|
REPORT OF THE WASC VISITING TEAM EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW To: California State University - San Bernardino December 2, 2003 In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Reaffirmation of Accreditation Team Roster Samuel H. Smith, WASC ChairPresident EmeritusWashington State University Jerry D. Campbell, Assistant Chair/Team WriterChief Information Officer & Dean of LibrariesUniversity of Southern California Rachel LindseyDean, College of Arts & SciencesChicago State University Edward J. Schoen, Sr.Dean, College of BusinessRowan University
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I IC Preparatory Review Update SECTION II II-A Evaluation of the Institution’s Educational Effectiveness
Inquiry Theme 1: Becoming a Teaching and Learning Community Theme II: Becoming a Safe, Supportive and Welcoming Campus Community and Physical Environment Issue 1: Campus Climate for Diversity Theme III: Engaging with the External Community and the Region II-B Evaluation of the Institution’s Systems for Enhancing Teaching Effectiveness and Learning Results SECTION III SUMMARY OF TEAM CONCLUSIONS AND MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PREPARATORY REVIEW AND EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW Recommendations
Section I - Institution and Visit Context
IA - Description of Institution and Visit
CSUSB’s attractive campus includes a substantial
and well- maintained fiscal plant. To accommodate its rapid and
continuing growth in the student population, it has added nine new buildings
over the past 15 years, renovated others, and has capital construction plans to
continue a substantial building program. While it has been characterized
as a commuter campus, it is increasingly experiencing demand for on- campus
housing. This is in part due to the vast, 27,000 square miles encompassed
by its two- county service area. Thus, its capital construction plans
include an increase in the number of residential accommodations.
The size of its service area has also brought demand for CSUSB to
increase its capacity to offer distance education and to open a second campus
in
CSUSB currently enjoys excellent administrative leadership, a
highly qualified and productive faculty, and a talented and dedicated
staff. In addition, the student body is diverse, capable, and
enthusiastic about the quality of CSUSB programs.
CSUSB Accreditation History:
CSUSB received initial accreditation in May, 1964 followed by the
customary schedule of visits. As a result of a 1973 change in WASC
policy, the next full review of the institution was postponed until fall
1979. At that time CSUSB received reaffirmation accreditation, but Commission
concern about unit inflation resulted in a fifth- year visit in 1984 during
which CSUSB was required to respond to the accreditation standards in the Handbook. The 1984 visit resulted in reaffirmation accreditation and approval of a
name change from California State College,
The 1989 Commission action included: 1) reaffirm
accreditation; and 2) scheduling the next comprehensive visit for the spring of
1994. At that time, the Commission also stressed the importance of
developing a distinctive role for CSU,
Between 1990 and 1993, several substantive change actions expanded CSUSB’s program offerings both on- and off-
campus. In 1994, CSUSB again received reaffirmation accreditation with
the next comprehensive visit scheduled for 2002. Subsequently, that visit
was rescheduled to 2003. During 2000, CSUSB requested two
substantive change actions. One request was approved and expanded CSUSB
programs internationally. The second request resulted in deferral of an
off-site program via distributed learning in collaboration with
IB - Quality of the Educational Effectiveness Presentation
and Alignment of the
The CSUSB proposal was well- organized around three themes and
presented in a manner consistent with the recommendations of the Preparatory
Review Team. The three themes were discussed and selected during the
Preparatory Review process. Utilizing numerous committees and
organizations composed of faculty, staff and students, the CSUSB process was
considered well-organized and highly inclusive. The team compliments
those involved on the extensiveness and inclusiveness of their process.
The data presented and the issues reviewed exceeded the expectations of the
team. CSUSB clearly understood what it was being asked to do and
performed exceedingly well.
CSUSB’s participation in this accreditation
process will clearly assist them as they move forward with their next logical
steps in their strategic or operational planning. The Team found in the
Educational Effectiveness proposal and repeatedly heard that CSUSB was well-
managed, had a heightened sense of community, was optimistic about the future,
and poised for a dramatic increase in student numbers.
The team also repeatedly heard that the institution was
energetically engaged in development of new programs but that they would like a
more clearly articulated vision of what they would become over the next
decade. This vision would then give them a clear opportunity to revisit
their strategic plan and adjust it accordingly.
Although CSUSB has an existing strategic plan, consideration is
being given to revisiting the strategic planning process. The Team’s
recommendations are consistent with CSUSB’s articulated interest in revisiting strategic planning and the team encourages
their moving forward in this process with dispatch.
IC - Preparatory Review Update
There were three issues identified in the Preparatory Review and
will be addressed individually.
Diversity.
This issue was identified in the 1998 Fourth Year Visit as well as the recent
Preparatory Review. CSUSB is located in a geographical area that is
widely diversified, changing in composition and growing rapidly in the number
of residents. There is no question but that CSUSB is attempting to
diversify its faculty, staff and students. CSUSB is encouraged to
increase its ongoing efforts to assure its entire academic community that all
members will be treated in a fair and consistent manner. Clearly, some
progress is being made, but during the EE visit this issue remained a
continuing concern for too many CSUSB constituents. Diversity is
discussed on more detail later in this report.
Student Advising. CSUSB appears to have placed considerable resources
towards improving the quality of its student advising. CSUSB has clearly
made progress, but as advising occurs in the numerous academic units there
appears to be considerable variation in its quality and perceived importance.
The team made two further suggestions. First, CSUSB should
consider establishing minimal standards for advising that could be monitored
across all units in an effort to enhance quality and reduce variation.
Second, CSUSB is encouraged to consider additional recognition or incentives to
those with assigned responsibility for student advising. The timing of
the EE visit was too soon after the Preparatory Visit to expect a response to
this issue.
Funding the Strategic Plan. Clearly progress is being made to align budgeting of
resources to support the existing strategic plan. As CSUSB moves into the
next phase of its strategic planning, it is suggested that their goals be more
visibly linked to their budgeting process. Again, this EE visit occurred
too soon after the Preparatory Visit to expect improvement in this area.
CSUSB continues to evolve in a positive manner and with a planned
period of growth and development. The team urges CSUSB to undertake an
appropriate process that will enable it to clearly articulate a vision of what
it could become in the next decade and develop an appropriate strategy to
ensure its success.
It is expected that over the next few years, CSUSB should clearly
be a very different institution. The team is confident that the CSUSB
community is aware of future opportunities and urges them to move boldly
forward.
Section II - Evaluation of
Educational Effectiveness
IIA - Evaluation of the Institution’s Educational
Effectiveness Inquiry
1. Evaluate the appropriateness and quality of the evidence used to inform the inquiry undertaken by the institution: The CSUSB Educational Effectiveness
Report (EE Report) is notable for the quantity and quality of the evidence
embedded in the report as well as referenced on the CSUSB website.
Throughout all sections of the report, qualitative and quantitative evidence is
provided, institutional reports and documents are cited, and, where
appropriate, data and documents from other sources are referenced to support
facts, analyses, and conclusions. This evidence provides rich support for
and informs the various inquiries pursued to establish the university’s
educational effectiveness. Indeed, the Team was uniformly impressed with
the effort CSUSB undertook to ensure thorough documentation for any positions
taken. Based on discussions during the Team visit, this approach to
gathering evidence seems to represent the institution’s overall and ongoing
practices of quality assurance applied to most areas across the institution (the
few exceptions are noted below and elsewhere in this report).
There is one exception to this pattern of evidence collection and
that is in the area of community outreach programs and
partnerships. Many of these programs are grant supported and one
can conclude that supporting entities require program evaluation.
However, the CSUSB report cites assessment and evaluation of partnership
activities as an area of concern (EE Report, p. 173.) The report goes on
to state that while the project outcomes of some partnerships can be
quantified, others are more elusive. Thus, for some outreach programs the
level of evaluative data collected is inconsistent with that demonstrated for
other segments of the university. To ensure the value of time, effort and
resources devoted to these programs, more attention needs to be given to
assessment and evaluation of these programs.
2. Evaluate the appropriateness and quality of the methodologies used to inform the inquiry undertaken by the institution: Evidence included in the report was
developed through a variety of methodologies including surveys of on- and off-
campus constituencies, testing, and its general education portfolios as well as
statistical analyses of descriptive data. The Team considered all of
these methodologies appropriate for the respective inquiries.
3. Verify, validate, and assess the institution’s analysis of the issues: The
Team devoted most of its time during the EE site visit to verifying,
validating, and assessing CSUSB’s analysis of the
issues raised in their examination of the three themes:
1) Becoming a Teaching and Learning Community; 2) Becoming a Safe,
Supportive and Welcoming Campus Community and Physical Environment; and
3) Engaging with the
External Community and the Region. This was executed
primarily through a full schedule of meetings with key groups where members of
the Team were able to ask probing questions seeking confirmation of the
analysis presented throughout the EE Report.
As a result of its efforts, the Team found that a significant
number of pertinent issues were raised and that the corresponding analyses were
remarkably accurate, candid, and verifiable. In no case did the Team find
an analysis to be misleading, evasive, or simply to have missed the mark.
The Team notes that CSUSB has taken the self- study process with
admirable seriousness, endeavoring to identify every rock in the path of its
progress, to examine it with penetrating conscientiousness, and to take action
where appropriate. The issues will be commented on individually below.
4. Comment on how the institution engaged in and evaluated
the results of student learning: CSUSB considers its efforts in the area
of the assessment of student learning to be one of its strengths. Data
about student learning is collected using a variety of methodologies and the
results are consistently the basis for program improvement. Often during
the visit, various members of the faculty and administration indicated their
pride in the university’s history of engagement in and progress with
assessment, particularly in comparison to other California universities.
The Assessment Committee discussed their attendance at statewide assessment
conferences where they shared information about CSUSB’s assessment program. According to the university’s assessment plan, the
general education program is the last one to begin the process. Thus,
progress with review of this area lags behind that of most majors.
However, two areas stand out as exceptions to CSUSB’s progress. The EE Report indicates that approximately 17% of the majors
have not begun assessment including new programs and interdisciplinary
majors. Although it is understandable that new programs are just
beginning the assessment process, the Assessment Committee admits to struggling
to get faculty engaged in assessing interdisciplinary programs indicating that
they, unlike other majors, do not have assigned/dedicated faculty.
Faculty for these interdisciplinary programs are assigned to other majors in
which assessment is being conducted. The committee’s frustration with
this problem was evident and the Visiting Team made suggestions about
alternative approaches for assessing these interdisciplinary
program.
Overall, the quality and variety of data collected and analyzed in
the assessment process is both broad and deep. Furthermore, documentation
indicates that the results are used to close the feedback loop resulting in
program change including curricular revision and support program implementation. (This issue will be discussed again later in this report.)
5. Evaluate the institution’s conclusions,
recommendations, and improvement plans:
As noted in number 3 above, the scope of issues covered is broad. Nonetheless, the CSUSB followed through with its analyses to reach outcomes
in virtually all instances. These outcomes are expressed in the many
conclusions, recommendations, and improvement plans found throughout the EE
Report. Furthermore, the Team found itself
consistently in agreement with the conclusions, recommendations,
and improvement plans presented in the EE Report.
6. Evaluate any actions taken to implement the plans: Similarly, the Team found most
conclusions, recommendations, and improvement plans to have been acted
on. The self- study process set in motion an extraordinary panoply of
actions derived from analyses and conclusions. Thus, from the beginning of the
self- study process, solutions to problems began to be implemented and
improvements began to be made throughout the university. By the time the EE
Report was drafted, many such actions could already be reported, and many
others were in the offing.
The Team notes, however, that most recommendations and actions,
while to positive effect, have been what might be termed particular and focused
in scope. This was clearly recognized by CSUSB in the Integrative Essay
where it pointed out that the implications of dealing with the three themes is
that it is time for a larger step to be taken. To quote from the
Essay: "The campus has not yet widely discussed or digested all the
implications of and potential uses for the many findings and educational
results in order to improve the process of teaching and learning." (p.
187) Indeed, it was clear to the university that it was time to revisit
the strategic plan and achieve a "better focus on priorities." (p.
188)
7. State the Team findings and recommendations with
regard to each issue, topic, or theme:
THEME I: Becoming a Teaching and Learning Community
Issue 1: Continuing Emphasis on Being a Teaching and Learning
Community: The
EE Report and discussions with numerous individuals and groups document that
productive and enviable growth in instituting and nurturing an impressive array
of learning communities has taken place across the University, and that the
Teaching Resource Center and the Learning Research Institute provide strong
support for these initiatives. Similarly, the Office of Undergraduate
Studies provides a broad range of support services for student learning, such
as the Educational Opportunity Program and the Student Assistance in Learning
Program. Clearly, the University is committed to enhancing the learning
outcomes of its students and providing the support to insure those results.
What is somewhat unclear to the Visiting Team is what all of the
learning community activities mean for the University, e.g., are they
undertaken on an ad hoc basis simply to improve student learning or are they
undertaken as a strategic initiative aimed at differentiating the University
from other members of the California State University (CSU) system. While
the University’s focus on being a teaching and learning community is admirable
and while the University has achieved notable success with these endeavors, it
is uncertain why this emphasis has been adopted and how it relates to the
strategic direction of the University.
The Visiting Team also agrees with the University’s acknowledgment
that greater attention be devoted to enhancing advisement of students, and
encourages the University to proceed with the implementation of suggested
strategies to improve advisement (e.g., withholding course registration before
consulting with an academic advisor). Because these suggestions encompass
a wide variety of approaches, the University should also consider the development
of minimum standards for advisement so that uniform benefits are achieved from
the array of advising activities and tactics.
Issue 2: Expanding Summer Session and Move to Year-
around Operations:
The University recently encountered a significant problem when the Chancellor
of the CSU system mandated year- around operations among the CSU without
carefully considering the impact that change in policy would have on those
campuses that housed summer school operations in auxiliary organizational units
and used the resulting revenues to support campus initiatives. This
change in CSU policy resulted in a serious disruption of the revenue stream of
the College of Extended Learning (CEL). Nonetheless, the University
appears to have responded to this problem, and the CEL is developing viable
strategies to replace the lost revenues.
Issue 3: Faculty Development and Improvement of
Instruction:
The University should be applauded for the significant growth in support of
faculty development and for the numerous, ensuing research activities
undertaken by faculty and the growing number of successful grant proposals
developed by faculty and staff. The University’s successes in the areas
of faculty research and grant activities have placed the institution on the cusp
between comprehensive and research university status. Nonetheless, while
the University appears to appreciate the significance of this development, and
acknowledges the need for "more released time to support research and
grant writing" (p. 31) and "the
lack of research facilities, space, and technical support,"
(p. 31), the University does not seem at present to be prepared to address this
development squarely, as indicated in the EE Report's acknowledgment that the
University does not have a "direct solution" (p.189) to faculty
requests for "additional assigned time to do non-classroom work." (p.
189).
Multiple comments from faculty and administrators across the
campus suggest that the University should begin to engage in a dialogue to
determine if it wishes to implement a ‘hybrid model’ of teaching and research,
to define more clearly the expectations of faculty performance in
research/grant activities, and to clarify the centrality of these
initiatives to the University’s mission.
Issue 4: International Programs and Internationalizing
the Curriculum:
The Visiting Team was very favorably impressed with the admirable success the
University has achieved in internationalizing its curriculum, and the faculty
and staff are to be congratulated on the richness and variety of international
programs underway such as Middle Eastern Islamic Studies, Latin American
Studies, and the Center for Global Management. Equally impressive is the
broad array of opportunities in international study supported by the Office of
International Student Services.
What is not clear to the Visiting Team is whether these
initiatives, like the multiple learning center activities discussed above, have
been developed, implemented, and promoted because they were consistent with a
strategic direction undertaken by the University and/or whether the University
encourages such initiatives because they are viewed simply as educational
enhancements.
Issue 5: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment &
Program Effectiveness:
The Visiting Team concluded that the comprehensive outcomes assessment program
developed by the University not only in the major programs but also most
recently implemented in general education is an admirable and significant
strength of the University. Although interdisciplinary programs have not
fully implemented a comprehensive assessment regimen pending clarification on
the allocation of faculty responsibility between academic units, the University
is committed to the full implementation of outcomes assessment as a means of
improving its academic programs, and the Visiting Team applauds the
University’s admirable work in this area. Likewise, the University has
demonstrated its commitment to systematic program review under which all
academic programs will undergo comprehensive appraisal every five years, a
component of which is learning outcomes assessment data. The Visiting
Team also encourages the University to proceed with its plan to incorporate
interdisciplinary programs into the assessment program. Recognizing this issue
is a challenge, the University is encouraged to consider creative strategies
for assessing these programs without assigned faculty.
Issue 6: Strategic Planning Progress: In the Fall 2002, the University carried
out a five- year retrospective review of its progress in implementing its
Strategic Plan, and correctly notes that numerous activities successfully
undertaken by the University directly support its goals of being an integrated
learning community, providing a safe, supportive, welcoming campus community,
and developing strategic community partnerships. The Visiting Team
readily agrees that the University has achieved notable success on all three
fronts, and congratulates the University for that success. Nonetheless, a
wide array of faculty and professional staff have recognized the need to
undertake a substantive review of the University’s mission and strategic vision
so that it can (1) more clearly prioritize the numerous opportunities available
to the University as it fulfills its role in the economic development of the
Inland Empire, and (2) delineate more clearly the overall strategic direction
of the University. By engaging in these activities, the University will
be able to differentiate itself from other CSU institutions and maximize the
advantage of its academic strengths.
THEME II: Becoming a Safe, Supportive and Welcoming Campus
Community and Physical Environment
Issue 1: Campus Climate for Diversity: The report on Issue No. 1 is candid,
honest, and thorough in its assessment. For historical reasons, CSUSB has
had to redouble its efforts in recent years to achieve its ambitions for
creating a climate that welcomes diversity and reflects the general cultural
makeup of the community it serves. With strong Presidential leadership
and significant campus involvement, it has made and continues to make
commendable progress on this issue.
The conclusions on this issue, particularly as reflected in the Reflective
Essay on Issue 1, reveal that CSUSB is clearly aware of the nature of the
remaining diversity challenges. The Team is confident that institutional
will and momentum will continue to gain ground on this issue and especially
encourages its effort to find ways of involving the entire faculty in its
pursuit of its diversity goals.
Issue 2: Satisfaction with Operations and Services: The Team’s efforts confirmed the
report’s finding that there is generally broad satisfaction in all areas of the
university community with operations and services. The Team applauds its
efforts, nonetheless, to improve and finds its recommendations in this regard
to be appropriate and commendable.
Issue 3: Need for More Campus Activities and More
Student, Faculty, and Staff Involvement in Events and Activities: On this issue also, Team
investigations sustained the findings of the report. There is
demonstrable progress on this issue based on findings of surveys repeated in
1992 and 2001 and supported by a significant number of reports. In
general, the findings show improvement in quality of campus activities and
increases in participation by all groups. Of greatest significance,
perhaps, the survey findings showed that over half of the students found such
out- of- class activities to contribute to the quality of their degree
programs.
The data also showed that demonstrable progress has been made on
the matter of diversity and that the University is determined to continue the
trend. (This issue is addressed in more detail elsewhere in this
report.) Nevertheless, although increasing attendance at campus activities
and events is a problem common to commuter universities, the Team encourages
CSUSB to continue efforts to address this issue and to provide a rich array of
programs.
Issue 4: Availability of Technology to Assist Students
and Operations: The
Team found the availability of technology to assist students and operations to
be excellent. It commends the University for developing a plan and
executing it well. Because CSUSB has made such progress in implementing
academic technology, the Team urges the University to consider technology as
one of the potential keys to a competitive advantage in the next few
years. This may especially be the case with respect to serving larger
numbers of students with limited physical facilities.
Issue 5: Physical Aspects of Campus: CSUSB enjoys a large and well-
kept campus with a fine physical plant. It also has well- conceived plans
for continued growth and is continually making the campus more welcome and easy
to negotiate through signage, improved security, escort services, a Sexual
Assault Response Team, counseling and psychological services, and so on.
The Team found that these proactive efforts of the University have had and
continue to have a positive impact on the University.
THEME III: Engaging with the External Community and the Region
Issue 1. Image and Visibility: CSUSB is commended for progress in
improving its image and visibility in the surrounding community through
outreach programs (including applied research) and partnerships. The
University engages in a large array of activities in these areas and a
significant number of students participate in them. The Team agrees with
the observation expressed during a visit session that there could be some
benefit to coordinating the internship opportunities emanating from the various
community programs.
Issue 2. Continuing Education and Lifelong Learning: Once a financially thriving unit, the CSU
system change to state- supported year- round summer school had a very negative
effect on the amount of revenue the College of Extended Learning (CEL)
generated. The post- September 11, 2001 downturn in conferences and
international programs also severely affected revenue generation.
Together, these two events have forced the CEL to review its strategic plan,
assess which of its programs should be continued, and develop new programs that
meet the needs of the surrounding community.
The EE Report provides evidence that the CEL continues to offer
many successful extension programs, to sponsor conferences and international
program activities, and to receive grants to initiate new programming.
However, the loss of programs and revenue streams provide an opportunity for
critical review of new areas of growth. The EE Report details the CEL’s thinking about new directions based on the 2000
community needs assessment. Pivotal to new short- and long- term
directions will be expansion in the Coachella and Victor Valleys and Palm
Desert areas.
Rather than falling into complacency, the CEL has responded to the
downward shift in revenue by rethinking its strategic plan and developing new
directions. The EE Report defines sound approaches to developing new
strategies, programs and activities focusing on relationships both internal and
external to CSUSB. The CEL is urged to attend to these suggestions as it
reshapes itself for the future.
Issue 3. Community Outreach and Partnerships: As discussed previously, CSUSB faculty
and staff have successfully initiated and implemented a plethora of community
outreach programs and partnerships. On the other hand, the area of
community outreach programs and partnerships is an exception to the high
standard of evidence collection at CSUSB. Many of these programs
are grant supported and one can conclude that the granting agencies or
organizations require program evaluation. However, the report cites
assessment and evaluation of partnership activities as an area of
concern. The report goes on to state that while project outcomes of some
partnerships can be quantified, others are more elusive. Attention is
needed in this area in order to determine a program’s or partnership’s
contribution to the University’s mission and Strategic Plan.
Despite the obvious opportunities for community outreach programs
and partnerships, the Visiting Team expressed concern that the extraordinary
number of activities in which CSUSB is currently engaged has the potential to
grow beyond the University’s ability to support them. Needless to say,
the faculty, administrators and staff with whom we met argued that the
relationships with the community developed through these programs was a source
of pride and distinction for the University, enhanced CSUSB’s image and visibility, and that the capacity to conduct these activities had not
yet been reached. Nevertheless, the Team urges the campus to begin the
process of developing a focus or compilation of niches that will define
both the University and the community opportunities it pursues. While
CSUSB may be able to met the challenge of overcoming any obstacles that may
come with continuing to increase community outreach, developing a focus (or
foci) may provide direction and improve the University’s ability to manage high
quality programs.
Issue 4. Distributed Learning: Although CSUSB has been offering distance
learning since the 1980s, this mode of offering classes was not mainstreamed
until two years ago. Created in 1999, the Office of Distributed Learning
(ODL) received a Title V grant the same year. With the infrastructure
improvements that resulted from the grant, CSUSB was able to improve and expand
its ability to serve the surrounding 27,000 mile region. By coordinating
efforts within the University and forming partnerships with entities in the
surrounding areas (such as community colleges), the ODL provides services to
CSUSB students as well as courses and training to the surrounding
community. The Palm Desert Campus will depend significantly on electronic
mediated instruction.
While the growth in distributed learning as discussed in the EE
Report is impressive, little attention was given to planning and future
directions. As stated in the EE Report, (p.176), "Coordination of
the disparate demands, prioritization, and funding continue to be major
considerations as our distance learning offerings and web- enhanced course
offerings continue to blossom." Unfortunately, there was no further
detail. CSUSB is strongly encouraged to review its mission with regard to
distributed learning so that the future is directed by planning and opportunity.
Issue 5. External Funding: CSUSB’s fund- raising is impressive especially
for a young institution of its size. Grant activity has grown steadily
over the last eight years. On the other hand, there have been ebbs and
flows in gifts to the University. A not insignificant percentage of gifts
are designated for the Palm Dessert Campus. Nevertheless, CSUSB is
commended for its new direction in development and aggressive development of
its fund- raising capability is strongly encouraged.
II - B Evaluation of the Institution’s Systems for Enhancing
Teaching Effectiveness
The University has achieved remarkable success in (a) harnessing
institutional research data, (b) implementing outcomes assessment measures,
structures and processes, (c) developing realistic assessment plans for most of
its academic programs, (d) articulating clear academic program goals and
objectives, (e) generating annual assessment progress reports, and (e) using
assessment data to document its successes in achieving educational goals,
shaping curriculum, and identifying curricular changes and areas needing
improvement (e.g., advisement and instruction). Likewise, while
assessment processes are not presently directly linked to planning and budgeting
activities at the University level, they are employed at the College level to
inform the budget support provided to ongoing academic programs and the
allocation of monies to new academic initiatives, the latter commitments being
made principally on the basis of their alignment with the University’s
strategic plan. Further, the University has made significant strides in
developing a comprehensive assessment program for the four skill areas
(writing, speech, mathematics and critical thinking) and three subject areas
(natural science, humanities, and social and behavioral sciences) that compose
the University’s general education
program.
The University Outcomes Assessment Committee (UOAC) serves a vital
role in the assessment process by insuring program assessment plans more
uniformly address the program’s missions, learning goals, objectives, criteria
for evaluation, methodology in carrying out assessment, evaluation, and
reporting of findings. The UOAC critiques each academic program’s assessment
plan, recommends appropriate improvements, and approves the academic program’s
assessment approach. Further, each academic program submits annual
updates on its outcomes assessment activities, describing the assessment
activities for the year and the results achieved, and cataloging changes
incorporated in the academic program as a result of the assessment data.
Similarly, the University’s successful five- year periodic program
review process: (a) documents the success and achievements of each major
program, (b) provides the opportunity to make an informed diagnosis of the
curriculum, modes of instruction, sufficiency of faculty, and supporting
resources (information and technology), and (c) incorporates the student
learning outcomes assessment results.
The Visiting Team commends the University for its comprehensive
assessment program which measures effective teaching and successful learning
outcomes, and for its useful and systematic program review process, which
routinely appraises academic program effectiveness and facilitates the
implementation of program improvements by the faculty.
CSUSB is commended for its impressive array of programs that
support teaching and learning. The strategic plan calls for,
"Creating a learning community that supports the discovery and application
of new knowledge about learning processes" (EE Report, p. 7). In
response, CSUSB has developed a variety of programs and entities that provide
opportunities for faculty and students to improve in these areas. The
report summarizes almost thirty examples of learning communities at CSUSB which
together include more than twenty separate components or attributes of the
learning community. (See also previous discussion in this report.)
In existence since 1996, the Teaching Resource Center (TRC)
supports instructional innovation and improvement by providing faculty
development activities for those seeking to improve their teaching. The
TRC conducts needs assessments and faculty development surveys.
Evaluations of support for teaching improvement are positive for workshops and
grants, design of courses and use of teaching strategies. Some faculty
(30- 35%) report improvement in student learning and performance, student
satisfaction, student evaluation of teaching effectiveness, and faculty
scholarship on teaching and learning. With the increased focus on
defining CSUSB as a ‘ learning community’, the TRC promoted the development of
a Teaching Academy (TA). Composed of faculty representatives from each
college and the library, the TA, "assists with the development of projects
to engage faculty and students in ‘intentional’ teaching and learning
communities" (EE Report, p.1).
Recently, the University also established the Learning Research
Institute to, "promote interdisciplinary scholarly focus on teaching and
learning and how [they] may be improved" (EE Report, p.7).
The Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies operates a host of
academic support programs for students that includes advising, mentoring,
counseling, retention services, tutoring, the Writing Center and other academic
support services for students. In demonstration of their success, the
report included quantitative and qualitative data evaluating many of these
programs and indicating their success with improving retention. Findings
of the review conducted by the Director of Research and Policy Analysis in
Undergraduate Studies further verifies program success. (It should be
noted that earlier comments about concerns with student advisement as an area
faculty recognize as needing improvement referred primarily to advising in the
major departments).
CSUSB routinely collects an exceptional range of information that
includes but is not limited to the following:
The Team found the
evidence to be voluminous, well- prepared, and compelling. Indeed, it
found that the evidence was so vast that CSUSB had not fully assimilated its
implications by the time the reports were written. It was clear, however,
that efforts to utilize the information derived from data was still on going
and that the University was benefitting tremendously
from the evidence it had assembled.
Section III - Summary of team
conclusions and Major Recommendations from the Preparatory Review and
Educational Effectiveness Review
Through both the Preparatory and Educational Effectiveness
Reports, the CSUSB community conducted a thorough, comprehensive and candid
review of the University. It is commended for the manner in which it
tackled difficult issues coming to identify the vast majority of its strengths
and weaknesses. The candor and objectivity of the CSUSB constituents as
expressed in the reports, and during the visit, indicated a pride in the
University’s identity and mission, and a commitment to its improvement.
As a result of both visits, the Teams concluded that CSUSB
provides quality education based on the assessment of student learning.
Furthermore, as a result of the broad and deep review of the three themes
considered in the EE Report, CSUSB identified those areas that require
immediate attention and planning. This latter process has also resulted
in a vast amount of data upon which planning for the future can be based.
It was apparent in our meetings at CSUSB that a tremendous amount
of time and effort was invested in developing the two reports. This was
no small accomplishment in light of the fact that CSUSB’s review process was truncated with the time between the two reviews shortened to
six months.
The team also wishes to describe a general concern that appears to
be an overarching characteristic of CSUSB that emerged during the review
process. This concern is further reflected in some of the following
recommendations.
There is a wonderfully positive attitude at CSUSB that encourages
the development of new and innovative programs and projects. This
extensive number of programs and projects that have been initiated by CSUSB is
impressive but, the team is concerned that their sheer number and breadth are
too numerous and divergent to be sustained over time at a reasonable level of
support and quality.
Taking the learning communities and the community outreach
programs and activities as exemplars, the Team was unanimous in the opinion
that the rationale for their development was not consistently evident.
Furthermore, without development of a consensus about foci or niches for these
activities, CSUSB may continue to create new endeavors outgrowing its ability
to maintain the current level of quality, especially during a time of fiscal
stagnation. Continuing to create and maintain activities for their own
sake without a clear understanding of how they contribute to the overall health
of the university drains resources from other existing, important, and
justifiable activities that are consistent with the vision and mission of
CSUSB.
Recommendations 1. Diversity: CSUSB should continue to attend to the issue of diversity, particularly for faculty and staff. The University is encouraged to increase its ongoing efforts to assure its entire academic community that all members will be treated in a fair and consistent manner. While the student body is diverse, the university needs to develop strategies to identify and improve those areas students continue to perceive as unresponsive. In addition, the university needs to take steps to identify the concerns of minority faculty and staff, and develop strategies to address them. 2. Student Advising: While considerable resources have been directed toward the improvement of student advising, some problems were identified as continuing. CSUSB should consider: 1) establishing minimal standards for advising that could be monitored and produce uniform benefits across all units; and 2) additional recognition or incentives for those with student advisement responsibility. 3. Reconsidering the Strategic Plan: CSUSB is urged to undertake an appropriate strategic planning process that will enable it to clearly articulate a vision of what it could become in the next decade, articulate more clearly its strategic direction, and develop appropriate strategies to ensure its success. 4. Community Outreach and Partnerships: In view of the impressive array of community activities in which CSUSB is involved, it is strongly encouraged to continue assessing and evaluating these programs and to identify foci or niches that define their continuation as well as the development of new initiatives.Although the team was impressed with CSUSB’s many outreach programs, their systematic assessment was not standardized to determine their viability and contribution to the university. With too many programs not fully engaging in the assessment process, CSUSB should develop guidelines for their annual assessment review. 5. Assessment of Student Learning: Using its current strong commitment and effort in the area of assessment of Student Learning, CSUSB is strongly encouraged to develop and implement a plan for assessment of interdisciplinary programs. Although the team understands that these programs do not have assigned faculty, CSUSB must identify strategies to ensure that objectives and outcomes are developed, data are collected, and program improvement results. The team was satisfied that there is a commitment to assessment of the general education program. Progress in this area should be monitored to ensure continued success. 6. Learning Communities: While the growth in learning communities is impressive, their formation appears to be without strategic planning. The visiting team suggests that this initiative should be revisited with a goal to defining its purpose and future strategic direction. 7. Faculty Research: Without question, CSUSB has experienced tremendous growth in faculty research and grantsmanship. Based on comments from many faculty and administrators, this growth has not been without a price. The University is urged to begin a dialogue to resolve its status as a research vs. a comprehensive institution, to define the expectations of faculty performance in research/grant activities, and to clarify the centrality of these initiatives to CSUSB’s mission. 8. Internationalization: With the many international programs and initiatives in which CSUSB is engaged, the University is encouraged to clarify whether their role is strategic or whether they are educational enhancements. This is particularly important in light of the high level of diversity that exists in the surrounding community.
|
|||
Acrobat Adobe Reader  |
California State University, San Bernardino 5500 University Parkway San Bernardino CA 92407-2318 Tel. 909-537-5000 |
|||