I - Institutional Information

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 1 I - Institutional Information To complete this section, first click on the Edit/Checkout button. Then copy and paste the headings into the Institutional Response box below and enter your information. O 4. List all accredited programs (as they appear in your catalog). Note: Listing new programs here does not confer accreditation. New degree programs, majors or emphases must be in effect for at least two years and have graduates and follow the guidance in the process book before accreditation will be granted. O 5. List all programs that are in your business unit that are not accredited by ACBSP and how you distinguish accurately to the public between programs that have achieved accredited status and those that have not. O 6. List all campuses where a student can earn a business degree from your institution. O 7 Person completing report: Person completing report Name: Phone: E-mail address: ACBSP Champion name: ACBSP Co-Champion name: QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response O 4. List all accredited programs (as they appear in your catalog). Bachelor of Science in Business Administration with optional concentrations in Accounting (CPA track), Accounting (Managerial track), Finance, Management Information Systems, and Marketing. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 2 O 5. List all programs that are in your business unit that are not accredited by ACBSP and how you distinguish accurately to the public between programs that have achieved accredited status and those that have not. 1) Master of Science in Management: The Master of Science in Management is preparing for its initial accreditation with ACBSP. An assessment plan is being further developed and learning outcome data is being collected. The School of Business will be seeking accreditation for it in conjunction with its reaffirmation in 2017. At that time data, sufficient to identify trends, will be available and presented. There is no representation that the MSM program is ACBSP accredited, but additional language has been developed for the School of Business website to make that clearer. 2) Bachelor of Science in Informatics: This is an interdisciplinary degree across different programs such as mathematics, biology, psychology, communications, and nursing. No accreditation is or will be sought related to this degree. There is and will be no representation of this program being accredited by ACBSP. 3) Bachelor of Applied Science: This is a special degree only for those that already have an Associate of Applied Science degree from a regionally accredited institution such as Ivy Tech. There is and will be no representation of this program being accredited by ACBSP. O 6. List all campuses where a student can earn a business degree from your institution. All degrees are awarded by the Richmond location. Courses are delivered at two additional educational locations: Lawrenceburg, Indiana and Madison, Indiana. These educational locations are geographically located away from the main campus and are supported with faculty and administration that report to the Dean of the IUE School of Business & Economics on the main campus. Students at the Lawrenceburg and Madison locations follow a cohort-based model. O 7 Person completing report: Persons completing report Name: Dr. Marsha Jance, Associate Professor of Business Administration Phone: 765-973-8341 E-mail address: mjance@iue.edu Name: Dr. David Frantz, Dean of the School of Business and Economics Phone: 765-973-8337 E-mail address: dfrantz@iue.edu 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 3 ACBSP Champion name: Dr. David Frantz, Dean School of Business and Economics ACBSP Co-Champion name: Dr. Marsha Jance, Associate Professor of Business Administration Sources There are no sources. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 4 II - Status Report on Conditions and Notes O 8. Conditions or Notes to be addressed: You do not need to address Opportunity for Improvement (OFI). Please explain and provide the necessary documentation/evidence for addressing each condition or note since your last report. Are you requesting the Board of Commissioners to remove notes or conditions? (If the justification for removal is lengthy consider attaching an appendix to QA report). Remove Note: Remove Condition: If you are not removing a note or condition, please list the note(s) or condition(s) below and explain the progress made in removing same. Do Not Remove Note or Condition: QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response The School of Business and Economics at Indiana University East does not have any notes or conditions that need to be addressed or removed at this time. Sources There are no sources. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 5 III - Public Information O 9. The business unit must routinely provide reliable information to the public on its performance, including student achievement such as assessment results. Describe how you routinely provide reliable information to the public on your performance, including student achievement such as assessment results and program results. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Results: Such as what you report in STANDARD #4, ETS, MFT, accounting assessment, management assessment, critical thinking, communication, etc. How do you make the results public? Program Results: Such as what you report in Standard #6, graduation rates, retention rates, job placement, etc. How do you make the results public? QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response Here is the web link to the ACBSP Quality Assurance Report for Indiana University East School of Business and Economics: http://www.iue.edu/business Sources There are no sources. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 6 1 - Standard 1 Leadership Organization a. List any organizational or administrative personnel changes within the business unit since your last report. b. List all new sites where students can earn an accredited business degree (international campus, off-campus on-campus, online) that have been added since your last report. QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response a.list any organizational or administrative personnel changes within the business unit since your last report. There have been no major organizational or administrative personnel changes since the last ACBSP Quality Assurance Report, which was submitted in February 2014, although it should be noted that the Director of the Master of Science in Management program resigned to pursue employment elsewhere in Summer 2015 and the current Dean will be returning to a faculty position effective July 1, 2016. b. List all new sites where students can earn an accredited business degree (international campus, off-campus oncampus, online) that have been added since your last report. No new sites have been added since the last ACBSP Quality Assurance Report, which was submitted in February 2014. Sources There are no sources. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 7 2 - Standard 2 Strategic Planning This is an example of tables that you might use below in your institutional response. Identify any major changes to the key strategic goals/objectives during this QA reporting period: Key Strategic Goals/Objectives Any Major Changes 2. Report the top 3-5 short/long term strategic goals/objectives, summarize the key measures used and progress toward achieving each objective during the current QA reporting period. Strategic Objectives Key Measures Progress Toward Achievement 3. If there have been any significant changes to your strategic planning process (for example, new stakeholders, new process steps, etc.) during the QA reporting period, please report them in a table similar to this. Strategic Planning Process Changes Summary QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 8 Please see the attached Excel file addressing Standard 2: Strategic Planning. Sources Standard 2 report--2016 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 9 3 - Standard 3 Student and Stakeholder Focus Complete the Standard 3 - Student- and Stakeholder-Focus Results table, found under the Evidence File tab above. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Student- and stakeholder-focused results examine how well your organization satisfies students and stakeholders key needs and expectations. Performance measures may include: satisfaction and dissatisfaction of current and past students and key stakeholders, perceived value, loyalty, persistence, or other aspects of relationship building, end of course surveys, alumni surveys, Internship feedback, etc. Measurement instrument or processes may include end of course surveys, alumni surveys, Internship feedback, etc. Each academic unit must demonstrate linkages to business practitioners and organizations, which are current and significant, including an advisory board. Periodic surveys should be made of graduates, transfer institutions, and/or employers of graduates to obtain data on the success of business programs in preparing students to compete successfully for entry-level positions. QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response The Standard 3 Excel file contains information on the different centers at the School of Business and Economics at Indiana University East and student feedback from the exit survey given on the Peregrine Exam. The centers include the Center for Leadership Development, Center for Economic Education, Center for Entrepreneurship, and the Business & Economic Research Center. Data has been provided for calendar years 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. The student satisfaction items address satisfaction with advising, degree program, course offerings, instruction / teaching, and preparedness to enter the current job market. Data has been provided for Spring 2014, Summer 2014, Fall 2014, Spring 2015, Summer 2015, and Fall 2015. 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 10 Sources Standard 3 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 11 4 - Standard 4 Measurement and Analysis of Student Learning and Performance a. Program Outcomes. List outcomes by accredited programs. Many of the program outcomes should be used as part of a student learning assessment plan and be measurable. State the learning objectives for each program (MBA, Ph.D., BBA, AA, etc.) accredited. A program is defined as follows: a plan of study is considered a program when it requires a minimum of 12 credit hours of coursework beyond the CPC and/or is recorded on a student s transcript (ex. Business Administration: major/concentration/option/specialization in Accounting, Finance, Marketing, etc.) b. Performance Results. Complete Table Standard 4 - Student Learning Results found under the Evidence File tab above. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response Standard 4a. Program Outcomes: The Bachelor of Science in Business Administration is accredited by ACBSP. The following are the outcomes and sub-outcomes under 3.0 (Doing) for the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree at Indiana University East. Outcomes in red are reported on in this QAR report. Data and results can be found in the Excel files for Standard 4 in the Evidence section. 1.0 (Thinking): Evaluate and select from possible solutions to problems. 2.0 (Being): Assess his / her ability to function professionally and ethically in a global society. 3.0 (Doing): Synthesize concepts, theories, and tools from CPC to address business issues. Sub Outcomes under 3.0 (Doing): 3.1 Analyze the financial performance of a firm 3.2 Use financial tools to make managerial decisions 3.3 Develop a marketing plan 3.4 Identify and explain business and economic theories and concepts 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 12 3.5 Use quantitative tools to solve business problems 3.6 Develop a plan to coordinate human and material resources 3.7 Evaluate the possible impact of the legal environment on a business 3.8 Develop an international strategy for a business 3.9 Evaluate the ethical climate of an organization 3.10 Use information technology as a business tool 3.11 Complete the accounting cycle of a business The concentrations are Accounting CPA track, Accounting Managerial track, Management Information Systems, Finance, and Marketing. The Marketing concentration is new since the last QAR report, which was submitted in February 2014. The following are the outcomes which are reported on in this QAR report. Data and results can be found in the Excel files for Standard 4 in the Evidence section. Accounting CPA Track Concentration: Demonstrate proficiency in accounting. Accounting Managerial Track Concentration: Demonstrate proficiency in accounting. Management Information Systems Concentration Students should be able to design and to query a database. Finance Concentration Demonstrate proficiency in finance Marketing Concentration Define a core set of marketing concepts Standard 4b. Performance Results Please see the Excel files in the Evidence section for Standard 4. Sources Standard 4 Accounting 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 13 Standard 4 Finance Standard 4 Management Information Systems Standard 4 Marketing Standard 4 Outcome 1.0 Standard 4 Outcome 2.0 Standard 4 Outcome 3.0 Standard 4 Outcome 3.10 Standard 4 Outcome 3.11 Standard 4 Outcome 3.6 Standard 4 Outcome 3.7 Standard 4 Outcome 3.8 Standard 4 Outcome 3.9 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 14 5 - Standard 5 Faculty and Staff Focus a. Faculty and Staff Focus Complete Table 5.1 Standard 5 - Faculty- and Staff-Focused Results found under the Evidence File above b. Faculty Qualifications Complete Table 5.2 Standard 5 - New Full-Time and Part-Time Faculty Qualifications and Table 5.3 Standard 5, Criterion 5.8 - Scholarly and Professional Activities, found under the Evidence File tab above, for new full-time and part-time faculty members hired since last self-study or QA report. Do not include faculty members previously reported. QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned Institution Response Part A) Faculty and Staff Focus: Table 5.1 provides the following information: 1) The number of faculty hires and resignations / retirees for academic years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016. 2) The number of faculty scholarly activities (presentations and publications) for calendar years 2013, 2014, and 2015. Part B) Faculty Qualifications Table 5.2 provides the new full-time and part-time faculty qualifications for 2013, 2014, and 2015. Table 5.3 provides a list of full-time faculty scholarly and professional activities for 2013, 2014, and 2015. Sources Standard 5 Table 5.1 Standard 5 Table 5.2 Standard 5 Table 5.3 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 15 6 - Standard 6 Educational and Business Process Management a. Curriculum o List any existing accredited degree programs/curricula that have been substantially revised since your last report and, for each program, attach a Table - Standard 6, Criterion 6.1.3 - Undergraduate CPC Coverage, found under the Evidence File tab above. List any new degree programs that have been developed and, for each new program since your last report, attach a Table - Standard 6, Criterion 6.1.3 - Undergraduate CPC Coverage found under the Evidence File tab above. Note: If you have a new degree at a level currently accredited by ACBSP, then report information on: student enrollment, program objectives, instructional resources, facilities and equipment, admissions requirements, graduation statistics, core professional components (CPCs), and the outcomes assessment process to ACBSP. If the new degree is at a higher level than what is currently accredited, the school must complete a self-study to add the degree. Excerpt from Accreditation Process Manual: New Degree Programs If a business school or program expands or plans to expand its curriculum by offering new degrees, new majors or concentrations, or a new emphasis after it has been accredited, then ACBSP must be notified during the early stages of the program planning and expansion. If the new degree is at a level currently accredited by ACBSP, then report information on: student enrollment program objectives instructional resources facilities and equipment faculty qualifications admissions requirements graduation statistics core professional components (CPCs) and outcomes assessment processes and results. If the new degree is at a higher level then what is currently accredited, the school must complete a self-study to add the degree. New degree programs, majors or emphases must be in effect for at least two years and have graduates before accreditation will be granted. If the new program is determined to be substantially different from other programs offered by the institution, ACBSP, at its discretion, may direct a new visit to be conducted. If, as a result of a new program visit, ACBSP determines that the overall quality of an institution is being diminished, the institution may be scheduled for a complete reevaluation. b. o List any accredited programs that have been terminated since your last report. o Provide three or four examples of organizational performance results, reporting what you consider to be the most important data, using Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results, found under the Evidence File tab above. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. QA Report Status: Completed Due Date: Not Set Assigned To Not Assigned 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Indiana University East - Self Study - 4/14/2016 Page 16 Institution Response Part A: The School of Business and Economics introduced a marketing concentration after the last QAR report, which was submitted in February 2014. The marketing concentration requires an additional 15 credit hours beyond the business core and general education courses for the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree. A marketing concentration outcome and assessment data can be found in Standard 4. More information regarding the marketing concentration will be available for the 2017 self study. Part B: The School of Business and Economics has not terminated any programs since the last QAR report, which was submitted in February 2014. The Excel file Standard 6 Table 6.1 contains information on the budget, total number of credit hours, headcount, graduation rates, number of business graduates, courses taught, and retention rates. Sources Standard 6 Table 6.1 Standard 6 Table 6.3 2016 ACBSP. All rights reserved. Powered by Campus Labs

Standard Two - Strategic Planning: Complete the following question/tables concerning your business unit strategic plan: 1. In the table below, identify any major changes to the key strategic goals/objectives during this QA reporting period: Key Strategic Objectives Major Changes Major changes have not occurred to the strategic goals/objectives during this QA reporting period. 2. In the table below for your top 3-5 short/long term strategic goals/objectives, summarize the key measures used and progress toward achieving each objective during the current QA reporting period. Strategic Objectives Key Measures Progress Toward Achievement 1. Achieve and maintain dual accreditation with ACBSP and AACSB A. Timely submission of QAR to ACBSP; B. Submission of AACSB Eligibility Application 2014 submitted, no notes or conditions; eligibility application submitted and positively received July 2015 2. Recruit and develop additional faculty positions A. Budgeted faculty lines; B. Completed searches There are three new faculty for the 2015-2016 academic year. In addition, the School of Business and Economics anticipates that there will be two to three new faculty hires for academic year 2016-2017. 3. Maintain strong financial and sustainable program A. Budget growth; B. Enrollment Growth; C. School Reserves Budget growth in last two years 6.1 % and 5.2% respectively; Year over year enrollment continues to grow; 2016 graduates appear on track for record number; School reserve funds have increased in each of past 5 years because of additional enrollments; Financial pro formas created for four year plan to include additional faculty. 3. If there have been any significant changes to your strategic planning process (for example, new stakeholders, new process steps, etc.) during the QA reporting period, please report them in the table below. Strategic Planning Process Changes Summary No significant changes to report.

Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) Current Results: What are your current results? Analysis of Results: What did you learn from your results? Action Taken or Improvement made: What did you improve or what is your next step? Increase the number of events offered through the different centers of the School of Business and Economics at Indiana University East. The following shows the number of events offered by the four centers each year for the years 2012-2015. The number of events offered by the Center for Economic Education, Center for Entrepreneurship, and Business & Economic Research Center has increased over this four year For the most part, the number of period. The Center for Leadership events offered by the different Development had fewer events in centers has increased over the 2015 as compared to 2013 and 2014. four year period. Encourage the centers to continue offering events to the community and university. Year Center for Leadership Development Center for Economic Education Center for Entrepreneurship Business & Economic Research Center Total 2012 21 5 15 1 42 2013 32 4 15 1 52 2014 32 7 25 1 65 2015 26 11 52 2 91 Number of Events Offered 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 21 65 52 52 42 32 32 25 26 15 15 11 5 4 7 1 1 1 2 2012 2013 2014 2015 91 Center for Leadership Development Center for Entrepreneurship Total Center for Economic Education Business & Economic Research Center

Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. Increase the level of student satisfaction with the advising experience What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) Current Results: What are your current results? The graph and numbers below show the weighted mean. The average is consistently below 2.0 for the six periods listed on the This is a question given on the exit survey of the Peregrine exam. graph. Please note that on the survey, 1 denotes very satisfied, The weighted mean results from 2014-2015 (Spring, Summer, and Fall 2 satisfied, 3 dissatisfied, 4 very dissatisfied, and 5 unable to semesters) are provided. judge Analysis of Results: What did you learn from your results? It appears that overall students are satisfied with advising. Action Taken or Improvement made: What did you improve or what is your next step? Continue to monitor the results and continue to look for ways to improve the student advising experience. Survey Question: What is your level of satisfaction with the advising that you have received regarding course selection and program planning? The following is the rating system for this survey: Very Satisfied 1 Satisfied 2 Dissatisfied 3 Very Dissatisfied 4 Unable to Judge 5 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Number of Respondents 59 34 64 19 13 33 Weighted Mean 1.7966 1.9412 1.75 1.7368 1.7692 1.5455 2.5 Student Advising 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. Increase the level of student satisfaction with the quality of instruction / teaching that they are experiencing. What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) This is a question given on the exit survey of the Peregrine exam. The weighted mean results from 2014-2015 (Spring, Summer, and Fall semesters) are provided. Current Results: What are your current results? The graph and numbers below show the weighted mean. The average is consistently below 2.0 for the six periods listed on the graph. Please note that on the survey, 1 denotes very satisfied, 2 satisfied, 3 dissatisfied, 4 very dissatisfied, and 5 unable to judge Analysis of Results: What did you learn from your results? It appears that overall students are satisfied with the quality of instruction / teaching. Action Taken or Improvement made: What did you improve or what is your next step? Continue to monitor the results and look for ways to improve instruction and teaching. Survey Question: What is your level of satisfaction with the overall quality of instruction / teaching? The following is the rating system for this survey: Very Satisfied 1 Satisfied 2 Dissatisfied 3 Very Dissatisfied 4 Unable to Judge 5 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Number of Respondents 59 34 64 19 13 33 Weighted Mean 1.6102 1.6471 1.7344 1.5789 1.6923 1.8182 2.5 Instruction / Teaching 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) Current Results: What are your current results? Analysis of Results: What Action Taken or Improvement did you learn from your results? made: What did you improve or what is your next step? Increase the level of student satisfaction with preparedness to enter the current job market This is a question given on the exit survey of the Peregrine exam. The weighted mean results from 2014-2015 (Spring, Summer, and Fall semesters) are provided. The graph and numbers below show the weighted mean. The average is consistently below 2.0 for five out of the six periods listed on the graph. In Summer 2015 the weighted average was above 2.0. Please note that on the survey, 1 denotes very satisfied, 2 satisfied, 3 dissatisfied, 4 very dissatisfied, and 5 unable to judge It appears that overall students are satisfied with their preparedness in entering the job market. Continue to monitor the results and look for ways to improve student preparedness. Survey Question: How satisfied are you that the program fully prepared you to enter the current job market? The following is the rating system for this survey: Very Satisfied 1 Satisfied 2 Dissatisfied 3 Very Dissatisfied 4 Unable to Judge 5 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Number of Respondents 59 34 64 19 13 33 Weighted mean 1.7797 1.8529 1.9688 1.7368 2.3077 1.8182 2.5 Student Preparedness to Enter the Current Job Market 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. Increase the level of student satisfaction with the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree. This is a question given on the exit survey of the Peregrine exam. The weighted mean results from 2014-2015 (Spring, Summer, and Fall semesters) are provided. Current Results: What are your current results? The graph and numbers below show the weighted mean. The average is consistently below 2.0 for all six periods listed on the graph. Please note that on the survey, 1 denotes very satisfied, 2 satisfied, 3 dissatisfied, 4 very dissatisfied, and 5 unable to judge Action Taken or Improvement Analysis of made: What did you improve or Results: What what is your next step? did you learn from your results? It appears that overall students are satisfied with the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree. Continue to monitor the results and look for ways to improve student satisfaction with the degree. Survey Question: How satisfied are you with your Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree at IUE? The following is the rating system for this survey: Very Satisfied 1 Satisfied 2 Dissatisfied 3 Very Dissatisfied 4 Unable to Judge 5 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Number of Respondents 59 34 64 19 13 33 Weighted mean 1.6949 1.6471 1.5156 1.4737 1.6923 1.6364 2.5 Student Satisfaction with Bachelor of Science in Business Administration Degree 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Performance Measure: What is your goal? The goal should be measurable. What is your measurement instrument or process? (indicate length of cycle) Current Results: What are your current results? Action Taken or Improvement made: What did you Analysis of Results: What did you improve or what is your next step? learn from your results? Increase the level of student satisfaction with course offerings in the major / concentration. This is a question given on the exit survey of the Peregrine exam. The weighted mean results from 2014-2015 (Spring, Summer, and Fall semesters) are provided. Survey Question: How satisfied are you with the availability of course offerings in the major / concentration The graph and numbers below show the weighted mean. The average is consistently below 2.0 for all six periods listed on the graph. Please note that on the survey, 1 denotes very satisfied, 2 satisfied, 3 dissatisfied, 4 very dissatisfied, and 5 unable to It appears that overall students are satisfied with the judge course offerings in the major / concentration. Continue to monitor the results and look for ways to improve student satisfaction with course offerings in the major / concentration. The following is the rating system for this survey: Very Satisfied 1 Satisfied 2 Dissatisfied 3 Very Dissatisfied 4 Unable to Judge 5 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Number of Respondents 59 34 64 19 13 33 Weighted mean 1.5763 1.8529 1.5938 1.4211 1.9231 1.6364 2.5 Student Satisfaction with Course Offerings in the Major / Concentration 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Outcome 1.0 Evaluate and select from possible solutions to problems. Performance Measure What is your Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made measurement instrument or Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? What is your goal? Average recommendations score from case study rubric at or above 22 points (Proficient) (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative BUS J401 case study in which student teams analyze a firm and make recommendations for improvements. Summative, Direct, Internal The average scores for Fall 2014, Spring 2015, Summer 2015, and Fall 2015 are plotted on the graph. Data has been continually collected since 2010. Results are presented here for the past four successive semesters, and they continue to be above the goal desired. The previous standard of having scores above 20 was raised to 22 (73%). Areas of success: In general, the quality of students ability to make recommendations has been maintained. The overall quality of the case studies has continued to improve. The inclusion of executive summaries and more detailed financial information is being consistently provided. The focus of this particular measure is on the ability to develop alternative recommendations. Areas for Improvement: We continue to look for ways to enhance the team experience. A peer member evaluation form that has been used to differentiate levels of performance in some cases has been utilized. Even though the average numbers may not demonstrate this, the gap between high performing groups and low performing groups seems to have widened. Student evaluation comments have more frequently indicated that this was a great group experience but we strive to have this be a universal one for all students Analysis and action taken: In the 2014 QAR, it was noted that the project was broken down into two phases. This proved to be advantageous, although there has not been a dramatic increase in the overall scores. However, related to the recommendations section of the case analysis, which is the focus of this assessment measure, the point values were emphasized and students attention has been drawn to this section of the scoring matrix. There has been some experimentation with letting the students choose their industry and company rather than being assigned an industry and company. This has had mixed results. It may be an unrealistic expectation that movement a higher level is possible without a change of methodology or experience. It should also be noted that from a micro perspective, we had 2 of 35 groups over this 4 semester series that fell below (20) or goal of 22. This occurred in the Spring of 2015. Greater attention was paid to early communication with the groups. This was also the first semester of a new learning management system. This may account for the rise in scores in the summer of 2015, the following semester. Results of Action taken: As a result of actions taken, the range of performance has increased creating a few projects particularly well done, but also a few projects completed at more moderate levels. There are too many factors at play here to determine whether this is simply a result of the actions taken or more a reflection of the intellectual capacity of the students in a particular class. Moving toward the reaffirmation self-study though, it seems timely to evaluate whether this teaching method should be replaced by a simulation model as it might provide a more relevant model for students to deal with emerging business issues making recommendations in a more real-time environment. Semester Average Fall 2014 25.17 Spring 2015 24.80 Summer 2015 27.67 Fall 2015 25.82 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Outcome 2.0 Assess his/her ability to function professionally and ethically in a global society. Performance Measure What is your Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made measurement instrument or Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? What is your goal? The aggregate average of the implementation plan component of the personal strategic plan will be at or above 80% (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative An assessment rubric developed to assess the personal strategic plans developed in the capstone course BUS J401 (Administrative Policy). The assessment rubric for each individual assignment will be combined into an aggregate rubric. Summative, Direct, Internal Data has been continually collected since 2010. Results are presented here for the past four successive semesters, and they continue to be above the goal desired. Areas of success: Student personal strategic plans continue to become more detailed and are now more focused on linking plans to timeframes. Areas for Improvement: The primary area for improvement here is in dealing with individual students who under-perform. The only real way to advance the aggregate average would be to eliminate a low percentage of students who score below 70% Analysis and action taken: From previous analysis, the scoring rubric was adjusted to allow for more points for this portion of the assignment, signaling an increased importance on it. Instructions were also emphasized in a video. Results of Action taken: There has not been a significant consistent increase in aggregate scores compared to prior years, although the quality of plans has increased marginally. Given so many data periods, this measure will be collected only periodically from this point forward. However, this experience has prompted the faculty to now utilize more career assistance tools in some pilot projects in entry level classes like resume building and mock interviews. Semester Average Fall 2014 89.87% Spring 2015 83.11% Summer 2015 82.38% Fall 2015 86.72% 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Outcome 3.0: Synthesize concepts, theories, and tools from CPC to address business issues. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Total score will be at least 60% and above the Outbound ACBSP (All) score which was 51.34% according to the Peregrine reports for this period. Total section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative, External, Comparative Scores are all above 60% except for one semester (Spring 2015) The students performed above the Outbound ACBSP (All) score of 51.34% which was reported in the Peregrine exam results. Continue to monitor the scores for the Total section of the Peregrine Exam. The following are the Total scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 61.19% Summer 2014 63.51% Fall 2014 66.27% Spring 2015 59.88% Summer 2015 63.76% Fall 2015 67.02% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.6: Develop a plan to coordinate human and material resources. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The human resource section of the business plan will have an average rating of 2.0 or better. Business plans in the BUS W311 course were sampled. All, at least 5 plans, or 10% of the business plans (depending on which was largest) were sampled for each section taught for Fall 2014, Spring 2015, and Fall 2015 semesters. The human resource sections were then scored on a scale: 0 if a plan was not included; 1 poor (provided at least a heading); 2 satisfactory; 3 excellent. The average of all the plans sampled in that particular semester was calculated and is reported below. Direct, Summative, Internal The average is below 2.0 Additional plans will be sampled in the future and will be reviewed by The average of the human additional faculty to see resource sections of the what improvements business plans sampled in each need to be made in BUS semester are below 2.0, but W311 to improve scores not by much in 2 of the in this section of the semesters. business plan. Semester Average Score Fall 2014 1.93 Spring 2015 1.78 Fall 2015 1.92 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Ourcome 3.7: Evaluate the possible impact of the legal environment on a business Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Legal Environment of Business score will be at least 60% and above the Outbound ACBSP (All) score which was 55.77% according to the Peregrine reports for this period. The following are the Legal Environment of Business scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Legal Environment of Business section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative, External, Comparative Scores are all above 60%. Continue to monitor the The students performed above scores for the Legal the Outbound ACBSP (All) score Environment of Business of 55.77% which was reported section of the Peregrine in the Peregrine exam results. Exam. Semester Percentage Spring 2014 64.75% Summer 2014 68.53% Fall 2014 72.46% Spring 2015 62.90% Summer 2015 72.29% Fall 2015 70.53% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.8: Develop an international strategy for a business Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Global Dimensions of Business score will be at least 60% and above the Outbound ACBSP (All) score which was 45.95% according to the Peregrine reports for this period. Global Dimensions of Business section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative, External, Comparative Scores are below 60% for four semesters Discuss the results with The students performed above the instructors teaching the Outbound ACBSP (All) score BUS D301 to determine of 45.95% which was reported ways to help increase in the Peregrine exam results. scores in this area. The following are Global Dimensions of Business scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 63.11% Summer 2014 52.06% Fall 2014 54.15% Spring 2015 51.30% Summer 2015 58.33% Fall 2015 64.53% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.9 Evaluate the ethical climate of an organization Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Business Ethics score will be at least 60% and above the Outbound ACBSP (All) score which was 53.51% according to the Peregrine reports for this period. Business Ethics section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative, External, Comparative Only one score was below 60% (Spring 2015) The students performed above Continue to monitor the the Outbound ACBSP (All) score scores for the Business of 53.51% which was reported Ethics section of the in the Peregrine exam results. Peregrine Exam. The following are Business Ethics scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 60.00% Summer 2014 60.59% Fall 2014 63.38% Spring 2015 59.28% Summer 2015 61.46% Fall 2015 64.80% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.10 Use information technology as a business tool. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative The average score will be a 40 or higher out of 50 possible points on an Excel regression assignment given in BUS A202 (Introduction to Managerial Accounting) This is a new assessment piece used to measure Outcome 3.10: Use information technology as a business tool. Only two data points are currently available for the ACBSP QAR 2016 report. Formative, Internal Direct, Both scores are below 40; however, the average did increase from Fall 2014 to Spring 2015. Only two data points are available at this time. The assignment will be given again in Spring 2016 in BUS A202. Embed a regression example in the course to help the students prepare for this assignment. Some students may not have had statistics and thus regression prior to taking BUS A202. Semester Average Score Fall 2014 24.54 Spring 2015 32.03 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.10 Use information technology as a business tool. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative The Information Management Systems score will be at least 60% and above the Outbound Information Management Systems section of Continue to monitor the ACBSP (All) score which was 59.04% according to the Peregrine reports for this period. the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for scores for the Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative, External, The students performed above Information the Outbound ACBSP (All) score Management Systems Comparative of 59.04% which was reported section of the Peregrine Scores are all above 60% in the Peregrine exam results. Exam. The following are Information Management Systems percentage scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 77.54% Summer 2014 79.12% Fall 2014 82.15% Spring 2015 67.83% Summer 2015 74.38% Fall 2015 74.93% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Outcome 3.11 Complete the accounting cycle of a business Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The average score should be at least a 70%. This is an accounting cycle project given in BUS A201 (Introduction to Financial Accounting). Data is provided for 2014 and 2015 semesters both in-class and online sections. Direct, Comparative, Internal, Formative The average scores are below 70% except for one semester. Students in both online and in-class sections are below the target goal. Provide additional materials and examples to help students prepare better for this project. Semester Average Spring '14 Online 71.1% Spring '14 In Class 65.4% Summer '14 Online 67.2% Fall '14 Online 63.0% Fall '14 In Class (1) 61.8% Fall '14 In Class (2) 49.6% Spring '15 Online 61.4% Spring '15 In Class 57.3% Summer '15 Online 56.6% Fall '15 Online (1) 51.4% Fall '15 Online (2) 53.7% Fall '15 In Class (1) 54.0% Fall '15 In Class (2) 48.1% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 71.1% Spring '14 Online 67.2% Summer '14 Online 63.0% 61.4% Fall '14 Online Online Spring '15 Online 56.6% Summer '15 Online 51.4% Fall '15 Online (1) 53.7% Fall '15 Online (2) 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 65.4% Spring '14 In Class 61.8% In Class 49.6% 57.3% Fall '14 In Class Fall '14 In Class Spring '15 In (1) (2) Class 54.0% 48.1% Fall '15 In Class Fall '15 In Class (1) (2)

Accounting CPA and Accounting Managerial Concentrations Outcome: Demonstrate proficiency in Accounting Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Advanced Accounting score will be at least 60%. Advanced Accounting section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative The scores were below 60% in three semesters (Spring 2014, Summer 2014, and Spring 2015). Accounting faculty will continue to monitor the scores and see where improvements can be made. Accounting faculty are also looking The scores have improved in into other assessment the two most recent semesters pieces that better and are above the 60% goal. measure this outcome. The following are Advanced Accounting scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 55.00% Summer 2014 45.00% Fall 2014 84.00% Spring 2015 58.00% Summer 2015 66.25% Fall 2015 67.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Finance Concentration Outcome: Demonstrate proficiency in Finance Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative What did you improve or what is your next step? The Advanced Finance scores will be at least 60%. Advanced Finance section of the Peregrine Exam. Data is given for Spring, Summer, and Fall 2014 and 2015 semesters. Direct, Summative The scores were below 60% in three semesters (Spring 2014, Summer 2015, and Fall 2015). The scores have been Finance faculty will decreasing in recent semesters. continue to monitor the scores and see where improvements can be made. The following are Advanced Finance scores from the Peregrine Exam for the following semesters: Semester Percentage Spring 2014 57.50% Summer 2014 70.00% Fall 2014 61.25% Spring 2015 67.50% Summer 2015 57.50% Fall 2015 40.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015 Semester

Marketing Concentration Outcome: Define a core set of marketing concepts Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made or process? Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative 80% of marketing students meet or exceed expectations for marketing knowledge. Within topic areas, students score 70% or better. The marketing concentration is new since the last ACBSP QAR, which was submitted in February 2014. A well-developed assessment plan is in place for the marketing concentration. However, at this time only two data points are available since this is a relatively new concentration. More data will be available for the 2017 self-study. 15 question assessment quiz embedded in BUS M303 (Marketing Research). It is administered to all students in the class and the marketing concentration students are reported. Direct, Summative, External 72% of students meet or exceeded expectations in Fall 2014. 80% of students meet or exceeded expectations in Fall 2015. The percentage of students that meet or exceeded expectations increased from Fall 2014 to Fall 2015. A revamp of BUS M301 (Introduction to Marketing Management) and new materials that focus on key constructs presented in the BUS M301 (Introduction to Marketing Management) course helped improve the Fall 2015 scores. Semester Needs improvement Meets expectations Exceeds expectations Total (Meet or Exceeds Expectations) Number correct 8 to 9 10 to 12 13 to 15 Fall 2014 29% 43% 29% 72% Fall 2015 20% 60% 20% 80% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Percentage that Meets or Exceeds Expectations Fall 2014 Fall 2015

Management Information Systems Concentration Outcome: Students should be able to design and to query a database. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made or process? Measurable goal Do not use grades. What are your current results? What did you learn from What did you improve or what is your next step? the results? What is your goal? (Indicate type of instrument) direct, formative, internal, comparative Mean score of at least a 9. Passing rate of at least 75% Selected questions from IIM I340 and INFO I308 final exams. 1. Reducing an E-R diagram to tables. 2. Formulating SQL queries. Formative and Direct The mean score is below a 9.0 and the passing rate is below 75% for four data periods (2011, 2013, 2014, and 2015). In spring 2016 we are adding an extra lesson on designing and formulating nested queries (SQL subselects) because students have had difficulty with those in years past. We are also restoring a group project to design and partly implement a database for an online sheet music store, having noted that The mean score and students have no experience with database design and implementation (i.e., passing rate have declined designing, creating, and populating tables) except in their lab on the Entitysince 2009. However, there Relationship model where they reduce E-R diagrams to tables. It could be are also significantly more useful to provide an integrated training/testing system, which would enable students in the course over students to repeatedly practice and review their skills in database design and the years 2013-2015 then in formulating SQL queries. However, the availability of resources to implement earlier years. such a system is doubtful. Year Number of Students Pass Rate Mean Score 2009 3 100.00% 10.983333 2010 1 100.00% 10.5 2011 5 60.00% 8.732 2012 17 82.35% 9.288235 2013 12 25.00% 6.245 2014 13 61.54% 8.735385 2015 17 29.41% 7.077647 120.00% 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% Pass Rate 12 10 8 6 4 2 Mean Score 0.00% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Standard #5 Faculty and Staff Focus, Table 5.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Faculty and Staff Focused Results Faculty and staff-focused results examine how well the organization creates and maintains a positive, productive, learning-centered work environment for business faculty and staff. Key indicators may include: professional development, scholarly activities, community service, administrative duties, 5.0 business and industry interaction, number of advisees, number of committees, number of theses supervised, satisfaction or dissatisfaction of faculty and staff, positive, productive, and learning-centered environment, safety, absenteeism, turnover, or complaints. Faculty Hires and Resignations/Retirements Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Maintain a positive ratio of faculty hires to resignations / retirements Academic years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016 are presented. Analysis of Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made What did you learn from the results? There has been a positive The School of ratio each year except for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 for the number of hires vs resignations / retirements. Business has hired at least one new faculty member each year except for the 2014-2015 academic year. On average there has been only about 1 faculty resignation / retirement per academic year. What did you improve or what is your next step? There are 2 to 3 potential new faculty hires for the 2016-2017 academic year. 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 Academic Year 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Hires 1 3 2 0 3 Resignations / Retirements 0 1 2 1 1 0.0 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Hires Resignations / Retirements

Standard #5 Faculty and Staff Focus, Table 5.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Faculty and Staff Focused Results Faculty and staff-focused results examine how well the organization creates and maintains a positive, productive, learning-centered work environment for business faculty and staff. Key indicators may include: professional development, scholarly activities, community service, administrative duties, business and industry interaction, number of advisees, number of committees, number of theses supervised, satisfaction or dissatisfaction of faculty and staff, positive, productive, and learning-centered environment, safety, absenteeism, turnover, or complaints. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase the number of faculty scholarly activities such as presentations and publications. Calendar years 2013, 2014, and 2015 are presented The number of faculty presentations has increased over this three year period. There was a large number of faculty publications in 2014. Analysis of Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made What did you learn from the results? Faculty are actively presenting at conferences / workshops and publishing their work. What did you improve or what is your next step? Continue to encourage faculty to present at conferences/workshops and to publish. Continue to have travel funds in place in order to encourage faculty to present their research at conferences / workshops. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Number of Faculty Presentations and Publications 28 26 24 20 9 6 2013 2014 2015 Year 2013 2014 2015 Presentations 24 26 28 Publications 6 20 9 Presentations Publications

Standard Five: Faculty and Staff Focus - TABLE 5.2 Complete Table 5.2 and 5.3 for new full-time and part-time faculty members since last self-study or QA report. Do not include faculty members previously reported. Criterion 5.3.1 The composition of faculty must include sufficient academic credentials and business or professional experience to ensure appropriate emphasis on both business theory and practice to meet program objectives. Table 5.2 - NEW AND FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS Faculty Member Name (alphabetically by Last Name) Brudvig, Susan (full-time) Major Teaching Field Marketing Courses Taught (List the courses Taught during the reporting period, Do not duplicate Listing) BUS M300 Intro Marketing, BUS M301 Marketing Management, BUS M405 Consumer Behavior, BUS M303 Marketing Research, BUS M480 Marketing Internship, BUS M554 Marketing Management LIST ALL EARNED DEGREES (State Degree as Documented on Transcript, must include Major Field) Ph.D. in Business Administration (Major Field: Marketing) from Florida State University; MBA from Purdue University; MA in Sociology from Marquette University; BA in Sociology from University of Wisconsin at Parkside DOCUMENT OTHER PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION CRITERIA Five Years Work Experience Teaching Excellence Professional Certifications ACBSP QUALIFICATION 1. Academically 2. Professional 3. Minimal 1) Academically Clemons, Rebecca (full-time) Operations Management DBA in Business Administration (Operations and Supply Chain Management) from Cleveland State University; MS in Applied Statistics ECON E270 (Statistics), BUS P301 (Operations and Operations Research from Bowling Green State University; BA in Management), BUS P330 (Project Management) Business Administration from Bowling Green State University. 1) Academically Crane, Roger (full-time) Accounting BUS-A 202 Intro to Managerial Accounting BUS-A 311 Intermediate Accounting I BUS-A 312 Intermediate Accounting II BUS-A 325 Cost Accounting BUS-A 328 Intro to Taxation BUS-A 339 Advanced Taxation BUS-A 411 Accounting Information Systems BUS-A 422 Advanced Financial Accounting BUS-A 424 Auditing Master of Business Administration with Finance Concentration from Ball State University; MS in Accounting from Ball State University; BS in Business Administration w/cpa Accounting Concentration and minor in Economics from Indiana University East 19 years as owner/operator of $32M wholesale distribution company Indiana Certified Public Accountent (CPA license #CP1130060) Institute of Management Accountants Certified Management Accountant (CMA #46651) American Insitute of Public Accounatnts Certified Global Management Accountant (VGMA #110041933) 2) Professionally Fowler, Shari (full-time) Goo, Wongun (full-time) Accounting Management (Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management) BUS-A 311: Intermediate Accounting I, BUS- A 422: Advanced Financial Accounting, BUS-A 312: Intermediate Accounting II, BUS-A 201: Introduction to Financial Accounting, and BUS-A 424: Auditing and Assurance Services BUEA M550: Leadership and Motivation; BUS Z441: (Wage and Salary Administration) Master of Accounting, Major: Accounting from University of Alabama in Huntsville; Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Major: Accounting from University of Alabama in Huntsville PhD, Business Administration from Georgia State University; Master of Science in Business Administration from Seoul National University in South Korea; Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Seoul National University in South Korea Certified Professional Accounting, State of Iowa and State of Indiana; Program Director of Accounting Program at Briar Cliff University (2012-2015); Director of CPA Review Course (2012-2015); Owner of Fowler Accounting and Consulting (2004-2014). 2) Professionally 1) Academically Davison, Christopher Information Technology Doctor of Philosophy in Information Technology from Capella University; MBA in INFO-I 213 WEB SITE DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT; BUS- Technology Management from University of Phoenix; Bachelor of Science in S 310 SYSTEMS ANALYSIS & PROJECT MGT Information Systems from Indiana University; Associate of Science in Computer CompTIA (Network + Certification); CompTIA Science from Indiana University (A+ Certification) 1) Academically Duke, M. Todd Information Technology IIM-I 380 DATA COMMUNICATIONS IN IIM Estelle, David Foster, Rebecca Grafflin, Matthew BUS D301 International Business Environment IIM-I 300 FNDTNS/PRIN INTEGRATD INFO MGT; INFO-I 303 ORGANIZATIONAL INFORMATICS BUS-Z 440 PERSONNEL - HUMAN RES MGMT MBA from Indiana Wesleyan; BS in Integrated Information Management from Indiana University East 2) Professionally Master of Science in Management from Indiana University East; Associate of Science in Nursing Registered Nurse; Certified to Administer from Indiana University East; Bachelor of Science in Exercise Science from Ball Chemotherapy Oncology Nursing Association; State University Certified Clinical Nutritionist 2) Professionally Currently enrolled in a Ph.D in Health Services Program at Walden University; MBA in Health Care Management from Columbia Southern University; BS in Business Administration from Columbia Southern University; Master of Science in Management from Indiana University; Bachelor of Music Education from Indiana University 2) Professionally 2) Professionally Knight, L. Christopher Leyes, Anna Morgan, Bruce Accounting BUS A318 Fraud Examination 1; BUS A350 Master of Science in Criminal Justice from University of Cincinnati; Principles of Forensic Accounting Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Indiana University. MBA, Health Care Management Indiana Wesleyan University, Marion, IN; BA, Accounting Saint Martin s University, Lacey, WA; AA, Information Management Community College of the Air Force, Maxwell AFB, AL; AA Campbell University, Bious Creek, NC. BUS A202 Introduction to Managerial Accounting MS in Integrated Marketing Communications from West Virginia BUS-M 415 ADVERTISING & IMC University; BS in Communication Studies from Indiana University; AAS in Visual Communications from Ivy Tech Community College CPA, CFE, certificate in online teaching from Indiana University East 2) Professionally 2) Professionally 2) Professionally Nichols, Anthony Oakes, Michael Accounting Finance BUS A465 Financial Investigations; BUS A335 Accounting for Government & Non-Profit Enterprises BUEA-M 553 MANAGERIAL USE OF FINAN INFO MAcc Master of Accountancy, Shorter University, Rome, GA Ph.D. Information Systems, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL M.S. Information Systems, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA M.B.A. Business, Berry College, Rome, GA B.E.T. Electrical Engineering, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA B.S. Biology, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA A.S. Young Harris College, Young Harris, GA MBA in Finance and Applied Economics from University of Rochester; BS in Journalism from Indiana University 1) Academically 2) Professionally Tower, Karen Accounting BUS A201 Introduction to Financial Accounting; MBA from University of Phoenix; AAS in Accounting from Ivy Tech State BUS A202 Introduction to Managerial Accounting College; BS in Business Administration from Indiana Wesleyan University 2) Professionally

o Use for Scholarly Activities A = Scholarship of Teaching B = Scholarship of Discovery C = Scholarship of Integration D = Scholarship of Application Standard Five: Faculty and Staff Focus - Table 5.3 Criterion 5.8.1. Faculty members must be actively involved in professional activities that will enhance the depth and scope of their knowledge and that of their disciplines, as well as the effectiveness of their teaching. The institution must demonstrate a reasonable balance of scholarly and professional activities by the faculty as a whole, consistent with the stated institutional mission Example - Table for Faculty Load Year Faculty Member Highest Degree earned Professional Certification Papers Presented FACULTY LOAD, FULL -TIME FACULTY MEMBERS Scholarly Activities Published Articles Manuscript and books Unpublished Articles Manuscript and books Professional Related Service Professional Activities Professional Conferences and workshops 2013 Braxton-Brown, Greg Ph.D. D-2 12 1 2 1 2014 Braxton-Brown, Greg Ph.D. D-2 12 2 2 1 2015 Braxton-Brown, Greg Ph.D. D-2 12 2 2 1 Consulting Professional Meetings Professio nal Member ships Other 2013 Brudvig, Susan Ph.D. -- -- -- A-1 -- 2 -- -- 3 -- 2014 Brudvig, Susan Ph.D. -- A-2 A-2 -- D-2 3 1 1 3 -- 2015 Brudvig, Susan Ph.D. -- A-1 A-1, B-1 A-2, B-5 D-2 2 1 1 1 -- 2013 Cheung, Oi Lin Ph.D. 2 2014 Cheung, Oi Lin Ph.D. B-6 2 2015 Cheung, Oi Lin Ph.D. D-1 2 2 2013 Clemons, Rebecca MS B-2 D-2 B-1 D-2 3 2014 Clemons, Rebecca MS B-2 D-2 B-2 D-2 3 2015 Clemons, Rebecca DBA B-1 (submitted for publication) D-2 D-2 D-2 4 2013 Crane, Roger Masters CPA 1 2 1 5 2014 Crane, Roger Masters CPA, CGMA 1 5 4 3 5 2015 Crane, Roger Masters CPA, CMA, CGMA 1 7 6 6 5 2013 Fowler, Shari MACC CPA 1 1 2014 Fowler, Shari MACC CPA 1 1 2015 Fowler, Shari MACC CPA 1 1 1 4 2013 Frantz, David D. Mn. C-1, D-1 D-4 4 3 3 2 2014 Frantz, David D. Mn. C-2, D-3 D-1 D-5 4 3 2 2 2015 Frantz, David D. Mn. C-2, D-2 A-1 D-4 4 3 2 2 2013 Goo,Wongun Ph.D. B-1 2014 Goo,Wongun Ph.D. B-1 2015 Goo,Wongun Ph.D. B-1 2013 Jance, Marsha Ph.D. A-5 A-3 1 5 2 2014 Jance, Marsha Ph.D. A-4 A-5 2 4 2 2015 Jance, Marsha Ph.D. A-2 A-1 (accepted for publication) 2 2 2 2013 Messer, Carla R MBA A-2 D-2 2 1 3 5 1 2014 Messer, Carla R MBA A-2 2 1 2 6 1 2015 Messer, Carla R MBA A-3 2 1 3 4 1 2013 Savoy, April Ph.D. B-3 3 6 2 2014 Savoy, April Ph.D. B-1 2 1 2 2015 Savoy, April Ph.D. D-1 D-1, A-1 B-1 (accepted for publication) 1 3 4 2013 Scales, Timothy MBA A-5 A-4 4 6 8 4 2014 Scales, Timothy MBA A-5 A-3 A-1 4 7 10 4

2015 Scales, Timothy MBA A-7 A-2 A-1 4 6 8 4 2013 Simpson, LaCalvince MBA 1 2014 Simpson, LaCalvince MBA 1 1 1 2 2015 Simpson, LaCalvince MBA Quality Matters Certification 5 3 4 2 2013 Weber, Gregory Ph.D. A-1 A-1 1 1 2014 Weber, Gregory Ph.D. 1 1 2015 Weber, Gregory Ph.D. 2 1 2013 Zhong, Litao Ph.D. B-1, D-1 B-1, D-1 1 1 2 2014 Zhong, Litao Ph.D. B-1, D-3 B-2, D-1 D-1 4 3 4 2015 Zhong, Litao Ph.D. D-1 D-1 D-1 5 3

Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, Effectiveness Results and other characteristics reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Analysis of Results Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase the budget by 5% Indiana University East budget each year. data for academic years 2009 to 2010 through 2015-2016. The budget increase was 5.2% for the 2015-2016 academic year. What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? The budget has Continue to monitor the increased by at least budget and see if a 5% 5% since 2010-2011. increase in the budget is However, the attainable each year. percentage increase has slowed over the past few years. 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Budget Percentage Increase 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Academic Year Percentage Increase 2009-2010 3.7% 2010-2011 27.3% 2011-2012 25.6% 2012-2013 14.1% 2013-2014 13.2% 2014-2015 6.1% 2015-2016 5.2%

Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Effectiveness Results Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase the number of courses taught by full-time faculty. Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, and other characteristics reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Indiana University East institutional research data for Spring 2010 through Fall 2015. Analysis of Results Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made From Spring 2012 through Spring 2015, at least 40% of the courses were taught by full-time faculty. What did you learn from the results? In Fall 2015 there was a decrease in the percentage of courses taught by fulltime faculty. There were a larger number of total courses taught (111) and one full-time faculty member was on sabbatical. What did you improve or what is your next step? The School of Business is anticipating that 2 to 3 new faculty will be hired for the 2016-2017 academic year. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Courses Taught S10 F10 S11 F11 S12 F12 S13 F13 S14 F14 S15 F15 Full-Time Adjunct Total 60% 50% 40% 30% Percentage of Courses Taught by Full-Time Faculty Personnel S10 F10 S11 F11 S12 F12 S13 F13 S14 F14 S15 F15 Full-Time 30 32 37 34 38 47 48 46 36 44 42 35 Adjunct 48 45 48 53 50 57 42 48 53 58 52 76 Total 78 77 85 87 88 104 90 94 89 102 94 111 Percentage taught by full-time faculty 38% 42% 44% 39% 43% 45% 53% 49% 40% 43% 45% 32% 20% 10% 0% S10 F10 S11 F11 S12 F12 S13 F13 S14 F14 S15 F15

Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, and other characteristics Effectiveness Results reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What did you learn from the results? What is your goal? Increase headcount by at least 5% from Fall to Fall semesters and Spring to Spring semesters Indiana University East institutional research data for fall and spring semesters. The data covers Fall 2010 through Fall 2015 and Spring 2010 through Spring 2015. The fall semester headcount percentage increase has been at least 5% except for Fall 2014 when the increase was only about 2%. The spring semester headcount percentage increase has been at least 5% except for Spring 2013 when it was 4.6% and Spring 2015 when it dropped by 1%. What did you improve or what is your next step? Except for one fall Continue to monitor semester and two spring semesters, the headcount has increased by at least 5%. headcount growth. Explore additional opportunities to work with Admissions and advising to increase the number of students. Fall Semester Headcount % Change Fall 2010 626 Fall 2011 664 6.07% Fall 2012 746 12.35% Fall 2013 806 8.04% Fall 2014 825 2.36% Fall 2015 877 6.30% 1000 900 800 700 600 Headcount (Fall Semesters) 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% Percentage Change Headcount (Fall Semesters) 500 8.00% Spring Semester Headcount % Change Spring 2010 526 Spring 2011 611 16.16% Spring 2012 674 10.31% Spring 2013 705 4.60% Spring 2014 775 9.93% Spring 2015 767-1.03% 400 300 200 100 0 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015 Headcount (Spring Semesters) Percentage Change Headcount (Spring Semesters) 900 18.00% 800 16.00% 700 14.00% 600 12.00% 500 10.00% 400 8.00% 300 6.00% 200 4.00% 100 2.00% 0 Spring 2010 Spring 2011 Spring 2012 Spring 2013 Spring 2014 Spring 2015 0.00% -2.00% Spring 2011 Spring 2012 Spring 2013 Spring 2014 Spring 2015

Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, and other characteristics Effectiveness Results reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. 250 200 150 100 50 Business Graduates Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase the number of total business graduates Indiana University East institutional research data for calendar years 2010-2015. Analysis of Results 0 Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made There has been a decrease in the number of total business student graduates in the past couple of years. What did you learn from the results? The undergraduate business graduates has been increasing over the past few years. There has been smaller graduate cohorts for the Master in Management program over the past two years and this has affected the number of total graduates. Two Master in Management cohorts graduated in calendar year 2013. What did you improve or what is your next step? Continue to work with Admissions and the local community to increase the number of students in the Master of Management program. 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Percentage Change Number of Total Business Graduates Calendar Year Undergraduate Business Grads Graduate Business Grads Total Business Graduates % Change 2010 125 0 125 2011 127 0 127 1.60% 2012 172 0 172 35.43% 2013 167 37 204 18.60% 2014 182 19 201-1.47% 2015 184 9 193-3.98% 5.00% 0.00% -5.00% -10.00% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Effectiveness Results Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase retention rates. Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, and other characteristics reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Indiana University East institutional research data for Fall 2009 to Spring 2010, Fall 2010 to Spring 2011, Fall 2011 to Spring 2012, Fall 2012 to Spring 2013, Fall 2013 to Spring 2014, Fall 2014 to Spring 2015 Analysis of Results Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made The retention rate for beginners and total increased from (F13 to S14) to (F14 to S15) What did you learn from the results? The retention rates have been at least 80% for beginners, transfers, and total except for F13 to S14 for beginners and F14 to S15 for transfers. What did you improve or what is your next step? Continue to monitor and to work with students to increase retention rates. 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Retention Rates F09 to S10 F10 to S11 F11 to S12 F12 to S13 F13 to S14 F14 to S15 Beginners Transfers Total Student F09 to S10 F10 to S11 F11 to S12 F12 to S13 F13 to S14 F14 to S15 Beginners 86.70% 90.90% 87.50% 87.00% 77.19% 87.69% Transfers 82.90% 86.40% 84.50% 89.20% 82.44% 79.00% Total 84.30% 88.00% 85.30% 88.50% 80.85% 82.42%

Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, Effectiveness Results and other characteristics reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Analysis of Results Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? Increase credit hours by at least 5% from Fall to Fall semesters and Spring to Spring semesters Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Indiana University East institutional research data for fall and spring semesters. The data covers Fall 2010 through Fall 2015 and Spring 2010 through Spring 2015. The fall semester increase has been under 5% for the past three fall semesters. The spring semester saw a drop in credit hour growth in Spring 2014; however, the spring credit hours grew by close to 8% in Spring 2015. What did you learn from the results? What did you improve or what is your next step? The percentage Continue to monitor credit increase has been hour growth. Explore closer to 3% than 5% additional opportunities to for fall semesters work with Admissions and over the past three advising to increase the years. number of credit hours. Fall Semester Total Credit Hours % Change Fall 2010 5766 Fall 2011 6062 5.13% Fall 2012 6994 15.37% Fall 2013 7209.5 3.08% Fall 2014 7440 3.20% Fall 2015 7718 3.74% Spring Semester Total Credit Hours % Change Spring 2010 4986 Spring 2011 5902 18.37% Spring 2012 6503 10.18% Spring 2013 6801 4.58% Spring 2014 6666-1.99% Spring 2015 7183 7.76% 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Total Credit Hours (Fall Semesters) Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Percentage Change Total Credit Hours (Fall Semesters) Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015 8000 Total Credit Hours (Spring Semesters) Percentage Change Total Credit Hours (Spring Semesters) 7000 20.00% 6000 5000 15.00% 4000 10.00% 3000 2000 5.00% 1000 0 Spring 2010 Spring 2011 Spring 2012 Spring 2013 Spring 2014 Spring 2015 0.00% -5.00% Spring 2011 Spring 2012 Spring 2013 Spring 2014 Spring 2015

Standard #6 - Organizational Performance Results, Table 6.1 Complete the following table. Provide three or four examples, reporting what you consider to be the most important data. It is not necessary to provide results for every process. Table 6.1 Standard 6 - Organizational Performance Results Organizational Organizational effectiveness results examine attainment of organizational goals. Each business unit must have a systematic reporting mechanism for each business program that charts enrollment patterns, student retention, student academic success, and Effectiveness Results other characteristics reflecting students' performance. Key indicators may include: graduation rates, enrollment, improvement in safety, hiring equity, increased use of web-based technologies, use of facilities by community organizations, contributions to the community, or partnerships, retention rates by program, and what you report to governing boards and administrative units. Analysis of Results Performance Measure What is your measurement instrument or process? Current Results Analysis of Results Action Taken or Improvement made Measurable goal (Indicate length of cycle) What are your current results? What is your goal? IUE graduation rate equal to Graduation rates as reported to or above the average IPEDs graduation rate for the other (https://www.iu.edu/~uirr/reports/sta IU regional campuses. ndard/graduation/). Data from 2004 through 2009. The IU Regional Graduation Rate is an average of the graduation rates from IU Kokomo, IU Northwest, IU South Bend, and IU Southeast. The IUE graduation rate has been increasing over the past few years. What did you learn from the results? The IUE graduation rate was above the average IU regional graduation rate for 2009. What did you improve or what is your next step? The university continues to develop initiatives and to work with students to improve retention and graduation rates. Graduation Rates 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 IUE Graduation Rate IU Regional Graduation Rate Year IUE Graduation Rate IU Regional Graduation Rate 2004 17.80% 25.23% 2005 19.40% 23.95% 2006 27.10% 23.78% 2007 23.50% 27.35% 2008 26.80% 28.43% 2009 28.50% 26.68%

Standard Six: Educational and Business Process Management - Table 6.3 Criterion 6.1.3 Undergraduate Common Professional Component (CPC) Programs that include a B.A. (with a business major), B.S. (with a business major), B.B.A., B.S.B.A., or objectives that imply general business preparation with or without a functional specialization must include coverage of the Common Professional Component (CPC) at the level prescribed by the ACBSP. The CPC as outlined below must be included in the content of the courses taught in the undergraduate programs of all accredited schools and programs. Each CPC area must receive a minimum coverage of two-thirds of a three (3) semester credit-hour course (or equivalent) or approximately 30 coverage hours. Directions for using table: Enter your academic discipline and degree type on row 6. Replace the sample core courses with your core courses and update columns B - L with the number of coverage hours for each CPC area. The total columns will total using the the formulas. Figure 6.5 Example of a Table of Undergraduate Common Professional Component (CPC) Compliance Bachelor of Science in Business Administration Hour Class Session by CPC Topic Core Courses a. MKT b. FIN c. ACC d. MGT e. LAW f. ECON g. ETH h. GLO i. IS j. QMSTAT k.l. POL/COMP Total BUS A201 3 35 4 1 3 1 2 1 2 52 BUS A202 30 6 1 3 2 3 4 6 55 BUS D301 3 5 3 35 4 50 BUS F301 45 1 2 1 3 1 3 56 BUS J401 6 3 15 6 3 20 53 BUS J404 6 30 5 6 47 BUS L203 40 3 43 BUS M301 30 10 3 3 9 3 3 61 BUS P301 6 10 3 3 2 20 3 47 BUS W100 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 3 8 6 49 BUS W311 10 10 4 8 4 4 2 8 50 BUS Z301 2 30 2 2 3 3 42 CSCI A110 40 8 48 ECON E103 4 36 2 2 10 4 58 ECON E104 4 4 36 2 2 10 4 62 ECON E270 3 3 45 51 IIM I300 2 2 6 4 35 49 Total 59 72 75 111 66 83 56 82 82 115 72 873