new electronic approval/monitoring/ AUB Periodic Review Report June

29 reporting systems for the president, provost, and deans on faculty involvement in REP projects. Reflecting positive results from these changes, REP reported that the number of AUB faculty involved increased from 37 to 71 in II. Some Progress with Further Responses Being Developed A. Standard 3: Institutional Resources Explore, in depth, the possibility of generating additional revenue by broadening continuing education programs to include evening and for-credit courses. This would improve the efficiency of facility utilization and further the achievement of AUB s educational mission to the broader community. (Recommendation 3.2, prioritized) Continuing Education for Revenue-Generation and Outreach Based on assessment of market needs, regional trends, and existing University strengths, AUB has adopted a multi-pronged approach to further the achievement of AUB s educational mission to the broader community over the last five years and in its future plans as outlined in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. This includes initiatives which are revenue generating, and others which are provided as outreach activities, as well as a mix of non-credit, certificate, and degree programs. Classes offered through these programs are scheduled during the week, in the evening, and on the weekend depending on the course and target audience. The primary avenues identified for providing education to the broader community include: The Continuing Education Center (including the University for Seniors established in 2010), which offered non-credit and diploma/certificate programs Executive Education offered as graduate degree programs through the faculties Future initiatives for e-learning which are in initial stages of exploration The mission of the Continuing Education Center (CEC) is to meet the lifelong educational and training needs of all learners in the local community and the region. Harnessing AUB resources in various fields of knowledge, CEC offers a variety of standard and customized certificate programs, non-credit courses, and workshops in Lebanon and the region. CEC aims to enhance professional and technical skills while addressing the needs for personal development and cultural enrichment. The CEC currently offers four diplomas in Human Resource Management, Marketing Management, Project Management, and Human Resource Management; and 11 certificates in Accounting Studies, Community Health Nursing, Critical Care Nursing, Essentials of Business, Financial Management, Interior Design, Leadership and Management in Nursing, Marketing Management, Nursing Informatics, Office Management, and Project Management. Faculties/schools also offer executive education masters. Currently the OSB offers an Executive MBA and FHS offers an Executive MS in Health Care Leadership. Other short-term non-credit executive/ continuing education is also offered by the OSB as well as FM; an executive program in Food Security is under development by FAFS. Faculties/schools are encouraged to pursue opportunities for developing revenue-generating executive education programs, but these must be initiated by faculty and deans in a bottom-up manner. An E-learning Task Force (e-tf) was established by the provost in 2013 to assess the implications and appropriateness of expanded e-learning at AUB (governance, accreditation, revenue models, potential market, technology platform, training). Such a move has the potential to meet the objectives mentioned in this recommendation among others. The e-tf includes representation from all faculties, the AUB librarian, and IT personnel. The e-tf is charged to develop an e-learning plan with costing including governance, accreditation, direct and indirect revenue models, and assessment of current and future e- markets. AUB Periodic Review Report June

30 Study ways to attract more research funding and other grants to the University. (Recommendation 3.1, strategic) Increasing External Research Funding Opportunities Increasing external research funding is a major priority for the University as described in Section Three. AUB s external research awards totaled $5.6 Million in 2009 and it reached close to $13.0 Million in AUB faces challenges in this domain because there are a number of sources of US research funding (e.g. NSF) that we are ineligible to apply for due to our location outside of the US. In addition to lobbying efforts through the Association of American International Colleges and Universities (AAICU) for legal changes that will make AUB eligible for more US governmental funding, AUB aggressively pursues funding from US programs for which we are eligible, local, regional, Canadian, and European sources. AUB faculty have been awarded large competitive grants from the US government. Despite its stated policy, NSF has awarded a grant of $150,000 in 2013 to a professor in FAS for a project titled Space- Time from the Spectral Point of View: Towards Quantum Gravity based on the impressive quality of the research proposal. Most recently, the American Food and Drug Administration and the National Institute of Health awarded a $2.1 million grant to AUB to study e-cigarettes. The five-year study is based on collaborative research by faculty members from the Departments of Mechanical Engineering, Health Promotion and Community Health, and Chemistry. In addition, NIH awarded a faculty member from the Faculty of Medicine a $431, grant for a project titled Capacity Building in Chronic Non-communicable Diseases and Disorders among Multidisciplinary Curriculum Based Interfaculty Approaches. The project started in , has duration of three years, and included seed funding and scholarships for the new MS and Certificate in Health Research (SHaRP Scholars in Health Research Program). AUB has also received many USAID grants for various projects. Although Lebanese government funding for research is scarce, the University has signed an agreement with the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research (LNCSR), which partially supports the stipends of 8 PhD students for three years; the number is expected to rise to 24 in the next 3-year cycle. Faculty members are applying for and receiving significant research funding from regional governmental and non-governmental sources. Most recently grants are awarded from Qatar National Research Funds to projects in engineering, agriculture, health, medicine, and management with partner institutions in Qatar. Other major research funding sources include the Canadian International Development Research Centre and the European Commission (EC) where its high-value grants are awarded to AUB in partnership with European and regional institutions. The provost and OGC are exploring and pursuing opportunities for AUB to tap into European research funding at a larger scale and are also contributing to the process through which research calls are defined. An additional strategy for pursuing research grants includes developing partnerships with other universities to apply for funding for joint projects, recent MOUs have been signed with American University of Cairo (with possibilities for collaboration in multiple fields of research) and UCL (with a focus on high performance computing and big data). Redouble Development Office efforts to secure funds needed to support the geographical and socio-economic diversity of students and the new PhD programs. (Recommendation 3.3, strategic) Increasing Financial Aid Increasing funding to support the geographical and socio-economic diversity of students and the new PhD programs has been and continues to be a major priority of the University. Major accomplishments on this front have been described earlier in this section including: In the last three years, AUB s annual financial aid awards from institutional resources have doubled to $26 million. AUB Periodic Review Report June

31 AUB secured major multi-year grants totaling $39 million to support full-scholarships and requisite academic support for economically disadvantaged students from across Lebanon and the region (see Table 4 on page 19). The Scholarship Initiative fundraising campaign conducted between 2009 and 2013 exceeded its target by $5.5million, raising $25.5 million. One of the key strategies is the creation of endowed scholarships, of which there are now 320. Six named PhD scholarships were established through the Development Office between the beginning of 2009 and July As described above, other support for PhD students has been secured from the Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research (LNCSR). Maintaining and increasing these types of financial aid are a major priority in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and the upcoming Capital Campaign; this is discussed more in Sections Three and Six. B. Standard 5: Administration Identify communication gaps within the AUB community and develop processes to eliminate them. Better mechanisms are required to improve overall communications between senior administrators, including deans, and faculty. The publication of summaries of BOD and Cabinet minutes might be helpful in this respect. (Recommendation 5.1.3) More than ever, the University administration is communicating with faculty in productive ways. This communication happens at multiple levels and includes the following: The administration sends regular s regarding pressing issues to all faculty. The president and provost organize town hall meetings in the faculties to discuss issues as varied as faculty contracts, IT, the University budget, and strategic planning. Other University administrators participate in these town hall meetings as appropriate. Administrators in addition to the president and provost present and participate in discussions in the Senate as appropriate or requested by the Senate. Faculty members are represented on task forces on pressing issues and search committees for administrative positions (current examples: Task Force on Faculty Compensation, CIO Search Committee, Tenure Task Force, Task Force on Students with Special Needs) The provost has an open-door policy for meeting with faculty members. Deans hold regular faculty meetings to discuss issues of importance Faculty/school strategic planning occurred in most cases through faculty meetings or retreats held by the deans The administration is committed to productive two-way communication with faculty members and will continue to engage with faculty and improve upon current mechanisms and practices. CONCLUSION This section has highlighted examples of the University s responses to prioritized recommendations from the 2008 Self Study. AUB s efforts to date demonstrate the University s commitment to the MSCHE standards of excellence. Initiatives in the Academic Strategic Plan 2014 (discussed more in Section Three) based on the recommendations will ensure further development and implementation of appropriate responses. Where work remains to be done, the findings are consistent with the nature of the recommendations, which often require long-term planning and monitoring, concerted action across academic and administrative units, and additional human or financial resources. AUB Periodic Review Report June

32 SECTION 3: MAJOR ACHIEVEMENTS, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES In the heart of a region in transition, and in light of rapidly changing global developments economic, technological, social, political, environmental, medical the American University of Beirut (AUB) understands that there are new imperatives for excellence in education, research, and service. The University currently faces internal and external challenges, as well as exciting opportunities. AUB is growing and evolving in response to these challenges and opportunities. The last five years represent a period of intense activity on the part of faculty, administrators, and staff to consolidate AUB s position as the leading liberal arts and research institution in the region; strengthen the requisite foundation of policies and governance/administrative structures; engage in assessment and strategic planning; and develop new academic, research, and outreach programs to meet regional/global challenges and market opportunities of our times. Before identifying the University s new and continuing strategic directions, an updated assessment of AUB s current status, strengths and vulnerabilities of the University, as well as current challenges and opportunities, was necessary. Strategic priorities were selected based on an assessment of strengths that can be built upon and areas in which AUB can and should build capacity because of strategic importance to the region and/or the fulfillment of the University s mission. Based upon these assessments, the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan was developed as the roadmap for navigating the identified challenges and opportunities (Appendix A-1). The four goals and related initiatives, as well as the critical enablers 12, each address challenges and opportunities identified in the strategic planning process. Table 5 provides an overview of the goals and critical enablers articulated in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Details about the inclusive and comprehensive strategic planning process that resulted in this plan are described in Section Five. See Appendix A-1a for a timeline of the strategic planning process and roster of the individuals and units involved. Table 5: Overview of Goals and Critical Enablers in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan Strategic Goals 1) Deliver a World Class Student Experience / Develop Critical Thinkers & Ethical Leaders 2) Create Knowledge & Advance Quality Research/Promote Interdisciplinarity & Innovation 3) Maximize Impact for Positive Change in the Region 4) Invest in the Health of the Community and the Arab World Critical Enablers Governance and Accountability Policies for governance and accountability help to ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. Operational Efficiency Best practices for organizational administration and staff development will be followed to ensure the effective and efficient operation of the University. Physical and IT Infrastructure Appropriate and up-to-date facilities and information technology capacity are required for effective 21 st century education, research, and administration. Strategic Budgeting The University budget model and process will utilize strategic planning and assessment to optimize resource allocation for fulfilling the institutional mission and achieving strategic objectives. The 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan will enable all members of the AUB community to play an active role in shaping the future of AUB and our region. Working towards this unified vision and investing University resources accordingly will enable AUB to sustain its regional leadership and contributions and achieve its aspirations for global excellence and impact. 12 Critical Enablers lay a necessary foundation for the achievement of the strategic goals. AUB Periodic Review Report June

33 I. Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses/Areas for Improvement AUB s most recent strategic planning process began at the level of units and faculties with internal assessment and benchmarking with regional and international universities. Evaluation of the implementation of the previous strategic plan, the results of the 2008 Self-Study, along with academic and institutional assessments such as Periodic Program Reviews provided an informed starting point for analysis and discussion. In parallel, The Office of the Provost engaged in benchmarking of AUB s international rankings and academic research profile with peer and aspirant regional and international universities to assess the University s status as well as accomplishments to date. (See appendix C-1 for benchmarking data.) The conclusion of the benchmarking exercise revealed that AUB is the leading university in the region with realistic aspirations to global excellence and impact. The primary reasons for AUB s regional leadership are the University s strengths that lie in the quality and research of its faculty, excellent professional education, and the liberal arts approach that has always been the foundation of education at AUB, and its dynamic and relevant educational programs and research with a focus on innovation and interdisciplinarity. These factors, coupled with AUB s location in Lebanon, have enabled AUB to continue to attract the brightest students in the region. These strengths are the foundation which will enable the University to weather external challenges; in the coming years, AUB will build upon these strengths to seize new opportunities to accomplish its mission to provide excellence in education, to participate in the advancement of knowledge through research, and to serve the peoples of the Middle East and beyond. Table 6 summarizes the University s primary strengths in relation to external challenges and opportunities. Table 6: AUB s Primary Strengths in Relation to External Challenges and Opportunities Strengths Position as Regional Leader & Global Competitor in Higher Education Quality Faculty & Research Impact Strong Professional Education Legacy & Liberal Arts Foundation/Commitment to Free Thinking & Critical Inquiry Location in Lebanon Dynamic & Relevant Education & Research/Focus on Innovation & Interdisciplinarity Continuing Ability to Attract Brightest Students in the Region Many of the strengths and weaknesses, or areas for improvement, identified during the strategic planning process at the level of units and faculties/schools relate primarily to the four Critical Enablers which have been identified as necessary to optimally fulfill the University s mission and achieve strategic goals: Governance and Accountability, Operational Efficiency, Physical and IT Infrastructure, and Strategic Budgeting. Policies for governance and accountability help to ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. AUB s solid foundation in the critical enabler of governance and accountability represent one of AUB s major achievements in the last five years and is discussed at the end of this section as well as in Section Two. Strengths and weaknesses in relation to the other critical enablers are discussed in other sections of the PRR. Operational efficiency requires that best practices for organizational administration and staff development are followed to ensure the effective and efficient operation of the University and is discussed throughout the PRR. Physical and IT infrastructure expresses the reality that appropriate and up-to-date facilities and information technology capacity are required for effective 21st century education, research, and administration and is discussed in Sections Four and Five. Strategic budgeting refers to the importance of a University budget model and process that utilizes strategic planning and assessment to optimize resource allocation for fulfilling the institutional mission and achieving strategic objectives and is discussed in Section Six. Table 7 summarizes AUB s strengths and areas for improvement in relation to the four critical enablers. AUB Periodic Review Report June

34 Critical Enabler Governance and Accountability Operational Efficiency Physical and IT Infrastructure Strategic Budgeting Table 7: AUB s Strengths and Areas for Improvement in Relation to Critical Enablers Strength Solid foundation of policies and procedures Increasing levels of shared governance Creation of Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and unit-level strategic plans for faculties/schools; Academic Support; Enrollment Management & Student Support;& Centers, Museums, & Institutes; AUBMC 2020 Systematic assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness at the program/departmental level Increased faculty recruitment Physical Over 65 buildings, including new state-of-the-art facilities for FEA, OSB, athletics, research centers; upgraded heritage buildings Medical Center Specialized labs in sciences, engineering and medicine 5 libraries with extensive collections 14 3 museums and 2 art galleries 60.9 acre campus; 247 acre research farm and educational facility IT New high performance computing cluster Academic IT committee 15 E-learning initiatives and task force ACPS/CTL Initiatives to integrate new learning technologies Current academic and AUBMC strategic plans Alignment of academic capital budget with assessment Alignment of fundraising with strategic priorities Areas for Improvement (Vulnerabilities in Facing External Challenges) Monitoring of implementation of policies and procedures and ensuring policy consistency Differentials in University-wide application of shared governance Inhibitors to interdisciplinary education and research 13 Ad hoc rather than systematic assessment of institutional effectiveness in administrative units and at the level of faculties/schools Recruitment and development of specialized staff for units such as labs, library, IT, comptroller, communications, and grants and contracts Incentives and staff development plans to encourage professional growth High turnover in leadership of some administrative units Physical Limited space for growth Reaching capacity in student learning and study spaces Upgrades and expansion to student/faculty housing options needed Power plant needs upgrading (coupled with daily 3-hour electrify outages across Beirut. 16 ) Need for common facilities for cross-faculty interaction IT Limited internet bandwidth country-wide Need for fully integrated ERP (Enterprise) system, including Banner IT solutions to support assessment-based planning and decision-making Matching IT capacity to needs of research university and medical center Tuition dependency/lack of alternative revenue streams Budget model and process Resource allocation for student services is low compared to peers 13 The inhibitors and the actions taken to diminish them are described at the end of this section in Solid Foundation of Policies and Procedures 14 See Appendix C-3 for more details about Library Resources 15 Committee coordinates and prioritizes academic IT project requests from faculties, chaired by Associate Provost composed of associate deans, CIO, relevant IT managers. 16 The Lebanese government does not have the capacity to provide 24-hour electricity country-wide. AUB Periodic Review Report June 2014

35 II. Strengths and Achievements This section provides a more detailed explanation of the University s primary strengths which are not discussed elsewhere in the PRR. AUB s strengths that will enable the University to face current challenges and successfully fulfill its mission and strategic goals in the coming years including AUB s position as the regional leader and global competitor in higher education, quality faculty and research impact, strong professional education, and legacy and liberal arts foundation which is intricately ties to its commitment to free thinking and critical inquiry, and location in Lebanon. All of these strengths contribute to the final strength which is that AUB continues to attract the brightest students in the region. Some of these strengths are the result of major achievements of the University in the last five years and/or efforts to improve on weaknesses related to the critical enablers. Many of the University s current strategic priorities build upon these successes to lead AUB to new levels of excellence. A. Position as Regional Leader and Global Competitor in Higher Education AUB is widely recognized as the leading academic institution of the region. AUB has emerged as a regional leader in international rankings, faculty productivity, and research quality and impact in the past decade. AUB is one of the highest rated universities in the Arab world and is in the top 15% of all international universities assessed by the QS 2013 World University Rankings. AUB faculty productivity and the impact of their published research have more than doubled in the last ten years, outpacing all other universities in the Arab world. Today, AUB leads the region in American-style higher education and quality research; its peers are now global. (See Appendix C-1 for detailed benchmarking data.) To maintain its standing as the regional university of choice, AUB is continually working to enhance students learning experience. Recent efforts have focused on ensuring academic excellence, curricular innovation, improving student services, and increasing opportunities for student exchange and international collaboration. AUB Periodic Review Report June

36 Academic Excellence, Curricular Innovation, and Improving Student Services AUB has introduced processes for continuous review, assessment and improvement of its academic programs (See Section Five), increased choice and flexibility in it educational offering; and is strengthening the liberal arts foundation in its undergraduate curricula. Many of the efforts to improve the student experience at AUB have been in response to 2008 Self Study recommendations and resulted in establishing new academic support units to improve undergraduate and graduate student services. These include: 1) the Enrollment Management Unit which is coordinating efforts to upgrade all student services from admissions, registration, student orientation, advising, to career services; 2) the Graduate Council which is facilitating graduate student recruitment and services. Increasing opportunities for student exchange and international collaborations In addition, the University introduced new policies and procedures to facilitate student exchange opportunities for incoming international students and outgoing AUB students interested in study abroad for a semester or a year. In 2010, the Office of International Programs was created. Since then, the number of AUB outgoing students has increased from less than 10 students per year to more than 100 per year not including nearly 100 students who study abroad during summer. AUB currently has over 100 active agreements with institutions across the globe to facilitate international exchange and collaboration. B. Quality Faculty and Research Impact The University s faculty members are productive, dedicated, and high quality by international standards. AUB is committed to undergraduate education and teaching excellence by faculty who are active researchers. The University s faculty and physicians have been and continue to be among the leading professionals and thinkers of the region, producing cutting-edge and quality research focused on regional issues. Our research and education are closely united. Faculty members teaching is informed by their research; when engaged in relevant research faculty stay at the cutting edge of their fields and are more energized to teach. University and external support for maintaining labs, technology, and facilities research activities enhances the student learning environment. Finally, a vibrant research environment serves as an advantage in attracting more top quality faculty to the University. In the past five years, AUB has reached a record high in recruitment of top faculty for campus and the medical center. The student to faculty ratio is now 11.2:1, down from 13:1 in On campus alone (not including the medical center/fm), the number of full time faculty has increased by 20% since In comparison to other Arab universities, AUB faculty members have the highest research productivity as measured by publication count per faculty member per year, citation count per paper, and h-index (research impact). The number of refereed research papers published by AUB faculty per year more than doubled over the past decade (Scopus Data Base) from 423 in to 938 in 2013, while AUB faculty members increased by 30 percent from 392 in to 543 in AUB has a better 2013 QS World Ranking (250) than some U.S. peers, however, all US peers have higher citations per faculty. Factors that affect this datum include the fact that the U.S. peers have more full-time faculty, larger student bodies, and higher graduate-to-undergraduate student ratios than AUB. (See Appendix C-1 for detailed benchmarking data.) AUB s research profile has been steadily improving as measured by external research awards, research expenditures, joint papers published by AUB faculty with faculty from international institutions, and PhD program enrollment. Sponsored research activity has been increasing at AUB in all faculties. (See Appendix C-2 for details on research expenditures at the faculty level.) Total external research awards reach around $14 Million in 2013 compared to $5.8 Million in International research collaboration, measured by number of co-authored papers with authors from institutions outside of Lebanon, has increased as demonstrated by the chart on the following page. AUB Periodic Review Report June

37 Number of Papers Published Jointly by AUB Faculty and Authors from International Institutions Us & Canada Eurpean Union Arab Countries Local Rest of the World Creating a critical mass of graduate students, especially doctoral students, is key to increasing research productivity and quality. With its PhD programs in place for six years since their re-introduction in 2008, the University is reinforcing its position as a research institution. In , the overall PhD student count at AUB was 27; today it is close to 100 students. Current PhD programs at AUB are Arabic Language and Literature; Arab and Middle Eastern History; Cell and Molecular Biology; Civil Engineering; Electrical and Computer Engineering; Environmental and Water Resources Engineering; Mechanical Engineering; Theoretical Physics; Biomedical Sciences (concentration in Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics; Cell Biology of Cancer; Microbiology and Immunology; Neurosciences Program; Nutrition; Pharmacology and Toxicology; Physiology). Forthcoming PhD programs include Biomedical Engineering (under review); Chemistry (under review). C. Strong Professional Education AUB is renowned for its professional education with 5 strong professional schools and faculties, all of which have earned accreditation for some or all programs 17, and its superior medical school and medical center. In terms of student interest, AUB reflects a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine) profile. The majority of the University s students major in the sciences, engineering, architecture and business. Also favored are programs in Arts and Sciences that are often viewed as being more career-oriented such as biology, chemistry, computer science and economics. Established in 1867, the Faculty of Medicine (FM) has trained generations of medical students and physicians. Since it opened in 1902, the AUB Medical Center (AUBMC) has served countless individuals and families in times of war and peace. The Medical Center has three accreditations. Today, FM s ambitious research efforts are helping to transform the medical field. Established in 1905, the first of its kind in Lebanon and the Middle East, the Rafic Hariri School of Nursing (HSON) has a long history of serving Lebanon and the region through nursing education and health care. It continues to set regional trends in nursing education, practice, and research though its example and regional consulting to help establish Colleges of Nursing and develop the nursing workforce. The first of its kind in the region, the Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) was established in 1954 as the School of Public Health. The faculty trains professionals who promote health and wellbeing as change agents, advocates, researchers, and leaders of health care institutions. Many FHS research activities are 17 See Appendix A-3 for a list of AUB s institutional and program accreditations. AUB Periodic Review Report June

38 interdisciplinary and community-based to ensure relevance and real-world impact. An active collaborator regionally and internationally, FHS serves as a hub for research and dialogue on health in the Arab world and is playing an increasingly strategic role in assessing regional health problems and developing evidence-based policy solutions. Alumni and faculty members of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture (FEA) have literally shaped the region since the mid-20 th century serving as the lead engineers, builders, and architects in Lebanon, the Gulf, and beyond during this crucial phase of physical and economic development in the Middle East. The faculty is now poised to guide the next generation of regional development and scientific innovation as it ventures into information technology, energy resource management, environmental engineering, and biomedical engineering. Established in 1952, the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences (FAFS) has trained a far-reaching cadre of agricultural experts from Pakistan and Afghanistan to Morocco and the Maldives. FAFS continues to shape agricultural practice in the region, while introducing educational programs that respond to global issues arising at the nexus of food, nutrition, and the environment such as food science, nutrition and dietetics, agribusiness, landscape architecture, ecosystem management, and rural community development. After providing business education for over a hundred years, in 2000 AUB established an independent School of Business. The Suliman S. Olayan School of Business (OSB) has quickly built a reputation as a premier business school and graduates approximately 350 students from its undergraduate program and 60 students from its graduate programs every year. In , its MBA program was ranked first in Eurasia and Middle East by Eduniversal. OSB educates the business leaders of tomorrow and enhances the skills of the business leaders of today through its Executive MBA and continuing education programs. Building on a strong foundation of education and research tailored to the needs of the region, OSB is now striking out in the fields of finance, human resources, family business, and entrepreneurship. D. Legacy and Liberal Arts Foundation; Commitment to Free Thinking and Critical Inquiry The liberal arts educational model that combines general education in fundamental skills and knowledge with specialized training remains the foundation of an AUB education. Chartered in New York State in 1863, the University bases its educational philosophy, standards, and practices on the American liberal arts model of higher education. The University believes deeply in and encourages freedom of thought and expression and seeks to foster tolerance and respect for diversity and dialogue. Excerpted from AUB Mission Statement With curriculum and values that were originally modeled on American liberal arts colleges, AUB s distinction lies in the transformative nature of its educational program to develop students minds and characters. This liberal arts foundation is not matched by any educational institution in the region. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS), AUB s oldest faculty, embodies the University s core commitment to the liberal arts and sciences. It provides the foundation for general education to all AUB students, and offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in the arts, humanities, and social, natural, and mathematical sciences. The faculty is dedicated to advanced research in all of these domains as well as interdisciplinary fields in response to regional and global needs or to human curiosity and imagination. At this critical historical moment in the Middle East, FAS is well positioned to engage with contemporary issues in ways that resonate far beyond the campus walls. As described in Section Two, the successful implementation of a comprehensive General Education (GE) Program in the last five years lies at the heart of AUB s commitment to providing its undergraduate students with a rigorous curriculum in a liberal education model. AUB students are AUB Periodic Review Report June

39 exposed to both an in-depth learning experience in their chosen field of specialization as well as a breadth of knowledge in an array of intellectual experiences. The GE Program is that part of the curriculum which provides all AUB undergraduate students with fundamental skills and knowledge that should nurture their intellectual growth and guide them to become knowledgeable and well-informed graduates. General education at AUB provides students with essential skills in research and communication, familiarity with significant modes of thought and broad exposure to fields of learning in a diversity of areas cultural, societal, and scientific so that they better learn to think critically and analyze intellectual and social issues in their historical and contemporary contexts from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, and thereby, to enrich their lives by fostering problem solving skills and promoting life-long learning, in a program that embraces the principles of student choice and active learning. The GE Program achieves these aims through an assortment of over 400 general education courses from which students fulfill their GE requirements that nurture their intellectual growth as critical thinkers. In addition to the revitalized GE Program, AUB has undertaken a number of initiatives in support of the arts and humanities to provide unique opportunities for broadening students perspectives including: The Farouk K. Jabre Center for Arabic and Islamic Science and Philosophy was established in 2012 with the mission to support research on Arabic and Islamic science and raise awareness about these fields through outreach and education. The Arts and Humanities Initiative (AHI) was initiated in 2012 by a three-year $735,000 grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to integrate faculty development with curricular innovation in humanistic disciplines. The provost appointed an Arts and Humanities Initiative Committee, chaired by Prof. Maher Jarrar. AHI supports visiting professors, faculty fellows and, and postdoctoral fellowships. AHI also holds conferences and debates on a variety of related topics. Two AUB Art Galleries have been opened since Exhibitions are now regularly opened in these newly created spaces. Community Engagement Enhancing Liberal Arts Education Community engagement opportunities at AUB support the development of ethical leadership in its students and broaden their perspectives. All faculties and schools at AUB engage in outreach activities. Three independent units provide additional opportunities for the University community to engage with to communities outside the gates. With the establishment of the Center for Civic Engagement and Community Service (CCECS) AUB formalized its long standing commitment to public service. Early CCECS programs focused on campus-wide and local issues including help for disabled students and computer renovation for NGOs. The Community Development Unit (CDU) within the CCECS, engages students in rehabilitation projects with a tangible impact. The CDU has taken the lead in responding to the Syrian Refugee Crisis working with faculty and students from across the University, as well as with donors and NGOs to coordinate the design and construction of water and sanitation facilities and school rooms for refugee communities among other projects. Initiatives like the tree planting program of the Nature Conservation Center (NCC) have contribute to reforestation of villages all over Lebanon while raising awareness of the importance of conserving Lebanon s natural heritage. The AUB Neighborhood Initiative was established by the president in 2007 to mobilize AUB resources, especially its intellectual resources, for the public good, starting in the university s back yard. The Neighborhood Initiative has established the University for Seniors and developed seminal plans to improve the local environment such as the reconfiguration of Jeanne D Arc Street and the Ras Beirut Noise Map to measure noise levels and lobby for improvement. AUB s legacy is embodied by alumni who have had a broad and significant impact on the region and the world as political leaders, diplomats, intellectuals, physicians, business people, builders, and practitioners in all sectors of society. AUB alumni exemplify the values that AUB seeks to instill in its graduates: a commitment to creative and critical thinking, life-long learning, personal integrity, civic responsibility, and leadership. AUB Periodic Review Report June

40 E. Location in Lebanon Founded 150 years ago, AUB has shaped and been shaped by Lebanon, the region, and its people. AUB s commitment to intellectual freedom and respect for diversity is rooted in fertile ground in one of the most open and diverse countries in the region. In comparison to other regional institutions, AUB has a relative advantage that enables constructive dialogue and collaborative knowledge production related to the enormous transformations and the social and political challenges faced by the region. AUB is perceived as politically neutral locally and regionally and has excellent relations with all political leaders Lebanon, as well as excellent international relations. AUB faculty members are engaged in public policy development and frequently assume high profile political positions as officials and advisors in the government (in neutral capacities or as individuals with personal political inclinations from the diverse spectrum of Lebanese politics). In addition, the central and attractive location of AUB in a cosmopolitan and culturally rich neighborhood on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea in Beirut, is appealing to students and faculty; especially those with family connections in Lebanon or an interest in regional issues. F. Dynamic and Relevant Educational Programs and Research with a Focus on Innovation and Interdisciplinarity AUB s academic excellence is reflected in its current, and dynamic, new educational programs that respond to regional and international market needs and societal challenges. Many of these programs are interdisciplinary reflecting the complexity of global challenges (See Appendix A-6 for brief descriptions of selected interdisciplinary programs). Table 8: Dynamic and Relevant Educational Programs Introduced Since 2008* * Program has been approved, but will be launched in Bachelor s Degrees BE Industrial Engineering* BLA Landscape Architecture BS Medical Audiology Sciences* BS Medical Imaging Sciences BA Media Communications BS Agribusiness BS/BE Chemical Engineering BS Construction Engineering Doctoral Degrees (PhD) Arab and Middle Eastern History Arabic Language and Literature Biomedical Sciences Biomedical Engineering* Cell and Molecular Biology Civil Engineering Electrical & Computer Engineering Environmental and Water Resources Engineering Mechanical Engineering Theoretical Physics Masters Degrees ME Biomedical Engineering* MS/ME Chemical Engineering MA Clinical Psychology MS Construction Engineering MS Energy Studies* ME Applied Energy MS Finance MS Health Research MA Human Resource Management MA Islamic Studies* MA Media Studies (thesis and non-thesis) MA Middle Eastern Studies (non-thesis) MS Orthodontics* MA Public Policy and International Affairs* MS Rural Community Development* MA Transnational American Studies Executive MS in Health Care Leadership* These new programs reflect a change in paradigm for education towards interdisciplinarity; several of the newly launched degrees are interdisciplinary or offered jointly between two or more faculties. The Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) and the Faculty of Medicine (FM) are jointly offering the following degrees to develop the healthcare workforce and prepare students for employment where market needs exist: BS in Medical Imaging Sciences, BS in Medical Audiology Sciences, and a BS in Medical AUB Periodic Review Report June

41 Laboratory Sciences. FM, FHS, the Hariri School of Nursing, and the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences collaborate to offer the MS and Certificate in Health Research Program (SHaRP) whose mission is "To provide superior didactic education complemented with state-of-the-art interactive and practical training in health research, with a focus on non-communicable diseases research. It is intended for physicians and other health care professionals, to improve and advance the health care agenda for non-communicable diseases in Lebanon and the region". The newly established Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs (DUIP) has launched two new master s degrees: MS in Energy Studies and MA in Public Policy and International Affairs. The MS inenergy Studies involves three faculties (FAS, FEA, and OSB) and offers a professional master's program integrating engineering and science with policy, economic and other social science research perspectives to train the next generation of energy leaders. While the Public Policy and International Affairs program will fill an important and timely regional gap at times of acute political and economic change, it will also be enriched with the support and resources of the endowed Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs. The new MA in Islamic Studies is a timely interdisciplinary program offered by the Center of Arab and Middle Eastern Studies and is supported by faculty from different disciplines within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. The MA in Media Studies and BA in Media and Communications are yet another example of offering majors to meet job market demand. The offering of BE in Industrial Engineering and MS in Chemical Engineering is a direct response to emerging market needs associate with the potential expansion of the oil and gas sector in Lebanon. Even the MS in Orthodontics is a response to job market forces. The creation of these programs demonstrate the University s commitment to provide education both to address changing market needs and regional challenges. Opportunities for Relevant, Innovative, and Interdisciplinary Research The University establishes and supports Research Centers of Excellence, including interdisciplinary research centers, as part of its strategy to develop quality research of relevance, including: Munib and Angela Masri Institute of Energy and Natural Resources Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs (IFI) Farouk K. Jabre Center for Arabic and Islamic Science and Philosophy Darwazah Center for Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship Center for Research on Population and Health (CRPH) Center for American Studies and Research (CASAR) Nature Conservation Center (NCC) Center for Advanced Mathematical Sciences (CAMS) Center for Arab and Middle Eastern Studies (CAMES) In addition to the above, AUBMC s Clinical and Research Centers of Excellence include: Abu-Haidar Neuroscience Institute (AHNI) Children's Cancer Center of Lebanon (CCCL) Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Center Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute (NKBCI) Sustaining existing centers and establishing new ones is a strategic priority in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. AUB Periodic Review Report June

42 G. Ability to Attract the Brightest Students in the Region Based on the core strengths described above, AUB continues to attract best and brightest students from Lebanon and the region. Despite political instability in Lebanon and regionally in recent years, international student population has remained between 25 to 28% of the total population. The number of undergraduate applications received annually has increased by almost 1,000 from 4,434 in 2009 to 5,344 in AUB s admissions practices are intended to ensure the diversity of the student body without sacrificing quality. The high quality of undergraduate applicants is reflected in the fact that roughly one-third of new sophomores (the largest category of entering students) reporting school ranks in had placed in the top tenth of their classes during two of their last three years of secondary school, with 86% in the top half or above. Undergraduate retention has been stable and strong, near 93% for all undergraduates; 86% for entering freshman and 96% for entering sophomores, which is high compared to U.S. peers. H. Governance and Accountability Policies for governance and accountability help to ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. Shared governance structures support the long term health of the institution and improve faculty satisfaction in their work environment. During the past five years, AUB has reformed and created more than 35 policies to strengthen the capacity and role of the faculty; to introduce university-wide initiatives to support graduate education and interdisciplinary programs; and to streamline institutional and program assessments (Appendix A-5). These policies will enable the University to move towards its strategic goals. Academic Governance of Interdisciplinary Education and Research Programs One major governance change initiated by the University in the last five years was the creation of the Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs (DUIP) in The DUIP was a result of recommendations made by a Task Force on Interdisciplinary Programs composed of faculty engaged in interdisciplinary research or serve in interfaculty committee for the Environmental Science Graduate Program. This committee was established by the provost in 2010 in response to the following internal inhibitors identified by faculty: governance and funding structures are bound by the traditional disciplines territories and policies; and faculty participation in and contribution to interdisciplinary research and education programs as well as to centers activities are not recognized by departments and do not lead to a reduction in the workload. The DUIP supports existing interdisciplinary programs as well as new ones that have been developed and approved within and across faculties/schools such as the MS in Energy Studies Program and the MA in Public Policy and International Affairs Program. In addition to essential governance reforms, incentives and recognition for activities which strengthen the capacity of the University have been provided to its centers, institutes, and museums, to foster interdisciplinary research and programs; and which encourage more faculty and administrators to endorse and promote interdisciplinarity. Building the administrative capacity to support this initiative has been pursued at the same pace as academic development. DUIP is a University-wide degree-granting body headed by a director who reports to the provost. It has an independent cost center and budget. The process followed to create the DUIP resulted in buy in from faculties and deans to encourage and promote interdisciplinarity with the result of numerous new interdisciplinary programs being established. To address some of the challenges related to interdisciplinary research centers, a governance structure for centers and institutes has been implemented, which includes the appointment of a steering committee for each center and institute to advise on resource allocation and activities and to function as the governing body of the center. AUB Periodic Review Report June

43 Faculty Policies AUB s advancement in university research profile is due to efforts in providing and facilitating research support and focusing on improving contractual conditions of the faculty from the previously typical three-year contract to seven- and ten-year contracts for the ranks of professor and associate professor. Since implementation of revised faculty promotion and reappointment policies in 2010, the number of AUB faculty at the rank of professor increased from a handful of faculty in 2009 to 120 faculty members in fall while the number of associate professors on long term contracts increased from none in 2009 to 61 faculty members out of the 109 associate professors. The next step needed is the reinstatement of tenure as it is essential for sustained critical inquiry and encourages faculty to make a long term investment in the University. As discusses in Section 2 a tenure proposal has been developed and is under discussion and review by the BOD and BOT. The following list briefly describes policies relating to faculty which were developed or revised since 2008: Revised promotion policies approved by BOT in November 2009 which included the creation of a candidate promotion committee to analyze file and evaluate scholarship. Faculty reappointment policies were approved in November 2010 including offering long term contracts. By 2012, 35% of the faculty have seven year contracts. This policy of offering long-term contracts to associate and full professors has been well-received by faculty. Guidelines for recruitment and new appointments were approved by the BOD in March 2013 introducing a transparent process for recruitment and voting by secret ballot. The provost developed templates for recruitment, reappointment, and promotion files that were reviewed and approved by the academic deans. The templates provide greater uniformity in the type and organization of material included in these dossiers. In addition, the faculty recruitment process has been improved with one AUB faculty member external to the program sitting on search committees. The Faculty of Medicine s revised its policy on academic tracks, appointments, and promotions in Chair appointment, compensation, and evaluation policy implemented in October 2011 introduced equitable compensation to chairs through administrative allowance and limited the chair terms to two terms to ensure rotation of leadership. Faculty development (travel to conferences) policy was introduced in October 2011 The Unified Faculty Bylaws adopted in 2011 to codify the organization of faculties; the makeup of faculty committees; and all policies and procedures governing academic affairs in faculties/schools. A key consideration in developing the Unified Faculty Bylaws was to observe shared governance values and transparent decision making. Signing Authority and Academic Titles Matrix (Approved March 2010) Policy on Arbitration of Authorship Disputes (Approved June 2013) Institutional Integrity Policies: The University policy on Research Integrity and procedures to address allegations of research misconduct approved in June A new Institutional Integrity policy, including principles of ethical conduct, and policies and procedures to address harassment allegations and grievances (Approved November 2012). Policies That Promote Academic Excellence and Improve Students Educational Experience A number of policies have been revised or developed to promote curricular excellence and innovation, including: The Periodic Program Review was introduced in October 2010 to promote and maintain high quality undergraduate and graduate programs that are effective and consistent with the mission and resources of the departments and the University. AUB Periodic Review Report June

44 The unified University Graduate and PhD Admissions and Academic Policies were introduced in 2010 and 2011 which are consistent across degree programs and in alignment with the requirements of the NY State Department of Education and the Lebanese Ministry of Higher Education. The creation of the Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs (DUIP) in June The DUIP will provide a responsive environment for developing and supporting current and new interdisciplinary graduate programs and interdisciplinary research. General Education Program requirements were revised in September 2011, at the start of the third year of the new GE program, the number of GE-designated courses reached 400. This program ensures that our students obtain the depth and breadth of knowledge that are the hallmarks of a liberal arts education. Policies and procedures on double major and dual degree were introduced in These policies aim to prepare students with multiple skills that broaden their experience and increase their employability. A University committee was established to advise on and monitor application of English Language Proficiency Requirements. Policies for governance and accountability help to ensure academic excellence, improve students educational experience, facilitate academic governance and administration, and promote institutional integrity. This foundation of policies has already helped in institutionalizing means for ensuring the University s fulfillment of its mission and strategic goals. III. External Challenges and Opportunities The strategic planning process that resulted in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan identified new external challenges and promising opportunities in the rapidly changing social, economic, technological, and political environment in the region and globally. The 2008 Self-Study identified internal challenges faced by the University at that time which are reflected in the 2008 Self-Study recommendations. Section Two described these recommendations, their underlying challenges, and the University s achievements in responding to them, thus demonstrating progress to date in addressing these internal challenges. This section will focus on the external challenges and opportunities newly identified through the University s most recent strategic planning process. Global and regional realities affect the University s operations; its immediate constituencies of students, faculty, and staff; as well as the peoples of the Middle East and beyond whom the University s mission impels AUB to serve. To face each of these challenges, the University has identified its relevant strengths and weaknesses and (without being opportunist or callous) conceived ways these challenges provide opportunities to improve AUB s fulfillment of its educational, research, and service mission as it addresses these challenges internally and externally as articulated in its 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. The tables on the following pages outline three major external challenges of our times; how these challenges affect the University and its constituents; existing strengths that enable AUB to face these challenges; University vulnerabilities in facing the challenge; and opportunities created by these challenges to improve AUB s mission fulfillment. AUB Periodic Review Report June

45 Table 9: Local and Regional Political Instability and Conflict External Challenge: Effect on AUB and Its Constituencies: University Strengths in Facing Challenge: University Vulnerabilities in Facing Challenge: Opportunities Created for Mission Fulfillment Which Are Addressed by 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan: Local and Regional Political Instability and Conflict 1) This negatively affects faculty, international student, and upper administration recruitment. 2) This negatively affects the economy (economy addressed in Table X). 3) Regional trauma of war, conflict, displacement. The following strengths will aid the University in recruiting students and faculty despite local and regional political instability and conflict: Position as Regional Leader & Global Competitor in Higher Education Quality Faculty & Research Impact Strong Professional Education Continuing Ability to Attract Brightest Students in the Region The following strengths enable the University to play a positive regional role through education, research, and outreach in this context: Legacy & Liberal Arts Foundation/Commitment to Free Thinking & Critical Inquiry Dynamic & Relevant Education & Research/Focus on Innovation & Interdisciplinarity Recruitment and development of specialized staff for units such as labs, library, IT, comptroller, communications, and grants and contracts Incentives and staff development plans to encourage professional growth High turnover in non-academic administrative leadership Upgrades and expansion to student/faculty housing options needed Tuition Dependency/lack of alternative revenue streams Goal 3: Maximize Impact for Positive Change in the Region Goal 4: Invest in the Health of the Community and the Arab World Although we wish our region did not have to face this challenge, this challenge also poses as an opportunity to instigate the development of new educational programs, research, and outreach efforts to address the myriad effects in our regional context, a few select examples include: MA in Public Policy and International Affairs Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship Community Development Unit (CDU) initiatives to engage faculty and students in developing and implementing innovative solutions to respond to the Syrian Refugee Crisis in Lebanon Opportunities such as these can even serve to attract students and faculty who are interested in engaging academically with the issues of political instability and conflict in the region. Goal 1: Deliver a World Class Student Experience / Develop Critical Thinkers and Ethical Leaders Goal 2: Goal 2: Create Knowledge & Advance Quality Research/Promote Interdisciplinarity & Innovation In order to continue to recruit students and faculty we have to maintain AUB s status as the University of choice in the region by achieving both of these goals. AUB Periodic Review Report June 2014

46 External Challenge: Effect on AUB and Its Constituencies: University Strengths in Facing Challenge: Vulnerabilities in Facing Challenge: Opportunities Created for Mission Fulfillment Which Are Addressed by 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan: Table 10: Economic Challenges Economic Challenges: Increasing costs and inflation, market instability, lower incomes/fewer job opportunities for students and families 1) Tuition increases: When increasing costs related to compensation, IT, real estate and construction/development, research, health care, etc. drive up the cost of tuition it negatively effects students and their families; works against strategic priority for affordable education/socio-economic diversity in the student body; and could ultimately hurt enrollment as the cost becomes too high for average families to pay. 2) Negatively affects faculty recruitment and retention: The University cannot keep up with inflation/cost of living 18 and market trends for faculty compensation. This negatively impacts faculty recruitment and retention as some faculty may choose positions in the U.S., Europe, and especially the Gulf states where Universities can offer much higher faculty compensation and research funding/facilities. 3) Slows pace of facilities development and renovations: The high cost of real estate and construction/development (including materials) slows AUB s efforts to match development and renovation to meet the growing needs of the University for facilities for education, research, and housing for students and faculty. Economic instability and market downturns may impact major donors giving for capital projects. The following strengths will aid the University in recruiting students and faculty despite local and regional political instability and conflict: Position as Regional Leader & Global Competitor in Higher Education Quality Faculty & Research Impact Strong Professional Education Continuing Ability to Attract Brightest Students in the Region Dynamic & Relevant Education & Research/Focus on Innovation & Interdisciplinaitry Tuition dependence/lack of Alternative Revenue Streams Budget Model and Process Upgrades and expansion to student/faculty housing options needed Goal 1: Deliver a World Class Student Experience In order to make AUB education worth it to families on tight budgets, AUB must maintain and advance its position as one of the best universities in the region. Extra effort will also be required to maintain affordable tuition and increase student financial aid. Goal 2: Create Knowledge & Advance Quality Research/Promote Interdisciplinarity & Innovation As a vibrant hub of innovative and high quality research, the University can offer faculty non-monetary incentives to join or stay at AUB. Goal 3: Maximize Impact for Positive Change in the Region Provides incentives for partnership and collaboration in securing opportunities for research funding in Europe, the US, and the region. The University has an obligation to address economic challenges faced in its outreach, education, and engaged research. Examples of this include continuing education programs to help people compete in a tightening job market; new educational programs like Rural Community Development; and more typical community service efforts AUB can deliver a successful model for incubators to spinoff companies that impact the national economy and generate income by investing in faculty, staff, and student innovation. Critical Enablers: Operational Efficiency and Strategic Budgeting Economically challenging times create imperatives for cost-savings efforts, more strategic budgeting, and development of alternative revenue streams. 18 Beirut is almost as expensive as New York or more for some indicators. AUB Periodic Review Report June 2014

47 External Challenge: Effect on AUB and Its Constituencies: University Strengths in Facing Challenge: University Vulnerabilities in Facing Challenge: Opportunities Created for Mission Fulfillment Which Are Addressed by 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan: Table11: Increasing Complexities of Global/Regional Problems Increasing Complexities of Global/Regional Problems The shift to problem-centered research and interdisciplinary degree programs is a global trend that encompasses many fields to address major research questions in areas related to human development issues, environment, energy, economical issues and public policies. Interdisciplinary research is often needed to enable solution of real world problems that are complex with solutions not confined by the boundaries of a single disciplinary framework. Complex problems require advanced tools of research enabled through high computing power and data storage, state of the art lab facilities, skilled staff, and responsive academic programs. Challenges the traditional academic structures and orientation to respond to these new complexities. Requires a more collaborative and less competitive/territorial approach. AUB has built strong foundation disciplines in different fields and its faculty engagement in interdisciplinary research is slowly growing. DUIP was created to facilitate and promote interdisciplinary educational programs. New interdisciplinary educational programs and centers of excellence have been established. When compared to other regional institutions, AUB has the relative advantage of freedom that enables constructive dialogue and collaborative knowledge production related to the enormous transformations and the social and political challenges faced by the region. AUB is positioned to play a role in studying and finding solutions to regional problems in such areas as water and water management/treatment, food security, energy, health, environment, and big data with applications in e-health, data mining, bioinformatics; transportation; and banking. Academic governance and funding structures are bounded by the traditional disciplines territories and policies. Faculty participation in and contribution to interdisciplinary research and education programs as well as to centers activities are not recognized by departments and do not lead to a reduction in the workload. Common facilities for cross-faculty interaction are very few at the institution Existing IT capacity cannot keep up with evolving IT needs of a modern research university and medical center. Challenges recruiting skilled staff in specific areas such as OGC, IT, labs, etc. Goal 2: Create Knowledge & Advance Quality Research/Promote Interdisciplinarity & Innovation Goal 3: Maximize Impact for Positive Change in the Region To serve the needs of the region at a time of rapid growth of knowledge, AUB will have to engage in increasingly multifaceted research and challenging forms of pedagogy as dictated by complex curricular demands. Generally, interdisciplinary research and programs extend to issues beyond science and technology to impact society and involve economy, public policy and culture. Interdisciplinary research fosters innovation, attracts external funders, and provides new outreach opportunities for the University. Several key interdisciplinary niche areas have been identified in the region in relation to environmental studies and energy studies. AUB can play a critical role in Lebanon s definite and transformative future prospects in oil and gas. AUB has the critical mass of faculty with the scholarly record to expand in these areas to serve the needs of the region and beyond. Additionally, the region lacks an academic focus on the arts and humanities. There is a significant need to recognize and create important niches for scholars of humanities, for the integration of technology in the arts, and for deepening knowledge of Middle Eastern, Arabic and Islamic Studies. Goal 1: Deliver a World Class Student Experience / Develop Critical Thinkers and Ethical Leaders The academic imperative for AUB in the coming years is to prepare our students for a future that requires new skills and the ability to cross intellectual boundaries. In education and research, we must be accountable to the increasingly interconnected challenges of the future. AUB Periodic Review Report June 2014

48 CONCLUSION The challenges we face grow as we continue to operate in a competitive environment with limited resources and changing political and social landscape. Nonetheless, AUB is better positioned than most universities to face these challenges and understand and engage changes around us. AUB is the oldest and most respected private university in the Arab world. Its competitive advantages include its long history, faculty quality and research output, STEM configuration, liberal arts foundation, location in Lebanon, and its dynamic and relevant research focused on innovation and interdisciplinarity. These strengths have allowed the University to meet increased competition from the many new educational institutions being founded in Lebanon and the region. In the development of the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan, goals and priorities were selected based on an assessment of strengths that can be built upon and areas in which AUB can and should build capacity because of strategic importance to the region and/or the fulfillment of the University s mission. This plan can now serve as roadmap for navigating the identified challenges and opportunities as we strive to achieve the four strategic goals and improve AUB s capacity in relation to the critical enablers. 48

49 SECTION FOUR: ENROLLMENT AND FINANCE TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS Enrollment and retention at AUB remains healthy, with moderate enrollment increases despite economic and political instability in the region as well as increased regional competition. Enrollment increases have been accompanied by increases in full time faculty and improved facilities. The student to faculty ratio has actually decreased in the last five years from 13:1 to 11.2:1. Numbers of applications have increased while maintaining the acceptance rate; and the quality of AUB students remains high. The reintroduction of PhD programs has been met by student demand and enrollment. The PhD and new niche masters programs are raising the international profile of AUB as a graduate school of choice. Two major developments since the 2008 Self-Study described in detail in Section Two include the establishment of the Enrollment Management Unit and the Graduate Council which support strategic planning, coordination, and monitoring of progress for undergraduate and graduate enrollment respectively. As reflected in the audited financial statements and in the financial ratios, AUB s fiscal status remains sound. Although the economic and political climate in Lebanon is marked with uncertainty, we remain confident that the financial footing that is currently in place at AUB will continue to pave the way for a solid future. AUB is positioned to take on the ambitious projects and initiatives outlined in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and the AUBMC 2020 vision. AUB is committed to careful stewardship of its resources in order to carry out its mission and further enhance the University s position as one of the region s top universities. I. Enrollment Trends This section will address undergraduate and graduate enrollment issues separately due to the specificities of each. First the basic profile/expectations for applicants is described below. Students may apply for admission to AUB s four-year undergraduate program as freshmen in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, as sophomores/first year professionals (FYPs) in all faculties, as transfer students from other universities, or as visiting, special (part-time/not working for a degree), or second degree applicants. Sophomores/first year professionals are the largest category of entering students because students with the Lebanese Baccalaureate or full International Baccalaureate Diploma 19 are admitted as sophomores since their diploma is officially recognized as equivalent to the freshman year of college. Most freshmen apply from schools outside of Lebanon and hold the equivalent of high school diploma. Students may apply for entrance in either the fall or spring semester. Students holding a Bachelor's degree may apply to AUB s master degree programs. Applicants who have a good record of academic achievement and a potential for creative and independent work may be admitted into one of the following categories: 1) Admission as a Regular graduate student, with the possibility of financial assistantship as a teaching or graduate research assistant; 2) Admission on Probation; or 3) Admission as Prospective Graduate Student (FAFS, FAS and FEA). In addition, students may be admitted as a special student not working for a degree and as a visiting graduate student. The minimum admission requirements for all categories are described clearly in the graduate catalogue including additional requirements set by the individual programs as approved by Faculty Graduate Studies Committee. Admission to the master s program at AUB is competitive, based on the academic record and achievements of the applicant. Students may be admitted to PhD programs into one of the following categories: 1) Admissions for Students Holding a Master s Degree or 2) Admissions for Students Holding a Bachelor s Degree. The minimum admission requirements for the two categories are 19 Students completing 12 years of schooling and doing one of the following programs: Lebanese Baccalaureate, French Baccalaureate, Syrian Baccalaureate, Jordanian Tawjihi, German Abitur, Official Government Secondary School leaving Certificate, full IB Diploma or IGCSE/GCE (2 A levels or 4 AS levels) can apply directly to the sophomore level at AUB. 49

50 described in the University graduate catalogue as well as admissions criteria and deadlines. Admission to the PhD program at AUB is competitive, based on the academic record and achievements of the applicant, and the research foci of the department/program. Before they can enroll, all admitted students must satisfy the English Language Proficiency Requirements (ELPR). Admissions requirements (including the ELPR), procedures and deadlines are clearly stipulated in AUB s catalogue and on its website. Students who show aptitude for success at AUB, but do not meet English Language Proficiency requirements can apply to the University Preparatory Program, which provides high intensity English Language programs for undergraduate and graduate students. A. Undergraduate Enrollment History and Projections Undergraduate Enrollment History Since , total student enrolment at AUB has increased by 9 percent (Table X). The rise in enrolment over the last five years has been accompanied by considerable growth in human and material resources. The total number of FTE teaching faculty has increased by 21 percent, from 437 ( ) to 530 ( ), on campus resulting in a decrease in the university-wide student/faculty ratio from about 13:1 to 11.2:1. At the same time, significant resources continue to be invested in the renovation of existing buildings (dorms, labs, classrooms and so on) and the construction of new ones (such as new buildings for the School of Business and the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture). Table 12: Student Total Enrollment and Full Time Faculty through Undergraduate Student Head Count FT Faculty Head Count Year AUB AUB+AUBMC Total Change % Change 9% 21% 30% The number of undergraduate applications received annually has increased by almost 1,000 from 4,434 in 2009 to 5,344 in 2013, although AUB s acceptance rate has fluctuated only slightly in the past five years and in 2013 was 64%, the same as in The yield rate has decreased slightly from 64% in 2009 to 58% in (See Appendix D-1 for details). AUB s admissions practices are intended to ensure the diversity of the student body without sacrificing quality. The high quality of undergraduate applicants is reflected in the fact that roughly one-third of new sophomores (the largest category of entering students) reporting school ranks in had placed in the top tenth of their classes during two of their last three years of secondary school, with 86% in the top half or above. 50

51 Undergraduate retention has been stable and strong, near 93% for all undergraduates; 86% for entering freshman and 96% for entering sophomores. The graduation rate for all students is 83%. As part of assessing strengths and weaknesses in 2011, the Strategic Planning Unit for Enrollment Management and Student Services benchmarked AUB statistics against peer institutions 20 and found that the University s retention and graduation rates are high in comparison. (The Report of the Strategic Planning Unit for Enrollment Management and Student Services is included in Appendix D-2). Undergraduate Enrollment Projections Undergraduate enrollment is expected to increase moderately by approximately 200 students in , and total enrollment is expected to remain steady around 7000 through Faculty recruitment and renovation/construction projects continue in pace with the increase in students. The Enrollment Management Unit is also working to ensure that student services are maintained and improved to meet student needs. One challenge faced by the University even with moderate enrollment increases is that most new students enter as sophomores and apply to enter a specific major. There is disproportionate demand for engineering majors and majors perceived as pre-med such as biology and chemistry; in response the Enrollment Management Unit in coordination with the faculties/schools are working on ways to market majors with lower demand. In addition substantial resources have been committed to engineering to address student enrollment increases. FEA is inaugurating the newly completed Irani Oxy Engineering Complex in summer 2014 which includes more than 8,000 square meters of space for labs, classrooms, and offices. The innovative design of the complex provides utmost flexibility to group lab modules and shift partitions such that all labs created are autonomous and flexible, able to be combined and technically upgraded with ease and can easily evolve with new technologies and new program needs. In 2013 FEA created new space in the FS1 building to house the Chemical Engineering program and its labs in September In addition, two new buildings for FEA are in the process of selecting bidders: the Mikati Engineering and Science Library and the Masri Building for Energy and Environment, which together will add 2400 square meters of instructional and research space to lower campus. Both buildings will add 2400 square meters of usable space. The Mikati Engineering and Science Library will serve as the central academic/study space on the lower campus, serving FAS and FAFS in addition to FEA students. The Masri Building will include faculty office space, seminar rooms and class rooms as well as two simulation labs. Other construction and renovation projects will provide new and upgraded spaces for FM, HSON, FAS, and FAFS. The AUBMC 2020 Vision proposes major construction and renovation to facilities serving FM, HSON, and AUBMC. In addition to the obvious positive effects on medical and nursing education at AUB, projects that will directly enhance or increase educational spaces and labs include the renovation of the Diana Tamari Sabbagh Building, which houses the Faculty of Medicine, to transform the medical school into a world-class basic biomedical research and medical education center and the construction of the new Daniel Academic and Clinical Center, which will incorporate clinical care, education, and research in one state-of-the-art facility. The new building for the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs (IFI) was inaugurated in January In addition to housing the IFI, the building provides lab space for FAS programs in media and communications as well as space for the new master s program in public policy and international affairs. The 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan includes planned renovation and/or construction of new facilities for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences. (See Table 20: Major Strategic AUB Capital Projects in Section Six, page 88 for more details). 20 American University of Cairo, American University of Sharjah, Villanova University, Seton Hall University, American University, St. Louis University, George Washington University, Case Western Reserve University, University of Rochester, Tufts University, Georgetown University. 51

52 B. Graduate Enrollment History, Projections, and Analysis Graduate education at AUB enables the University to meet a number of its strategic objectives. Creating a critical mass of graduate students, faculty, and resources through new graduate programs is necessary to continue to increase quality and quantity of research. Graduate programs attract international students and increase the geographic diversity of the overall student body. New graduate programs are being developed to meet new regional challenges and market opportunities in strategic fields of research. AUB has recently introduced new Master s degrees in Energy Studies, Chemical Engineering, Construction Engineering, Health Care Leadership, Health Research, Islamic Studies, Public Policy and International Affairs, and Rural Community Development. Some of these programs were offered in , while others will be offered in The reintroduction of PhD programs in 2008 has significantly boosted AUB s research capacity. AUB currently offers PhDs in Arab and Middle Eastern History, Arabic Language and Literature, Biomedical Sciences, Cell and Molecular Biology, Civil Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Theoretical Physics. A new PhD in Biomedical Engineering has been approved by the University and will be offered in Graduate Enrollment History Graduate student enrollment has been increased moderately in line with AUB s strategic priorities and introduction of new graduate programs (See Table 8 on page 39). Enrollment in masters programs peaked in at 1211 and has decreased slightly to 1155 in Enrollment in PhD programs, reintroduced in 2008, has met targets and indicates the success of program reintroduction in terms of student demand. Table 13 breaks down graduate student enrollment by Masters, Medical, and Doctoral students since Table 13: Graduate Student Enrollment (Head Count) MA/MS MD PhD Total Total Increase Graduate Enrollment Projections Individual programs make graduate student enrollment projections, but these are not tracked or monitored on an institution-wide basis. With the establishment of the Graduate Council, developing University-wide graduate student projections and monitoring enrollment in relation to these projections is now more feasible. Individual programs engage in student recruitment through avenues relevant to their fields. The Graduate Council has also developed a marketing and recruitment strategy with guidance from the University Office of Communications which involves increasing web and social media presence; targeting students in the region (Saudi Arabia, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Turkey) through participation in recruitment fairs/exhibitions and/or social media campaigns; holding two annual Graduate Studies Open Houses on campus; engaging with regional and international government bodies to include AUB among the list of universities eligible for their government scholarships for study abroad; and coordinating with the Office of International Programs and the AUB New York office to ensure presence at graduate student recruitment fairs/exhibitions in North America. 52

53 II. AUB s Financial Health and 3-Year Projections Historically, the spending rate from AUB s endowment has been set at 4.75% (20-quarter moving average) for many years. In a move to strategically grow the value of the endowment and investment pool over time, beginning in 2013/14 the draw rate was lowered to 4.6%. This rate will continue to drop in increments of 0.2% over the next three years at which time it will remain at 4.0% thereafter. Although this places a burden on our operating budget in the coming few years, this tactical move will have a long lasting and positive impact on our endowment over time, thus helping to reduce tuition dependency in the long term. Also in 2013/14 AUB began placing unrestricted gifts into quasiendowment to further grow our funds acting as endowment. As these were previously recognized as revenues in operations, being able to absorb this change speaks well of the University s ability to more prudently manage its finances and work diligently towards one of its primary strategic goals to grow the endowment in the coming years and decades to bolster the financial fortitude of the overall organization. Many new buildings have been constructed on campus in the past several years made possible by generous giving from our donors and from bank loans with favorable interest rates, including subsidized interest rates from the Lebanese government. This has greatly expanded our facilities and the quality of our student experience as it relates to classrooms and athletic facilities in particular. AUB debt ratios (discussed in more detail later in this report) continue to remain in conservative ranges which the Board of Trustees Finance Committee sees as a necessary judicious step given the part of the world in which AUB s operations are conducted. AUB has also begun taking steps several years in advance to prepare for future loan repayments with the creation of a loan sinking fund to ensure that AUB makes debt repayments on time. In 2013, the University formalized its Debt Management and Hedging Policy which was approved by the Board of Trustees with a notable component being a debt ceiling of $150 million. In 2013, the administration also authored a new policy on Approval, Signing, and Delegation of Authority which was approved by the Board of Trustees and further reinforces the commitment of the organization to implement firmer internal controls and policies to safeguard the finances of the University. Lastly, internal financial reporting and compliance processes have greatly improved in the past two years with a more professional finance team that now closes the accounting books on a timely basis, which was not the case in the past. The approval of AUB s audited financial statements at the November 2013 Board of Trustees meeting (5 months after year-end which has never been achieved at the University before) represents a milestone and a notable shift in the way the University conducts its affairs internally in relation to financial reporting. Reporting capabilities have hence improved significantly. A. Operating Revenues, Expenses and Key Assumptions The University is currently facing the same challenges felt across higher education: increasing costs related to faculty, staff, research, and facilities and the resulting increases in tuition. There is a limit to which the student population can absorb these increases and increased tuition can limit the University s achievement of a strategic goal for socio-economic diversity in the student body. Affordable Education is a strategic priority in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and AUB is adopting a multi-faceted approach to achieve this goal. At the same time, faculty compensation may need to be increased to address inflation and market forces that affect recruitment and retention. The new 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan as well as the ambitious AUBMC 2020 Vision will require significant resources to implement fully, although most of these resources will be raised through the upcoming comprehensive fundraising campaign. Alternative revenue streams need to be aggressively pursued in the coming years to maintain the University s academic excellence without making education at AUB unaffordable for students of average means. 53

54 USD Millions Based on the assumptions that follow, AUB s operating revenues and expenses (including AUBMC) are expected to grow as depicted in the following table Operating Revenues and Expenses / / / / / /17 Revenues Expenses Trend For historical data that isolates campus revenue and expenditures, see Appendix D-3 which includes IPEDS data submitted in MSCHE s annual institutional profiles for the previous three years. The main assumptions for the operating budget for 2014/15 through 2016/17, which includes AUBMC, are presented below. Revenue Assumptions The University s revenues for 2014/15 are anticipated to be distributed as follows: 43.1, 12% Operating Revenues ($M) Patient-Related 140.0, 40% 170.4, 48% Student-Related Investment & Other Income At the time of writing this report, the envisioned operating budget for 2014/15 included revenues totaling $353.5 million. Of this, 48% are revenues related to AUBMC patient care and 40% are expected to be generated by students (net of financial assistance) with the balance of 12% stemming from investment and endowment income and other miscellaneous revenue sources. The main assumptions for the next three years in terms of operational revenues follow. 54

55 Tuition Rates and Student Population: Tuition rates for undergraduates and graduates are budgeted to increase annually by 3-5 percent in the coming three years. Undergraduate enrollment is expected to increase moderately by approximately 200 students in , and total enrollment is expected to remain steady around 7000 through Patient-Related Revenues: Assumptions for patient-related revenues in 2014/15 through 2016/17 are assumed to be at growth rates less than the actual annual increases in the past few years. Although more growth is possible, the AUBMC revenues budget allows for some conservatism to shield against unforeseen events that are not uncommon in Lebanon. Other Student Fees: The technology fee is assumed to not increase in 2014/15 and increase modestly annually for the next two years. Dormitory rates are also assumed to follow the same pattern as the technology fee. Regional External Programs: Revenues from AUB s Regional External Programs (REP) are expected to be lower in 2014/15. However, an additional $750,000 million is projected for 2015/16 increasing to $1 million in 2016/17 with the opening of an AUB office in the UAE in 2014/15. Investment and Endowment Income: Investment and endowment income is expected to remain flat as the draw rate is lowered from 4.6% to 4.0% from 2014/15 to 2016/17. Gifts, Grants and Contracts: No major gifts are assumed in the next years that would favorably impact the University operating budget because major donations being sought are for the comprehensive fundraising campaign (which includes traditional building projects as well as endowment funds for scholarships, faculty chairs, and research) and in 2013/14 AUB began placing unrestricted gifts into quasi-endowment to further grow our funds acting as endowment. US federal grants and contracts are expected to be maintained at their current levels. Expense Assumptions The University s expenses for 2014/15 are anticipated to be distributed as follows: 15.4, 4% Operating Expenses ($M) 20.3, 6% 36.3, 10% Compensation & Benefits Supplies & Maintenance Utilities 81.8, 23% Administrative & Other 199.7, 57% At the time of writing this report, the operating budget expenses for 2014/15 are estimated to equal our projected revenues of $353.5 million. 57% of the total is categorized as compensation and benefits. The next largest category is 23% for supplies and maintenance which includes pharmaceutical and medical supplies sold at the AUBMC. The remaining amounts are found in utilities (4%), administrative and 55

56 other expenses (10%) as well as depreciation and minor equipment expenditures of 6%. The key assumptions for the next three years in terms of operational expenses are listed below. Compensation and Benefits: A pool for salary increases based on 3.0 percent for those in the academic ranks is assumed for 2014/15. In March 2014, the president formed the Task Force on Faculty Compensation chaired by the provost to develop a recommendation for a sustainable plan for faculty salary adjustments over the next 3-5 years. Benefits rates are budgeted to remain the same for 2014/15 through 2016/17. Health insurance premiums are expected to increase annually at a rate of about 5 percent. Fuel Prices: Fuel prices are assumed to be stable for the coming few years. At the time of the writing of this report, NYMEX light crude prices were trading at around $100 per barrel. This pricing assumption will be monitored and revised as necessary with any major fluctuations in fuel prices as they may occur over the coming three years. Interest Rates: Interest rates calculations for AUB s loans are budgeted to account for a 0.5 percent annual increase in the 3-month LIBOR rate (for our US-based loans) and for a one percent annual increase in the 1-year Lebanese treasury bill rate (for our Lebanese-based loans) for 2014/15 through 2016/17. Loan Sinking Fund: The operating budget for 2014/15 through 2016/17 includes contributions to our loan sinking fund for future loan repayments between $2.25 million and $2.75 million each year. Capital Campaign: We have included in the draft budget for 2014/15 $1.25 million funding for the capital campaign. This will increase by $500,000 incrementally each year through 2016/17 based on our current projections. Strategic Initiatives: Many of our initiatives in the strategic vision for the campus have yet to be fully quantified owing to lack of clarity concerning the timing of potential donations and the scope of expected giving for individual projects. Nonetheless, we can reasonably anticipate requiring some operational funding to complement future donations for these endeavors. Accordingly, we are anticipating adding $500,000 in 2015/16 and $1.0 million in 2016/17 for funding related to initiatives in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. End-of-Service Catch-Up Provision: In recent years, the University s Provident Fund (included as part of AUB s investment pool) provided for end-of-service (EOS) funding requirements for AUB s employees. As salaries of existing staff increase, AUB s accounting must reflect a higher EOS requirement in the form of an annual catch-up provision which is currently not covered in the operating budget. For 2014/15 we are planning to fund $1.3 million of the required catch-up provision, and this is planned to increase to $4.0 million by 2016/17. B. Contingencies and Projections In order to remain prudent in our financial planning, AUB acknowledges the possibility of future events that may or may not occur in the coming years based on past experience. Much of our uncertainty when it comes to planning relates to the Lebanese government, particularly with issues relating to taxation and the minimum wage. Our three-year financial projection already has provided for a future tax liability owing to the vagaries of Lebanon s outdated and incomprehensive tax code. Additionally, the University recognizes the potential for government-mandated decrees that could negatively impact the bottom line of the organization, in particular as relates to changes in the minimum wage and/or employee benefits accorded under local labor laws. The minimum wage has been increased in 2008 and in The February 2012 increase in the minimum wage in Lebanon was implemented to address cost of living increases in the country which resulted in a $9 million annual financial burden on the University. In order to prepare for a probable future adjustment of similar magnitude, AUB recognizes the importance 56

57 USD Millions of establishing a reserve for this future likelihood. We have therefore set aside $4.5 million in the 2014/15 operating budget for this contingent probability. This is expected to be increased to $9 million by 2017/18 to buffer against a possible government-mandated wage increase in the coming few years in Lebanon. AUB s financial projections for 2014/15 through 2016/17 assume a relatively stable financial and political situation in Lebanon with no major financial shocks anticipated. Although the AUB administration acknowledges the fact that the local and regional environment is susceptible to abrupt changes that can negatively impact the campus and AUBMC operating results, further restricting funds from the operating units (e.g., in the form of additional budgetary reductions to build more contingencies) is, in our opinion, disruptive and potentially counter-productive to the operations of the faculties and academic support units in particular. As has been done for several years now, we will continue to monitor the situation in the country cautiously and address situations as they arise knowing that the administration can employ mid-year expense cutbacks should such action be required. This has proven successful in the past, and we have weathered many storms while still remaining in fiscal balance. C. Audited Financial Statements and Ratio Analysis The following is an overview of the main components of AUB s audited financial statements along with a ratio analysis to provide additional insight into the University s financial performance when compared to North American peer institutions. Projected Net Assets and Liabilities Based on the above stated assumptions for operations in the coming three years, we anticipate a gradual increase in our total assets and net assets through 2016/17. We recognize the fact that changes in world equity markets during this time could easily disrupt the valuation of our investments, hence resulting in a different picture than what is depicted in the following graph. However, looking at our investments with a longer-term view and assuming a relatively stable operational situation, we can envision a scenario similar to that which is projected below. 1, , Net Assets and Liabilities Liabilities Net Assets As is represented in the graph, total assets and net assets have grown from 2011/12 to 2012/13. That trend is anticipated to continue through the end of the 2014 fiscal year at an approximate increase of 5%. The same growth rate in net assets is projected for the following two years. Lastly, liabilities are expected to rise in tandem with our asset growth. 57

58 Debt As of June 30, 2013, AUB s outstanding debt balance was $63.5 million as compared to $59.3 million at the end of the prior period. Loan Balance Interest Repayments Maturity Amount Outstanding Rate (%) Begin JPMC $6m $6.0 $ % Sep Feb JPMC $5.5m $5.5 $ % Jan Aug Fransabank $28.5m $28.5 $ % June 2015 June 2022 JPMC $50m $50.0 $ % Dec Dec BankMed $35m $35.0 $ % Oct Oct BLF $15m $15.0 $ % April 2017 April 2024 TOTAL $140.0 $63.5 AUB s debt portfolio includes fixed-rate and variable-rate debt along with an interest rate exchange agreement that is used for hedging interest rate exposures within the University s debt portfolio. In accordance with our debt management and hedging policy, AUB remains within its $150 million debt ceiling with an outstanding balance of $63.5 million as of June 30, 2013 and total borrowing capacity of $140 million. Management Letter Starting in the second half of 2012, AUB s Finance team adopted a new approach regarding the management letter observations received from its external auditors, Deloitte and Touche ( Deloitte ). Prior to this date, the management letter was considered to be primarily an internal document, and the follow-up on action items indicated in the managerial responses were not formally monitored and brought to conclusion with the external auditors. As a result, it was agreed by both AUB and Deloitte to change the format of the management letter and to include the status of outstanding issues in an effort to better track separate observations as well as to show progress made by management on a wide range of issues including those directly related to finance but also related to operational and specifically IT issues. Accordingly, the Deloitte Report to Management dated June 30, 2013 is a much more comprehensive document covering observation from multiple years and audit periods that is divided into three main sections which are: 1) Current year comments; 2) Prior year comments not corrected; and 3) Prior year comments corrected. The progress made in the last year has been considerable in terms of addressing the observations of the external auditors, and many areas are still being addressed based on identified corrective action plans as detailed in this most recent version. It should be noted that the FY 2013 audit identified no material weakness, and only two observations are categorized as significant deficiencies. As of the writing of this report, both of those significant deficiencies have already been satisfactorily addressed and resolved. In particular, AUB now generates its financial statements directly from its financial management system, which was not the case before, and AUB s financial closing process has been streamlined and now takes place faster and more comprehensively than was done before in the past. Also, recent requirements imposed on AUB and other US organizations related to investigating potential suspension or debarment of principals of suppliers have been satisfactorily met. We therefore expect these observations to be reported as corrected in the FY 2014 management letter. 58

59 Ratio Analysis Benchmarked to North American Peers AUB monitors its financial performance using an analysis of financial ratios specifically intended for institutions of higher education. These calculations follow the methodology set forth in Strategic Financial Analysis for Higher Education, Seventh Edition published in 2010 by Prager, Sealy and Co., LLC, KPMG LLP and Attain LLC. The authors of this publication emphasize four core financial ratios which are the Primary Reserve, Net Operating Revenues, Return on Net Assets and Viability ratios. These four ratios are further represented in a composite measure to help gauge overall financial health of the organization known as the Composite Financial Index. We have limited our analysis in this report to these five main indicators which allow us to measure AUB's financial situation compared to other organizations. We have also included another ratio that is important to debt (Debt Burden Ratio) which is critical to monitor, particularly in a period of expansion such as what AUB is currently undergoing. These ratios are recommended by the administration and are reviewed and approved periodically by the Finance Committee which sets the targets for the ratios. These financial performance measures are benchmarked against an initial list of peer institutions in North America, 21 all of which operate medical centers and which make their audited financial statements publicly available. The financial ratios are derived from AUB's audited financial statements and are meant to identify trends in financial performance as well as to give an indication of the health and vigor of the institution's overall financial position. It is intended as a guide for further investigation of issues as well as a measurement tool for monitoring financial performance over multiple years. Although the usage of ratios provides only limited insight into the details of a complex organization such as AUB, they are nonetheless meaningful guides for monitoring financial well-being in future years and to assist university decisionmakers in strategic financial planning at AUB. Primary Reserve Ratio AUB Result Target Peer Performance The Primary Reserve Ratio measures the financial strength of the institution by comparing expendable net assets to total expenses. Expendable net assets represent those assets that the institution can access quickly and spend to meet its operating and capital requirements. This ratio provides a snapshot of financial strength and flexibility by indicating how long the institution could function using its expendable reserves without relying on additional net assets generated by operations. In principle, AUB could therefore operate 11 months before fully exhausting its expendable reserves compared to 10 months with its peer group. Return on Net Assets Ratio AUB Result 4.8% 4.0% 5.2% -0.7% 8.8% Target % Average Peer Performance -21.7% 6.4% 16.5% -2.4% 10.3% 21 Duke University, Emory University, Johns Hopkins University, Tulane University, Tufts University, University of Rochester, Vanderbilt University, and Washington St. Louis University 59

60 The Return on Net Assets Ratio determines whether the institution is financially better off than in previous years by measuring total economic return. A decline in this ratio may be appropriate if it reflects a strategy to better fulfill the institution s mission. On the other hand, an improving trend in this ratio indicates that the institution is increasing its net assets and is likely to be able to set aside financial resources to strengthen its future financial flexibility. The Return on Net Assets Ratio is better applied over an extended period so that the results of long-term plans are measured. AUB s fiscal 2013 result of 8.8% is its best score in the past several years. The five-year average for AUB is 4.4% compared to its target average of 3.0% and compared to the five-year peer average of 1.8%. Net Operating Revenues Ratio AUB Result -2.7% 5.8% 6.5% -5.2% -0.9% Target % Average Peer Performance 1.7% 2.5% 3.3% 1.6% 1.3% The Net Operating Revenues Ratio is a key financial indicator, explaining how the surplus from operating activities affects the behavior of the other three core ratios. A large surplus or deficit directly impacts the amount of funds an institution adds to or subtracts from net assets, thereby affecting the Primary Reserve, the Return on Net Assets and the Viability ratios. Our results for FY 2013 were better than that of the prior year, however they still fell short of our longer-term target of 5%. Viability Ratio AUB Result Target Peer Performance The Viability Ratio measures one of the most basic determinants of clear financial health, the availability of expendable net assets to cover debt should the institution need to settle its obligations as of the balance sheet date. AUB s viability ratio remains quite sound at 5.3. This compares to our targeted floor of 1.0 and to the 2013 peer average of 1.7. The University still remains comfortably within its limits for external debt. Composite Financial Index AUB Result Target Peer Performance The Composite Financial Index (CFI) is a weighted average of the four core ratios (primary reserve, return on net assets, net operating revenues and viability ratios). The CFI only measures the financial component of an institution s well-being and must be analyzed in context with other associated activities and plans to achieve an assessment of the overall health, not just financial health, of the institution. AUB s CFI score of 6.6 is an improvement over the prior year, well above the targeted floor of 4.0 and higher than the peer average for the period of fiscal 2009 through 2013 (3.0%). Our score remains high 60

61 % Return due to debt management and also owing to a good showing with our return on net assets in 2013 in particular. Debt Burden Ratio AUB Result 2.9% 3.4% 2.8% 2.8% 1.9% Target % Peer Performance 3.6% 3.3% 4.5% 4.2% 3.3% The Debt Burden Ratio examines AUB s dependence on borrowed funds as a source of financing its mission and the relative cost of borrowing to overall expenditures. AUB s debt burden rests at 1.9% in fiscal 2013 which is well below the University s targeted ceiling of 5% and better than our peers for the past several years as well. Continued prudent debt management will continue to keep this ratio in acceptable boundaries and to keep AUB in a strong financial posture. D. Investments and Endowment Endowment Returns AUB has taken part in the NACUBO Endowment Study for many years, and we are pleased to report that our investment returns have been excellent as can be seen in the below comparative table: Endowment Returns /13 5-Year 10-Year UVA Duke AUB MIT Stanford Princeton Yale Harvard Dartmouth As of June 30, 2013 AUB s investment pool was valued at $483 million. Capital Budget The University has experienced considerable expansion in the past ten years in terms of new facilities that have been constructed which include most notably, the Charles Hostler Student Center, CCC Scientific Research Building, the S. Olayan School of Business, the Irani Oxy Engineering Complex, the new Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs building, and various medical research centers and AUBMC upgrades. Our construction projects continue both on campus and at the Medical Center with financing for these coming from a combination of sources which includes AUB s plant fund, donations and loans. AUB s cash flow for the major construction projects through 2022/23 totals more than $560 million which still requires funding to be identified for the AUBMC 2020 Medical Complex. All other projects for the AUBMC and Campus have identified funding through a combination of approved bank loans, committed donations and from the University s plant fund. Future capital projects are also envisioned but are dependent upon potential donations which are still 61

62 being cultivated under the direction of the Advancement group. The list of capital projects for the AUBMC and Campus are listed below for recently completed projects, in process construction and other planned initiatives already presented to the Board of Trustees. 22 Medical Capital Projects Project $M Status Daniel Academic & Clinic Center 75.1 In Process DTS Building Renovation 24.0 In Process AUBMC Administration Building 12.4 In Process Building Planned Medical Center Lobbies 2.4 Completed MD Café 1.3 Completed Neuro Ambulatory Center 1.0 Completed PET-CT Scan Building 3.0 Completed Robotic Surgery Equipment 2.6 Completed Total Medical Projects Campus Capital Projects Irani Oxy Engineering Complex 27.0 Completed Issam Fares Institute 8.3 Completed Architecture Building 9.3 Planned Renovation of Bechtel 3.0 Planned Mikati Engineering & Science Library 3.0 Planned Masri Instiute for Energy and Environment 3.0 Planned Real Estate Acquisitions 11.2 In Process Information Technology 9.6 In Process Total Campus Projects 74.4 Future Capital Projects AUBMC 2020 Medical Complex Hospital Information System New Modern Facilities for FAFS Center for Contemporary Studies of the Arab Region TBD TBD TBD TBD Through improved fiscal management, AUB ended fiscal year 2013 in a solid financial position and continues to do so in the current year. The university maintains its focus on strategic prioritization by utilizing financial resources to further the university s mission and goals. Although the economic and political climate in Lebanon is marked with uncertainty, we remain confident that the sound financial footing that is currently in place at AUB will continue to pave the way for a solid future. AUB is positioned to take on complex and ambitious projects such as the initiatives outlined in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and the AUBMC 2020 vision that will serve to take the university to yet a higher level of service excellence. Further investments in faculty and educational endeavors are also part of our strategic plan. As reflected in the audited financial statements and in the financial ratios, AUB s fiscal status remains strong. AUB is committed to careful stewardship of its resources in order to carry out its mission and further enhance the University s position as one of the region s top universities. 22 See Table X on Page X for a list of strategic capital projects which includes the academic purpose of each project. 62

63 SECTION FIVE: EVIDENCE OF ORGANIZED AND SUSTAINED PROCESSES TO ASSESS STUDENT LEARNING AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS American University of Beirut s achievement of its mission and goals for its educational programs, services, and initiatives is determined through assessment processes designed to evaluate progress and inform decision-making. The Institutional Assessment Committee (IAC), the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA), the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL), the Office of the Provost, Assessment/ Accreditation Officers and Deans/Associate Deans, department chairs in Faculties/Schools, and now the Academic Assessment Unit (AAU) all play significant roles in guiding, supporting, coordinating, and monitoring assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness of academic and administrative academic support units which take place across the University. See Appendix E-1 for a brief description of IAC member units and their roles in assessment at AUB. Over the last five years, AUB has made significant strides in the development and use of organized and sustained processes to assess student learning. Most academic programs and the General Education (GE) Program have developed Program Learning Outcomes (PLO) with the support of CTL and undergo regular PLO assessment. The Periodic Program Review (PPR) for academic departments which incorporates surveys and data from OIRA links assessment of student learning with assessment of institutional effectiveness of academic units. More work remains to be done to refine identified PLOs and assessment mechanisms, as well as in assessing affective learning outcomes (ethics, values, personal growth, etc.) that are by nature difficult to measure. The creation of the Academic Assessment Unit (AAU) under the Office of the Provost in 2014 to coordinate all academic institutional assessment and planning activities represents a significant step in capitalizing on the progress made and building stronger links between the assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness. AAU facilitates the following activities: Periodic Program Reviews (PPR), PLO assessment, GE Program learning outcomes assessment, and KPI tracking. In addition, AAU provides technical assistance (training, data, KPI tracking) for unit-level quality assurance assessments as needed for non-academic administrative units. AAU closely coordinates with OIRA, which continues to provide surveys and data to inform many levels of assessment of institutional effectiveness. The use of this data has led to a number of improvements in the last five years, especially in relation to enrollment management and student services. AUB has effectively set the stage for the development of a culture of assessment across the University and particularly among faculty. Through policies, requirements, and the support and training to meet the requirements, faculty have become accustomed to PLO assessment. CTL has played a large role in providing training and support to faculty in LO assessment practices through workshops, seminars, and individual support. (See Appendix E-2 for a list of CTL Assessment-Related Workshops since 2008.) The Director of the CTL explains that one of the ways they have attempted to promote a culture of LO assessment in their professional development activities with faculty has been to emphasize the fact that current educational practice suggests the need to focus on learning and not just teaching; when learning is the focus, assessment stops being a "chore" to complete but rather an important component of developing learner-centered teaching practices. Across the University, administration, faculty and staff are devoting greater energy and attention to the future direction of the University and its units; the initiatives devised to achieve common goals; the scope and pace of progress meeting those goals; and the resources needed to ensure that outcomes meet expectations. OIRA conducted a 2013 survey of assessment and its uses at AUB, the results of which offer some insight into the variety of assessments used and the extent to which assessments are used to inform decision-making. Assessment is strengthened and sustained by a genuine desire for institutional renewal in the direction of effectiveness, transparency, accountability, and integrity. AUB has only been engaging in formal strategic planning for ten years; the University s processes for the assessment of overall institutional effectiveness and achievement of strategic planning goals are evolving, gleaning 63

64 improvements based on the experience of the implementation and assessment of the 2009 Strategic Plan as we plan to implement and assess the new 2014 Academic Strategic Plan. This chapter will summarize AUB s responses to 2008 Self-Study recommendations in relation to assessing student learning (Standards 12 & 14), describe current structures and processes for assessment of student learning (Standard 14) and institutional effectiveness (Standard7), as well as challenges and future directions in assessment currently under consideration. I. Student Learning Assessment A. Progress Documented in the 2011 Monitoring Report On June 25, 2009, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) acted to reaffirm the University s accreditation and to request: a monitoring report due April 1, 2011 documenting implementation of an organized and sustained assessment process to evaluate and improve student learning, including (1) establishment of measurable learning outcomes at the program level, including general education (Standards 12 & 14); (2) use of appropriate assessments of the attainment of learning goals at the program and course levels, including direct and indirect measures (Standard 14); and (3) evidence that student learning outcomes are used to make improvements in teaching and learning (Standard 14). This request drew on two separate suggestions appearing in the report of the evaluation team, one for a comprehensive plan for the assessment of programmatic learning outcomes across faculties/schools; and another specifically focusing on AUB s GE program. Similar recommendations appeared in the 2008 Institutional Self-Study and are mentioned in Section Two. AUB s Monitoring Report, submitted and accepted in 2011, summarized and documented the University s progress in the assessment of student learning until the end of March It clarified that measurable learning outcomes (LOs) had been established for all University undergraduate courses and programs, including GE, as well as graduate-level courses and programs in faculties/schools with full or partial program accreditation. The process that resulted in this achievement is described by Dr. Saouma BouJaoude (Director of CTL) and Dr. Amal BouZeineddine (Associate Director of CTL) in a paper presented at the International Lilly Conference in 2013: [A] plan that employed five phases was developed in order to help faculty members become well versed in developing and assessing program learning outcomes and in using assessment results to improve student learning. The five phases were: (1) setting the goals of the assessment plan, (2) identifying the training framework/model that would align with the goals, (3) delineating the learning outcomes plan, (4) implementing the plan, and (5) reflecting on the entire learning outcomes process. To implement the plan, many departments established assessment committees constituted of the department chair and one or two faculty members. In addition, most faculties appointed assessment/accreditation officers to support the assessment committees and insure timely data collection, reporting of results, and developing improvement activities and plans. Additionally, an institutional assessment committee chaired by the University provost was established to coordinate all university assessment activities, two of which are the assessment of program learning outcomes and the departmental periodic reviews. Furthermore, the university Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) was charged with managing the assessment of program learning outcomes; a task which included training faculty members on writing program learning outcomes, developing assessment plans, designing and implementing direct and indirect assessment tools, and writing improvement 64

65 plans. To accomplish these tasks, CTL appointed an assessment officer whose role is to support departments and individual faculty members involved in assessment in collaboration with other CTL members. Furthermore, departments involved in assessment activities can get the support of the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA), a university office whose mission is to act as a resource and repository for official institutional statistics, information, and policies; coordinate assessment and evaluation of university programs and processes to support planning, decision-making, and improvement; formulate and implement data-gathering activities such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups for a wide variety of internal and external uses; and develop, administer, and report assessments required by the University for admission, placement, and other educational purposes. 23 The accreditation status of programs in major academic units was an important distinction in the Monitoring Report. 24 Two major units with professional accreditation across programs, namely, the Suliman S. Olayan School of Business (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) and the Rafic Hariri School of Nursing (Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education), were shown to have used appropriate assessment measures and processes at the program and course levels for continuous improvement. Graduate programs in the Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) met the assessment requirements of the Council on Education for Public Health; however, FHS planned to optimize results by establishing processes similar to those in place for undergraduate programs. ABET, Inc. learning outcomes a-k were being used to assess student learning and inform improvements in all undergraduate engineering programs in the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture (FEA), even those without program accreditation. FEA s undergraduate programs in Architecture and Graphic Design (ArD), as well as all of its graduate programs, were not undergoing formal assessment at the time, with improvements being made on an ad hoc basis. An assessment committee was formed for ArD to align their PLOs with NAAB requirements in preparation for application for accreditation and developing an assessment plan for the newly revised curriculum which they are beginning to implement in The University s main challenge prior to 2011 was developing appropriate assessment processes in academic units without program accreditation: namely, the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences (FAFS) and the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS), which together account for about half of AUB s student population. CTL played a pivotal role in training and otherwise assisting departmental faculty as they prepared assessment plans, agreed upon assessment tools, and piloted plans for at least one of the undergraduate programs that they offered. All FAFS departments and 14 of the 15 FAS departments met this objective by March 2011; some departments exceeded expectations, with Social and Behavioral Sciences, for example, piloting plans for two degree programs and one diploma program. Implementation of AUB s revised GE requirement, which took effect in Fall , was overseen by a Senate GE Committee, which developed measurable learning outcomes for the program; communication and writing skills; and four major disciplinary fields of learning (natural sciences, humanities, social sciences, and quantitative thought). The committee invited faculty to propose existing courses for GE designation and explain how they would meet GE LOs and assess student learning. By the end of March 2011, the committee had approved 279 courses, which were listed on the Registrar s website and clearly identified on Banner. The Writing across the Curriculum initiative also made good progress thanks to a three-year grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation which funded the development of 20 new writing-intensive courses, 17 of which were offered in At the time of the Monitoring Report, the GE Committee was working with the CTL and OIRA to prepare a program assessment plan, develop appropriate measures, and train selected committee members in assessment. 23 (BouJaoude & BouZeineddine, 2013) Appendix E-3 24 See Appendix A-3 for a current list of AUB s accreditations at the faculty and/or program level. 65

66 B. Assessment of Program Learning Outcomes Since 2011 Process Each program/major at the American University of Beirut is expected to develop and implement a comprehensive program learning outcomes (PLO) assessment plan. AAU lists the following guidelines for departments preparing their PLO assessment plans on the Program Assessment section on its website: Program Learning Outcomes (PLO) Assessment Plans: Departments will develop assessment plans for PLOs in each offered program/major. There may be cases where it is more helpful to develop plans at the level of minor/concentrations rather than major. Assessment results should inform program/major improvement, and departments should decide how they can best set up plans to facilitate such improvement. Assessment plans should be simple and easily implementable given the usual resources/constraints. A do-able plan is one in which assessment can be completed in one cycle (example: 3 years). Curriculum Mapping Matrix: The development of a curriculum mapping matrix helps identify the list of the courses where each program/major LO is introduced or emphasized, and hence can be used for assessment. Assessment Methods: Ideally, programs/majors are expected to use a variety of assessment methods, including at least one direct and one indirect measure for assessing each learning outcome. Multiple methods can be used to assess each learning outcome in order to assure greater validity of the results. Methods can be active/passive, quantitative/qualitative, and direct/indirect. Capstone courses or senior projects can be used to assess most PLOs. Alumni, employers and students surveys can be used as indirect methods of assessment. Communication/Dissemination of PLOs: In order for the plan to be useful, departments are encouraged to communicate and disseminate the program learning outcomes to prospective and current students in addition to all faculty members in the department. PLO Assessment Reports: After collecting the assessment data, an annual assessment report can be prepared and used to present and analyze the data in a formal way. The report can include tables, charts, statistical data analysis, etc. You can follow the PLO Assessment templates provided by AAU. At the end of an assessment cycle (for example on the third year), one report summarizing the whole process will be prepared and disseminated within the department for improvement plans purposes. 25 Progress All undergraduate programs submitted PLO Assessment Reports for a second year in summer 2012, and completed the three-year PLO assessment cycle with a Three Year Summary Report in summer The reports request information on programs PLOs, approach to PLO assessment, the assessment tools used, the assessment results, changes to be made based on the results, and dissemination plans. Department Summary Reports were first submitted to the faculties/schools for review and summative analysis and then forwarded to CTL, the unit responsible for PLO assessment at the time, and to the Office of the Provost. Examples of Annual and Three-Year Summary PLO Assessment Reports, the AUB Assessment Summary Report, and faculty/school summative analysis for the three year cycle completed in can be found in Appendix E-4. Departments consistently used both direct and indirect methods to assess LO s. Following the submissions of the reports, the AUB Assessment Summary Report (Appendix E-4) stated: In most programs different assessment tools are used to assess each PLO. For direct assessment, rubrics are developed and scored using embedded questions in midterm or final exams. Scoring rubrics are also used for assessing presentations, reports, and 25 Program Assessment Guidelines, AAU Website 66

67 capstone projects. Some departments like Biology and Business are using exit exams to directly assess all the PLOs of graduating students. In OSB, a standard test (COMP-XM Exam) is used for the direct assessment. In all engineering programs, direct assessment is done using the capstone/final year project which spans for a complete academic year. For indirect assessment, exit surveys, alumni surveys and employer surveys are used in most programs. The survey results can be used for triangulation with the direct results. In few programs, focus groups are developed in order to tackle a specific program issue. The three-year assessment process resulted in improvements in most academic programs. Many departments have made or planned changes in curriculum, teaching methods, course scheduling, the assessment process, advising practices, and facilities. For example, in FAFS, the results of the three year PLO assessment of the Nutrition and Food Science revealed weaknesses in some courses in tackling specific PLOs. Discussion of the results in departmental meetings revealed the need to modify the content of specific courses, offer courses every semester instead of only once a year as well as revise some of the assessment methods being used. Based on PLO assessment findings, the Agribusiness program has proposed changes to the curriculum as well as the recruitment of specialized faculty in Agribusiness management in order to provide better learning opportunities for students. In FHS, both undergraduate programs, Medical Laboratory Sciences (MLS) and Environmental Health (ENHL) decided to reassess their PLOs indicating that the original PLOs were too broad and general. This limited the utility of the assessment of their achievement and limited translating the findings into corrective actions at the course or capstone course level. They have recommended an in-depth review of the PLOs to be more specific and revise the current assessment methods to better inform the program to ensure effective assessment and improvement. This recommendation is in line with that of the external reviewers. In FAS, many departments suggested improving the data collection process for their assessment plans for the next cycle. Reflection and assessment of the PLO assessment process, particularly in relation to faculty experiences and perceptions have indicated successes as well as issues to address in the next phase of PLO assessment. In their Three-Year Summary Assessments, many departments reported that the experience and results of the three-year assessment cycle has indicated the need to refine PLOs and their assessment measures. This is an expected outcome given that many programs had developed PLOs for the first time in preparation for this assessment cycle. At the same time, the FAS faculty summary (Appendix E-4) included the observation: Many departments have revised their PLOs and rephrased them with the stated objective of making them more assessable. A general observation is that all revised PLOs have become less in number, some of which considerably so. One wonders whether the real motive is clearer, more representative, and more assessable PLOs; or is it simply more easily assessable ones. Other points raised in the FAS summary relate to implementation and support and the challenge and importance of involving faculty beyond the department chairs. In 2013, CTL conducted a survey of AUB faculty members involved in the assessment process (Appendix E-3). Table 14 lists some notable findings from the survey. These findings suggest success in developing and supporting student learning assessment practices, with work to be done in translating increased use of assessment into a widely shared culture of assessment and more importantly into improved teaching and learning outcomes. This finding also is not surprising given that University-wide assessment of PLOs started only five years ago. 67

68 Table 14: Selected Results: Survey of AUB Faculty Perceptions of Assessment 26 Support for Student Learning Outcomes Assessment [T]he majority of participants are satisfied or very satisfied with the individual support they receive as well as with the support they receive from the faculty and CTL (Page 9) Emphasis on Types of Learning Outcomes Assessment When asked about the emphasis AUB places on different areas of learning outcomes assessment the majority of participants thought that the emphasis is focused more on cognitive development and professional skills (84% and 82% respectively) than on affective development (52%). (Page 11) Importance of Assessing Learning Outcomes to Activities at AUB A large majority of participants thought that assessing learning outcomes was important or very important for accreditation at the program and institutional levels (92% and 86% respectively) and for assessment of program review (88%). Moreover, a large majority thought this assessment was important or very important for improving undergraduate programs and student learning. Finally, 74% of participants believed that assessment was important for improving the quality of instruction. (Page 13) Relationship Between Assessment of Learning Outcomes and Student Learning [T]he majority of participants believed that assessing learning outcomes has a positive impact on student learning with varying degrees. Specifically, 82% thought that the quality of teaching is enhanced if faculty members assess learning outcome regularly and 72% thought that quality of education is enhanced if this assessment is mandated. However, a smaller percentage of participants thought that learning outcomes assess student learning accurately (64%) and 64% believed that assessment have improved education at AUB. Finally, a little more than 50% of participants thought that students are learning more and faculty members are responding to diverse learning styles as a result of assessment of learning outcomes. (page 15) Culture of Assessment [T]he majority of participants (72%) agreed that faculty members are using learning outcomes assessment techniques more than before approximately one quarter of participants believed that faculty members enjoy assessing learning outcomes or discuss improving assessment practices with colleagues. Finally, only half the participants thought that faculty members and administrators agree on the value of assessing learning outcomes. Overall, the implementation of a formal PLO Assessment process has been very successful with near complete participation by undergraduate programs across the University, increasing awareness of the importance of Learning Outcomes and methods for assessment, and improvements being made at the departmental, program, and course level based on assessment of student learning. The challenges to be faced in the next few years are appropriate given that AUB is only now entering its second full cycle of program learning assessment. The University-wide units and resources in place to support student learning assessment and AUB faculty members are capable of meeting these challenges. Established in November 2014, AAU is now responsible for coordinating and monitoring the PLO Assessment process to pair it more closely with the PPR and Academic Strategic Planning. Continuity will be maintained because the same staff person who was responsible for PLO assessment at the CTL has moved to the AAU and continues to direct the program and provide individualized support to faculty as needed. CTL will continue to support LO assessment through faculty workshops and seminars. OIRA will continue to support LO assessment through developing and conducting surveys and tests as needed. The IAC will continue to serve as a resource for coordination and discussion of LO assessment issues among the relevant units (Appendix E-1 represents the units who participate in the IAC and their roles). 26 (BouJaoude & BouZeineddine, 2013) 68

69 C. Assessment General Education Program Student Learning Outcomes Since 2011 General Education at AUB seeks to provide students with essential skills in research and communication, familiarity with significant modes of thought and broad exposure to fields of learning in a diversity of areas cultural, societal, and scientific so that they better learn to think critically and analyze intellectual and social issues in their historical and contemporary contexts from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, and thereby, to enrich their lives by fostering problem solving skills and promoting life-long learning, in a program that embraces the principles of student choice and active learning. A graduating AUB student should demonstrate competency in communication and exposition in English and (when relevant) Arabic and be able to approach, be able to access and critically select information in organized and sophisticated ways, think through, analyze, and explain problems and issues rationally from a variety of methods and perspectives. The student should also attain an appreciation for the potential complexity of ideas and issues and a sense of how approaches to them change over time and may differ depending on historical period and cultural and/or social context. Implementation of AUB s revised GE requirement, which took effect in Fall , was overseen by the Senate GE Committee (established in 2009), which developed measurable learning outcomes for the program; communication and writing skills; and four major disciplinary fields of learning: natural sciences, humanities, social sciences, and quantitative thought (The GE PLOs are listed in Appendix B- 3). The GE committee invited faculty to propose existing courses for GE designation and explain how they would meet GE LOs and assess student learning. By the end of March 2011, the committee had approved 279 courses; in , the number of approved GE courses exceeds 400. Online resources for faculty about the course submission and approval process including the PLOs for GE designation are available on the GE website. Faculty can submit courses through Moodle, which is widely used and supported across the University. The GE three-year assessment cycle which was being developed at the time of the Monitoring Report was completed in 2013 (Appendix E-5). Both direct and indirect assessment methods were used and implemented over six semesters. The chair of the GE Committee of the Senate and the GE Officer coordinated the assessment process with faculty members from different disciplines and collected the assessment data. Assessment data for fifteen GE Program learning outcomes was directly collected using GE rubrics from selected GE courses taken by most AUB students. CAAP standardized tests were also used as direct assessment tools of some of the learning outcomes. Indirect assessment data collected by OIRA from surveys like Exit Surveys and College Outcome Surveys (COS) for the past years were also investigated and used for triangulation of the results. The General Education Program Assessment Report was prepared in February 2013 to describe the successes, challenges, strengths, and weaknesses of the program, primarily based on the extent to which GE program and courses achieve the GE PLO s. The GE Assessment Report indicated that most of the seventeen GE learning outcomes (LOs) are being met. All LOs were achieved with strong or satisfactory results for the areas of Communication Skills (Arabic and English), Social Sciences, and Natural Sciences, while LOs for Quantitative Thought and Humanities were partially met. Of the five general LOs, the Critical Thinking LO was met, the Information Technology LO was partially met, while the Ethical Thinking LO was below target. Two LOs (Teamwork and Intellectual independence in pursuit of knowledge) were not assessable through existing GE courses (this is described in more detail below). Appendix E-5 contains a detailed summary table of the LO direct assessment. An Improvement Plan for the General Education Program (Appendix E-5) was developed in March 2013 and approved by the GE Committee. This plan was based on assessment results and recommended actions for improvements. It includes recommendations for updating GE courses, learning outcomes, GE program processes for certifying and recertifying GE courses, and the assessment methods related to the GE program, in addition to a proposal for a new GE governance model. The recommended governance model was approved in spring and summer 2013 by the Senate and then the Board of 69

70 Trustees and implemented starting AY (The new GE governance structure is detailed in Section Two). Also as a result of the GE program assessment, the process of certifying and re-certifying GE courses has been revised. For initial certification, evaluators from the GE Board will examine a detailed course syllabus in addition to the previously required application form showing how the course addresses the learning outcomes of a specific GE area. A GE certification is given for one year, and recertification is required at the end of the first year and every three years after. For GE course recertification, the evaluators examine a course portfolio that includes the course syllabus, all assignments, presentations, projects, exams and few samples of students work. Portfolios of 72 existing GE courses were reviewed in fall 2013 for GE re-certification, and portfolios of 120 existing GE courses are under review this spring. All course portfolios and review results are uploaded on the GE intranet and shared with the GE Board. Materials used for the certification for an example GE Social Sciences course can be found in Appendix E-6. In addition, subcommittees have been formed to analyze assessment results and recommend solutions to improve achievement of the few LOs whose targets were not fully met or which were not assessable 27. The subcommittees are expected to complete their work in Fall To address the challenges identified by the GE Program Assessment in assessing two LOs related to teamwork and intellectual independence in pursuit of knowledge using GE courses, the Director of the GE Program submitted a proposal to the Academic Development Committee (ADC) of the Senate to add to the GE requirements a 3-credits capstone course that could be offered in the major. This proposal was approved by the ADC, which is now assessing the faculties capacity for implementation. The same proposal also suggested improving the Writing across the Curriculum by adding to the GE requirements a 3-credits Writing in the Discipline course offered in the major. This was approved by the ADC and by the Senate effective in Fall The Writing Center is following up with departments by providing support for successful implementation. (More about the Writing Center s role in this process is described in Section Two.) Also as a result of the GE Program assessment, the GE website was developed and serves an audience of students and faculty with the following features: Online advising tool for students and faculty advisers to help assess a student s GE requirements and choose GE courses to fit their path of study and expand their intellectual horizons. An explanation of GE requirements and regularly updated lists of all GE courses in different areas. Resources for faculty about how to develop and submit courses for GE designation, including the GE Learning Outcomes (Listed in Appendix B-3). The GE Three Year Assessment and subsequent Improvement Plan not only are resulting in concrete improvements to the GE program, but this process and its result can also serve as a model for other academic programs and units to follow. The next GE Program assessment is scheduled for when it will undergo the Periodic Program Review process (see below). II. Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness A. Assessment of Academic Departments (Periodic Program Review) As reported in the 2011 Monitoring Report, as a response to a key recommendation in the 2008 Institutional Self-Study, in AUB established a process for the periodic review of academic programs for the assessment of program effectiveness and alignment with AUB s mission. This process necessarily includes assessment of program and course LOs. The Periodic Program Review Policy states: 27 These learning outcomes fall into the areas of ethics, Information Technology, analysis of the development of world cultures, quantitative thought, intellectual independence in pursuit of knowledge, and teamwork. 70

71 Academic program reviews promote and maintain high quality undergraduate and graduate programs that are effective and consistent with the mission and resources of the department and the University. They verify that AUB s existing programs meet or exceed international standards of academic excellence and also aid in the identification of promising new areas for programmatic offerings. A successful review depends on the proper assessment of course and program learning outcomes and the use of assessment results to improve student learning. While such improvements can and should be made on an annual basis, major programmatic changes usually require a formal process of review. (See Appendix E-7 for the full text of the Periodic Program Review Policy.) Periodic Program Review (PPR) also helps to align curricular revision and development with strategic planning at the institutional and faculty/school levels and allocation of University resources, including funding, for planned initiatives. According to the PPR policy, all undergraduate and graduate programs and departments without professional accreditation are reviewed at least once every six years. Where possible, departments are requested to review all of their degree programs simultaneously and to submit a single self-study report. Departments that review programs for professional accreditation by external boards, commissions, or other agencies follow the schedule and requirements of that body for their accredited programs. As schools with full program accreditation and continuous quality improvement cycles, OSB and HSON have not been included in the first PPR round. See Appendix A-3 for an updated list of AUB s program/faculty accreditations. Implementation of the policy began in October 2010 and is currently in its fourth cycle. The updated schedule and policies, procedures, and guidelines are posted on the website of the Academic Assessment Unit (This information is also included as Appendix E-7 Guidelines for Periodic Program Review). PPR Cycles to Date Cycle One of the PPR focused on four departments in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences: Chemistry, Physics, Philosophy, and Political Studies and Public Affairs. The cycle was completed by the end of Cycle Two included the Faculty of Arts and Sciences: History and Archaeology, Mathematics; The Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences: Nutrition and Food Sciences; the Faculty of Health Sciences: Medical Laboratory Sciences, and Environmental Health; and the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture: Engineering Management. All departments completed the review process in Spring Cycle Three is scheduled for completion in Spring It involves the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture: Civil and Environmental Engineering graduate programs and Mechanical Engineering graduate programs 28 ; The Faculty of Arts and Sciences: Computer Science and Education; and the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences: Agricultural Sciences. Cycle Four, which began in Fall 2013, includes the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture: Electrical and Computer Engineering graduate programs; The Faculty of Arts and Sciences: of Biology, Fine Arts, and Art History; and the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences: Landscape Design and Ecosystem Management. The review process may be summarized as follows and generally takes about 21 months: Faculty members conduct a departmental self-study which provides descriptive and evaluative information about the program, the faculty, and the students; and which includes an action plan that suggests areas and specific plans for improvement. The action plan identifies future program needs, directions, and priorities. External reviewers with significant academic expertise in the discipline under review visit the campus and prepare a separate report, which may lead to modification of the department s plan for program enhancement, creation, or termination. The Department provides a response to the report of the external reviewers. 28 Undergraduate programs in FEA are already thoroughly assessed for ABET, Inc. accreditation. 71

72 The dean consults with the department chair regarding the reviewers report and to evaluate the department s action plan. An internal review committee studies these documents and drafts a final report to the provost. The department s action plan, with any revisions based on feedback from the external reviewers, dean, and provost, is approved in a conclusive meeting attended by the provost, dean, chairperson, and AAU chair. Upon completion of the PPR process, the department submits annual reports to the AAU. There will be annual reporting on progress and needed resources. Institutional resources have been put into place to support departments as they engage in the PPR process. In 2010, a PPR coordinator was appointed (who now serves as the Chair of the Academic Assessment Unit) who supports and monitors departments during the PPR process. Detailed PPR guidelines and a template are available for departments (previously on the website of the Office of the Provost, now on the AAU website). Upon request, OIRA provides departments undergoing PPR with standard program data (e.g., statistics on SAT scores, admissions, enrollment, gender, nationality, retention, graduation), as well as additional data (e.g., courses offered, teaching faculty, research output, facilities) and findings from specially commissioned surveys (e.g., of alumni, employers, current students). A budget is maintained to support this initiative; it funds: a) one course release for two semesters or a one-month summer salary for the faculty member charged with drafting the departmental self-study; and b) honoraria plus travel and other expenses for two to three external reviewers for each department under review. The consolidation of oversight and coordination of the PLO assessment process and the PPR process in the AAU is expected to facilitate further integration of program learning outcomes into departmental self-studies and subsequent action plans and eventually resources allocation. The PPR process was a beneficial experience for all departments who completed the review as it helped identify strengths and areas for improvement. Many program strengths and achievements have come to light through the PPR process. For example, the external reviewers report for the Nutrition and Food Sciences program stated: The review team was generally impressed with the Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences. The faculty and staff are committed. The students are of high quality, engaged, and satisfied. The program is the top among its peers. The general environment can be summarized as follows: 1. Morale in the department is very good. There is a true sense of community (all in it together). 2. Leadership in the department is excellent and the transition to the new chairperson has gone well. 3. Barriers to research were identified. Addressing these barriers would improve research productivity. 4. Facilities are generally adequate but productivity would increase if more specialized equipment were available in the department. Another example of program success was indicated by the external reviewers for the Mechanical Engineering department: 1. The Master of Engineering: major in Applied Energy program at AUB is quite unique and is in a strong position of relevance and gaining prestige in the region. This is coupled with the specific focus of research on coherent areas in energy efficiency, manufacturing processes, and mechatronics, which gives the AUB program an edge when compared to similar institutions in the region. 2. AUB is a well-established university, with long historical traditions dating back to the last century. There is clear recognition of AUB graduates. 72

73 3. The presence of AUB in one of the best areas of Beirut, and the multicultural and social environment should make hiring new faculty more attractive as compared to newer institutions in the region. 4. A more established research faculty track record at AUB is very positive compared to KAUST, KUSTAR, etc. 5. AUB students are well-trained engineers, with plenty of practical experience as a result of the rich laboratory and design practices they attain throughout their education. 6. At AUB, enthusiastic and high-caliber students are strong components of the program, who become great ambassadors for the high quality of the program. The final outcome for each departmental PPR is a set of recommendations for improvements of curricula, labs, facilities, and/or governance (Action Plan). In some cases, weaknesses in programs had been perceived previous to the implementation of the PPR but not addressed. Now, these weaknesses are being addressed because of the PPR which results in an Action Plan with an implementation schedule for the recommendations that is endorsed by the dean and the provost. Some departments implemented recommended improvements even before finalizing the review process, in other cases implementation of recommendations is on-going or on hold until appropriate resources can be identified. The types of program weakness that have been identified through the PPR process can be generally categorized into the following areas: curricular reforms and/or changes; upgrades to facilities and equipment; and revised program structure, governance and/or external relations. Table 15 details examples of improvements which have been recommended and/or implemented in each of these areas. Table 15: Examples of improvements recommended and/or implemented as a result of PPRs Curricular Reforms and Changes Curricular revisions emerging from PPR recommendations vary in complexity and needed resources. Some of the curricular recommendations are minor and do not have budget implications and are addressed by reviewed departments during or soon after the review process. Examples of these changes include introducing new courses, a research/design team project, minor changes for updating undergraduate or graduate curricula; or redefining program focus. For major curricular changes, the provost forwards the academic aspects of the program action plan to the Academic Development Committee (or Board of Graduate Studies, if applicable), which then reviews and forwards the plan to the Senate for approval. Changes that require adding faculty lines to departments require significant resources and cannot always be implemented immediately, although the PPR process is facilitating the distribution of faculty lines based on assessment. The Action Plans for Philosophy, Physics, Political Science and Public Administration (PSPA), Mathematics, and Chemistry departments all included recommendations for new faculty lines. The departments were asked to provide detailed proposals for the requested lines, and some new lines have already been approved, including three new assistant professors starting in Mathematics in Fall and a new line for PSPA for which there is an open search. Upgrades to Facilities and Equipment Almost all PPRs raise space issues; some are minor but others are major and require significant investment to address. Examples of minor space issues include renovation and space partitions for offices, classroom renovations, modernizing of classrooms and labs, and upgrades of department computers. For example, the Philosophy department Action Plan recommended the provision of three additional offices to the department. The Philosophy department reported in May 2014 that two additional offices were so far allocated. The Chemistry department was asked to work on optimizing space usage, and to convert some space to accommodate additional graduate students in modern research laboratories. Space issues were also raised by the reviewers in on-going reviews such as the Math Department and the Engineering Management graduate program. The Math Department Action Plan recommended solutions to the space issues. The Math Department reported in April 2014 that in 73

74 coordination with the FAS Associate Dean a plan has been developed to redesign existing large offices not currently allocated to the department to accommodate all current instructors, vacating their current offices for three new professors who will be joining the department next year. This plan will be implemented over the coming summer. Revised Program Structure, Governance and/or Faculty Relations In some cases, governance issues and/or challenges in inter-faculty relations are raised through the PPR process. For example, the Chemistry Department s PPR Action Plan recommended increased dialogue among all Chemistry faculty members, and that Chemistry Faculty meetings should be held at least once a month. The Chemistry Department has already positively acted to these recommendations. The Mathematics Department s PPR Action Plan recommended improvement in coordination and fairness across sections for selected courses. After one year, the department reported that based on the recommendation of the curriculum committee, Math 101, 102, 203, 204, 201, 202, 218, 251, Stat 201, 210, 230 are all being coordinated. The PPR Action Plans and annual progress reports for Philosophy and Nutrition and Food Science are included in Appendix E-8. B. Ongoing Work of the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) acts as a resource and repository for official institutional statistics, information, and policies; formulates and implements data-gathering activities such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups for a wide variety of internal and external uses; develops, administers, and reports assessments required by the University for admission, placement, and other educational purposes; serves as a testing center for various international administrations and organizations and administer instructor and course evaluations, and provides feedback to faculty members to improve teaching. A comprehensive list of OIRA s assessment activities and their uses for educational and institutional improvement is included in Appendix E-9. OIRA regularly administers a number of surveys and standard tests for assessment purposes that support both assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness. Instructor Course Evaluation (ICE): Conducted each term in collaboration with the faculties to evaluate courses and teaching, this survey is used for curricular and instructional improvement and also as a broad indicator of teaching proficiency for the reappointment of instructional faculty. AUB recently moved the ICE from paper administration to on-line. The first semester resulted in an expected drop in the response rate. Measures have since been taken to improve the online response rate, including withholding release of grades for two weeks for students who do not complete ICE surveys. This action resulted in response rate improvement of almost double after only one semester of implementation from 37-40% to almost 80% in fall and spring of AUB has acquired new software for online administration of the ICE which will allow students to complete the ICE with mobile devices in addition to computers, a development that is expected to further improve the online response rate. Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP): This is an ACT test annually administered to a sample of junior students to assess their skills in critical thinking, mathematical reasoning, scientific reasoning, reading, and writing. College Outcomes Survey (COS): OIRA has developed (with ACT s knowledge and permission after the ACT COS was stopped in 2012) a version of the COS which is used to assess student s perceptions of their growth (intellectual, social, personal, interpersonal, preparedness for graduate study or career) over the academic year. 74

75 Student Registration Survey: Introduced in 2000, this annual survey assesses student satisfaction with the various aspects of the registration process and now also includes questions used to evaluate and improve New Student Orientation. Exit Survey: The Exit Survey assesses the perceptions of graduating students about their years at AUB and also gathers information on their future plans (e.g., graduate school, immediate employment). Alumni Survey: Administered by OIRA every three years until 2009, this survey is now conducted by the Office of Alumni Affairs, which is part of University Advancement. Employee Satisfaction Survey: Also administered every three years, this survey monitors faculty and staff satisfaction with their roles and the University. UCLA HERI Faculty Survey: This comprehensive survey of the issues relevant to professorial faculty is administered every three years. Findings are closely monitored by the Provost s Office. Library Survey: Each year, faculty, students and staff are asked for feedback on services offered by the University Libraries. Food Services Survey: OIRA annually assesses satisfaction with AUB s various cafeterias. Advising Survey: All undergraduate students were surveyed in Spring 2014 as a recommendation of the Advising Task Force. The survey will be administered annually to assess strengths and weaknesses in the advising program and provide data for decision-making to improve undergraduate advising at AUB. Specific findings and data trends are presented to the appropriate administrators and managers after each survey. The aggregate results of most surveys are posted online on the OIRA website. Data mining and special analyses are provided upon request. Such analyses may include input from focus groups convened by OIRA to explore significant changes in findings. Other surveys are conducted on an ad hoc basis to inform planning and decision-making. Some examples from the last three years include: Freshman Student Survey: Conducted in collaboration with the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, this survey is occasionally conducted to inform improvements to the freshman experience. Graduate Student Survey: Soon after its establishment in 2012, the Graduate Council requested this survey of the concerns and needs of graduate students. New Student Orientation Survey: Orientation is closely linked to student satisfaction with the registration process as well as overall student life. This survey was requested by the Enrollment Management Unit (EMU), which revised the orientation process significantly for Fall Student Loan Survey: Before AUB negotiated a new agreement with local banks for the provision of student loans, it conducted this survey to assess student needs. OIRA also conducts more specialized surveys to support academic program reviews (for PRR, PLO, or program accreditation purposes) or the development of new graduate degrees, whether disciplinary or interdisciplinary. OIRA makes institutional data available to the public and/or external bodies in a number of ways: Facts and Figures: These fast facts which may be accessed through the About AUB section of the University s website provide essential information and are regularly updated. Fact Book: Published each spring by OIRA, the Fact Book provides a general overview of the University, and information and statistics on: student enrollment, graduation, and retention; tuition and financial aid; academic programs and degrees awarded; faculty and staff numbers and salaries; financial expenditures; physical facilities; selected academic and administrative services; and research centers and programs. 75

76 Common Data Set: Specific data on all aspects of university life are provided annually to the College Board and published on the OIRA website. The Admissions Office also posts consumer information for prospective and current students on its Financial Aid website. External Bodies or Aggregate Surveys to which AUB Reports Data Annually: College Board s Annual Survey of Colleges, Peterson s Annual Survey of Graduate and Professional Institution, Peterson's Annual Survey of Undergraduate Institutions, Annual Survey of Undergraduate Financial Aid online survey, QS World University Rankings, Middle States Commission on Higher Education (Institutional Profile), National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity (Delaware Study) C. Uses of Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness to Improve Policies, Services, and Programs The significant work and recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study spurred the development and revision of policies, programs, and services to enable the University to better accomplish its mission. What follows is a description of the role assessment has played in some of these new and/or improved policies, programs, and services. In the last five years, 35 University policies have been revised or developed, most often involving a process of assessment and benchmarking. The Enrollment Management Unit, the Graduate Studies Council, and the General Education Board were all established as a result of assessment activity. These initiatives and/or units continue to use assessment to guide their ongoing work to improve student services and educational programs. Also described below are the results of OIRA s 2013 Assessment Survey which give a broad view on uses of assessment across the University. Enrollment Management Unit The Enrollment Management Unit was established as a response to recommendations in the 2008 Self- Study. The EMU uses assessment data related to enrollment and student services to guide its work and ongoing policy and practice recommendations to the University, all of which are described in detail in Section Two. Below are a few brief examples of AMU s use of assessment for institutional planning and improvement: Many of EMU s accomplishments to date are responses to specific recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. Different methods of assessment were used to assess and make recommendations on University policies for admissions related to composite score calculations, the School Record Standardization (SRS) Method, and the SAT requirement. (Details are documented in Appendix B-1: Inventory of Responses to Self-Study Recommendations; Recommendations and 8.1.2). EMU s efforts to improve the course registration and scheduling process at AUB are informed by an annual Student Registration Survey. In addition to other IT solutions described in Section 2, EMU can now provide a schedule assessment report to faculties/schools each semester. Since implementation of these solutions and a FAS pre-scheduling initiative, the number of Time Conflicts and Closed Sections failure messages sent to students in Student Record System dropped by 15% and 35% respectively after only one semester. EMU is continually improving New Student Orientation (Details are documented in Appendix B-1: Inventory of Responses to Self-Study Recommendations; Recommendation 9.4.iii.1) based on results of the annual Student Registration Survey which includes questions about New Student Orientation. EMU did a comparative study of freshman and sophomore performance and acceptance into majors in order to assess the lower retention rate for freshman. The study identified four main issues: a) poor performance in the freshman year; b) inability to join the first choice of major; c) poor preparation for the sophomore year; and, to a lesser extent, d) weak advising. As a result the Enrollment Management Strategic Planning Unit included recommendations for more effective advising, including increased support for all first year students. Also as a result, changes have been made to the freshman admissions process to admit students who are well-rounded and capable of 76

77 succeeding at AUB. More recently, a new Advising unit at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences 29 was established to support freshman and majorless students. (Details are documented in Appendix B-1: Inventory of Responses to Self-Study Recommendations; Recommendation 8.1.5) EMU s Student Advising Assessment and Improvement Initiative was developed in response to COS Survey results about undergraduate student s level of satisfaction with advising. An annual Advising Survey has been introduced this year to further guide improvements in this area. (The 2013 Advising Survey is included in Appendix E-10). Graduate Council As described in detail in Section Two, the Graduate Council (GC) was established in 2012 as a response to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study and the Graduate Task Force (GTF) which was formed in Shortly after its establishment, the GC commissioned a special graduate student survey (Appendix E-11) from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment which helped in setting the Council s goals, objectives, and initiatives. The survey found that graduate students are generally satisfied with the academic, administrative and intra-departmental aspects (faculty, student services, library resources), which indicates that the University is achieving its core educational mission. The survey indicated that there is room for improvement in opportunities for research exposure; inter-disciplinary and professional networking; career services; facilities in terms of space; and Graduate Assistantships. Using the survey results, the GC has developed an action plan in which the GC is strategically coordinating the combined efforts of student organizations and AUB units to effectively meet the graduate students needs articulated in the survey. The GC has developed interrelated responses to create a vibrant graduate community, increase research exposure, and improve career guidance. The GC helped establish the Graduate Student Society (GSS) which now operates independently as a student organization that collaborates with GC as needed. The GSS is both social and academic, thus address all three issues mentioned above. The GSS, GC, AUB Libraries, and the Writing Center have collaborated to establish an annual calendar of events related to research, thesis writing, and advisor/advisee relations. The CTL, Department Chairs, and key faculty members are also involved as needed. GC and the Arts and Humanities Initiative (AHI) started an independent graduate life student working group to address the needs of students in the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences (including needs articulated in the survey) and the working group s efforts are being championed by faculty members in FAS. This student-led effort is seeking space for the purpose of building graduate community by obtaining currently unused or underused space in coordination with the dean and individual faculty members. GC plans on encouraging other sectors of the student population to organize efforts such as the above mentioned student group as it is proving to be an effective way to navigate space issues for graduate students on campus. The GC has also been promoting exchange opportunities for research (in collaboration with OIP); and publishes a newsletter to share graduate research news across campus. Finally, the GC has been instrumental in further developing a proposal drafted by GTF regarding to improve the University s Graduate Assistantship policy. With additional input from an ad-hoc committee consisting of faculty/school representatives, the revised GA policy proposal has been submitted to the Office of the Provost for consideration. The aims of the proposal are to (1) introduce a more comprehensive policy; (2) increase GA stipends; and (3) fully utilize GA labor resources by allowing GA's to be appointed across Departments and Faculties and in Academic Support Units. GE Program and GE Board As described in detail earlier in this chapter, AUB s current GE Program was developed as a response to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. A comprehensive assessment of the program and its learning outcomes was conducted after three years of program implementation in This assessment revealed significant achievements of program goals as well as a few weaknesses. The weaknesses were addressed 29 All freshmen at AUB are initially admitted into FAS. They join a major in FAS or another faculty/school in their sophomore year based on application and admission to the major. 77

78 in a comprehensive improvement plan with actionable recommendations, including the development of the GE Board; many of these recommendations including the creation of the GE Board have already been implemented. Development and Revision of Policies In the last five years, the Office of the Provost has spear-headed the revision and/or creation of 35 University policies related to academic excellence, the student educational experience, academic governance/administration, and institutional integrity (Appendix A-5). The process of revision and development of these policies has been characterized by assessment of current practices and external benchmarking. Often this process is done in the context of a committee or task force made up of faculty and relevant administrative representatives as appropriate. A few examples of this process are represented in Table 16. Table 16: Assessment and Benchmarking for Policy Revision/Development Approved Policies Revised Recruitment, Promotion, and Reappointment Policies and Guidelines General Education Governance Policies Institutional Integrity Policies 30 Unified Faculty Bylaws Policies Under Development Faculty Workload Policy 31 Tenure Policy 32 Faculty Compensation 33 Assessment of Current Practices President, provost, and deans conducted assessment 3-Year GE Program Assessment Harassment and Discrimination Policy Committee Risk Reduction and Management Committee (focus: Human Research Protection Program) Assessment and integration of pre-existing individual faculty bylaws Feedback from deans and chairs Faculty Workload Committee Internal reporting on faculty teaching loads Second Task Force on Tenure Faculty Survey Task Force on Faculty Compensation Aggregate historical data Benchmarking Best practices at peer U.S. universities Best practices at peer U.S. universities Best practices at two regional and 10 U.S. universities Lebanese and U.S. laws Best practices at U.S. universities Current practices at U.S. universities National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity Extensive literature review Current practices at U.S. and regional universities regarding tenure and retirement policies and compensation Average U.S. faculty salaries by discipline Best practices for peer universities Survey of Assessment Activities by Administrative and Academic Units In September 2013, OIRA conducted a survey of assessment tools and processes employed by academic and administrative units reporting to the chief operating officer. The purpose of the survey was to establish a baseline for unit-level assessment across the University that will inform planning for future assessment initiatives. The survey will be conducted every two years. Heads of units were supplied with a 30 More about these policies is described in Section Two. 31 This is currently being revised based on Faculty feedback. There are plans for approval by Senate and BOT in Work to develop a Tenure Policy for AUB is described in Section Two. 33 The Task Force began its work in spring 2014 and will continue through

79 template to provide information about assessment tools used on a regular basis; ad hoc (one-time) assessments conducted by the unit in the past three-to-four years; how assessments are used for evaluation and decision-making; and examples of how these regular or ad hoc assessments have been used to change policies/procedures or to otherwise inform improvements. A summary of the 2013 Assessment Survey can be found in Appendix E-12. Twenty-three administrative units and eighteen academic units completed the survey representing a cross-section of the University, including major administrative units; Table 17 lists units who responded to the 2013 Assessment Survey. Table 17: AUB Units That Responded to 2013 Assessment Survey Administrative Units Enrolment Management Unit IT Enterprise Systems Center for Teaching and Learning Physical Plant Department Alumni Relations- Advancement Office Environmental Health, Safety and Risk Management Office of Development Registrar's Office Center for Civic Engagement and Community Service Procurement & Contracts Administration Human Resources Office of the Chief Financial Officer Internal Audit IT Networking Continuing Education Center Office of Admissions Graduate Council IT Academic Core Processes and Systems Office of Student Affairs Hariri School of Nursing Academic Units Pharmacology and toxicology Dermatology Mathematics English Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs Business Information and Decision Systems Track Psychiatry Economics OSB Computer Science Center for Arab and Middle Eastern Studies Management, Marketing, and Entrepreneurship FAFS, Dean's Office Experimental Pathology, Immunology & Microbiology Faculty of Health Sciences Radiation Oncology OIRA All units reported regular assessment activity most often annually, twice a year, or quarterly. Fewer units reported use of ad hoc assessments. Examples of assessment tools used reported by administrative units included: OIRA surveys, Evaluation Forms, Oracle Reports, excel sheets, databases, laboratory safety inspections, Human Resources Departmental Audits, Financial Ratio Analysis, and employee performance reviews. Examples of assessment tools used reported by academic units included: Program Learning Outcome assessments, Periodic Program Review, OIRA surveys, Lime surveys (alumni, exit, other), employee performance reviews, evaluation forms, rubrics, embedded questions, tests and course grades, focus groups, and interviews. Almost all units reported using survey results to improve services 79

80 and or unit performance. Table 18 provides examples of improvements made based on assessment by administrative and academic units that were reported in the 2013 Assessment Survey. Table 18: Examples of Improvements Made Based on Assessment by Administrative and Academic Units Administrative Units Enhance services Improve the quality of workshops Improve alumni events Improvement in the services provided such as reducing the response time of the Emergency Response Team through motivating them Ensure that best candidates are recruited to meet the Improve the quality of the seminar Improve lab safety Improvements in specific procedures Improve orientation Improve the quality of PLO activities Consolidating purchases of similar items Improve training, assess weaknesses Align policies to labor law and other legal requirements Enhance satisfaction with advising Review the exit interviews and find ways to retain good employees Enhance effectiveness of scheduling Academic Units Changes to course syllabus/content and/or program curricula (most cited example) Promotions and pay raises based on outcomes (cited numerous times) Institution of simulation lab for practice and a summer practicum as students felt they needed more practice. Added content to courses such as geriatrics as required by accrediting body. Promotion of teaching effectiveness seminars and use of team based learning, blended learning and case based learning for better student engagement. Corrective actions in the advising process Curriculum changes such as requesting that science faculty add biology prior to human morphology and then combining human morphology with physiology to create a 5 credit course over 2 semesters. Offering courses in block form, reducing credits from 6/clinical course to 5 to better align ourselves with US schools of nursing, Organizational adjustments are made based on outcomes of assessment Changes to assessment approaches such as administering the final exam as a take home exam Monitor the residents progress Now use a peer evaluation approach Used in decisions to allocate GAs to faculty members in next semester Deciding on courses to offer Start a new program or not Included in the market study of new program proposals Improvement, revise forms & process 80

81 E. Strategic Planning and Assessment In the heart of a region in transition, and in light of rapidly changing global developments economic, technological, social, political, environmental, and medical the University understands that there are new imperatives for excellence in education, research, and service. The Unified Academic Strategic Plan 2014 (Appendix A-1) is nearing finalization and many of the articulated initiatives are already being implemented. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the Unified Academic Strategic Plan 2014 are currently being developed by the Academic Assessment Unit in close coordination with the Office of the Provost. AUB s processes for the assessment of the achievement of strategic planning goals are evolving, gleaning improvements based on the experience of the implementation and assessment of AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan (Appendix E-13) as the University plans to implement the new 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan (Appendix A-1). More details about strategic planning development, implementation, and assessment processes at AUB follow. AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan (Appendix E-13) was based on the consolidation and alignment of various academic and non-academic planning units strategic plans 34 including the Medical Center s AUBMC 2020 Vision (Appendix A-8). It also incorporated major recommendations from the 2008 Institutional Self-Study. This work was facilitated by the Office of Strategy Management (OSM) 35 and guided by a University-wide Steering Committee. In order to benefit from the 2009 Strategic Plan, AUB adopted a strategy review process that consisted of the following processes: Monitoring the extent of implementation of the planned strategies. Analyzing the results of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Identifying appropriate corrective action as needed. Initiating discussion and achieving agreement on these recommendations. The strategy review process was supported by OIRA s assessment division. Eight teams representing relevant faculties/schools and units corresponding to the strategic plan s five core and three foundational goals were assembled. Each team divided its assigned goal into a set of objectives and then isolated measures (KPIs) to monitor progress in achieving each of these objectives. At the conclusion of this process, 59 objectives and over 185 measures had been identified for assessment purposes. Objectives and measures have continued to undergo periodic revision as the University gained more experience with strategy review. At the time of the first comprehensive review in 2012, each objective was assigned to an analyst who examined the relevant measures and suggested corrective plans of action as necessary. For monitoring, OSM presented KPI assessment at special meetings attended by senior administrators, including the deans of the faculties/schools. (Slides from presentations of the 2012 strategy review are included in Appendix E-14). OSM met with heads of the University s faculties/schools and major administrative units to conduct annual reviews of progress in meeting relevant institutional strategic planning goals. Each of these units worked with OSM to develop and track measures relevant to their strategic plans and their overall operations, including programming. With the start of the second strategic planning cycle, the strategy reviews were superseded by broader evaluations (e.g., formal SWOT analyses) that included successes/setbacks encountered when implementing the first plan. Program accreditation is also a factor in faculty/school annual assessment since it often requires faculties/schools to monitor specific metrics and report changes to accrediting bodies. AUB accomplished many of the objectives of the 2009 Strategic Plan as evidenced throughout this report; some which require long-term efforts were carried over into the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. 34 Some of these strategic plans are available at the AAU website. 35 The Office of Strategy Management was subsumed under the AAU in 2014 after the retirement of its Director. 81

82 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan The 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan (Appendix A-1) is the result of investigation and dialogue in AUB s six faculties/schools, key administrative academic-support units, and task forces on pressing diverse issues facing the University such as expanding graduate studies, reinstating tenure, revitalizing arts and humanities, strengthening STEM fields, and promoting interdisciplinary programs. The strategic planning process was guided by the Office of the Provost with support for unit-level strategic planning from OSM. During this thorough and inclusive process, stakeholders identified key strengths to leverage, challenges to address, and opportunities for maximum impact. Strategic goals were set and the infrastructure and resources necessary for their achievement was identified. Each faculty/school developed a strategic plan. In addition, three university-wide strategic planning units were created for Enrollment Management and Student Services; Academic Support; and Institutes, Centers, and Museums which also developed Strategic Plans. These plans are available on the AAU website. Following the development of these plans, the Academic Review Committee, chaired by the Provost and comprised of the deans of faculties/schools, the chairs of the three university-wide strategic planning units, and key administrators reviewed each strategic plan in light of the University s priorities. The strategic planning process was informed by the 2011 strategy review meeting mentioned above which assessed AUB s achievement to date of its 2009 Strategic Plan and informed goal-setting for the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Other forms of assessment also contributed to the new plan, including external benchmarking, SWOT and data analyses conducted by faculty/school and university-wide committees (enrollment management/student services; academic support; and centers/museums) during the unit-level strategic planning process. The results of these evaluations and appropriate strategies to address them were thoroughly discussed during a series of Academic Review Team meetings which took place between January and June See Appendix A-1a for a timeline of the Strategic Planning process and roster of the individuals and units involved. In Fall 2012, the Office of the Provost prepared the draft 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan document and it was discussed in a December 2012 retreat of the Board of Deans (which includes the President, Provost, COO, VP Advancement, VP Legal Affairs, VP Regional External Programs) and subsequently shared through presentations to the Board of Trustees. In , a summarized and refined version of the 2014 Academic Strategic Plan was developed for dissemination to the BOT and final feedback from deans and key administrators. It is expected that this plan will soon be approved by the BOT and that subsequently key administrative units, such as IT, will align their own strategic plans with the 2014 Academic Strategic Plan. Many initiatives included in the plan are already underway. With the new 2014 Academic Strategic Plan close to finalization, KPIs for the institutional goals and initiatives are being developed by the AAU in close coordination with the Office of the Provost. The structures for assessing achievement of these KPIs as well as developing and monitoring unit-level KPIs for academic and administrative support units are still evolving. One of the lessons learned from the assessment activities for the 2009 Strategic Plan was the need to reduce the complexity of the process and reduce the number of KPIs to make tracking manageable, accessible, and useful to the end users. This lesson will inform the new structures created for monitoring the implementation of the 2014 Academic Strategic Plan and the related unit level plans. III. Future Directions in Assessment In the five years since the 2008 Self-Study, AUB has had time to iterate a process of student learning assessment (Standard 14) in relation to learning outcomes and assessment of institutional effectiveness (Standard 7) in relation to implementation of AUB s first strategic plan. These interrelated assessment processes have brought the University into greater alignment with MSCHE standards and continue to do so. Based on the advances made in student learning assessment during this period, the assessment of AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan, and the development of AUB s 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan, as well as the assessment of the processes themselves, the University established the Academic Assessment 82

83 Unit (AAU under the Office of the Provost to manage and coordinate essential planning and assessment functions. The AAU centralizes University academic assessment functions and facilitates the following activities: Periodic Program Reviews (PPR), Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) assessment, General Education PLO assessment, and KPI tracking. In addition, the AAU provides technical assistance (training, data, KPI tracking) for unit-level quality assurance assessments as needed for administrative academic support units. The AAU closely coordinates with the OIRA, which administers and analyzes surveys and tests, and collects other forms of institutional data for internal/external assessment and reporting. The Chair and staff of the AAU bring significant experience and institutional memory in the assessment work they are charged with coordinating. The AAU Chair is a full professor with 27 years of experience at AUB and was part of the 2008 Self-Study Working Group for Institutional Assessment and Student Learning Assessment. He chaired the GE Committee from 2009 to 2013 and is currently the GE Director. He also has coordinated all PPR activities since the first cycle in The Assistant Director of General Education and Assessment served as the General Education and Assessment Officer at the Center for Teaching and Learning to support the work of the GE Committee and coordinate and support faculty implementing University-wide PLO assessment from 2012 to At AAU, she continues to coordinate and support GE and PLO Assessment activity; in addition she is developing KPIs and tracking methods to measure institutional performance based on the 2014 Academic Strategic Plan. The Executive Officer for the AAU formerly served in the same role for the Office of Strategy Management and follows up on the various administrative tasks related the GE program and PPR. Bringing coordination of the varied planning and assessment functions into one unit under the Office of the Provost provides opportunities to create more linkages between assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness with strategic planning and budgeting for academic and administrative academic support units. One initial step in this direction is the streamlining of annual reporting on PLO Assessment and PPR Action Plan Progress Reports. Starting in 2015, department chairs will prepare an annual departmental assessment report which will be submitted to the dean of their faculty/school and to the AAU. This report will follow a template provided by AAU (See Appendix F-3) that contains both PLO assessment activities including assessment methods, data sources, data analysis, and improvement plan, as well as a complete improvement plan with estimated resources needed for specific actions for improvement recommended on the basis of various sources of assessment (LO assessment, PPR Action Plan, KPIs, or Accreditation Requirements). When the department submits its annual budget request, this assessment report and improvement plan will be used to prioritize the planned activities. CONCLUSION As one faculty member on the PRR Committee stated in a PRR review meeting, a paradigm shift has occurred at AUB in relation to assessment. All academic units are engaging in assessing student learning outcomes and the unit s achievement of strategic and mission-based goals. The Enrollment Management Unit and Graduate Council are using assessment to improve student services and enrollment-related issues in coordination with academic and administrative academic support units. The University s 2014 Academic Strategic Plan has four focused mission-based goals each with concrete initiatives for which KPIs and tracking mechanisms are currently under development. The AAU is well positioned to consolidate and further improve upon AUB s assessment of student learning and institutional effectiveness, with the oversight of the Institutional Assessment Committee and the Office of the Provost, and in coordination with the IAC s other member units: the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Enrollment Management Unit, and the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. 83

84 SECTION 6: LINKED INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESSES The American University of Beirut (AUB) allocates significant resources to meet strategic priorities which have been identified through assessment and strategic planning. Accomplishment of many of the 2009 Strategic Plan (Appendix E-13) and AUBMC 2020 Vision goals (Appendix A-8), as well as allocations and fundraising commitments to accomplish goals outlines in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan signify the University s commitment to allocate resources based on strategic planning. The University is currently facing the same challenges felt across higher education: increasing costs related to faculty, staff, research, and facilities and the resulting increases in tuition. There is a limit to which the student population can absorb these increases and increased tuition can limit the University s achievement of a strategic goal for socio-economic diversity in the student body. Affordable Education is a strategic priority in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and AUB is adopting a multi-faceted approach to achieve this goal. At the same time, faculty compensation may need to be increased to address inflation and market forces that affect recruitment and retention. The new 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan as well as the ambitious AUBMC 2020 Vision will require significant resources to implement fully although most of these resources will be raised through the upcoming comprehensive fundraising campaign. Given the various forces affecting the University s operating and capital budgets, the University wants to continue to improve and clarify its planning and budgeting processes to ensure mission fulfillment as well as accomplishment of strategic priorities. The University has identified the following goals for a revised linked budgeting and planning processes (including setting of fundraising priorities): 1) Maintain current operations at appropriate levels to achieve the University s mission based on student enrollment, faculty population, and assessment of institutional and/or unit/program-level effectiveness (evidence-based). 2) Respond to priorities articulated in institutional strategic plans (AUB s 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and AUBMC s 2020 Vision) as well as unit-level strategic plans and/or action plans for improvement based on formal assessment processes (e.g. PLO assessment and PPR). 3) Maintain a balanced operating budget on an annual basis. 4) Reduce tuition dependency by increasing the endowment and increasing alternative revenue streams such as executive and continuing education; e-learning 36 ; consulting projects through regional external programs, faculties/schools, and centers/institutes; and technology/innovation transfer. 5) Improve the budgeting and planning process to systematically include increased communication with and appropriate levels of input from various campus constituencies. Since the 2008 Self-Study, the University has been working to improve the linkages between budgeting and strategic planning to promote strategy-based budgeting starting with rigorous internal assessment as well as benchmarking with regional and international universities. Evaluation of the implementation of the 2009 Strategic Plan, the results of AUB s 2008 Self-Study, along with academic and institutional assessments such as the Periodic Program Reviews have provided an informed starting point for analysis and discussion to guide budgeting and resource allocation. I. Overview of Current Planning and Budgeting Processes A. Strategic Planning and Assessment The strategic planning process for the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan (Appendix A-1) began at the level of units and faculties with internal assessment and benchmarking with regional and international universities. Evaluation of the implementation of the 2009 Strategic Plan, the results of 36 This is currently in the exploratory phase as described in Section Three. 84

85 AUB s 2008 Institutional Accreditation Self-Study, along with academic and institutional assessments such as Periodic Program Reviews provided an informed starting point for analysis and discussion. Task forces on pressing diverse issues facing the University such as expanding graduate studies, reinstating tenure, revitalizing arts and humanities, strengthening STEM fields, and promoting interdisciplinary programs also contributed to the process. Each faculty/school developed a strategic plan. In addition, three university-wide strategic planning units were created for Enrollment Management and Student Services; Academic Support; and Institutes, Centers, and Museums. During this thorough and inclusive process, stakeholders identified key strengths to leverage, challenges to address, and opportunities for maximum impact. Strategic goals were set and the infrastructure and resources necessary for their achievement was identified. Then, the Academic Review Committee, chaired by the Provost and comprised of the deans of faculties/schools, the chairs of the three university-wide strategic planning units, and key administrators reviewed each strategic plan in light of the University s priorities. Through this integrative process, the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan was established. This plan provides an opportunity for all members of the AUB community to play an active role in shaping the future of AUB and our region. By working towards this unified vision and investing our resources accordingly, we will sustain AUB s regional leadership and contributions, and fulfill the University s aspirations for global excellence and impact. Based on the University s experience of assessing and monitoring progress in achieving the goals of its 2009 Strategic Plan, KPIs and an assessment plan for the 2014 Unified Strategic Plan are currently under development with a focus on reducing the number of KPIs and the complexity of the assessment process to improve accessibility and usability of assessment data. The Office of the Provost recently hired a Senior Budget Officer who will make recommendations regarding linking budgeting to this assessment plan. B. Financial Planning and Budgeting The financial planning process is based on a multiple-year time horizon. AUB s operational plan is revised annually and encompasses a three-year time horizon where year one represents the annual budget and years two and three are forecasted expectations for the operations of AUB. Equally, the capital plan is a ten-year plan with year one representing the approved budget followed by nine years of forecasted expectations in capital expenditures. The development of the University s financial plans (operating and capital) are the result of a process that takes place throughout the year. Deliverables to the Board of Trustees are usually presented for approval at full meetings of the Board of Trustees in March, June and November of each year. Appendix F-1 details the major components of the annual planning and budgeting cycle of the University. The Finance Committee of the Board of Trustees provides direction for the full Board as well as the University leadership for fiscal responsibility. The Finance Committee at its regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year reviews the University s revenues and expenditures, balance sheet and other matters related to its on-going solvency. The Finance Committee approves the annual budgets and submits them to the full Board for approval. This committee also ensures the maintenance of an appropriate capital structure and oversees the management of University-wide assets. II. Evidence of Linked Planning and Budgeting Processes Since 2008 Both the operational and capital plans are linked and integrated with the University s strategic plans. AUB s fundraising plans for its endowment, donations, grants, and alternative revenue streams are also linked to the University s strategic priorities as identified through strategic planning and assessment. 85

86 A. Units/Initiatives Allocated Operating Budget Resources Based on Strategic Planning and Assessment Significant resources have been allocated to support initiatives and projects identified through the University s strategic planning process 37 as well as the 2008 Self-Study. In response to the 2008 Self-Study, a number of units/initiatives and positions were prioritized in the 2009 Strategic Plan or have been included in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. (All of these units/positions are described in detail in Section Two.) What follows is a description of operating budget allocations for these units/initiatives and/or positions: Office of International Programs (OIP): AUB established the OIP in August Its staff include: a director, two managers, and an administrative officer. Operating funds are also allocated for travel for recruitment purposes. The establishment of the office was in response to AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan Goal Two to expand the international diversity of its student body and to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. Periodic Program Review (PPR): AUB appointed a PPR Coordinator in October 2010 and allocated an annual operating budget to support Program Review that includes costs of 12 to 16 external evaluators (two per department undergoing review); faculty incentives for departmental self-study preparation (course buy-out, etc.); and other related costs. Since October 2010, all undergraduate and graduate programs and departments without professional accreditation are reviewed at least once every six years, and the result is a self-study report which includes an improvement plan. The self-study report and the improvement plan are reviewed internally and externally, and the Office of the Provost s follows up on the implementation of the improvement plan, including allocation of resources. The establishment and funding for the PPR process was in response to AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan Goal Eight of Institutional Renewal and to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. Graduate Council (GC): AUB established the GC in Its staff include an appointed chair from the faculty, two management nonacademic staff and one administrative officer to support graduate studies and services. The establishment and funding for the GC was in response to AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan Goal Four of Research and Graduate Education and to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. General Education (GE) Program: A staff General Education (GE) Assessment Officer was appointed in 2011 to support the Chair and faculty committee responsible for GE Program implementation and to coordinate the three-year assessment of the program. This position was one necessary component to enable the University to address AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan Goal One of Undergraduates and Liberal Education and to respond to MSCHE requirements related to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. Enrollment Management Unit (EMU): AUB established the EMU in November 2012 as an independent unit with an appointed chair from the faculty, a coordinator, and a Senior Research Analyst. In cooperation with concerned University offices (Admissions, Registrar, Office of International Programs, Office of Student Affairs), the EMU undertakes steps to ensure a selection process from a highly qualified pool of student applicants, develops initiatives that guarantee student success and enhance the effectiveness of the services, and processes of admissions, registration, financial aid, course placement, and student support services. This unit was established based on recommendations of the Strategic Planning Unit for Enrollment Management Report (Appendix D-2) and as a response to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. This unit will also be instrumental in implementing initiatives to improve Student-Centered Services under Goal 1: Deliver a World Class Student Experience in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. 37 Including the 2009 Strategic Plan, AUBMC 2020 Vision, and 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan 86

87 Positions to Promote Institutional Integrity: Since the approval of AUB s Institutional Integrity Policies, a budget has been allocated for the Ombuds Office and a University Ombudsperson. In addition, a budget has been allocated for an Institutional Integrity Officer (Title IX Coordinator) reporting to the provost to address compliance issues and handle grievance cases in line with the newly developed integrity policies. Searches are currently open for both positions. These policies and positions were established in response to recommendations in the 2008 Self-Study. Division of University Interdisciplinary Programs (DUIP): In 2013, AUB established the DUIP as a new degree granting academic unit as a new governance structure to promote interdisciplinary graduate degree programs such as the MS Energy Studies, the MS Environmental Studies, and the MA Public Policy and International Affairs. An annual operating budget and space have been allocated for the DUIP. Academic Departments Operating Budgets The largest costs in annual operating budgets for academic departments are faculty lines. To ensure that allocation of faculty lines is strategic, rational, and more transparent, in the provost introduced a new process for departmental requests for new and replacement lines for faculty members. Under the new process, in order to request the activation or creation of a new line, the chair must submit a New Faculty Recruitment Plan (see recruitment template in Appendix F-2) to the dean. The recruitment plan must be discussed with all departmental faculty members and summarizes the department s strategic rationale for the recruitment request. The request requires approvals from the dean and the provost, as well as clearance from the Office of Financial Planning. Recruitment Plans are submitted in February; the chair is informed if the request has been approved by early summer to plan the advertisement of the position by the following fall. The PPR process has resulted in allocation of additional faculty lines in some of the reviewed departments, such as Philosophy, Mathematics, and Political Science and Public Administration. B. Capital Budget Allocations Based on Strategic Planning and Assessment Capital Building and Renovation Projects Since 2008, more than $152 million in capital budget funds have supported or have been earmarked to support a number of projects articulated in the University Master Plan, the 2009 Strategic Plan, and/or AUBMC 2020 Vision. These projects are primarily supported by fundraising from major donors and loans. Table 20 on the following page provides an overview of these projects. Linking Academic Capital Allocations and Strategic Planning and Program Assessment The systematically implemented processes for assessing student learning outcomes and institutional effectiveness at the program level are now being used to assist in allocated capital budget resources to departments. The annual Academic Capital Budget for major equipment and renovations is vetted by the Academic Capital Budget Committee which is chaired by the Associate Provost with representation from all faculties/schools as well as the directors of financial planning and facilities. The provost and CFO are ex officio on this committee. Starting in , the committee chair consulted with the PPR Coordinator to assess which requests are a result of PPR action plans and those requests were given higher priority. This process was a success and will become a regular step in the annual capital budget allocation. Starting this year, departments will be alerted when beginning the PPR process that priority in capital budget allocation is for improvements that result from PPR and/or PLO assessment. Additionally, departments will be encouraged to include in the narrative that accompanies their requests justification based on how the needed expenditure was identified (e.g. strategic planning/kpi, PLO Assessment Improvement Plan, PPR Action Plan, or Accreditation Assessment/Requirements). Departments that completed the review cycle which takes approximately 21 months have already received capital support based on their PPR Action Plans. Examples include improved safety in chemistry labs including replacement of hoods, the renovation and upgrading of computer labs for the 87

88 Table 20: Major Strategic AUB Capital Projects Capital Projects with a * indicates projects for which funding is primarily from donors and also represent the alignment of fundraising and strategic priorities at AUB. Project Purpose Where/How Identified as a Priority Irani Oxy Engineering Complex* Issam Fares Institute (IFI) for Public Policy and International Affairs Building* Daniel Academic and Clinical Center* DTS (Medical School) Building Renovation Architecture Building Renovation of Bechtel Engineering Building Mikati Engineering and Sciences Library* Masri Institute for Energy and Environment* New Facilities for FAFS* (new building on site of current FAFS Wing B) Center for Contemporary Studies of the Arab World* (new building on site of Jesup Hall) Labs, classrooms, and offices for engineering (FEA) Houses IFI, new MA in Public Policy and International Affairs, and labs for FAS media studies and communication programs Combines AUBMC/FM clinical, education, and research activities in one facility. Houses medical school; center for biomedical research Classrooms, studios, and offices for Architecture and Graphic Design programs (FEA) Classrooms, labs, and offices for FEA Library for FEA and the sciences (FAS), this library will serve as the central academic/study space on lower campus Classrooms, labs, and office space; Masri Institute of Energy & Natural Resources Classrooms, labs, offices, and research centers for FAFS Classrooms, offices, graduate student space for FAFS social sciences departments; FAFS student advising and career services; Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship AUB Master Plan 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan AUBMC Vision 2020 AUB Master Plan, AUBMC 2020, 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan AUB Master Plan, 2009 Strategic Plan AUB Master Plan, 2009 Strategic Plan AUB Master Plan, 2009 Strategic Plan 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan AUB Master Plan, 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan Budget ($M) Status 27 Complete 8.3 Complete 75.1 In process 24 In process 9.3 Planned 3 Planned 3 Planned 3 Planned TBD TBD Plans in development Plans in development 88

89 Computer Science Department; and the upgrade of two labs in the Physics Department. Additionally, based on strategic priorities from the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan to support research in the sciences and PhD programs, $1.6 million has been allocated to replace an electronic microscope and add other critical equipment to the Central Science Research Lab in response to a request from the Biology and Physics departments. The University receives additional annual support of about $ Million from the USAID American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) grant program for capital budget allocation. This year the University applied for funds that support new advanced programs which are priorities in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Funding was requested for major equipment and renovations needed to launch new advanced programs in (a) energy technologies and in (b) biomedical sciences. AUB is establishing these programs to answer national and regional demands based on recent surveys that showed high workforce demand and interest in skilled graduates in these two areas of energy and biomedical sciences. The new regular and interdisciplinary programs that will be supported are: BE Industrial Engineering (FEA); ME Chemical Engineering (FEA); MS Energy Studies (DUIP); and ME and PhD in Biomedical Engineering (FEA and FM). C. Fundraising Successes Based on Strategic Priorities The University has and continues to link fundraising to strategic priorities. Below a few examples of this are described. Additionally, capital projects with a * in Table 20 are projects for which funding is being raised from donors and also represent the alignment of fundraising and strategic priorities at AUB. Scholarship Initiative Increasing funding to support the socio-economic diversity of students and the new PhD programs has been and continues to be a major priority as reflected in the 2008 Self-Study, the 2009 Strategic Plan and the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Major accomplishments on this front have been described in Section Two. The Scholarship Initiative fundraising campaign conducted between 2009 and 2013 exceeded its target by $5.5million, raising $25.5 million. One of the key strategies is the creation of endowed scholarships, of which there are now 320. Six named PhD scholarships were also established through the Development Office between the beginning of 2009 and July Named Research Centers and Institutes Establishing and sustaining interdisciplinary research centers of excellence in strategic fields of research is a thrust initiative in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. A number of major donations ranging between $5-10 million each have been secured in recent years to establish the following centers: Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship Farouk K. Jabre Center for Arabic and Islamic Science and Philosophy Munib and Angela Masri Institute of Energy & Natural Resources Darwazah Center for Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship Abu-Haidar Neuroscience Institute (AHNI) Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute (NKBCI) Grants and Contracts Increasing grants for research funding, student support services, and financial aid has been and continues to be a major priority as reflected in the 2008 Self-Study, the 2009 Strategic Plan and the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. AUB s external research awards totaled $5.6 Million in 2009 and it reached close to $13.0 million in In terms of grants for scholarships, AUB secured major multi-year grants totaling $39 million to support full-scholarships and requisite academic support for economically disadvantaged students from across Lebanon and the region (see Table 4, page 21), as well as secured partial funding for 8 PhD from the 89

90 Lebanese National Council for Scientific Research (LNCSR) and this number is expected to increase to 24. In terms of student support services and to support general education, a $400,000 grant was secured from the Mellon Foundation to support the development of the Writing in the Disciplines program as described in Section Two. The University secured an additional $750,000 grant from the Mellon Foundation to support the Arts and Humanities Initiative to bolster the liberal arts (another strategic priority in the previous and current strategic plans). Many more examples of awarded grant funding for research are described in Section Two. Upcoming Comprehensive Fundraising Campaign The University is in the midst of preparations for the most ambitious fundraising campaign in its history. Currently in the silent phase, the launch of this comprehensive fundraising campaign is scheduled for 2016 and will correspond with the University s sesquicentennial anniversary celebrations. Throughout the development of the campaign, close coordination between the provost, president, VP advancement, and VP Medical Affairs has resulted in fundraising priorities in line with the University s strategic priorities as articulated in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and the AUBMC 2020 Vision. The campaign will attract philanthropic support for a range of University priorities that will deliver a worldclass student experience, create new knowledge, have an impact in the Arab region, and improve the health of the community and the Arab world. Campaign priorities will include support for: professorial chairs; interdisciplinary research; new research centers focusing on subjects related to the needs of the Arab region including energy, the environment, food security, public health, biomedical research, and the arts and humanities; financial aid, student programs, and major new university facilities. It will also feature AUBMC 2020, a major physical expansion of all aspects of the Medical Center and the Faculty of Medicine and significant investments in medical education, research, and practice. These initiatives will be supported through funding in the form of endowments; capital; financial aid; and naming of faculties, programs, centers, and labs. D. Development of Alternative Revenue Streams to Support Mission and Growth Tuition is the major sources of funds for the University campus budget (excluding AUBMC). Approximately, 75 to 89 percent of the University's campus revenue comes from net tuition and fees, which factors in financial aid. The wide range is dependent on the endowment income, gifts, and fundraising for the specific year where this income provides the other source of revenue. There is broad agreement among campus constituencies that increasing alternative revenue streams is crucial for the fulfillment of the University s mission and achievement of its strategic goals; diversifying revenue is itself one of the specific objectives in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. The president is currently developing plans for a long-term Commission on Institutional Sustainability that would include membership from all campus constituencies (faculty, students, administrators, staff, alumni). One of its tasks will be to make recommendations regarding diversifying the University s revenue streams. Currently, there are a number of potential sources for alternative revenue for the University to capitalize upon. Continuing/Executive Education The mission of the Continuing Education Center (CEC) is to meet the lifelong educational and training needs of all learners in the local community and the region. Harnessing AUB resources in various fields of knowledge, CEC offers a variety of standard and customized certificate programs, non-credit courses, and workshops in Lebanon and the region. CEC aims to enhance professional and technical skills while addressing the needs for personal development and cultural enrichment. The CEC currently offers four diplomas and 11 certificates. Faculties/schools also offer executive education masters. Currently the OSB offers an Executive MBA (EMBA) and FHS offers an Executive MS in Health Care Leadership. Other short-term non-credit executive/ continuing education is also offered by the OSB as well as FM; an executive program in Food Security is under development by FAFS. The EMBA has successfully generated income for OSB and the 90

91 income is currently used for OSB faculty development and research support. Faculties/schools are encouraged to pursue opportunities for developing revenue-generating executive education programs, but these must be initiated by faculty and deans in a bottom-up manner. Consulting Services The Office of Regional External Programs (REP) the American University of Beirut consolidates the academic and professional experience of the University s faculty and staff to provide rigorous consulting and technical assistance through the Middle east and North Africa in agriculture/food sciences, business, education, engineering/architecture, management consulting, and medical/health sciences. REP generates revenue for the University, some of which is earmarked for the home faculty/school of the faculty member doing the consulting. REP has potential to generate more income for the University than the current status. An additional $750,000 is projected for increasing to $1 million in with the opening of an AUB office in the Gulf in REP s new focus will be corporate relations. Faculties/schools are also beginning to offer lab testing and technical consulting directly to clients. Minimal revenues have originated from lab service to the community by the environmental core lab and some FEA engineering labs. These services can be increased as FEA acquires its expanded lab space in the new Oxy-Irani Engineering Building which will be inaugurated in June Market needs generated by the recently discovered oil and gas reserves off of the coast of Lebanon may create new opportunities for AUB to generate income through lab testing and technical consulting. Work has started on developing a clearer framework for faculty outside activities and faculty consulting models. This will lead to higher income through overhead recovery model adopted by AUB. Center for Research and Innovation (CRI) CRI part of an entrepreneurial strategy for generating funding for the University with initial support and gap funding coming from a 900,000 Euro grant from the European Commission to support the establishment of the Center and eventually the Incubator; to train and support personnel for the Incubator Center to attract investors; and to establish a network for mentoring and entrepreneurship. This start-up business incubator will change the way faculty, students, and staff think about their work and research by providing a platform for faculty members and students to transform ideas and research into viable businesses. CRI will provide space and technical assistance to emerging academic entrepreneurs in addition to opportunities for networking, research presentations, and collaboration addressing critical challenges of the 21st century and as a result promote stronger linkages with industry to strengthen research contributions to innovation and economic growth. Steps taken so far include: Space has been allocated and renovation has started to host the Center OGC is currently preparing the five-year business plan/model for the Incubator visibility and structure. The Incubator is expected to be registered by summer Four engineering faculty are currently approved to start working on their startups (two based on research funding and two on consulting service). E-learning and Online Diplomas: A new online professional diploma will be launched next fall. The diploma is championed by the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture and is titled: Diploma in Green Technologies with three specializations: Energy, Building, and Water. The online diploma will be offered jointly through a consortium of three universities: AUB, American University in Cairo, and the Lebanese American University. AUB impact and income generation is expected and will be used by FEA to support education and research. An E-learning Task Force has been formed in September 2013 to develop an e-learning proposal including governance, accreditation issues, direct and indirect revenue models, and assessment of current and future e-markets. The Task Force is exploring the possibilities for E-learning and assessing their 91

92 appropriateness for AUB s educational goals and context. It is also assessing the University s capacity for developing e-learning initiatives; associated infrastructure costs; and economic feasibility. III. Revising AUB s Planning and Budgeting Model There is desire and commitment from all constituencies in the University (administrators, faculty, students) to move towards a more systematic approach to budgeting that ensures fulfillment of the University s mission and achievement of strategic goals and also involves clearer communication and appropriate levels of transparency and input from all stakeholders. In the 2008 Self-Study this was primarily articulated in recommendations related to developing, implementing, monitoring, and assessing a University-wide strategic plan as well as related to stakeholder input and communication regarding the budget process (see recommendations for Standard 2 in Appendix B-1). A number of these recommendations have been addressed, while others require significant further efforts. The first step in improving AUB s planning and budgeting model was focused on strategic planning. AUB s 2009 Strategic Plan and 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan (and related faculty/unit level plans) have laid the foundation for more strategic budgeting and planning as documented in this chapter. Work that remains related to strategic planning is to develop functional KPIs and an assessment plan for the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan and related faculty/unit level plans. In 2010, the Vice President of Finance formed a Budgeting Process Task Force to review current AUB budgeting policies/processes and to recommend changes/improvements based on best practices. This committee included the president, provost, VPs, and deans and the main accomplishment of this Task Force was the adoption of a carry-forward policy starting in that allows units and faculties to save unspent operating funds and carry them forward for up to two years. This policy created cost-savings incentive and allowed deans/unit-heads to have control over planning and implementing strategic initiatives/projects that they might not have the funds for in one year alone. This committee also resulted in recalibration of allocations between campus and AUBMC for services provided by campus units (e.g. president s office, IT, HR) to the medical center. With four years having passed, these allocations need to be revisited. Finally, the Task Force developed recommendations for cost-savings mechanisms, some of which were included in the operating budget. With the departure of the VP of Finance the work of the Task Force was interrupted, however a new CFO was recently appointed and currently there is an open search for the University s Chief Operating Officer and it is expected that the individual who is hired will develop mechanism for strategic planning and assessment of institutional effectiveness for administrative units and will support ongoing efforts to improve the planning and budgeting the process. The Office of the Provost has continued some of the work of this committee by collecting data on current operating expenditures and benchmarking with peer institutions to better understand how to best improve budget allocation to serve our academic strategic goals. In order to accurately benchmark instructional expenditures and instructional loads against norms for US universities, the University began annual participation in the Delaware Study (National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity). In January 2013 the Office of the Provost and OIRA submitted to the Delaware Study data related to instructional loads and associated direct financial costs of instruction according to definitions defined by the Delaware Study. Instructional costs are calculated per student credit hour and per full-time equivalent of students for each major. Faculty teaching loads are calculated using the average student credit hours, average organized class sections, and average full-time equivalent students taught per fulltime equivalent instructional faculty. All data can be benchmarked against other participants in the study 38 based on Carnegie classification. In October of 2013, the Financial Report on Academic and 38 The number of universities submitting data to the Delaware Study for was 128. Since its inception in 1992, nearly 600 institutions have participated in the Delaware Study. 92

93 Institutional Expenditures of Benchmarked Against U.S. Norms (Appendix F-2) was shared by the provost with the president and Board of Trustees. The same report was presented to the Board of Deans in February; in combination with challenges related to tuition increases and faculty compensation the report has sparked renewed interest and energy among administrators to improve the University s budget model and processes. The University will continue to participate in the Delaware Study to get a trend of the workload and expenses variation over time in order to make better use of the data obtained from one year results. The Office of the Provost collects and monitors other data to inform decision-making and resource allocation including institutional academic and financial key indicators which have been developed as part of the provost s dash board to measure growth and also observe enrollments, faculty size increase, student faculty ratios, research productivity, teaching loads, and finances. A detailed analysis of the status of the University including long term vision and aspirations was prepared by the provost for the Board of Trustees March 2014 retreat and laid the groundwork for the adoption of the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. Another piece of the work needed to move towards more strategic and inclusive budgeting began in March 2014 in the form of the Task Force on Faculty Compensation to develop a recommendation for a faculty compensation policy for the University and a sustainable plan for salary adjustments over the next 3-5 years. The committee was formed by the president, is chaired by the provost, and its composition includes faculty representation from the faculties/schools, two deans (FEA and FM), the interim COO, the CFO, and the Director of HR. The committee is analyzing aggregate faculty salary data on faculty salary by rank and faculty, benchmarking with US and regional peers, and considering inflation. The committee is expected to submit recommendations in early On a broader scale, to continue to move towards improved budget models and processes that ensure fulfillment of the University s mission and achievement of strategic goals and also involves clearer communication and appropriate levels of transparency and input from all stakeholders, the provost has established a position on his staff for a senior budget analyst, hired in spring 2014, who will work closely with the provost s team, the Academic Assessment Unit, and the Office of Financial Planning to explore different scenarios for budget models and processes that can be recommended to deans and senior administrators in a renewed effort to improve current planning and budgeting practices. First steps in this process will include analyzing best practices of peer universities, recommending common definitions that can be easily benchmarked for tracking and communicating financial projections and actual revenues/expenditures across the University (e.g. definitions used by IPEDS, Delaware Study, Chronicle of Higher Education), assessing current capacity for better tracking of resource allocation for strategic initiatives and recommending processes and/or needed technology solutions. Finally, the Academic Assessment Unit (AAU) under the umbrella of the Office of the Provost is positioned to capitalize on successes in the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) Assessment and PPR processes to develop mechanisms for assessing institutional effectiveness in achieving AUB s mission and strategic goals on a broader scale as well as linking planning, assessment and budgeting, especially in academic units and administrative academic-support units. One initial step in this direction is the streamlining of annual reporting by all academic departments on PLO Assessment and related improvement plans and/or PPR Action Plan Progress Reports. Starting in summer 2015, department chairs will prepare one annual departmental assessment report which will be submitted to the relevant dean, the AAU, and the provost. This report will follow a template provided by AAU (See Appendix F- 3) which contains both PLO assessment activities and the related improvement plan, as well as a complete improvement plan with estimated resources needed for specific actions for improvement recommended on the basis of various sources of assessment (LO assessment, PPR Action Plan, KPIs, or Accreditation Requirements). When the department submits its annual budget requests (operating and capital), this assessment report and improvement plan will be used to prioritize operating and capital budget requests. This reporting mechanism will also help to create a culture of linking budgeting, planning, and assessment at the departmental and faculty levels. 93

94 CONCLUSION Based on the comprehensive PRR process and documentation included in this report and its appendices, it is clear that the American University of Beirut (AUB) continues to meet the MSCHE Standards described in Characteristics of Excellence and has addressed many of the recommendations in the 2008 Self- Study. The University has shown considerable progress in Student Learning Assessment (Standard 14) with the implementation of the 3-year PLO Assessment cycles for all undergraduate programs; General Education (Standard 12) with the new GE Program requirements and governance and evidenced by the 3-Year GE Program Assessment; Educational Offerings (Standard 11) with regular assessment and improvement of existing educational programs through PPR and program accreditation as well as introduction of new cutting edge degree programs; Student Admissions, Retention, and Support Services (Standards 8 and 9) through the ongoing work of the Enrollment Management Unit and the Graduate Council; Integrity, Leadership and Governance, and Faculty (Standards 6, 4, and 10) through new and revised policies for shared governance, better working conditions for faculty, and integrity. The accomplishment of many of the goals outlined in the University s 2009 Strategic Plan and the development of the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan signify improvements in AUB s capacities in terms of Institutional Assessment (Standard 7) and Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal (Standard 2). We must build on AUB s achievements to date as well as grow in areas where we have identified room for improvement in order to fulfill our mission and accomplish the strategic goals outlined in the 2014 Unified Academic Strategic Plan. In the coming years, the University needs to develop systematic mechanisms for the assessment of institutional and unit-level effectiveness across the University. AUB also needs to develop a new budget model and process that reduces tuition dependency, is based on long-term planning and assessment, and involves clearer communication and appropriate levels of transparency and input from all stakeholders. The challenges that lie ahead are also opportunities for the development of innovative solutions for the improvement of our educational programs, our society, our region, and our planet. In a region of the world currently undergoing profound societal transformations, AUB is growing and evolving in response to new challenges and opportunities. The last five years represent a period of intense activity on the part of faculty, administrators, and staff to consolidate AUB s position as the leading liberal arts and research institution in the region; strengthen the requisite foundation of policies and governance structures; engage in assessment and strategic planning; and develop new academic, research, and outreach programs to meet regional/global challenges and market opportunities of our times. With sustained effort in the current trajectory, the University is capable of enhancing its mission fulfillment and accomplishing its new strategic priorities. 94