Texas A&M University-Kingsville. College of Graduate Studies. Graduate Council. Doctoral Program External Review. Self-Study Instrument AY 2008

Transcription

1 Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of Graduate Studies Graduate Council Doctoral Program External Review Self-Study Instrument AY 2008 (revised fall 2007)

2 Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of Graduate Studies Graduate Council Doctoral Program External Review Self-Study Instrument This instrument has been divided into six major sections: (I) General Information, (II) Program Content, Requirements, and Structure, (III) Program Students & Measures, (IV) Program Administration and Faculty, (V) Program Resources and Facilities, and (VI) Suggestions for Improvement. (Please note that Section VI is to be completed and sent separately to the Graduate Dean, but not be included in the Self Study Report that goes to the external reviewers) This instrument is to be completed by the person serving as the direct chief administrator of the subject program (the program director, graduate coordinator, etc.). Four hard copies and an electronic copy in Micro Soft Word of the completed instrument are to be submitted to the Graduate Dean by the deadline specified by the graduate dean. It is suggested that a copy of the report also be submitted to the college dean and department chair. The Graduate Dean will forward one copy to the chair of the Graduate Council s Program Review Committee and two copies to the External Review Team (ERT) for review and analysis. If the ERT requires additional information concerning the program, the committee chair will contact the person completing this instrument. The ERT s evaluation of the subject program will be communicated to the person completing this instrument in accordance with the schedule of events outlined in the Doctoral Program Review Process Guidelines. Questions on this instrument which pertain to individual courses apply only to the subject program s and level courses. If additional space is needed to answer any portion of this instrument, simply attach the required pages to the instrument as an appendix. -2-

3 Part I: General Information Program Identification Data I-01. Please provide the following information: Program title: Degree offered: Instrument delivered on: Instrument to be returned by: Current review period: Previous review conducted: Person completing this instrument: (Include college dean s signature, below) Name: Title: Signatures: (Graduate Coordinator) (Dept. Chair) (College Dean) (Date) I-02. Please provide a brief history of the degree program, including the reasons for the program s development, approximate approval dates for the degree program from the Board of Regents and/or the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, approximate number of graduates, and any other significant events in its life that would be relevant to the review process. -3-

4 Part II. Program Content, Requirements, and Structure II-01. Describe the current objectives of the program in no more than fifty words. Please include the program s strategic plan as an attachment to this document, including the mission statement if not part of the strategic plan. II-02. How do the program's (a) vision, (b) goals, (c) mission, and (d) objectives align with the University's Strategic Plan and goals? II-03. Explain how achievement of the programs' objectives will contribute to meeting the student's occupational, intellectual, research skill and cultural needs. -4-

5 II-04. Give specific evidence (statistics, study results, article citations, etc.) that the program's objectives (as reported in II-01) are being met. II-05. Specify policies and practices in place to encourage and recognize good teaching and research training for the student from the perspective of the faculty teaching the courses. II-06. Please specify the program's course and research requirements. Give the minimum number of 5XXX and 6XXX-level semester credit hours (SCH) required, and the maximum number of SCH of special problem courses allowed under the program. Specifically document how courses provide an understanding of the manner in which research is conducted. Indicate if there is a need for new courses. -5-

6 II-07. From the above indicated courses, specify which courses are required for the completion of the doctoral degree program within the doctoral program major area. Indicate which courses are required, if any, outside the doctoral program s major area. II-08. Please, specify which courses, within the doctoral program, constitute core courses. II-09. If the doctoral program is a joint doctoral program with another University, please give the minimum number of credit hours that must be obtained at Texas A&M University- Kingsville. Provide also the minimum number of credit hours that must be obtained at the partner University. -6-

7 II-10. Are courses at the 6XXX-level (with the exception of special problems) taught on an "Individual Instruction" basis? Yes No. If "Yes" be specific as to the extent of this practice, and describe the administrative procedure used to have this practice approved. II-11. Are any of the 5XXX and 6XXX-level courses offered over TTVN, internet or other non-traditional means?. Yes No. If "Yes" be specific as to the extent that this practice is carried on, and describe whether the course(s) are designed to ensure an opportunity for reflection and analysis of the subject matter (i.e., required "position papers", comprehensive final examination, limited enrollment that allows for a thorough evaluation of class assignments, course must meet 45 class hours for every 3 SCH of credit which is scheduled to span over the entire semester). Please, address each of these requirements and how you ensure that the delivery of the course is of high quality. II-12. What guidelines exist for selection of the student s dissertation committee? How are members of the student s program or dissertation committee selected? -7-

8 II-13. The College of Graduate Studies requires each recognized doctoral program to have comprehensive examinations and a dissertation. Explain how the subject program administers its comprehensive exams and dissertation. II-14. Does the subject program serve other graduate programs of the University through service courses, interdisciplinary courses, etc.? Yes No. If "Yes" please explain. II-15. List joint programs and collaborative research projects with other universities or other units within Texas A&M-Kingsville related to this doctoral program. -8-

9 II-16. Indicate areas of outstanding performance of the subject program such as teaching, research, or service. Please, provide summary of recognition, awards, indicators of successful performance in the indicated areas. II-17. Provide the date of the last program review, goals established for the subject program as the result of such review process, and progress made in achieving each goal since then, or in the past five years. II-18. To what extent are external reviewers included in reviewing the dissertation process? -9-

10 II-19. Is the program reviewed by accreditation agencies other than SACS?. Yes No. If "Yes" please complete the following: Result of Last Review: Full Accreditation Status Conditional Accreditation Status Probationary Accreditation Status Unaccredited Other: Please identify: If recommendations were made by SACS or other accreditation agencies, how are these recommendations currently being addressed? II-20. Please, provide an outline of intended changes in scope and/or direction of this doctoral program (new degrees, new curricula, shifts in organization, or staffing; new areas of specialization). -10-

11 Part III: Program Students and Measures III-01. Please provide the following information in the subject program. Measure Operational Definition Reporting Source 1. Number of degrees Rolling three-year average of the number CB per year of degrees awarded per academic year 2. Graduation Rates Rolling three-year average of the percent CB of first-year doctoral students 2 who graduated within ten years 3. Average Time to Rolling three-year average of the CB Degree registered time to degree 3 of first-year Doctoral students within a ten year Period 4. Employment Profile Percentage of the last three years of TAMUK (in field within one year of graduates employed in academia, of graduation) post-doctorates, industry/professional, government, and those still seeking employment (in Texas & outside Texas) 5. Admissions Criteria Description of admission factors TAMUK in abbreviated list 6. Percentage of Full- In the prior year, the percentage of FTS TAMUK time Students (FTS) (>/= 18 SCH) with support/the number with Financial Support of FTS) 7. Average Financial Average financial support provided per TAMUK Support Provided full-time graduate student (including Tuition rebate) for the prior year, including Research Assistantships, Teaching Assistantships, fellowships, tuition, benefits, (include all kinds of support) -11-

12 8. Student-Core Faculty Rolling three-year average of full-time TAMUK Ratio 4 student equivalent (FTSE) /rolling threeyear average of full-time faculty equivalent (FTFE) of core faculty 9. Core Faculty Rolling three-year average of the number TAMUK Publications of discipline-related refereed papers/ publications, juried creative/performance accomplishments, book chapters, notices of discoveries filed/patents issued, and books per year per core faculty member 10. Core Faculty External Rolling three-year average of the number TAMUK Grants of core faculty receiving external funds, average external grant $ per faculty, and total external grant $ per program per academic year Percentage Full-time Rolling three-year average of the FTS CB Students (>/= SCH/number of students enrolled (headcount) for last three fall semesters 12. Number of Core Faculty Number of core faculty in the prior year TAMUK 13. Faculty Teaching Total number of semester credit hours TAMUK Load taught per academic year by core faculty divided by the number of core faculty in the prior year 14. Faculty Diversity Core faculty by ethnicity (White, Black, TAMUK Hispanic, Other) and gender in program in prior year 15. Student Diversity Enrollment headcount by ethnicity (White, CB Black, Hispanic, Other) and gender in program in the prior year 16. Date of Last External Date of last formal external review, TAMUK Review updated when changed -12-

13 17. External Program Name of body and date of last program TAMUK Accreditation accreditation review, if applicable, updated when changed 18. Student Publications/ Rolling three-year average of the number TAMUK Presentations of discipline-related refereed papers/ publications, juried creative/performance accomplishments, book chapters, books, and external presentations per year per student Notes 1: Programs included only if in existence 3 or more years. Program is defined at the 8-digit code level. 2: First-year doctoral students: Those students who have been coded as doctoral students by the institution and have either completed a master s program or at least 30 SCH towards a graduate degree. 3: Registered time to degree: The number of semesters enrolled starting when a student first appears as a doctoral student until she completes a degree, excluding any time taken off during graduate study. The number of years is obtained by dividing the number of semesters by three. 4: Core Faculty: Full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty who teach 50 percent or more in the doctoral program or other individuals integral to the doctoral program who can direct dissertation research. (A faculty member may be counted only once within an institution s program inventory.) III-02. The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board defines a viable doctoral program as one that graduates at least 3 students in a period of three years. Has this program met this standard? Yes No Comment: III-03. For the program s required courses taught during the Fall 2007 semesters, what were the total number of courses taught? Give a breakdown in the table below indicating whether they were taught by individual instruction or as organized classes: Total number of courses (sections) taught: Number taught by individual instruction: Number taught as organized classes: -13-

14 III-04. Briefly describe the recruitment methods used during the academic year to attract students to the doctoral program, and indicate the type and kind of institutional support provided for recruitment. III-05. (a) Provide the approximate percentage of students in the subject program that are admitted with conditional status per academic year: % Define this conditional status and explain how a student removes it. (b) What is the retention rate? % (c) Rate what you believe to be the student satisfaction of this program: poor; good; excellent. (d) Rate what you believe to be the job placement of graduates: poor; good; excellent. Explain how you keep track of student job placements. (e) Rate the student participation in research activities with faculty: no activity; some activity; extensive activity. (f) Below, state the degree program s student learning objectives and student learning outcomes: Program s Student Learning Objectives: Program s Student Learning Outcomes: III-06. Provide information concerning the results of student/alumni satisfaction surveys. III-07. Please make any additional comments concerning students which have not been addressed above that would affect the degree to which this program contributes to the achievement of the goals of the department, and to the mission of the College of Graduate Studies and the University. -14-

15 Part IV. Program Administration and Faculty IV-01. Explain the administrative relationship between the chief administrator of the subject program and (a) the department chair (graduate coordinator, etc.) and (b) the Dean of the College in which the program is located. IV-02. Responsibilities/Duties Graduate coordinators perform a very important role for the College of Graduate Studies. Some of the graduate coordinator's responsibilities are listed below. Explain how the graduate coordinator fulfills the following nine (9) responsibilities: 1. Serve as a liaison between the unit and the graduate dean. 2. Maintains the academic records of graduate student majors in the unit. 3. Registers and pre-registers graduate students in the unit. 4. Works with the graduate dean in identifying graduate students in the program who are not performing well academically and should therefore be placed on scholastic probation. 5. Admits and rejects graduate student applicants in accordance to admission standards developed by the graduate faculty within the unit. 6. Resolves problems which may arise with graduate students in consultation with the graduate faculty in the unit. 7. In consultation with the graduate advisor insures that the degree plans are in compliance with plans in the catalog. 8. Insures that graduate policies are adhered to in the unit. 9. Certifies candidacy of students to the graduate dean. IV-03. (a). Is there a functioning graduate committee within the department or college which provides administrative advice or approval to the chief administrator of the subject program? Yes No If Yes describe the process. (b). Is there an external advisory committee which provides administrative advice or approval to the chief administrator of the subject program? Yes No If Yes describe the process. (c). List the admission criteria for the program other than GRE scores. -15-

16 (d). What is the faculty teaching load? (e). Describe the faculty and student diversity in terms of ethnicity, gender and nationality. IV-04. Describe how graduate students in the subject program are advised as to (a) admission to the program and general program requirements, (b) course selection each semester, (c) selection of dissertation, and (d) preparation for comprehensive examinations. IV-05. Where are the files on students in the subject program stored? Who is responsible for updating these files? IV-06(a). In your opinion, does the subject program have a sufficient number of faculty available to teach the required and elective courses which comprise the program? Yes No situation. If No describe what changes would be needed to rectify the IV-06(b). List the names of doctoral faculty in the program who are members of the TAMUK Graduate Faculty (SACS requires a minimum of four):

17 IV-07. (a) Using the LEGEND at the bottom of this page, give the requested data for each person listed in IV-06. EXAMPLE: (1) Smith, K. (2) MBA, PhD (3) PE (4) Y (5) 0 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (6) 2 (7) 3 (8) 2 (9) 5 LEGEND: (1) = Faculty name (2) = Earned degrees (3) = Licenses, certificates, etc. (4) = Tenured/Tenure-track (Y/N) (5) = Number of doctoral dissertations directed to completion in the last three years. (6) = Number of dissertations directed to completion in the last three years. (7) = Number of scholarly publications in the last three years. (8) = Number of presentations at professional meetings in the last three years. (9) = Number of outside professional meetings attended in the last three years. (b). Please include, as an attachment to this document, curriculum vitae for all faculty members who taught courses in the doctoral program. Include information on grants received, amount of the grant, and source of funding over the past three years. -17-

18 Part V: Program Resources and Facilities V-01. Identify budgeted amounts for the doctoral program in the following areas: Budget item Faculty 9 mos. salaries (avg. by rank) Professor.. Assoc. Professor.. Asst. Professor. Operating funds Grants and contracts Library support Annual Budget AY 2007 Annual Budget AY 2006 Equipment Comments: Are the faculty salaries competitive nation wide for similar ranks in the profession? If no, please explain with salary statistics for similar size universities. V-02. In your opinion, what is the consensus of the doctoral faculty involved with the subject program for the following factors? Using the legend given below the table, mark the appropriate box for each listed factor. Factor Research facilities and equipment Instructional facilities and equipment Computer hardware Computer software Operating budget Consensus of Opinion (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) LEGEND: (1) = Much improvement needed (2) = Significantly below average (3) = Average (4) = Significantly above average (5) = Outstanding -18-

19 V-03. The Quality Enhancement Program (QEP) is a course of action for continuous improvement that addresses the extent to which a program has achieved its objectives and outcomes and the university s goals with special attention to student learning outcomes. Document how the program is addressing each of the five university goals with special attention to student learning outcomes: a. Broaden the base of productive and educated citizens. b. Enhance student learning through civic, professional and research engangement. c. Support the development and maintenance of national prominent undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs. d. Promote the development of scholarly, research and creative activities that are nationally recognized. e. Provide a learner-centered environment in which the contributions of students, faculty and staff are valued. V-03. V-04. Make any additional comments concerning the program s resources and facilities which have not been addressed above that would affect the degree to which this program contributes to the achievement of the mission of the department, the College of Graduate Studies, and the University. Please attach your program IE Resource Requests so that specific attention may be given to your program needs. Part VI: Suggestions for Improvement (Please note that this section should be submitted to the Graduate Dean separately from the Self Study Report. This section should not be made available to the external reviewers.) VI-01. Describe the outcomes assessment model that has been used to assess the performance of this doctoral program. How have the results of program assessment been used to strengthen this program? VI-02. Identify those factors which, in your opinion, are the most significant strengths of the program. -19-

20 VI-03. (a) Identify those weaknesses which, in your opinion, represent areas where improvement is needed in the program. (b) Identify the strategies that are or will be implemented to correct and improve the problem(s) or weakness(es) addressed, above, in the program. VI-04. Submit a list of suggestions you believe to be feasible or attainable which would improve the subject program and which could be implemented before the next scheduled review. VI-05. Submit any other suggestions or recommendations you have for improving this program review. Note: An external Doctoral Program Review Team will visit your area at some point during the review process. Please make available to them the complete library of terminal paper/research projects and dissertations so that a sample may be analyzed for project quality review as part of the program review process. Follow-Up Program Evaluation The Provost receives the program review recommendations which have been made by the Graduate Council and Graduate Dean (and the external review team in the case of doctoral program reviews). Within a period of a month, the Provost convenes the Graduate Dean and appropriate College Dean to discuss the recommendations and development plan written by the Department Chair. The development plan for -20-

21 improvement is included in the program s strategic plan and institutional effectiveness plan. The outcome of the program review is discussed in subsequent budget hearings for the following fiscal year regarding the necessary planning required and the costs associated with improvements regarding staffing, resources, curriculum review, equipment, etc. Implementation and assessment occur as soon as new budgets become available after the budget hearings. An outcome assessment report of the recommendations made is required to be submitted to the Graduate Dean one year after the program review has taken place. -21-