Chicago State University

Chicago State University
Mission Statement Process and Goals2004-2005 Calendar Task Force Activities Strategic Plan 1999-2000 Long Range Plan Recommendations for Improvement Goal Updates NCA Evaluation Overview NCA Concerns Task Forces External Scan Report External Factors

Task Force Reports Facutly Task Force Educational Environment Technology Task Force Presentation (PowerPoint)Task Force on Academic Programs (PowerPoint) Hearing and Feedback

Strategic Plan Format for Unit Strategic Plans Strategic Plan Feedback form Unit Strategic Plan Annual Report Strategic Plan 2006 Unit Strategic Plans 2006-2007

Home

New Millennium Strategic Plan: Repositiong the University for Excellence in the New Centry

Academic Programs

The New Millennium Committees Task Force On Academic Programs was charged with determining "...whether programs/departments and curricular offerings (under- graduate, graduate and continuing education) were outstanding or good or targeted for phase-out in light of established criteria. These criteria included adequate student enrollment, the relationship to projected trends for the twenty-first century, scholarship and service contributions of programs and curricula, along with current and future projections for grants and contracts." Additionally, the committee was asked to recommend modifications, restructuring or consolidation of departments and colleges based on an analysis of the current structure; to review current student/faculty ratios for each academic unit and recommend revisions in light of the current state of affairs in higher education and projected trends for the twenty-first century; to recommend goals for the percentage of earned doctorates that each unit should aspire to; and to present innovative recommendations for any other aspect of academic affairs as appropriate. Over a series of meetings, the committee clarified critical elements of the charge; developed consensus on quantitative and qualitative criteria to be utilized in evaluation; determined strategies to collect data; and developed a standard reporting format for program review summaries. The quantitative criteria used in the evaluation of each program were number of faculty, student/faculty ratio, number of earned doctorates, accreditation status, average enrollment (and trend), average number of credit hours generated (and trend), number of degrees conferred (and trend), and program costs in dollars per credit hour as well as percent of state average for similar programs. The qualitative criteria included program objectives, projected needs for the 21st century, how close the program was to meeting accreditation standards, level of faculty scholarship, service contributions of the program (i.e. centrality to and fulfilling needs of other programs), funded grants and contracts and other pertinent information. All academic degree programs offered at CSU were reviewed. At task force meetings, program data were presented to the group, followed by a discussion of strengths and weaknesses for each program. When the process ended, the chair summarized the discussion and developed a statement of evaluation and recommendation(s) for each program.

Of the fifty programs reviewed:

six programs were rated as "very good --on the way to becoming outstanding". These programs met and exceeded most evaluation criteria and should serve as models for other CSU programs. The programs were B.S. Biological Sciences, M.S. Biological Sciences, B.S Chemistry, B.S. Ed Bilingual Education, M.S. Ed. Bilingual Education, and B.S. Ed. Elementary Education;

b) thirty five programs were rated as "good". This group includes sound and generally healthy programs with no serious shortcomings. However, one or more areas such as faculty productivity, enrollments, graduation rates and so on may need improvement. c) nine programs were rated in the "other" category with an explanation in the evaluation summary. In this group are programs with weaknesses or deficiencies serious enough to merit immediate intervention. It is recommended that programs in this grouping be examined more thoroughly and the appropriate action be taken. Recommended actions include curricular modifications, restructuring in the form of elimination of department status, increasing percentages of faculty with earned doctorates as necessary, new leadership and other similar actions. As the New Millennium Committee discovered in its environmental research, the Illinois Job Outlook projections for the Chicago area and Cook County indicate that the areas of greatest demand will be in the health sciences, computer science, business (primarily finance and accounting), information sciences, education and other technical fields. All studies of current access to computers and other high technology indicate that people of color are lagging far behind the rest of American society. According to the US Department of Commerce, 1995 Census Report, only 13.8 percent of African-Americans age eighteen and over have access to computers compared to 26.9 percent of the white population. Although a study in 1998 by the Department of Commerce shows that 40% of Caucasian households own a personal computer and have Internet access, only 19% of African-American households have personal computers and only 7.7% are connected to Internet. This study also indicates that computer usage and access to the World Wide Web is lowest in the midwest of all geographic areas within the U.S. In their final report "Technology: Bridge or Barrier to More Timely Degree Completion?", Witthuhn, Brush, and Riggins (1998) indicate that inner city schools "many times lack appropriate funding necessary to maintain an adequate computer system for student access." (p.22) As these observations reveal, differences in access are magnified when low socio-economic African-American students, from inner city public schools with inadequate technology resources are compared with majority students from wealthier school districts. If this discrepancy is allowed to continue, it will only widen in the next century. Significant corrective interventions must be mounted now if this trend is to be reversed. CSU has a moral responsibility and commitment to prepare its graduates to be proficient users of all types of information creation and retrieval devices. Futurists project that there will be high demand for two types of workers in the next century: those with technological skills and those in service industries. Futurists also indicate that the former will be highly paid for their work while those in service positions will not be well compensated. Already people of color and those for whom English is a second language predominate in service jobs. If the economic inequalities of American society are ever to be overcome, CSU and other institutions of higher education which serve these groups must have the resources and the educational programs necessary to provide the training and experiences required to make their graduates competitive for the highest paying positions in society. CSU must continue to increase its efforts to enter into partnerships with elementary schools and community groups in order to provide early experiences for youngsters in these groups so that these students will be attracted to and prepared for entry into these scientific and technologically demanding majors. As a comprehensive university, CSU is committed to supporting strong majors in the liberal arts, the humanities, and the social sciences, as well. The following strategic goals and strategies were developed by the New Millennium Committee based on input from all sources previously cited and through input from individuals in the CSU community and public hearings. No direct attribution to the Task Force on Academic Programs should be made.

STRATEGIC GOALS	*RESPONSIBILITY*	*TIMELINES*	*ASSESSMENT INDICATORS*
Strategic Goal 1: Strengthen the commitment of the entire CSU community to outstanding undergraduate, graduate, distance and continuing educational programs characterized by disciplinary depth and rigorous breadth with a high level of direct interaction between faculty and students.
Submit the report of the Task Force on Academic Programs to the Committee on Program Elimination for review and action.	Provost	Begin Summer 1999 Complete Fall 1999	Final recommendations of committee.
2. Review all educational programs on an eight year cycle that corresponds with external review and accreditation cycles where appropriate, beginning in the spring of 2000.	Provost Assistant Provost	Continuously to Begin by January 2000	Comparison of number of programs assessed year-to-year. 2. Questionnaires given to chairs and faculty in departments assessed. 3. Comparison of number of programs seeking external accreditation year-to-year.
3. Measure value-added student learning outcomes using pre-and post-testing in educational programs and customer satisfaction in academic support units.	Department Chairs and/or Assessment Coordinators	Continuously to Begin by January 2000 All Programs by Fall 2000	1. Comparison of number of programs measuring value-added year-to-year. 2. Comparison of number of programs making changes in curriculum based on these measures year-to-year.
4. Include evaluations by employers of CSU graduates and alumni into program review in all academic departments.	Department Chairs and/or Assessment Committees Institutional Research Career Development	Continuously to Begin by January 2000 All Programs by Fall 2000	Comparison of number of programs soliciting employer and graduate input year-to-year. 2. Comparison of number of programs making changes in curriculum based on this input year-to-year.
5. Enhance the Office of Institutional Research to support all evaluation, assessment, and planning efforts.	Director of Institutional Research	Continuously	1. Comparison of number of studies done year-to-year. 2. Additional support provided year-to-year.
6. Require all departments and majors to review course and degree requirements as part of the review process.	Department Chairs and/or Assessment Coordinators	Continuously	Comparison of number of programs reviewing course and degree requirements year-to-year. 2. Comparison of number of programs making changes in curriculum based on these reviews year-to-year.
7. Appoint Ad Hoc Committees to study the Board of Governors program and to study adding a doctorate in physical therapy and various B.S. programs in engineering.	President	Summer 1999 to be completed by May 2000	Recommendations made by committees. 2. Length of time taken to implement recommendations.
8. Require and support all departments and programs to pursue external accreditation, if available in the discipline.	Provost	Continuously	1. Comparison of number of departments that can be accredited. 2. Comparison of number of departments seeking and achieving accreditation year-to-year.
9. With the emphasis on a global perspective in academic programs, the department of modern foreign languages should be reinstituted.	Provost Dean of Arts & Sciences	2000-2001	1. Comparison number of majors requiring a foreign language year-to-year. 2. Comparison of number of students taking a foreign language course year-to-year.
Subgoal 1.1: Emphasize the development of fluency in oral and written communication, quantitative reasoning and critical thinking skills, skill with technology relevant to the field of study, creativity, professional and personal ethics and diligence in all educational programs.
Conduct assessment of General Education curriculum to determine the existence of course content and learning experiences related to that content.	General Education Assessment Committee, Dean of Arts & Sciences, Assistant Provost	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001	1. Report of the Faculty Senate General Education Committee. 2. Level of input from CSU community on adequacy of Gen Ed program. 3. Types of assessments used to measure adequacy. 4. Comparison of CSU Gen Ed program with others at state universities in Illinois. 5. Changes recommended.
2. Charge the related academic departments to make the necessary changes which may include revisions or deletions.	Provost, Dean of Arts & Sciences, Department Chairs and Appropriate Faculty	Spring, 2000 to be completed by Spring 2001	1. Number of course revisions year-to-year. 2. Number of department chairs and faculty involved year-to-year.
3. Evaluate basic skills requirements and developmental programs to determine if they are meeting current needs of CSU students.	Ad Hoc Committee Appointed by President	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001	1. Final Report of Committee. 2. Types of assessments used to measure adequacy. 3. Comparison of CSU developmental programs and requirements with others at state universities in Illinois. 4. Comparison of CSU developmental programs and requirements with best practices in literature. 5. Changes recommended. 6. Comparison of number of students who pass basic skills proficiency test year-to-year.
4. Encourage all majors to require courses that include oral and written communication, quantitative problem solving, field relevant technology and professional ethics.	Deans	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001	1. Number of majors that currently include these elements. 2. Number of majors that add these elements to required courses year- to-year. 3. Comparison of student learning outcomes in these areas by majors year-to-year.
5. Require general education programs to include a foreign language.	Provost, Dean of Arts & Sciences	1999-2000	When foreign language requirement was instituted. 2. Comparison of number of courses and enrollment in foreign language courses year-to-year. 3. Comparison of student learning outcomes in language year-to-year.
Subgoal 1.2: Incorporate and enhance research experiences, applied internships in business, industry and/or the community in which students apply knowledge gained in the classroom into all educational programs.
Encourage all majors to include opportunities for research and/or internships in applied settings in which students can apply knowledge and gain practical experience.	Deans	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001	Number of majors that currently include these elements. 2. Number of majors that add these elements to required courses year- to-year. 3. Comparison of student learning outcomes in these areas by majors year-to-year.
2. Seek corporate and other types of sponsorship of internships.	Deans, Department Chairs and Executive Director of CSU Foundation	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001 on-going	1. Number of majors that currently include these research and applied internships by type of internship. 2. Number of majors that add these research and applied internships year-to-year by type. 3. Comparison of student learning outcomes of students who have completed an internship with those who have not within majors year-to-year. 4. Student and mentor ratings of internships. 5. Number of dollars from donations, gifts & grants specified for support of internships.
3. Encourage all grant proposal developers to include both under- graduate and graduate student funded research and applied opportunities in their proposals.	Deans and Department Chairs	Fall 1999 to be Completed by Spring 2001 on-going	Number of grants proposals submitted with undergraduate and graduate research and applied opportunities year-to-year. 2. Number of undergraduate and graduate research and applied opportunities funded year-to-year.
Subgoal 1.3: Promote curricular reform and innovation in all areas of the academic program.
Seek external funding to implement a Center for Teaching Excellence with a full program of curricula and instruc-tional development materials and faculty development activities.	Vice President for Planning, Executive Director of CSU Foundation and Director of Faculty Development	Fall 1999	Number of concept proposals submitted to foundations and corporations describing CTE. 2. Number of full proposals requested and submitted. 3. Feedback from potential funders on quality of full proposals. 4. Funding received.
2. Implement Provost/President's Teaching Innovation Award to recognize teaching innovations such as learning experiences related to the Internet.	Deans, Department Chairs and Director of Faculty Development	Continuously	1. Number of innovative instructional projects initiated year-to-year. 2. Number of innovative instructional projects funded through released time and/or small initiation year-to-year.
Subgoal 1.4: Offer a variety of quality, well supported graduate degree programs including doctoral programs that are consistent with the university's educational mission, increase the enrollment of outstanding students and develop sources of increased funding for all graduate programs.
Recruit a Dean of Graduate Studies with experience supervising masters theses and doctoral dissertations and with an established reputation as a scholar in his/her discipline.	Search Committee, Provost and President	Accomplished	1. Number of masters theses and doctoral dissertations applicants have supervised. 2. Number of refereed research publications each has. 3. Comparison of successful candidate with others.
2. Establish more graduate assistantships and fellowships funded by research and training grants.	Dean of Graduate Studies and Director of Sponsored Programs	Continuously	1. Number of grant proposals sub- mitted to support graduate research and fellowships year-to-year. 2. Number of graduate research and fellowships funded year-to-year.
3. Seek areas of opportunity where departments can collaborate in offering interdisciplinary graduate degrees.	Dean of Graduate Studies, Deans and Department Chairs	Continuously	1. Comparison of number and type of interdisciplinary graduate programs offered year-to-year. 2. Quality of interdisciplinary graduate programs offered year- to-year based on program evaluation, assessment of learning outcomes, ratings and comments of students, faculty and research and internship mentors and employers. 3. Number of applicants to each program year-to-year. 4. Number of graduates of each program year-to-year.
4. Develop and seek IBHE approval of doctoral programs leading to Doctor of Physical Therapy, Doctor of Educational Leadership, and other similar programs and investigate the feasibility of developing other doctoral programs such as the DA in teaching mathematics.	President, Provost, Dean of Graduate Studies, College Deans and Department Chairs	1999-2000 2000-2001	1. Comparison of number of doctoral programs developed and approved by IBHE year-to-year. 2. Comparison of number of doctoral programs that admit students year-to-year. 3. Comparison of number of graduates from doctoral programs year-to-year.
5. Provide more opportunities for graduate students to interact across school boundaries.	Dean of Graduate Studies, Deans and Department Chairs	Continuously	1. Number of interdisciplinary opportunities for graduate students to interact year-to-year. 2. Ratings of students, and faculty of value of these interdisciplinary interaction opportunities year-to-year.
6. Encourage all research grant proposals to include graduate student support in requests for funding.	Director of Sponsored Programs, Deans and Department Chairs	Continuously	1. Number of grants proposals submitted with graduate student support year-to-year. 2. Number of graduate student support funded year-to-year.
7. Identify areas of need where CSU has market advantages relative to other institutions and focus development and expansion of graduate studies programs in these areas.	Dean of Graduate Studies, Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Number and type of techniques used to discover areas of need in which CSU has market advantage year-to-year. 2. Findings of these surveys. 3. Number and areas where CSU adds programs through Continuing Education year-to-year.
8. Seek external funding to establish research and teaching institutes in areas consistent with the university mission (For example: an Institute for the Study of Urban Public Policy, a Center for Research on Minority Health Issues and an Urban Education Center).	President, Provost, Executive Director of CSU Foundation, Dean of Graduate Studies, Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Number and type of contacts made to establish institutes year-to-year. 2. Number and type of proposals submitted to establish institutes year-to-year. 3. Number and type of proposals funded to establish institutes year- to-year.
9. Recruit resident faculty experts who will conduct research and offer full- and part-time advanced degree programs in these centers.	President, Provost, Executive Director of CSU Foundation, Deans and Department Chairs	As soon as funding is received	1. Number of faculty recruited for funded institutes year-to-year. 2. Number and type of undergraduate and graduate programs offered by institutes year-to-year. 3. Number of applicants to degree programs year-to-year. 4. Number of graduates year-to-year. 5. Evaluations of institutes and degree programs year-to-year.
10. Establish an outcome assessment process for all graduate programs.	Dean of Graduate Studies	1999-201	1. Number of graduate programs using outcome assessment year- to-year. 2. Curricula changes year-to-year.
Subgoal 1. 5: Expand CSU's continuing and distance education programs to populations CSU has not served in the past.
Survey CSU communities to determine CSU's major competitors in all areas of continuing, graduate and distance education.	Director of Institutional Research, Vice President for Planning, Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Number of techniques used to discover competitors year-to-year. 2. Type of techniques used to discover competitors year-to-year.
2. Identify areas in which CSU has a comparative advantage relative to other schools in the market and develop new and/or expanded continuing, graduate and distance education programs.	Dean of Continuing Education, Dean of Graduate Studies, Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Findings of these surveys. 2. Number and areas where CSU adds programs based on these studies year-to-year.
3. Encourage academic programs to develop continuing, life long learning experiences for their graduates and other non-traditional students.	Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Number of surveys of graduates and other non-traditional students to determine educational needs year- to-year. 2. Number of new courses and programs developed for non-traditional students year- to-year.
4. Enhance CSU's web-based courses and other non-traditional learning opportunities.	Director of Distance Education, Deans and Department Chairs	Immediately and on-going	1. Number of web-based courses and other non-traditional courses year- to-year. 2. Student ratings of these courses year-to-year. 3. Number of new web-based courses and other non-traditional courses year-to-year.
5. Recruit a Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education who has a demonstrated commitment to the goals of life long learning and entrepreneurial experience.	Search Committee, Provost and President	Immediately	1. Level of experience with life long learning and non-traditional students year-to-year. 2. Comparison of successful candidate with others year-to-year.
6. Integrate the administration of the programs in Continuing and Non-Traditional Education with the academic program of the university and ensure that the same high standards are maintained.	Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education and Provost	Fall 1999 and on-going	1. Number of Continuing Education programs that are reviewed using the same process and standards as in the regular educational program year-to-year. 2. Comparison of student learning outcomes between Continuing Education courses and similar courses in the regular program year-to-year.
7. Expand the professional development, career advancement and leisure learning activities offered through Continuing and Non-Traditional Education.	Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education and Director of Options Program	Immediately and on-going	1. Number of surveys of community members and other non-traditional students to determine educational needs year-to-year. 2. Number of new courses and programs developed for non-traditional students year-to-year.
8. Enhance the distant education offerings to include courses in all departments of the university.	Director of Distance Learning, Deans, Department Chairs and Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education	Immediately and on-going	1. Number of distance education courses and other non-traditional courses year-to-year. 2. Student ratings of these courses year-to-year. 3. Number of new web-based courses and other non-traditional courses year-to-year.
9. Evaluate all programs within Distance, Continuing and Non-Traditional Education just as are programs in all other areas of the university.	Provost and Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education	Fall 1999 and on-going	1. Number of Continuing Education programs that are reviewed using the same process and standards as in the regular educational program year-to-year. 2. Comparison of learning outcomes in Continuing Education courses and similar courses in the regular program year- to-year.
10. Initiate an outcome assessment program to evaluate student learning for Continuing, Nontraditional and Distance Education programs.	Assistant Provost & Dean of Continuing and Non-Traditional Education, Director of Distance Learning	Fall 1999 and on-going	1. Measures used to evaluate students year-to-year. 2. Use of results to make programmatic changes year-to-year.