angelo state university’s responses to the reaffirmation ... 2002...showing the deficiency...

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee 1

Angelo State University’s responses to the Reaffirmation Committee’s

recommendations are generally in four parts. The first part summarizes the concerns

expressed in the narrative of the report which led to the recommendation. The second

part responds to those concerns by enumerating the steps which have been taken to

rectify the deficiency identified by the narrative. The third part summarizes the

recommendation itself; some of the recommendations are very complex and inclusive.

The fourth part responds to the whole recommendation, showing how the university is

complying with all its parts.

In cases where the recommendation is simple or focused, the last two steps have

been omitted as repetitive.

The documentation for each recommendation is included in the tab for that

recommendation, with the exceptions of one chart which serves both Recommendation 1

and Recommendation 2 (Chart 1B) and one which serves both Recommendation 6 and

Recommendation 8 (Chart 8A).

The final section of this response contains charts for each recommendation

showing the deficiency identified from the narrative of the Committee’s report, the

person(s) or department(s) responsible for remedying the deficiency, a summary of the

elements of the remedy, and a timetable of accomplished and projected tasks.


List of Charts

Chart 1A . . . . Compliance with Elements of Narrative

Chart 1B . . . . Compliance with Elements of Recommendation

Chart 3A . . . . Assessment of Major Service Activities

Chart 3B . . . . Compliance with Elements of Narrative (Benchmarks)

Chart 3C . . . . Compliance with Elements of Recommendation

Chart 4A . . . . Compliance with Elements of Recommendation

Chart 8A . . . . Placement of Graduate Alumni in Employment or Advanced Study


List of Attachments

Attachment 1A . . . . Revised Standards for Academic Plans / Reports

Attachment 1B . . . . Revised Academic Checklist

Attachment 1C . . . . Job Posting for Part-Time Secretary for Institutional Effectiveness

Attachment 1D . . . . Revised and Original Reporting Forms

Attachment 2A . . . . Description of Targeted Alumni Survey Procedure

Attachment 2B . . . . Department of Physics Exit Survey

Attachment 2C . . . . Department of Physics Alumni Survey

Attachment 2D . . . . Department of Physics Alumni Placement Chart

Attachment 3A . . . . Revised Standards for Administrative Plans / Reports

Attachment 3B . . . . Revised Administrative Checklist

Attachment 5A . . . . Job Posting for Director of Academic Advising

Attachment 5B . . . . Job Description for Academic Advisor

Attachment 5C . . . . Advising Policies by College

Attachment 6A . . . . Survey of Master’s Level Graduates

Attachment 7A . . . . Procedures for Program Review

Attachment 9A . . . . Distance Learning Plan

Attachment 10A . . . Statement of Goals and Objectives for Athletics

Attachment 11A . . . Reorganization Plan

Attachment 12A . . . Job Posting for Director of Development

Attachment 13A . . . Master Plan for Building Projects

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee I-1

Article I

Recommendation 1. (Section 3.1) The committee recommends that ASU implement

a systematic, broad based, interrelated, consistent, and appropriate process to

evaluate all educational programs, that it use evaluation results to improve these

programs, and that such uses be documented.

Summary of Narrative

The Committee recognized that most of the academic programs are assessed by a

variety of means, most notably student achievement tests when available, and, in most

cases, the results are being used to improve the programs. However, the committee

determined that some departments do not have a standardized examination for objective

assessment and that some do not report in a timely manner.

Later in the narrative, the Committee noted that the dual credit early admission

program has not been formally evaluated until recently (Spring 2001).

Response to Narrative Elements

The data used by the Committee to determine timeliness deficiencies were old; in

fact, all departments submitted timely reports in the most recent cycle (academic

departments’ were due November 31, 2001 for AY 2000-2001). This factual correction

was accepted by the Committee’s chair for specific departments mentioned in the draft

report, and it is mentioned on p. 17 of the final report in conjunction with discussion of

curriculum; however, the general discussion of the recommendation retains the error. In

any case, all departments will continue to be required to meet the deadline. They have

been informed of the serious consequences of procrastination.

Solving the problem of standardized examinations is less straightforward, partly

due to the original design of the institutional effectiveness system.


From the inauguration of the institutional effectiveness system in 1997, all

programs were required to have a test of knowledge as one element in their plans and

reports. With the exception of the first year, when no money was available to pay for

nationally normed examinations such as the Major Field Tests from Educational Testing

Service, all departments have included this element each year. However, the test of

knowledge could be either national or local. This choice was allowed because no

nationally normed examination is available for many programs, particularly those

involving skill (such as music or professional writing) or those lacking a national market

(such as agriculture or kinesiology without teacher certification). Two programs with a

nationally normed test available chose to develop a local test instead; the local tests have

had up to four years’ administration.

Most departments use the Major Field Tests from ETS for one or more of their

programs. General Education uses the Academic Profile from ETS. These nationally

normed tests are considered “standardized.”

Programs with state or national licensure examinations use those as their test of

knowledge or skill; these are considered “standardized.”

Only one nationally normed examination is available at the graduate level. ASU

is participating in pilot testing for the field test for the MBA for ETS. The master’s level

program in Physical Therapy will use the National Physical Therapy Examination (a

licensure examination) as its standardized examination with its first graduating class

(2002). In Nursing, the graduates of the Master’s program take a national certification

examination for Clinical Nurse Specialist. Graduates of the master’s programs in


Education are evaluated by the ExCET (now called TExES), Texas’ certification

examination for teachers. These are considered “standardized.”

Other departments have used their master’s comprehensive examinations as their

tests of knowledge. The comprehensives for the non-thesis and thesis options are based

on standardized procedures. Master’s degrees with a thesis option use the traditional

thesis defense. Those with a non-thesis option use either an oral or a written examination

which is administered according to published procedures which are made known in

advance to the students. A few departments require that their students complete a

capstone experience that includes all the elements of their course of study. These

examinations and capstone courses are considered “standardized.”

The new Institutional Effectiveness system for academic reports is streamlined and

designed for consistency, both in the matter of standardized tests and in the matter of

preparation for employment, the focus of Recommendation 2.

1. The first objective is that students will learn the subject matter. All departments

now use at least one state or nationally normed examination. Each program in

each department uses a “standardized” test of knowledge, which may or may not

be the state or nationally normed one. “Standardized” is defined below.

2. The second objective is that students will be prepared for employment or

advanced study. All departments will use responses of alumni to help align

curricula and instruction with practice in the field or in advanced graduate and

professional studies. This is particularly important for graduate programs.


3. The third objective will be one designed by the department. It may focus on

student achievement or on a problem of particular importance to the department,

such as advising.

4. The objectives may be assessed one or two ways.

Students in different programs within a department whose preparation is

substantially the same are arguably assessable in the aggregate by means of a single

examination. For example, the course of subject matter study for kinesiology students

with teacher preparation is substantially the same as for those without certification goals.

The preparation of both groups of students may be assessed by means of the licensure

examination for the certification students, particularly the subject matter portion of the

examination. Thus, if a department has a state or nationally normed examination for a

majority of its students, and if that examination actually tests the subject matter rather

than, say, pedagogy, and if all students’ subject matter preparation is substantially the

same, the nationally-normed test will produce results that represent the preparation of all

students. This will apply only if the examination tests subject matter. Some of the recent

ExCETS (now TExES) have concentrated on pedagogy and methodology rather heavily;

these may not be appropriate. Practice tests available beginning in June will indicate

which tests can be used in this manner.

A locally developed test will be considered “standardized” when it can be

demonstrated to be valid and reliable. A test is valid if it covers representative material

from the appropriate subject areas. The validity of local tests will be established through

the program review process and confirmed by an external evaluation. A test is reliable if

it produces fairly similar results each time it is administered. The Director of


Institutional Research and Assessment, whose Ph.D. in Psychology qualifies her in

psychometrics, advised the Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee on the

reliability arguments for local tests. The validity of a portfolio, recital or matrix

assessment depends on the consistency between the criteria for students’ performance

and the expectations of the judges. The Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee

assesses departments’ claims that their portfolio-type assessments are standardized. The

psychometric stability of every local examination, evaluation matrix, juried performance

standard, or juried portfolio standard, must be approved by the IE Advisory Committee.

That committee examined 9 such instruments during the summer of 2002 and rated 5 as

reliable immediately. Four were ratable by a specific date in the near future. Three

instruments are under development.

Chart 1A identifies these and shows that every program now assesses students’

performance by means of a standardized instrument or is committed to do so by the date

shown.

Finally, the dual credit early admission program is currently evaluated by the

students who participate as they evaluate their instruction on the IDEA forms. A second

evaluation, a thorough longitudinal study of several retention factors including early

admission, was finished in May 2002 for the 1994 cohort. It indicated a lower retention

rate for this population, but the numbers were very small. This first study establishes a

potential benchmark; the 1995 cohort will give a more accurate trend. The perception is

that students who enroll in dual credit tend to transfer to larger Texas universities.


Summary of Recommendation Elements

The recommendation requires that ASU implement a systematic, broad based,

interrelated, consistent, and appropriate process.

Systematic

The original institutional effectiveness process required each department annually

to assess each program for which it has differing expectations for graduates. For each

program, the assessment had to include a test of knowledge and other appropriate

measures of student success. There should have been three objectives, each assessed two

ways. Of these two ways, only one could be a survey or other subjective measure. The

“Systematic” column on the accompanying chart (Chart 1B) lists the number of

objectives and the number of ways each was assessed for the AY 2001 reports. (Three

programs, Developmental English, Developmental Mathematics, and Aerospace Studies,

were allowed to limit the objectives to two.)

Only output measures that assess student success could be used; departments

could not cite input measures such as numbers of courses or qualifications of faculty.

The Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee used a checklist to determine

whether each department had conformed to this system. In the past, some departments

have wanted to use such measures (small classes; advertising revenue; expanded

curricula; increased budgets), but they have been disallowed.

In response to Recommendation 1, the system has been standardized and

simplified. Under the revised system, two measures of student success will be required:

(1) a state- or nationally-normed or otherwise standardized test of knowledge or skill, as

defined above; (2) data about job placement or placement in graduate or advanced


professional programs derived from strengthened and targeted alumni surveys (see the

response to Recommendation 2 below). All departments will add a third measure of their

own design. The goals may be assessed one or two ways.

Attachment 1A is a copy of the revised standards for academic plans and reports,

which will take effect with the plans filed for 2002-2003. These can be viewed at

http://www.angelo.edu/publications/institutional_effectiveness/academic.htm.

Attachment 1B is the revised checklist for reviewing academic reports to be used by the

Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee. A copy of the old checklist has been

included for reference.

Broad-Based

Every department must apply this process annually, even Aerospace Studies,

which technically does not produce graduates, having no majors. This will not change.

The column under “Broad-Based” on Chart 1B indicates whether a program was assessed

in 2001. Only discontinued programs and programs with no current graduates (for

example, Computer Science with Secondary Certification) and one program for which the

national licensure examination had been revised and rescheduled (Medical Technology)

did not file a full report.

Interrelated

Each department’s assessments are currently independent, although it could be

asserted that the alumni surveys and the ExCET licensure examination for teacher

certification students provide two avenues for comparison. In fact, the ExCET scores

were used in this way in 1998 and 1999, when changing state standards made it

imperative to check each department’s success in training certification candidates. The


developmental programs in English and mathematics specify that their students will pass

the TASP, formerly the college entry qualification for all Texas students; these

assessments are interrelated because of that test. Programs using the MFT standardized

tests are able to compare the performance of their students to that of students in other

programs by referring to the national norms. “Interrelated” on Chart 1B shows whether a

program uses such a test.

Assessments will be more firmly interrelated beginning in Fall 2002, when

targeted alumni surveys will be used by departments. This process will necessarily be

incremental, as explained under Recommendation 2 below; however, by Fall 2004, all

academic departments will be using targeted, related alumni surveys.

Consistent

Originally, most but not all departments (the exceptions were Psychology /

Sociology and Agriculture) used a state or nationally standardized test of knowledge for

at least one program. Psychology / Sociology will do so for both programs beginning

with the Fall 2002 (AY 2003) plan; Agriculture students in the food safety course now

take the National Registry of Food Professionals examination. Thus the departmental

plans for AY 2003 will all use at least one state or nationally standardized test.

The arguments for validity and reliability of local instruments have been carefully

examined by the Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee, whose faculty members

include several professors with training and experience in tests and measurements as well

as some with long experience in writing and administering examinations. Some local

tests have been in use for several years.


The factor of consistent standardized testing seems to have been the major

deficiency identified by the Committee in Recommendation 1. A second objection of the

Committee (in Recommendation 2) was that job placement is not used by every

department to determine student success. The “Consistent” column on Chart 1B

identifies those programs which use job placement or placement in a graduate or

professional program as a means of assessment, either by a departmental survey (DS) or

ASU’s alumni survey (AS). The element of consistency represented by the standardized

test is analyzed in Chart 1A and can also be derived from the “Interrelated” column.

Currently, most but not all departments use placement of graduates (employment

or further education) as a measure of student success for at least one program. This

measure will be required beginning with plans filed for AY 2003.

Appropriate

Programs for which there is no state or nationally normed test of knowledge or

skill have developed their own standardized tests. These must be accepted by the IE

Advisory Committee as explained above. For some programs (such as professional

writing, studio art, or music performance) the test may be based on a grading matrix or a

juried portfolio or recital. Some of these tools are actually more appropriate than

standardized tests for the skill they assess. However, all must demonstrate validity and

reliability, as defined above.

Chart 1B lists the examples of appropriate ways programs have tested the

knowledge or skill of their graduates.


Chart of Recommendation Elements

Chart 1B identifies compliance with these elements as of Fall 2001, the latest

cycle for which data are available. It indicates that liberal arts programs tend not to use

alumni or departmental surveys to assess job placement or placement in graduate school.

It should be noted that job placement has hitherto been only one of several appropriate

options. However, beginning with plans filed in the fall of 2002 (AY 2003), assessment

of placement in employment or advanced studies will be required.

Academic departments file reports on the previous academic year by October 31st

(the extra time is necessary so that ExCET, MFT, and survey data can be returned for

August graduates). The reports filed October 31, 2002, will not necessarily include the

new standards, as they will be based on plans filed for academic year 2001-2002. The

earliest opportunity to apply the new standards will be with plans filed beginning in

December. This cycle is the result of adjustments made over the last 5 years, required by

data availability.

The addition of Major Field Tests for the Psychology, Sociology, and Criminal

Justice students will place an additional burden on the Institutional Effectiveness

operation. The Institutional Effectiveness budget will cover the cost, and a part-time

secretary will be hired to take over the tasks of ordering, distributing, collecting, and

returning all the nationally normed tests. Additionally, the Institutional Effectiveness

office will assume the responsibility of administering the tests, hitherto delegated to the

individual departments.

The approval of even part-time staff is a very rare event in this unusually tight

budget biennium. It represents the university’s commitment to strengthen the assessment


process. A copy of the job posting is attached (Attachment 1B). The secretary was hired

as of August 1, 2002.

Documentation

Each program lists the improvements made as a result of assessment on the

Institutional Effectiveness Records-Keeping System. This is the final item on each

record sheet on the automated system. The Institutional Effectiveness Advisory

Committee checks particularly for these improvements each year and notes their presence

and appropriateness by means of a checklist. On Chart 1B, “Specific Doc” refers to

whether a program’s report for AY 2001 documents a specific improvement. “Continue

to monitor . . .” is not considered a specific improvement. “Include arpeggios in every

piano class” is.

Every program in each department has made such improvements in the past four

cycles and has documented them in this way. However, the system itself could make that

documentation clearer. Therefore, the report form has been modified to indicate the

specific connection between the prior year’s proposed modification and the present year’s

activity.

The revised form and its original have been attached (Attachment 1D). An

imaginary department has been used as a sample.


Recommendation 1 Chart 1A - Narrative Elements

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND

PROFESSIONAL STUDIES Elements of Narrative

On-time Normed test Normed test Local test Projected Academic Programs

Report available used standardized stan. date

Accounting, Economics & Finance

BBA Accounting yes yes MFT — —

A, E & F MBA Accounting yes yes MFT/pilot — — A, E & F BBA Finance yes yes MFT — —

Aerospace Studies

Air Force Reserve Officer Training Program

yes no n.a. n.a.

Computer Science BS yes yes MFT — —

Computer Science BS with Secondary Certification yes no students n.a. n.a

Kinesiology BS with Teacher Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Kinesiology BS Yes ExCET* — —

Kinesiology MS yes comps — Marketing & Management BBA (Business) yes yes MFT — —

Marketing & Management MBA yes yes MFT/pilot,

capstone — —

*For the Kinesiology B.S. and the ExCET, see p. I-4.


Chart 1A Continued

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL AND FINE ARTS Elements of Narrative



Art BA and BFA--Art and Fine Arts yes no Portfolio

rated 2002

Art BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Music BA yes Musicianship

evaluation rated

2002

Music Bachelor of Music with All Level Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Communications BA yes Under development 2005

Communications BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Communications MA Communications Systems Management comps 2002

Drama BA yes Local exam rated 2003

Drama BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Journalism BA yes Under development 2005

Journalism BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

English BA yes yes MFT — —

English BA (Writing Emphasis) yes Under revision 2005

English BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

English Developmental Program--Pre-Collegiate yes n.a. n.a.

English MA yes comps 2002

Government BA yes yes MFT — —

Government BA (Criminal Justice) yes yes MFT — —

Government BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Government MA (International Studies) (discontinued) yes n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Government M.P.A. yes comps 2002

History BA yes yes MFT — —

History BA with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

History BA with Secondary Composite Social Studies Certification

yes yes ExCET — —

History MA yes comps 2002


Chart 1A Continued

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL AND FINE ARTS Elements of Narrative



Mod. Languages BA (French) yes Local test rated 2005

Mod. Languages BA (French) with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Mod. Languages BA (German) yes Local test rated 2005

Mod. Languages BA (German) with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Mod. Languages BA (Spanish) yes Local test rated 2003

Mod. Languages BA (Spanish) with Secondary Certification yes yes ExCET — —

Psychology & Sociology BA, BS (Psychology) yes yes MFT — —

Psychology & Sociology BA (Sociology) yes yes MFT — —

Psychology & Sociology M.S. (Psychology/Ind. Org.) yes comps 2002


Chart 1A continued

COLLEGE OF SCIENCES Elements of Narrative



Agriculture BS yes yes NRFPE Local test rated 2002

Agriculture MS yes comps —

Agriculture Pre-Veterinary Medicine Curriculum Program

yes Local test rated 2002

Biology BS yes yes MFT — —

Biology BS (Medical Technology) yes yes Ntl.Regis — —

Biology BS with Secondary Certification


Biology MS yes comps 2002

Chemistry / Biochemistry BS yes yes MFT — —

Chemistry / Biochemistry

BS with Secondary Certification

yes yes

ExCET — —.

Mathematics BS & BA yes yes MFT — —

Mathematics BS & BA with Secondary Certification


Mathematics Developmental Program--Pre-Collegiate

yes yes TASP n.a. n.a.

Nursing Associate in Applied Science in Nursing

yes yes HESI, NCLEX-RN — —

Nursing BS yes yes HESI — —

Nursing MS yes Certif.* — —

Physics BS (Applied Physics) yes yes MFT — —

Physics BS (Physics) yes yes MFT — —

Physics BS with Secondary Certification

yes Yes ExCET — —

Physical Therapy MPT yes yes NPTE — —

*American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Clinical Specialist in Nursing exam


Chart 1A continued

ACADEMIC Elements of Narrative

Assessment On-time Normed test Normed test Local test Projected

Unit Name Report available used standardized stan. date

SCHOOL of EDUCATION

Education BS (Interdisciplinary Child Development)


Education MEd yes comps 2002

Education MA in Curriculum and Instruction


ACADEMIC Elements of Narrative

Assessment On-time Normed test Normed test Local test Projected

Unit Name Report available used standardized stan. date

Interdisciplinary Studies Masters yes comps 2002

GENERAL EDUCATION yes yes Academic Profile — —


Chart 1B - Recommendation Elements

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES Elements of Recommendation

Academic Programs Systematic Broad Based Interrelated Consistent Appropriate Documented


BBA Accounting 3:2,2,1 yes MFT/Pilot DS computer project yes

A, E & F MBA Accounting 3:2,2,1 yes MFT/Pilot DS computer project yes

A, E & F BBA Finance 3:2,2,1 yes MFT DS computer project yes

Aerospace Studies


2:2,2 yes DS AF commission yes

Computer Science BS 3:2,2,2 yes MFT AS group yes

Computer Science

BS with Secondary Certification no students yes

Kinesiology BS with Teacher Certification & BS 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET AS supervisor yes

Kinesiology MS 3:2,2,2 yes yes

Marketing & Management BBA (Business) 3:2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes

Marketing & Management MBA 3:2,2,2 yes MFT/Pilot DS ethics,

capstone yes

Systematic = 3 objectives assessed 2 ways (Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) for AY 2001 Broad Based = Program assessed in AY 2001 Interrelated = Comparison with other ASU programs is possible (TASP, ExCET or MFT) Consistent = Placement of Graduates (According to Departmental or Alumni Survey. Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) Appropriate = Additional knowledge or skills assessment tool used Documented = A specific improvement based on assessment is listed for 2001 report


Chart 1B Continued

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL AND FINE ARTS Elements of Recommendation


Art BA and BFA--Art and Fine Arts 2:2,2,2 yes portfolio yes

Art BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET portfolio yes

Music BA 3:2,2,2 yes AS jury yes

Music Bachelor of Music with All Level Certification 3:2,2,1 yes ExCET AS supervisor yes

Communications BA 3:2,2,2 yes yes

Communications BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET judge UIL yes

Communications MA Communications Systems Management 3:2,2,1 yes intern yes

Drama BA 3:2,2,2 yes local yes

Drama BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET play yes

Journalism BA 3:2,2,2 yes intern yes

Journalism BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes no students

English BA 3:2,2,2 yes MFT research yes

English BA (Writing Emphasis) 3:2,2,2 yes portfolio yes

English BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,1 yes ExCET supervisor yes

English Developmental Program--Pre-Collegiate 2:2,2 yes TASP TASP yes

English MA 4:2,2,2,2 yes comps yes

Government BA 4:2,2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes

Government BA (Criminal Justice) 3:2,2,2 yes yes

Government BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET yes

Government MA (International Studies) (discontinued) 3:2,2,2 yes yes

Government M.P.A. 3:2,2,1 yes DS comps yes

History BA 3:2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes

History BA with Secondary Certification 3:2,2,2 yes ExCET DS supervisor yes

History BA with Secondary Composite Social Studies Certification

3:2,2,2 yes ExCET DS supervisor yes

History MA 3:2,2,2 yes comps yes


Chart 1B Continued



Mod. Languages BA (French) 4:2,2,2,2 yes local yes

Mod. Languages

BA (French) with Secondary Certification 5:2,2,2,2,2 yes ExCET supervisor yes

Mod. Languages BA (German) 4:2,2,2,2 yes local yes

Mod. Languages

BA (German) with Secondary Certification 5:2,2,2,2,2 yes ExCET supervisor yes

Mod. Languages BA (Spanish) 4:2,2,2,2 yes local yes

Mod. Languages

BA (Spanish) with Secondary Certification 5:2,2,2,2,2 yes ExCET supervisor yes

Psychology & Sociology BA, BS (Psychology) 3:2,2,2 yes no yes

Psychology & Sociology BA (Sociology) 3:2,2,2 yes no AS intern yes

Psychology & Sociology M.S. (Psychology/Ind. Org.) 3:2,2,2 yes no comps yes

Systematic = 3 objectives assessed 2 ways (Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) for AY 2001 Broad Based = Program assessed in AY 2001 Interrelated = Comparisons with other ASU programs are possible (ExCET or MFT) Consistent = Placement of Graduates (According to Departmental or Alumni Survey. Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) Appropriate = Additional knowledge or skills assessment tool used Documented = A specific improvement based on assessment is listed for 2001 report


Chart 1B Continued

COLLEGE OF SCIENCES Elements of Recommendation


Agriculture BS 3:2,2,2 yes DS intern yes

Agriculture MS 3:2,2,2 yes DS yes


3:2,2,2 yes DS yes

Biology BS 3:2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes

Biology BS (Medical Technology) 2:1,1 yes DS


2:2,2 yes ExCET DS supervisor yes

Biology MS 3:2,2 yes DS comps yes

Chemistry / Biochemistry BS 4:2,2,2,2 yes MFT

MCAT DS students publish yes



3:2,2,2 yes ExCET DS tech. yes

Mathematics BS & BA 3:2,2 yes MFT DS yes

Mathematics BS & BA with Secondary Certification

3:2,2,1 yes ExCET DS yes

Mathematics Developmental Program--Pre-Collegiate

2:2,2 yes TASP TASP yes

Nursing Associate in Applied Science in Nursing - Associate

3:2,2,2 yes DS NCLEX yes

Nursing BS 3:2,2,2 yes N.L.N. yes

Nursing MS 3:2,2,2 yes DS Certif.* yes

Physical Therapy MPT 3:2,2,2 yes NPTE no grads

until 2002

Physics BS (Applied Physics) 3:2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes

Physics BS (Physics) 3:2,2,2 yes MFT DS yes


2:2,2 yes ExCET DS yes

*American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Clinical Specialist in Nursing exam Systematic = 3 objectives assessed 2 ways (Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) for AY 2001 Broad Based = Program assessed in AY 2001 Interrelated = Comparison with other ASU programs is possible (ExCET or MFT) Consistent = Placement of Graduates (According to Departmental or Alumni Survey. Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) Appropriate = Additional knowledge or skills assessment tool used Specific Documentation = A specific improvement based on assessment is listed on the 2001 report


Chart 1B Continued

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION Elements of Recommendation

Systematic Broad Based Interrelated Consistent Appropriate Documented

SCHOOL of EDUCATION


3:2,2,2 yes ExCET supervisor yes

Education MEd 3:2,2,2 yes AS comps

Education MA in Curriculum and Instruction

3:2,2,2 yes DS comps yes

INTERDISCIPLINARY AND GENERAL EDUCATION Elements of Recommendation

Systematic Broad Based Interrelated Consistent Appropriate Documented

Interdisciplinary Studies Masters 3:2,2,2 yes DS comps yes

GENERAL EDUCATION

General Ed. Assess rising juniors 7: 2 each Acad. AS IDEA n.a.

In 2-year cycle * n.a. Profile

* Report due in Fall semester of even numbered years Systematic = 3 objectives assessed 2 ways (Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) for AY 2001 Broad Based = Program assessed in AY 2001 Interrelated = Comparisons with other ASU programs is possible (ExCET or MFT) Consistent = Placement of Graduates (According to Departmental or Alumni Survey. Test of Knowledge is recorded on previous chart) Appropriate = Additional knowledge or skills assessment tool used Documented = A specific improvement based on assessment is listed for 2001 report


Attachment 1A Revised Standards for Academic Plans / Reports

Revised Academic Standards for Institutional Effectiveness

1. The first objective must center on students’ knowing the subject matter. All

departments will use at least one state or nationally normed examination. Each program in each department will use a “standardized” test of knowledge, which may be the state or nationally normed one or a locally developed one which has been “standardized” as explained below.

2. The second objective must center on students’ preparation for employment or

advanced study. All departments will use responses of alumni to help align curricula and instruction with practice in the field or in advanced graduate and professional studies. This is particularly important for graduate programs.

3. The third objective will be one designed by the department. It may focus on

student achievement or on a problem of particular importance to the department, such as advising.

4. The objectives may be assessed one or two ways.

The tools currently available—graduating senior survey, alumni survey, Major Field Tests, for example—will continue to be used. The administration of the MFTs has generated so many problems that we will need to re-think the way that is done; it will probably be centralized. Improvements in the alumni survey are being tested in three departments and will be phased in for all departments by 2004. The reporting forms do not clearly show the link between assessment, change, and improvement. They have been revised to make documentation of improvement easier.

(1) All the students in a program will take the same “standardized” test.

(2) All the students will take the test.

(3) The students will take the test under the same conditions. The test area must be secure. The length of the test must be the same for all administrations.

(4) The test must be valid: that is, it must cover representative material from the

appropriate subject area(s).

(5) The test must be reliable: that is, it must produce fairly similar results every time it is administered. (The Director of Institutional Research will help establish this.)


(6) Portfolio or matrix: Criteria for students’ performance and judges’ expectations

must be consistent. If necessary, explain the criteria to the students. The department must submit its argument for reliability and validity to the Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee by July 22, 2002.


Attachment 1C Revised Academic Checklist

Institutional Effectiveness Report

Academic Departments

Department ___________________________ Program __________________________

q Are the Mission Statement and Departmental Purpose Statement correct?

q Is the connection between last year’s assessment and this year’s objective explicit?

q Is there at least one test of knowledge?

q Is it standardized?

q Does the report link information about job placement or advanced study with specific improvements in curriculum or instruction?

q Is the TexES statement correct?

Reviewed by _____ , _____ , _____

Comment by Review Committee

Comment by IE Coordinator


ACADEMIC CHECKLIST 2000-2001 (Deadline October 31, 2001)

Department: Reviewers: ________; ________; _______ 1. Does the University Mission entry quote directly from the Mission Statement? 2. Does the Departmental Purpose derive directly from the University Mission? 3. Are there 3-5 objectives? 4. Does each objective have at least one Means of Assessment? Two are better. 5. For each "Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success"

a. Does it specify how the success will be measured? (NOT how the objective will be achieved.) b. Does at least one focus on student achievement? c. Is there a test of knowledge or skill? d. Does the ExCET criterion specify pass rates of 70? and 80% for each group?

6. Was the assessment actually performed or calculated? 7. Does the report close the loop by specifying how the information gathered will be used to improve programs or services next year? (NOT the whole action plan for next year, but how this bit of information will be used to improve the program.) Comments:

Means of Assessment & Criteria for Success

1a

1b

2a

2b

3a

3b

4a

4b

5a

5b

Does it specify how success will be measured?

Is there an element of student achievement?

Is there a test of knowledge? ExCET 70% and 80%? Assessment Results Was the assessment actually done or calculated?

Is the assessment related to the criteria?

How will you use what you learned to improve programs next year? Does it close the loop?

Relationship to past years’ plans (by IE Coordinator):


Attachment 1C Job Posting—Part-Time Secretary, Institutional Effectiveness

POSITION:

DATE OF APPOINTMENT:

SALARY:

RESPONSIBILITIES:

QUALIFICATIONS: Academic:

Experience:

SPECIAL SKILLS/ RESPONSIBILITIES:

APPLY TO:

APPLICATION DEADLINE:

Angelo State University San Angelo, Texas 76909

Announcement of Staff Vacancy (Classified Position)

Secretary (Half-time Position) Office of Institutional Effectiveness Job Posting #:

On or after July 29,2002

$9,229 annual salary, plus attractive fringe benefits. I Essential Functions: Serves as receptionist for the department, greeting staff, faculty, students, visitors and others; answers the telephone, addressing the caller in a professional, service-oriented manner; routes cal takes messages and/or makes appointments, as appropriate.

I Assembles, compiles, and/or summarizes information and data, in accordance with supervisor's instructions; orders, distributes, collects, and packages for return confidential and secure test

I material.

Uses word processing software to prepare machine-readable surveys, correspondence, spreadshee 4 travel/purchase requisitions and other documents; types and places surveys on University web site, as instructed; operates electronic scanner to read and report survey and test results. 1 Maintains records of departmental expenditi~res; maintains co~nputer and hard copy files in an accurate and timely manner; adheres to records maintenance, confidentiality, and related practice and policies; opens and distributes mail to appropriate personnel; assembles related material or documents for review or use by supervisor; operates a variety of office equipment such as typewriters, personal computers, photocopiers, calculators, fax machines, scanners, and related; orders supplies and maintains office inventories.

Other Functions: Assists in the monitoring of general education and other assessment tests; attends training, semin and other meetings as needed; performs other duties as assigned.

Possession of a high school diploma, GED certificate, or equivalent.

One year of diversified secretarial or equivalent experience.

Knowledge of clerical, and general office procedures and practices; knowledge of spelling, grammar, and punctuation; knowledge of word processing software and the operation of personal co~nputers; ability to perform basic mathematical calculations; ability to type 35-40 WPM; abilit

I organize and co~nplete tasks in an accurate and timely manner; ability to work harmoniously wit others; skill in oral comm~~nication and interpersonal relations. P Personnel Office Angelo State University P.O. Box 1 1009, ASU Station San Angelo, TX 76909

Open, but may be filled anytime after July 22, 2002

APPROVED:

A

I OFFlCEJIF THE PRESIDENT

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACT10 N EMPLOYER I


Attachment 1D Revised Reporting Form

ASSESSMENT RECORDS-KEEPING SYSTEM

Institutional Effectiveness

2002-2003

Unit Type:

Academic

Assessment Unit:

Russian

Academic Year:

2002-2003

Academic Unit Objectives

Objective 1 OBJECTIVE

1. Students will understand simple conversations. First Assessment

1a. WHAT PART OF LAST YEAR’S ASSESSMENT OF THIS OBJECTIVE ARE YOU CARRYING FORWARD? In the past, students have listened to the instructor’s conversations. This year, we have used multimedia and internet sources for conversations. 1a. MEANS OF ASSESSMENT AND CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: 80% of students taking the exit test in Russian will pass the listening portion of the examination. 1a. ASSESSMENT RESULTS: 60% of the students passed the listening portion. 1a. HOW WILL YOU USE WHAT YOU LEARNED TO IMPROVE YOUR PROGRAM OR SERVICE? The curriculum will be revised to emphasize active conversation.


Original form ASSESSMENT RECORDS-KEEPING SYSTEM

Institutional Effectiveness

2002-2003

Unit Type:

Academic

Assessment Unit:

Russian

Academic Year:

2002-2003

Academic Unit Objectives

Objective 1 OBJECTIVE

1. Students will understand simple conversations First Assessment

1a. MEANS OF ASSESSMENT AND CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: 80% of students taking the exit test in Russian will pass the listening portion of the examination. 1a. ASSESSMENT RESULTS: 60% of the students passed the listening portion. 1a. HOW WILL YOU USE WHAT YOU LEARNED TO IMPROVE YOUR PROGRAM OR SERVICE?: The curriculum will be revised to emphasize active conversation.


ACADEMIC CHECKLIST 2000-2001 (Deadline October 31, 2001)


a. Does it specify how the success will be measured? (NOT how the objective will be achieved.) e. Does at least one focus on student achievement? f. Is there a test of knowledge or skill? g. Does the ExCET criterion specify pass rates of 70? and 80% for each group?



1a

1b

2a

2b

3a

3b

4a

4b

5a

5b


Is there an element of student achievement?

Is there a test of knowledge? ExCET 70% and 80%? Assessment Results Was the assessment actually done or calculated?


How will you use what you learned to improve programs next year? Does it close the loop?


Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee II-1

Article II Recommendation 2 (3.1). The committee recommends that ASU implement

universally a plan to evaluate its educational success with respect to student

achievement, including, as appropriate, course completions, state licensing

examinations, job placement rates, and follow-up studies of alumni.


The Committee noted that ASU is not consistently and systematically using job

placement rates and career advancement data to evaluate its educational success with

respect to student achievement.


Because of a crisis at the State level involving information sharing, this problem

must be approached indirectly.

The most useful source of job placement data was formerly an agency called

Career Development Resources, which became part of the Texas Workforce Commission

(TWC). This was an external data source that tracked graduates across the state.

Institutions could find out whether their graduates were placed in jobs related to their

training, and other information could be extracted from the reports.

The TWC data were based on information supplied by the Texas Higher

Education Coordinating Board (THECB). This body was directed by the Department of

Education, citing FERPA concerns, to cease redisclosing student level data beginning in

2001. After 2002, the THECB will not be able to redisclose anything but directory

information. The TWC was thus forced to discontinue its placement reports. This

restriction has generated consequences across the state, not only for Angelo State

University.


Since the external source is no longer available, ASU has had to rely on three

locally generated surveys: a survey administered at graduation practice, an alumni

survey sent each year to graduates 3 and 5 years out, and a survey of recent master’s level

graduates sent 3 months out. The master’s level survey will be discussed in detail under

Recommendation 6 below. Additionally, individual departments have developed ways to

find out where their graduates are employed.

The graduation practice survey has not proved particularly valuable for job

placement information, although it will be continued for its value to departments because

it includes instruction and curriculum opinions by recent students.

The university-wide alumni survey is in its fourth administration, and it has been

clear for some time that the information it provides is not particularly robust. In the

interest of universality, the survey will not be abandoned, but the process will be

intensified incrementally.

During the summer of 2002, a procedure developed by the Physics Department

was adapted for use by departments in two other colleges: Art and Music (Liberal and

Fine Arts) and Computer Science (Business and Professional Studies). This procedure

uses a combination of web-based and traditional elements to establish and maintain

contact with graduates so they can be surveyed more simply. It is particularly focused on

job or graduate school placement and information about the success of the department’s

graduates in those placements. It is to be sent out under the auspices of the department

but compiled by the Institutional Research office. The Targeted Survey Procedure

appears as Attachment A. Copies of the Physics Department’s instruments and results

are also attached (Attachment 2B, Attachment 2C, Attachment 2D). During the four


years of the university-level survey, which surveyed eight cohorts, Physics accrued only

7 responses. During the same four years of its own survey, directed to four cohorts, it

accrued 19.

For graduates of the teacher certification program, the State Board of Education

Certification (SBEC) requires that graduates of programs be employed as teachers five

years after graduation. However, SBEC has failed to make the placement data available,

as it had promised. The School of Education is attempting to obtain the data directly

from the Texas Education Agency.

It should be noted that job placement rates are not appropriate tools with which to

assess some programs, particularly liberal arts programs. Many of these programs have

instead assessed placement of their graduates in graduate or professional schools, and

they will continue to do so.

Response to Recommendation

The recommendation requires ASU to assess student achievement, including, as

appropriate, course completions, state licensing examinations, job placement rates, and

follow-up studies of alumni.

The narrative focuses on job placement rates. These are discussed specifically above.

Course completion data are available for the university as a whole and are used in

state-level reports to the Legislative Budget Board. However, they are not disaggregated

at the department level; no department has found them appropriate as an indicator of

student success. Generally, the academic departments believe that drop rates are high.

Licensing examinations are used as an indicator by every program for which they

are available. These are listed on Chart 1A above under “Normed Test Used.” The most


frequently used examination is the certification test for teachers in Texas, the ExCET

(now called TExES). Biology, Nursing, and Physical Therapy have used licensing

examinations. For AY 2003, Agriculture will add the National Registry of Food

Professionals Examination.

Follow-up studies of alumni have been conducted regularly since 1998, although

the results have not been altogether satisfactory. These will be targeted, as described

above, to give departments more consistent and more specific information. Departments

currently using such studies are identified on Chart 1B under the column “Consistency”;

AS refers to the university’s alumni survey and DS to any survey of its graduates

developed by the department itself.

Chart of Recommendation Elements

Chart 1B lists the student achievement indicators used by each academic

department in one or another of its programs (under “Interrelated,” “Consistent,” and

“Appropriate”).


Attachment 2A

Targeted Alumni Surveys

The alumni surveys conducted by Institutional Research for the last four years have been expensive, time-consuming, and stingy in returning data. Two contributing factors to this unsatisfactory state are bad addresses and a lack of interest on the part of the alumni. These factors can be overcome if the departments themselves are involved in the process.

The Physics Department has used a procedure for getting information from its graduates that can be used as a model for departments with small numbers of graduates. It requires some intensive activity of the department head or a designated liaison that can be done just after May graduation, plus a small but regular commitment of attention from faculty members. Many of the procedures can be automated and put on-line. Some work is necessary at the beginning. However, IPE / IRA, Alumni Relations, and Information Technology can help. If the results obtained by Physics are any indication, the targeted surveys will provide for far more information, and more useful information, than the general one. In the last four years, the university-level instrument surveyed eight cohorts (two graduating classes per year) and returned 7 results to Physics. In the same period, the Physics Department surveyed four cohorts and retrieved 19 results. The Hooks The key element in the process is a good address. This can be e-mail or postal, preferably both. For Physics, the first occasion to request addresses is the exit interview, when students are asked to rate their program of study, to list their current employer, and to identify whether and where they will go to graduate school. Beginning in August, 2002, a second occasion will be graduation practice. When they fill out information for Alumni Relations, students will be asked to supply a permanent postal address and e-mail address, plus information about employment or graduate school placement. This method has been very successful in obtaining addresses; when the cards are entered into the Alumni database, they will be returned to IRA for distribution to the departments. Alumni Relations can also retrieve information about graduates’ job titles and addresses from as long ago as 1970. Their records are 85% accurate. For Physics, the next occasion is a survey mailed and e-mailed to everyone on the database maintained by the Department. It is very brief; it advertises its purpose as advising current physics students about careers. The on-line form is set up so that it automatically returns an e-mail to the department head.


In fact, the information gathered is compiled into a departmental tool, “Physics or Pre-Engineering Information Guide,” used by the faculty to inform students about scholarships available to Physics students, job opportunities for Physics graduates, and about where former Physics students are now employed or studying. The latter list is quite impressive. Most departments would probably be pleasantly surprised with their own similar lists. The Line The initial survey includes a space for “Additional Information.” Many respondents use this space to inquire about favorite professors. The department head forwards these requests. The professors respond personally, usually receiving more information in return. Respondents are sent the next copy of the departmental e-newsletter, which includes short items of campus news and feature stories or photographs of alumni. The newsletter ends with a copy of the on-line information form, and recipients are urged to forward the newsletter to other contacts. They are also asked for photographs and for copies of or links to articles they have published. At Homecoming, the department hosts an alumni reception that is another source of new contact information. The Physics Department also has the expertise to maintain a departmental listserv. The members of this group stay reliably in touch. Several times a year, the department hosts an open chat for all alumni and faculty. The Sinker The information the department gets from these multi-dimensional contacts is used to keep curricula current and to advise students about a course of study (particularly about which of the department’s three programs to enter). In the future, it will be possible to conduct employer surveys should the department see the need for information those would provide. When information is needed on a university-wide basis, the individual departments’ lists can be used. This should happen very rarely. Implications for other small departments

1. Setting up the initial electronic interface 2. Gathering the addresses 3. Writing the newsletter 4. Response rates—Physics gets about 16% by either paper or web. This is far better

than the general survey provides.


How IPA and IPE can help

1. Set up a template for the interfaces 2. Use graduation practice and MFT administration as further collection

opportunities 3. Get copy for newsletter from Career Development 4. Get copy from Alumni Relations

What would make things easier?

1. Issue students a permanent e-mail address—one they can keep when they graduate—and show them how to use it when they enroll

2. University-wide access to one of the address-finding services—although Alumni Relations’ database is probably good enough for most departments.


Attachment 2B Department of Physics Exit Survey

GRADUATING STUDENT EXIT SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS

Questions

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

1. Testing/grading system

2. Course content in your major field.

3. Instruction in your major field.

4. Out-of-class availability of your instructors.

5. Attitude of the faculty toward students.

6. Variety of courses offered by this department.

7. Class size relative to the type of course.

8. Flexibility to design your own program of study.

9. Availability of your advisor.

10. Value of the information provided by your advisor.

11. Preparation your are receiving for your future occupation or graduate program.

12. Which degree program are you completing? PHYS APHYS PHYS/TC 13. Are you attending graduate school? YES NO 14. If yes, where and what program? GRE score: _________ 15. Are you employed after graduation? YES NO 16. If yes, where and what company?

General Comments:


Attachment 2C Department of Physics Alumni Survey

The Department of Physics will use survey data to advise students of careers in

physics and physics-related fields.

Angelo State University physics/applied physics alumni may receive a copy of

the survey results by sending your request to Ms. Dinene Rusler.

Please enter the following information.

Name:

Mailing address: (Street, City, State, Zip Code)

Email address:

Web Page address:

ASU Degree:

Applied Physics

Physics

Teacher Certification

Year of Degree:

Graduate Degree(s): (University, Degree,

Year)


Professional Title:

Additional Information:

Send Form Clear Form

ASU Home Page | Physics Home Page | Quark Home Page

Last revised on 9/16/00

Comments: [email protected]

Department of Physics

Angelo State University


Attachment 2D Department of Physics Alumni Placement, 1999-2002

Physics Alumni as of May 2002 Alumnus Year Current Whereabouts

D.A. 2002 Ph.D. program, Mathematics, Rice University L.P. 2002 M.S. program, Nuclear Engineering, Texas A&M University A.W. 2002 M.S. program, Semiconductor Physics, Texas Tech University D.W. 2002 M.S. program, Aeronautical Engineering, George Washington

University C.C. 2001 Ph.D. program, Mathematics, Indiana University

H.D. 2001 Ph.D. program, Physics, Rice University

N.E. 2001 Unknown, San Angelo, TX J.H. 2001 MBA program, ASU S.R. 2001 Raytheon Systems, Garland, TX S.S. 2001 M.S. program, Biomedical Engineering, University of Arizona J.T. 2001 M.S. program, Physics, Texas Tech University J.C.W. 2001 M.S. program, Semiconductor Physics, Texas Tech University S.H. 2000 Texas Electronics, Dallas, TX O.B.S. 2000 M.S. program, Semiconductor Physics, Texas Tech University N.B. 1999 M.D./Ph.D. program, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA H.M. 1999 Unknown J.P. 1999 M.S. program, Meteorology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln A.T. 1999 SEMATECH, Austin, TX D.T. 1999 Texas Instruments, Dallas, TX

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee III-1

Article III

Recommendation 3 (3.2). The committee recommends that for each administrative

and support service unit, the university: a) establish a clearly defined purpose in

support of the university’s mission and goals; b) formulate goals in support of each

unit; c) develop and implement procedures to evaluate the extent to which these

goals are being achieved in each unit; and d) document the use of these results to

improve services provided by each unit.


The Committee found evidence that not all administrative and educational support

service units are in complete compliance with ASU’s requirement that each

administrative and educational support unit develop an institutional effectiveness plan as

defined in the recommendation. (1) some service activities are not formally assessed; (2)

some administrative units lack an external benchmark for verification of success; (3) not

all units were in compliance with Section III of the Criteria for Accreditation at the time

of writing of the Self-Study report.

Preview ASU, a program for new students that has an orientation element and an

advisement element, was mentioned in a later section (4.2.5) as not having demonstrated

that evaluations of orientation had been used to improve these programs. Although the

reference is to Recommendation 1, Section 3.1, the office that is in charge of Preview

ASU is an administrative one (Associate Dean of Student Life), so the response will be

included here.


(1) Major university-level service activities, as defined by the Self-Study

committee studying institutional effectiveness, are now formally assessed. Most are


assessed by one of the administrative offices as part of their Institutional Effectiveness

reports; some (for example, the Humanities Lectureship, which is sponsored by a local

hospital desiring to retain control over its activities) are assessed by the appropriate

department. These assessments include audience sizes, sponsors’ opinions, and

participants’ feedback. Chart 3A lists the university-level service activities and how they

are assessed.

(2) Beginning with Institutional Effectiveness reports filed July 31, 2002, all

administrative and student support units are required to use a benchmark in the

assessment of one of their goals. This may be a benchmark established in the

professional literature, a best-practices initiative established by the unit itself, or a peer-

established benchmark. These are explained in detail in Attachment 3A, which is a copy

of the instructions sent to these departments.

Chart 3B identifies the benchmarks used by each department for the 2001 and

2002 cycles. Attachment 3B is the revised checklist for reviewing administrative reports

to be used by the Institutional Effectiveness Advisory Committee. A copy of the old

checklist has been included for reference.

(3) All administrative units were in compliance with Section III by the end of the

cycle ending July 31, 2001 and by the end of the cycle ending July 31, 2002. The

documentation history for each unit can be found at

www.angelo.edu/publications/institutional_effectiveness. Go to Access On-Line System

and use the username “guest”; no password is required. Under the pull-down “view other

years” are the pages that document each unit’s assessment activity and improvement

record.


(4) Preview ASU is part of the Institutional Effectiveness report of the Dean of

Student Life. Both assessments of Objective 1 for AY 2000-2001 record changes to the

program based on assessments during the summer of 2001. The report was necessarily

incomplete, the reporting deadline preceding the final Preview session. The final

assessments indicated five improvements, of which the following is the most substantial:

“Because of repeated advising errors by the faculty, the Admissions Office is now pre-

assigning students to the appropriate remediation classes in advance of the faculty seeing

the student. This has put a major workload on the Admissions Office staff, but it has

greatly reduced the advising errors.”

Summary of Recommendation

For each administrative and support service unit, the university [must]: a)

establish a clearly defined purpose in support of the university’s mission and goals; b)

formulate goals in support of each unit; c) develop and implement procedures to evaluate

the extent to which these goals are being achieved in each unit; and d) document the use

of these results to improve services provided by each unit.

Response to Recommendation Elements

The instructions for developing institutional effectiveness plans and for reporting

results specify each of these elements, as can be seen through an examination of the IE

website http://www.angelo.edu/publications/institutional_effectiveness/administ.htm.

Each unit’s compliance can be documented as under (3) above. Chart 3C records each

unit’s compliance with the first three requirements (establish a purpose supporting the

mission statement; formulate goals; develop and implement evaluation procedures) and


cites at least one way the unit has documented its use of the results to improve services

during the year ending July 31, 2001, or July 31, 2002.


Chart 3A Major Service Activities at Angelo State University

Academic/Community Services

Institutional Effectiveness Component

Other Formal Assessment

Department/Unit in Charge

Wells Fargo Distinguished Lectureship in Business

X College of Business and Professional Studies

Roy E. Moon Lectureship X College of Sciences

Ralph Chase Lectureship X Angelo Community Hospital Committee

Medical Lecture Series X Department of Physical Therapy

Arts at ASU X

Department of Art and Music; Department of Communications, Drama, and Journalism

Art Exhibits X Department of Art and Music

Drama Events X Department of Communications, Drama, and Journalism

Ceramic Symposium X College of Liberal and Fine Arts

Small Business Development Center Lectures

X SBDC

International Trade Office X SBDC University Symposium X University Center International Business Symposium

X IBS Program Committee

ASU Planetarium Programs X Department of Physics Up and Coming Scholars Program

X President’s Office

Mother-Daughter Program X Educational Opportunity Services


Chart 3B Administrative Units’ Benchmarks

2001 and 2002

ADMINISTRATIVE Benchmark Nature of Benchmark Assessment 01 Unit Name

01 02 02

President Carr Foundation Y Y 2001 Legislat. reporting procedure SACS Criteria Institutional Effectiveness Y Y SACS visiting comm. recs 1-3 State Auditor’s Best Practices Internal Auditor Y Y State Auditor’s Best Practices Council of Presidents & Chancellors President’s Office Y Y R.Light Making the Most of College Stamats external review University News and Information

Service Y Y ADA Regulations WTTC Board’s policy guideline

West Texas Training Center Y Y Texas Infrastructure Grant policies

Benchmark, 01, 02: Did the department use a benchmark for 2001? 2002? Nature of Benchmark: 2001 benchmark on first line; 2002 benchmark on second line


Chart 3B Continued

ADMINISTRATIVE Nature of Benchmark Assessment

Benchmark 01

Unit Name 01 02 02 Vice President for Academic Affairs

HB 2107 (TASP exempt) Admissions Y Y Stamats external review Registrar Y CAS Registrar Program Guide Center for Academic Excellence (new) n.a. Y Legislature’s Closing the Gap initiative (CAE) Educational Opportunity Services Y CAS Standards (CAE) Advising (new) n.a. Y NACADA Standards & Guidelines (CAE) Honors (new) n.a. Y Ntl. Collegiate Honors Council (CAE) International Studies Y Ntl. Assn. Foreign Study Abroad (CAE) Critical Thinking Y IDEA evaluations (nationally normed) Institutional Planning, Research & Assessment Y SACS visiting comm. Rec. #9 (D. Ed.) Telecommunications & Information Technology Y Current Industry Standards—Northrup U.S. Government Printing Office Library Y Y Texas Infrastructure Fund Peer Comparison Survey Division of Continuing Studies Y Peer Comparison Survey U.S. Small Business Administration SBDC & International Trade Office Y U.S. Small Business Administration M I R Center Y MIR Center Board Dean: Liberal & Fine Arts Y Gov’s Customer Service Survey IDEA Dean: Business & Professional Studies Y Gov’s Customer Service Survey IDEA Dean: Sciences Y Gov’s Customer Service Survey External Audit Dean: Graduate School Y Y Grad. & Prof. Enrollment Mgt. Assn. Dean: School of Education* n.a. n.a.

*The School of Education is exactly congruent with the Department of Education. It is more useful to consider this entity under academic programs, for which benchmarks are not required. Benchmark, 01, 02: Did the department use a benchmark for 2001? 2002? Nature of Benchmark: 2001 benchmark on first line; 2002 benchmark on second line


Chart 3B Continued


Benchmark 01

Unit Name 01 02 02 Vice President for Fiscal Affairs

LBB (Leg. Appropr. Req. Guideline) Business Manager Y Y Gov’t Accounting Standards Board HB 1209 (Prompt Payment) Accounting Y Y State of Tx. Travel Allowance Guide Comptroller (GASB 34) Inventory Y State Auditor’s Management Audit General Services Commission Purchasing Y Tx. Building & Procurement Commiss. Physical Plant Y Student Travel Policy (Senate Bill 263) Personnel Y CUPA-HR Practices in Higher Ed. Peer Comparison Survey Print Shop Y Y Peer Comparison Survey

Post Office Y U. S. Postal Service Security Audit

Benchmark, 01, 02: Did the department use a benchmark for 2001? 2002? Nature of Benchmark: 2001 benchmark on first line; 2002 benchmark on second line


Chart 3B Continued


Benchmark 01

Unit Name 01 02 02 VP for University Relations & Development

Council for Adv & Spt of Education Development Y * SACS Criteria (6.2.1) Alumni Affairs Y Y Advisory Board standard State Fire Marshal Risk Management Y Y SACS visiting Comm. Rec #13 Dean of Student Life y CAS Standards American College Health Assn Health Clinic Y Y CDC Bioterrorism Guidelines SACS Criteria, CAS Standards Residence Life Y Y SACS Criteria, CAS Standards University Center Y CAS Standards CAS Standards University Center Program Office Y Y CAS Standards & CASE Standards University Police Y Law Enf. Managmt. Institute of Texas Financial Aid & Carr Scholarship Office Y NASFAA Statement of Ethical Princs. Brass Ring Conversion Schedules Career Services Y Y CAS Standards Int. Assn. of Counseling Services Counseling Y Y Int. Assn. of Counseling Services NCAA Intercollegiate Athletics Y Y NCAA and EADA Gender Equity NIRSA Extramural Guidelines Intramurals Y Y NISA Club Participation Guidelines

*Department had no Director during 2001-2002 and did not file a report. Benchmark, 01, 02: Did the department use a benchmark for 2001? 2002? Nature of Benchmark: 2001 benchmark on first line; 2002 benchmark on second line

2001 2002 43 Eligible Units 45 Eligible Units 22 Benchmarks 45 Benchmarks 51% Compliance 100% Compliance


Chart 3C Purposes, Goals, Documented Improvement

ADMINISTRATIVE Mission-related

Assessment Unit Name

Purpose Goals, measures

Nature of Improvement (documented in report)

President

Carr Foundation Y 3:1,1,1 Up-to-date records to determine correct payment information

Institutional Effectiveness Y 3:2,2,2 More systematic training of new department heads

Internal Auditor Y 3:2,2,1 Expand factor ranking choices to department heads

President’s Office Y 3:2,2,1 Use R. Light’s Making the Most of College

University News and Information Service Y 3:2,2,2 Greatly expanded available photo

and digital images

West Texas Training Center Y 3:2,2,1 Better construction management for phase 3 construction

Purpose: Does the Departmental Purpose Statement show a specific connection to the University’s Mission Statement? Goals, Measures: How many departmental goals, related to the Departmental Purpose Statement, are assessed? How many assessments are used for each goal? Nature of Improvement: A specific improvement to the program based on the results of the assessment. (Improvements for 2000-2001 are in regular font; improvements for 2001-2002 are in italics.)


Chart 3C Continued

ADMINISTRATIVE Mission-related Assessment Unit Name



Vice President for Academic Affairs

Admissions Y 3:2,1,2 Review and proceed with cross-training

Registrar Y 3:2,2,2 Increase operation times for RAMS and STAR

Center for Academic Excellence new (2002-03 is first year with students)

(CAE) Educational Opportunity Services Y 3:2,2,2

Send a second information letter to Academic Year Provisional students

(CAE) Advising new Increase private conference time with students

(CAE) Honors new (2002-03 is first year with students)

(CAE) International Studies Y 3:2,2,2 Distribute “International Studies Manual” more widely

(CAE) Critical Thinking Y 3:2,2,2 Increase time on decision-making exercises for undeclared students

Institutional Planning, Research & Assessment Y 3:2,1,2 Mount Web Page

Telecommunications & Information Technology Y 4:2,2,2,2 Extend hours in the largest lab on

campus

Library Y 3:2,2,2 Revise library instruction presentations to Eng 1302 & others

Division of Continuing Studies Y 4:2,2,2,2 Request fee increase for testing services

SBDC & International Trade Office Y 5:1,1,1,1,1 Increase time spent on support of travel

M I R Center Y 3:2,2,2 Increase field days for area agri-culturalists at MIR center

Dean: Liberal & Fine Arts Y 4:2,2,2,2 Improve the system for tracking applicants for graduation

Dean: Business & Professional Studies Y 4:2,2,2,2

Check class schedules of graduating students dropping courses

Dean: Sciences Y 4:2,2,2,2 Establish a mutually acceptable procedure for departmental review

Dean: Graduate School Y 4:2,2,2,2 Assist faculty to submit federal grants electronically

Dean: School of Education (School coincides exactly with Academic Department of Education; reports with other academic units)


Chart 3C Continued




Vice President for Fiscal Affairs

Business Manager Y 3:1,2,2 Telephone credit card payment by students at registration

Accounting Y 3:2,2,2 Contract with a new collection agency

Inventory Y 3:3:2,2 Develop standardized form to show physical location of property

Purchasing Y 3:2,2,2 Increase roster of local HUB vendors

Physical Plant Y 3:2.2.2 Involve higher-level administrators in policy decisions (re. keys)

Personnel Y 3:2,2,2 On-line search committee guidelines

Print Shop Y 3:2,2,1 Move formerly outsourced jobs to in-house

Post Office Y 3:2,2,2 Update Post Office web page with info about specific mailing needs



Chart 3C Continued




VP for University Relations & Development

Development Y 3:1,1,1 Aggressive effort with the Board of West Texas Utilities for increase

Alumni Affairs Y 3:2,2,2 Developed an interactive web page so alumni can update their records

Risk Management Y 3:2,2,2 Only persons who have completed training will be allowed to drive vans

Dean of Student Life Y 4:2,2,2,1 Preview procedures were changed (registration, ID, sequences)

Health Clinic Y 4:2,2,2,2 Work with Admissions to increase meningococcal disease awareness

Residence Life Y 3:2,2,2 5-year plan allows proactive plans rather than reaction to emergencies

University Center Y 4:1,1,1,1 Lowered prices for some food items to increase volume

University Center Program Office Y 3:2,2,2 Use CASE scores for extra-curric-ular learning. Get scores by1 Sept.

University Police Y 3:2,2,2 Increase crime prevention programs targeted to male students

Financial Aid & Carr Scholarship Office Y 3:2,2,2 Make the hyperlinks to the Carr Academic Scholarship easier to use

Career Services Y 3:2,2,2 Add more examples to the Resume Starter Kit

Counseling Y 3:2,2,1 Send information to student orgs about availability of speakers

Intercollegiate Athletics Y 3:2,2,2 Hired a Compliance Coordinator / Academic Advisor for athletes

Intramurals Y 3:2,2,2 Use graduate students to increase staff.



Attachment 3A

Revised Standards for Institutional Effectiveness—Administrative

1. All departments will use an external benchmark to measure their success. This

may be a standard found in the professional literature, a peer comparison, or proof that the department itself establishes best practice standards.

2. Departments should consider using a customer satisfaction survey if appropriate.

The Legislative Budget Board requires that the university file a customer satisfaction report in May of even-numbered years; results of individual surveys will be compiled for that report. Otherwise, the second objective will be one designed by the department.

3. The third objective will be one designed by the department.

4. Objectives may be assessed one or two ways.

The tools currently available—Student Opinion Survey, NSSE—will still be supported, in alternate years.

Benchmarks

The preferred benchmark is one developed by a professional organization to define competence or excellence. Ideally, it should not merely describe the basic requirements of the job. Instead, use something like an item from the "Best Practices List" provided by the Office of the State Auditor, or the Postal Service’s rules for the handling of hazardous materials, or the CDC’s new standards on bioterrorism preparedness. The CAS standards are a good source for benchmarks for student services departments. Others can often be found on a professional organization’s website. The benchmark may have been set by an advisory board. A second way to establish a benchmark is to compare your operation with your peers’. This may involve your surveying them—but they probably have IE reports to do as well, and they will answer your surveys if you promise to share the results. Some recent peer comparisons have included fee levels for services and the content of a web site for Institutional Research. A third way is to establish that your department sets standards for the field. ASU has one or two very specialized departments—perhaps unique—that could do this.


Customer Service

The Legislature has mandated customer service reports from all state agencies. The “statutorily required customer service quality elements,” with some examples, are as follows: General/Overall: “Overall, I am satisfied with the services I received.” Facilities: The facility is open during reasonable hours.” “The facility is clean and orderly, and I could easily find my way around.” Staff: “The staff members were able to answer my questions.” “The staff members were courteous.” “The staff members were knowledgeable and helpful.” Communication: “I received the information I needed to obtain services.” “I was given a clear explanation about the materials needed to receive services.” “My telephone call, e-mail, or letter was routed to the proper person.” Internet Sites: “I am able to access information about the services I need using the Internet.” “The website contained clear and accurate information on events, services, and contact information.” Complaint Handling Process: “I know how to make a complaint regarding services.” “If I complained, I believe it would be addressed in a reasonable manner.” Timeliness: “My telephone, letter, or e-mail inquiry was answered in a reasonable amount of time.” “The time I waited to receive services was reasonable.” Printed Information: “I have received printed information explaining the services available.” “The printed information provided thorough and accurate information.” “The printed information was clear and understandable.” We must submit the report by May 31 of even-numbered years. If you could use some of these elements in a customer service report, yours would contribute to our agency report. It would be good to design the report for FY 2003 so the bugs can be worked out. Institutional Research will work with you to design a report that will integrate with the one we have to submit. Please design a report that will be useful to you in any case, and use the elements that apply to you. This may mean that you don’t use all of them.

Third Objective

Design the third objective the way you have been doing—that is, identify a part of your operation that you’d like to get information about and define a way to measure your success with that part.


Attachment 3B Revised Checklist for Administrative Departments

Institutional Effectiveness Report

Administrative Departments

Department: ______________________________

q Are the Mission Statement and Departmental Purpose statement correct?

q Is the connection between last year’s assessment and this year’s objective explicit?

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3

q Is there at least one benchmark?

q Is there a customer service element?

Reviewed

Comment by Review Committee

Comment by IE Coordinator


ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKLIST 2000-2001 (Deadline July 31, 2001)


a. Does it specify how the success will be measured? (NOT how the objective will be achieved.) h. Is there a tangible or quantifiable element? (A number or a thing or a

document) i. Is there an external benchmark?



1a

1b

2a

2b

3a

3b

4a

4b

5a

5b


Is there a tangible or quantifiable element?

Is there an external benchmark?

Assessment Results Was the assessment actually done or calculated?


How will you use what you learned to improve services next year? Does it close the loop?


Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee IV-1

Article IV

Recommendation 4 (4.2.2). The committee recommends that an adequate number

of hours with appropriate prerequisites be identified consistently across program

areas and included with course descriptions to support the sequencing of courses

above the elementary level.


Careful examination by the Committee of the 2001-2003 Bulletin and follow-up

interviews revealed that prerequisites are not consistently identified across program areas.


Each department may have several program areas; for example, a biology student

might be enrolled in the B.S. program, the pre-medical or pre-dental program, the

medical technology program, or the teacher certification program. For the new Bulletin,

to be approved by the Board of Regents at its August 28-29, 2002, meeting, each

department has structured its program descriptions so that they are consistent across the

department.

Additionally, each department was asked to reconsider its sequencing structure

and to redefine it if necessary. Five departments did so: Art and Music, History,

Government, Management and Marketing, and Modern Languages. The School of

Education restructured its entire curriculum.


The Bulletin descriptions for each program must identify prerequisites for an

adequate number of hours. Within each department prerequisites must be identified

consistently across program areas. Prerequisites must be included with course


descriptions. The purpose of the identifying the prerequisites is to support the sequencing

of courses above the elementary level.


Chart 4A lists the status of each undergraduate program in each department with

regard to the four parts of the recommendation.


Chart 4A

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES Elements of Recommendation

Undergraduate Programs

No. of upper division hours with prereqs

identified

Consistent with all other areas in department

Included with course

descriptions

Support sequencing

above elementary


BBA Accounting 45 Y All accounting (15) Eco 3331,3360 Y

A, E & F MBA Accounting 54 Y All but 2323 (18) Y

A, E & F BBA Finance 51 y All but 3362 (17) Y

Aerospace Studies


57 Y All but 1331 (19) Y

Computer Science BS + Ed 4332,4323 Y All but 1331 (19) Y

Computer Science

BS with Secondary Certification 3 Y 4373 Y

Kinesiology BS with Teacher Certification + Ed 4332,4323 Y 4373 y

Marketing & Management BBA (Business) 129 Y

BA2321,3309,3332 4303,4319,4371, IBIS3311,3312, 4303,4321,4371, 4381,MGT3301, 3302,3303,3305, 3313,4301,4302, 4305,4306,4307, 4381,4391, MIS3303,3343, 4336,4343,4344, 4351,4361,4401, MKT3321,3322, 3323,3325,3326, 4324,4325,4326, 4328,4381

Y


Chart 4A Continued




identified



descriptions

Support sequencing

above elementary

Art BA Art 12 Y 3332,4371,4381, 4391 Y

Art BFA Fine Arts —* y Y

Art BA with Secondary Certification

12 + Ed 4322,4323

Music BA 65 Y

1131,1138,3121, 3122,3124,3224, 3125,3225,3226, 3127,1451,1452, 2343,2344,2451, 2452,3251,3252, 3263,3264,3341, 3342,3385,4151, 4253,4281,4282, 4381,4391

Y

Music Bachelor of Music with All Level Certification

Ed 4315,4317 Y same Y

Communications BA 30 Y

2344,3331,3361, 3363,4335,4364, 4365,4379,4381, 4391

Y

Communications BA with Secondary Certification 30 Y same Y

Drama BA 15 Y 3331,3334,4321, 4381,4391 Y

Drama BA with Secondary Certification 15+Ed 4322,4323 Y same Y

Journalism BA 42 Y

2311,2344,3313, 3317,3322,3335, 3361,3363,4322, 4325,4335,4364, 4365,4379

Y

Journalism BA with Secondary Certification 42 Y same Y

English BA 132 Y

All except 130C(37 upper division; 5 sophomore; 2 freshman)

Y

English BA (Writing Emphasis) 132 Y same Y

English BA with Secondary Certification

132+ Ed 4322,4323 Y same Y

English Developmental Program--Pre-Collegiate

n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

*The Art faculty require the flexibility to include talented students in studio courses whether or not they have completed Design I and Design II.


Chart 4A Continued

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL AND FINE

ARTS Elements of Recommendation



identified



descriptions

Support sequencing

above elementary

Government BA 75 Y All upper division (25) Y

Government BA (Criminal Justice) 12 n 3310, 4350, 4371,

4381 Y

Government BA with Secondary Certification +Ed 4322,4323 Y All upper division

(25) Y

History BA 105 Y All upper division (35) Y

History BA with Secondary Certification + Ed 4322,4323 Y Same Y

History

BA with Secondary Composite Social Studies Certification

105 Y Same Y

Mod. Languages BA (French) 27 y 1302,2311,2312, 3311,3323,3332, 4321,4327,4381

Y

Mod. Languages BA (French) with Secondary Certification

27 y Same Y

Mod. Languages BA (German) 30 y 1302,2311,2312, 2391,3311,3312, 3331,3342,4341, 4381

Y

Mod. Languages BA (German) with Secondary Certification

30 y Same Y

Mod. Languages BA (Spanish) 51 y

1302,2310,2311, 2312,2321,2322, 3311,3313,3314, 3315,3321,3323, 3325,3327,3332, 3333,4381

Y

Mod. Languages BA (Spanish) with Secondary Certification

51 y Same Y

Psychology & Sociology BA (Psychology) 69 Y All except

1303,2301,2304, Y

Psychology & Sociology BS (Psychology) 69 Y All except

1303,2301,2304, Y

Psychology & Sociology BA (Sociology) 9 Y 4301,4671 Y

Psychology & Sociology BS (Sociology) 9 Y 4301,4671 Y


Chart 4A Continued

COLLEGE OF SCIENCES Elements of Recommendation



identified



descriptions

Support sequencing

above elementary

Agriculture BS 38 Y

3342,3441,3443, 4181,4191,4391, 4242,4248,4342, 4343,4344,4346, 3332,4391

Y


3 Y 3441 Y

Biology BS 105 Y

1101,2401,2402, 2403,2424,3101, 3301,3302,3305, 3324,3403,3411, 3412,3413,3421, 4150,4191,4291, 4391,4303,4315, 4350,4381,4401, 4402,4404,4423, 4441,4443,4444, 4451,4480,

Y

Biology BS (Medical Technology)

30 Y Implied for all (7) Y


105 Y Same as for BS Y

Chemistry / Biochemistry BS 60 Y All except 4351

(25) Y



60 Y Same as BS Y

Mathematics BS 75 Y All but 130a and 130b Y

Mathematics BA 75 Y Same as BS (25) Y

Mathematics BS or BA with Secondary Certification

75 Y Same as BS (25) Y

Nursing Associate in Applied Science in Nursing - Associate

38 Y All (20) Y

Nursing BS 29 Y 3301,3303,3402, 3601,4301,4302, 4391,4601

Y

Physical Therapy No undergraduate n.a.

Physics BS (Applied Physics)

56 Y

1331,1342,2331, 2333,3331,3332, 3341,3342,3443, 3444,3461,4191, 4291,4391,4362, 4363,4452,5562,

Y

Physics BS (Physics) 56 Y Same as above Y


56 Y Same as above Y


Chart 4A Continued

School of Education Elements of Recommendation



identified



descriptions

Support sequencing

above elementary


27 n.a.

ECG3335,3337, 4305, RDG3331,3332, 3333,4301,4320, 4602, SPED3364,3365, 4362,4363,4364

Y

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee V-1

Article V

Recommendation 5 (4.2.5). The committee recommends that ASU conduct a

systematic program of undergraduate academic advising for all programs.


The committee noted that student surveys indicate that advising is effective.

However, it is conducted in a variety of ways depending on the needs of the departments.

The number of advisees ranges from 10 to 80 per advisor. Thirty faculty advisors

undertake to advise students who have not declared a major. At least one program

indicated that a systematic method of advising would be appreciated.


The Center for Academic Excellence, established in Summer, 2001, includes the

Office of Academic Advising. Two advisors have been working primarily with

undeclared students. By August 1, 2002, the Center hopes to hire a Director of Academic

Advising, and by September 1, 2002, a fourth advisor. The principal responsibilities of

the Director will be to provide quality support for academic departments’ advising

programs and to address the needs of at-risk students, defined as undeclared, provisional,

and probationary students. The job anouncement for the Director’s position and the

position description for the advisor are attached.

When the advising of all undeclared students moves to the Office of Academic

Advising, the 30 faculty members who currently undertake this assignment will be

released back to their academic departments, a move which will greatly improve the

average number of advisees per faculty advisor.

The Advising Committee developed two options for a systematic program of

undergraduate academic advising for the consideration of the Deans and Department


Heads at their June meeting. The preferred system, which will go into effect with the

printing of the next Bulletin and class schedule (during Fall, 2002), is as follows:

Since the needs and faculty resources of each department are so varied, a single

prescribed method would be counterproductive. Therefore, each department will publish

a standard advising procedure for majors which will include (1) the advising period and

advising times; (2) the way to find a faculty advisor and (3) the preferred method of

contact with the advisors. The policy was approved by the Deans and Department Heads

at their June 20, 2002, meeting. The departmental advisement information appears as

Attachment 5C of this section.


Attachment 5A

Job announcement, Director of Academic Advising


Attachment 5B

Position Description, Advisor


Attachment 5C Advising Policies (by College)

Academic Advising: Requirements and Contact Information

College of Business and Professional Studies

Accounting, Economics, and Finance Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of assigned advisors is posted throughout the departmental office suite. Students are encouraged to contact their assigned advisor directly, or they may contact the departmental secretary to make arrangements. Aerospace Studies All contract cadets, ROTC students who have been awarded a scholarship, must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Advising instructions and assignment of advisors is provided to each student in the syllabus on the first day of class each semester. The department encourages each student/cadet to contact the departmental secretary if their instructor/advisor has not arranged to meet with each student by the mid-point of each semester. Computer Science Students must see an advisor each semester until they have earned at least 90 semester credit hours and filed a degree plan with the Dean of the College. Students may seek the assistance of an advisor at any time. A list of advisors is posted in the departmental office suite. Students seeking advisement may contact their advisor directly or they may contact the departmental secretary to schedule an appointment. Kinesiology Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available advisors is posted throughout applicable campus buildings. Students are encouraged to contact their assigned advisor directly, or they may contact the departmental secretary to make arrangements. Management and Marketing Students must see an advisor each semester until they have earned at least 60 semester credit hours and filed a degree plan with the Dean of the College. A list of available advisors is posted throughout applicable campus buildings. Students are encouraged to contact their assigned advisor directly, or they may contact the departmental secretary to make arrangements.


College of Liberal and Fine Arts

Art and Music Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available advisors is included in a departmental student handbook that is circulated to all art and music majors. Students are encouraged to contact their assigned advisor directly, or they may contact the departmental secretary to make arrangements.

Communications, Drama, and Journalism Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Students are encouraged to contact the departmental office to receive their advisor assignment.

English Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of pre-assigned advisors is maintained by the department’s Advising Committee. Students may contact the department secretary or department head for their assignment and additional advisement information. Government Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available advisors is posted on faculty office doors and in the departmental office. Students are encouraged to contact their assigned advisor directly, or they may contact the departmental secretary to make arrangements.

History Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Students are encouraged to report to the departmental office for detailed instructions.

Modern Languages Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Dr. Edith Krause advises Spanish and German majors while Dr. Elisbeth-Christine Muelsch advises French majors. Students are encouraged to schedule a time for advisement by using the sign-up sheets posted on their office doors.

Psychology and Sociology Students must see an advisor each semester until they have earned at least 60 semester credit hours. A list of available faculty advisors is available in the departmental office. Students are also encouraged to visit the departmental web site for advisement information.


College of Sciences

Agriculture Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. The department will match advisor with students in their area of concentration. Students are encouraged to contact the departmental secretary to obtain their advising assignment. Biology Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available advisors is posted in the department office. Students are encouraged to contact the departmental secretary or department head for more information. Chemistry and Biochemistry Students, including pre-pharmacy majors, must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Students are encouraged to contact the department head to obtain further information. Mathematics Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. Notices are posted prior to each formal advising period directing students to pick up a class schedule booklet in the departmental office. At that time they receive detailed instructions regarding advising procedures. Nursing All new nursing department students in AASN and BSN programs will have initial advising by the respective program level director. From that point through graduation, students will have a permanent nursing faculty advisor. Advising is required prior to each semester registration. The MSN program advisor and director will advise graduate students, and advising is required prior to each semester registration. The nursing department head is also available to advise students in all three nursing programs. Students are encouraged to contact the department secretary or department head for additional information. Physical Therapy All pre-physical therapy students will be initially advised by the ASU pre-physical therapy advisor in the Department of Physical Therapy. From the point of program admission through graduation, students will be assigned a permanent physical therapy faculty advisor. Students may contact the Department of Physical Therapy for additional information. Physics Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available faculty advisors is available in the departmental office. Students are encouraged to contact the department secretary or department head for additional information.


School of Education

Students must see an advisor each semester until they graduate. A list of available faculty advisors is available in the dean’s office. Students are encouraged to contact the dean’s secretary or the dean for additional information.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee VI-1

Article VI

Recommendation 6 (4.3.4). The committee recommends that the university assess

placement of graduate students in their fields of study and demonstrate the effective

relationship between curricular content and current practices in those fields of

specialization.


The Committee recorded that there is no systematic follow-up of graduates and

assessment of graduates’ placements in the field.


The difficulty of assessment of master’s level graduates’ job placements is similar

to that for undergraduates, discussed under Recommendation 2. That is, the agency that

formerly compiled such information, the Texas Workforce Commission, is no longer able

to obtain the data from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, which has been

directed by the Department of Education, citing FERPA concerns, to cease redisclosing

student data. Another agency, the State Board of Educator Certification, had promised to

share placement data for certified teachers but has failed to do so.

Consequently, ASU is relying on locally generated information to assess

placement of master’s level graduates.

The alumni survey administered to all graduates, baccalaureate or master’s level,

has been particularly unsatisfactory for master’s level graduates. It was discontinued in

the summer of 2002 and replaced by a survey administered by the graduate school.

This survey is sent 30 days after graduation. Among the items are 11 that inquire

about job placement or acceptance to a program of advanced study. A copy of the survey

is attached (Attachment 6A).


Job placement is not the only source of information about current practices in the

field. Programs in Education, Agriculture, Physical Therapy, and the MBA all have

advisory boards; these departments and programs include some of ASU’s largest

graduate populations. Advisory boards will be used more frequently and more

effectively to define current practices in the field for these programs.


ASU must assess placement of master’s level graduates in their fields of study

and must demonstrate the relationship between curriculum and current practices in those

fields of specialization.

Response to Recommendation As of July 1, 2002, the following procedures were set in place:

(1) Recent graduates will be sent a survey 30 days after graduation; the survey

will ask for employment information, including questions about preparation for

employment or advanced graduate study.

(2) Based on responses to the survey, the departments will re-examine and adjust

their curricula and instruction. Each program will submit a report to the Graduate

Council by December 15 of each year.

(3) The survey focuses on the curricula and their relationship to current practices.

It includes items about instruction as well.

(4) Departments with Advisory Boards will collect information about current

practices in the field. These departments or programs are Education, Agriculture, the

MBA, and Physical Therapy. These include some of ASU’s largest graduate programs.


Many departments have developed their own surveys of their master’s level

graduates. These include items connecting curriculum and practice in the field. Two

departments also survey employers. Chart 8A shows how the departments use these data.


Attachment 6A Survey of Master’s Level Graduates

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee VII-1

Article VII

Recommendation 7 (4.3.5). The committee recommends that the university

implement the frequent systematic evaluation of graduate curricular offerings and

program requirements.


The Committee noted that the University has developed plans for more systematic

curricular review of graduate programs, as outlined in the Academic Master Plan 2000,

but has yet to document frequent and systematic review.


Formal program review began in AY 2002, the first reports being submitted in the

spring semester. Two of the first three departments under review have graduate

programs. The first of these, History, completed before the reaffirmation committee’s

visit, included the graduate program as part of its general review. The other,

Management and Marketing, was scheduled for external review during the summer of

2002, and the changes described below applied to that review. The external reviewer’s

report on the MBA program is exemplary in its thoroughness and will be a valuable guide

to the College of Business and Professional Studies.

Separate program reviews must now be conducted for graduate and undergraduate

programs within a department. External reviewers must be invited for graduate and for

undergraduate programs. Review of curriculum is central in the process.

The program reviews will use the survey results mentioned in the responses to

Recommendation 6 above and Recommendation 8 below. They will focus on the future,

rather than the past, of the program. That is, they will identify necessary improvements

in curriculum and instruction, some of which will be identified by the survey responses.


Results from the program review should be incorporated into the Institutional

Effectiveness process when appropriate.

The schedule established in the Academic Master Plan 2000 is still in effect, with

one department from each college undergoing review each year. The School of

Education’s review is ongoing until NCATE accreditation is achieved, after which it will

follow that body’s schedule.

The program review policy is attached (Attachment 7A). The review schedule is

on the second page. Departments with graduate programs are asterisked.


Attachment 7A

ANGELO STATE UNIVERSITY

San Angelo, Texas

PROGRAM REVIEW

JANUARY 17, 2002

A Member of The Texas State University System


Purpose of Program Review The primary purpose of the academic review process at Angelo State University is to examine such factors essential to the improvement of academic programs, as measured by the quality of the faculty, student learning, library and other educational resources, the curriculum, and available facilities. Program review is closely linked to institutional mission, effectiveness, planning, and budgeting. Through an examination of programmatic strengths and weaknesses, plans are developed, implemented, assessed, and renewed to support a campus culture of continuous quality improvement. When academic program review is done well, everyone benefits. Faculty and administration gain a deeper understanding of the university’s academic programs. Through a process of formative and summative review, clear, collegial agreements are developed to address goals for the future, including the requisite allocation of available resources. Moreover, Angelo State University becomes increasingly accountable to its students, the taxpayers of Texas, and other supporters for the quality of its product. Goals of Program Review The fundamental goals of program review are to:

• Assess program quality, effectiveness, demand, and efficiency.

• Integrate inherent program review assessment activities with ongoing efforts in institutional effectiveness and accreditation.

• Contribute to the institution’s strategic planning and budgeting processes.

• Provide a venue for the sharing of information that is utilized campus-wide for

ongoing programmatic improvement.

• Build on the University’s tradition of excellence by enhancing its reputation for academic quality.

Guidelines for Program Review The following guidelines are offered as a means to define the program review process and to aid in the development of report content.

• The review will be evaluative and not just descriptive. It will contain a frank analysis, both quantitative and qualitative, of available data and information.

• The review will focus on a program’s strengths and weaknesses. It will look at the

program as a whole and determine the appropriateness of current offerings.


• The review will be goal oriented. Departmental goals will be linked to the university’s mission and an assessment of progress toward these goals will be provided.

• The review will be forward looking. An action plan of clearly ordered priorities

and identified strategies will be provided. Schedule of Program Reviews 2001-2009 Angelo State University conducts academic program review based on a seven-year cycle. Where possible and appropriate, program review within a department has been scheduled to coincide with external accreditation; however, external accreditation does not serve as a substitute for program review. The following schedule indicates the year of review for departments and their specific programs.

2001-2002 2002-2003 Education Chemistry/Biochemistry History Art and Music Management and Marketing Physics 2003-2004 2004-2005 Aerospace Studies *Agriculture *Biology *Communications, Drama, and Journalism *Government 2005-2006 2006-2007 Computer Science *Kinesiology Mathematics *Nursing Modern Languages *English

2008-2009 *Accounting, Economics, & Finance *Education *Physical Therapy *History *Psychology and Sociology *Management and Marketing Physics * indicates at least one graduate program in the department.


Timetable of Program Review • VPAA notifies department head and dean(s) of program(s) under review. (January) • Department head, dean(s), AVPAA, and IPRA representative meet to discuss review

process and format. (January) • Department head prepares program review with the full participation of faculty.

(February – August). • Department head, dean(s), and AVPAA meet to review the report and the choice of

external reviewer(s). (Summer) • Dean(s) issue formal invitation to external reviewer(s). (Summer) • Department head forwards completed program review report to the external reviewer

at least two weeks prior to the on-campus visit. (August) • External reviewer completes campus visitation. (September) • External reviewer forwards completed external review report to department head

within fourteen days of departure. (October) • Department head and faculty meet to prepare recommendations based on internal and

external reviews. (October) • Department head forwards program review report, external review report, and

recommendations to dean(s) by November 1. • Dean(s) prepare written commentary and forward reports with commentary to

AVPAA by November 8. • VPAA, AVPAA, dean(s), department head and faculty (as appropriate) meet to

discuss the results of the program review. Discussion will be centered on recommendations presented in the reports, possible budget implications, and steps to be completed in support of the recommendations. (November)

• AVPAA completes a memorandum of understanding based on the discussion of the meeting(s) and forwards to department head, dean(s), VPAA and President. (December)

• Department head discusses memorandum with faculty to promote understanding and to advance implementation. (January)

• Deans, AVPAA, VPAA, and President apply program review findings to academic planning and budgeting processes. (February – March)

• Progress achieved in support of the memorandum of understanding will be included in the annual reports of the department heads. (Summer - Annually)

Components of the Program Review Report In consultation with their academic dean, department heads will identify an appropriate format for the program review report. One of the following options is to be followed. 1) Department heads may choose to follow a predefined format, as offered by a national

agency, that is professionally and academically associated with their program.


2) Department heads may choose to follow and address, as appropriate, the following components of the University’s suggested format.

A. Overview of the Program

a. Departmental mission and goals b. Brief history of the program c. National and local need for the program d. Special areas of expertise, or other unique aspects

B. Students

a. Demographics i. Total number of students served per year by age, ethnicity, and

gender ii. Number of majors, minors

iii. Number of full-time/part-time students b. Admissions and recruitment

i. Admissions requirements ii. Number and percent of applicants, admits, and matriculants

iii. Recruitment efforts by departments c. Financial aid

i. Number and percent of students on financial aid; ration of grant-to-loan funds

ii. Number of teaching and/or graduate assistantships and selection criteria

d. Academic progress and degree completion i. Number of degrees awarded annually

ii. Average time to degree iii. Average number of credits actually taken for the degree iv. Attrition in the first, second, and third years

e. Student outcomes i. Placement statistics

ii. Student satisfaction with program iii. Percentages of students who obtain licensure or certification iv. Student awards, fellowships, publications, presentations, etc.

C. Faculty

a. Demographics i. Number of full-time, tenured or tenure-track faculty by rank and

by age, ethnicity, and gender ii. Number of full-time, non-tenure track faculty by rank, age,

ethnicity, and gender iii. Number and percent of part-time faculty iv. Number of retiring faculty and number of new faculty in the last

three years

b. Qualifications


i. Degrees held ii. Percent tenured

iii. Special awards and distinctions (professional society fellows, national or international award recipients, national fellowship holders, etc.)

iv. Research and scholarly work v. Externally funded research or projects

c. Contribution to program i. Average teaching load

ii. Number of independent study, thesis, research, etc. students and distribution across the department

iii. Responsibility for student advisement d. Recruitment

D. Curriculum

a. Description of curriculum b. Course enrollments c. Course cycling (frequency of offerings) d. Process of curriculum development and revision e. Modes of instruction

E. Program Support Services

a. Library, computer and other technology-related facilities, laboratories, office space, classroom space, equipment, overall environment

b. Student services c. Budget resources d. Support staff

F. Cooperative Relationships with Other Departments, Agencies, or Businesses

a. Interdisciplinary projects b. Internships, clinical placements, practica c. Joint degree programs

G. Overall Assessment of Program

a. Strengths and weaknesses b. Goals for improvement

Selection of External Reviewer(s) The selection of an external reviewer should result from a collaborative process involving the department head and the college/school dean(s). The external reviewer should be well qualified to undertake the review, able to conduct the review in a professional manner, and prepared to submit the report in a timely fashion. Reviewers may be best qualified and most helpful if they come from peer institutions. Consideration may be given to


either in-state or out-of-state reviewers, although travel expenses should be kept at a reasonable level. A list of suggested regional institutions follows.

Texas: Midwestern State University, Sam Houston State University, Southwest Texas State University, Stephen F. Austin State University, Tarleton State University, or Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi.

Out-of-State: Central Oklahoma (or another regional Oklahoma institution), Central Arkansas, Northern Colorado, Adams State (Colorado), Eastern New Mexico, or Western Missouri (or another regional Missouri institution).

Generally, the use of one reviewer is sufficient when dealing with a single undergraduate program. The use of multiple reviewers may be necessary when both the undergraduate and graduate programs are being reviewed, and in instances where the program contains component areas requiring separate review. Consideration should be given to provide an honorarium and to cover the travel (airfare or mileage) and lodging expenses of the external reviewer. It is suggested that for the undertaking, an honorarium of $800 be offered. Coupled with the aforementioned expenses, most external reviews would cost within the range of $1,200-$1,500. Relevant academic units at the departmental, college/school, and university levels will cover the cost of the external review jointly. The Dean of the College in which the program is located and/or the Dean of the Graduate School as appropriate should formally extend the invitation to the external reviewer. Upon acceptance, a signed University Agreement and Requisition Order must be submitted for payment. Charge to External Reviewer(s) Program review represents a significant opportunity for the improvement of Angelo State University’s undergraduate and graduate programs. We recognize that the strength of the University as a whole is based on our ability to meet the needs of our students by providing high levels of quality learning. To this end, program review provides a vehicle for reflection and projection in support of the ongoing evolution inherent in our academic programs. External reviewers are asked to focus on specific strengths of the program and address ways in which these strengths can be maintained or expanded upon. Identification of program weaknesses is also of great importance and we ask that reviewers provide suggestions for improvement, highlighting areas of best practice as appropriate. In support of the program review, we request that reviewers:


• Read the department program review report, which will be provided in advance of their visit.

• Visit with departmental faculty individually while on campus.

• Visit with students who are majoring in the undergraduate and graduate programs

while on campus.

• Review relationships of the department and its programs with relevant component departments and offices of the University while on campus.

• Review a representative sample of Master’s Theses in appropriate areas.

• Submit a written report within fourteen days of departure that addresses

departmental strengths and weaknesses; provides suggestions for further improvement; and identifies pertinent resources including best practices.

Schedule of Activities for the External Reviewer(s)

The following itinerary is offered to aid in the completion of the external review.

Day 1 • Tour of program facilities. • Interview with department head and individual faculty members. • Review of relevant resources (libraries, computer labs, internship sites, etc.) • Dinner with departmental faculty and staff. Day 2 • Interview with students in the undergraduate and/or graduate programs. • Interview with associated academic administrators and University officials. • Concluding visit with department head and assembled faculty. Reviewers should plan to arrive the afternoon or evening before review activities commence. Departure may be scheduled for late afternoon following the concluding visit with the department head and assembled faculty.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee VIII-1

Article VIII

Recommendation 8 (4.3.5). The committee recommends that the university

implement frequent, systematic evaluation and data gathering to test the

effectiveness of graduate instruction, and if appropriate, revise the instructional

process based on the results of the evaluations.


The Committee noted that one area in need of improvement with reference to

graduate instruction is follow-up of graduate students and their employers.


This recommendation is related to Recommendation 1, as noted by the

Committee, and to Recommendation 6. The limitations of data-gathering noted in this

report’s response to Recommendation 1 also apply here; that is, the Department of

Education’s instruction to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to cease

redisclosing almost all student information because of FERPA concerns and the failure of

SBEC to provide promised teacher placement data apply to graduate students as well.

Therefore, all information about job placement must come from our own surveys.

Two surveys of master’s level alumni provide information on employment and

preparation. These are the surveys sent to graduates 30 days after graduation and the

alumni surveys which are being improved as described in the response to

Recommendation 2. As responses identify employers who employ five or more ASU

master’s program alumni, these employers will be surveyed about the performance of

those alumni in the aggregate.


Additionally, the IDEA evaluation of instruction will be administered every time

a graduate course is offered. Currently, only fall semester courses are required to be

assessed using this instrument.

Response to Recommendation

Chart 8A shows which graduate programs use the university’s alumni survey

(AS) or a departmental survey (DS) to track placement of graduate alumni in advanced

study or in degree-related employment. Two departments survey employers as well.

Four use the information to adjust curricula. None makes an explicit connection between

placement and instruction. The Physical Therapy program, which will graduate its first

class in 2002, will use placement information to make curricular adjustments. The

university level alumni survey includes several items related to master’s level graduates’

employment. Additonally, all students are now surveyed three months after graduation

by the graduate school. This survey contains some items related to employment (see

Attachment 6A). All graduate programs will use this information in the future (see

Attachment 1A, Revised Standards for Academic Programs).


Chart 8A

Placement of Graduate Alumni in Employment or Advanced Graduate Study

Program Placement Employer Curriculum Instruction Accounting MBA DS Kinesiology MS DS DS X Management & Marketing MBA DS Communications MA—new; no graduates

English MA AS X Government MPA DS X History MA DS Psychology MS DS Agriculture MS DS Biology MS DS Nursing MS DS DS X Physical Therapy—new; no graduates (DS) (X)

Education MA and MED AS X DS = Departmental Survey AS = Alumni Survey After July, 2002, all departments will also use the survey administered by the Graduate School to assess placement and the relation of curricula to current practices. Instruction is assessed primarily by the IDEA evaluation of instruction but is included in the Graduate School’s survey.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee IX-1

Article IX

Recommendation 9 (4.5). The committee recommends that the university formulate

clear and explicit goals for its distance education program and demonstrate that

they are consistent with the university’s purpose.


The distance learning committee had been appointed but had not yet met by the

time of the Committee’s visit. The university had not formulated goals for its distance

learning programs.


The charge of the ad hoc distance learning committee was to formulate the

university’s distance learning plan as required by the Texas Higher Education

Coordinating Board. The committee met during the spring of 2001and drafted a plan

based on the structure suggested by THECB.

The plan was offered to the Deans and Department Heads at its June 20, 2002,

meeting and was approved by the Administrative Council at its July 9, 2002, meeting. It

will be submitted to the THECB before its September 2003 deadline.

The plan establishes consistency with the university’s purpose by referring to the

Mission Statement: “Both traditional and technological learning resources are utilized in

instruction and research and to provide special services and programs of continuing

education and distance education, which contribute to the cultural and economic welfare

of the region served by the University.”

The plan appears as Attachment 9A to this section.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee IX-2

Attachment 9A

Distance Learning Plan

ANGELO STATE UNIVERSITY

San Angelo, Texas

INSTITUTIONAL PLAN FOR DISTANCE LEARNING AND

OFF-CAMPUS INSTRUCTION 2002-2007

A hard copy is available by contacting Dr. Beck (Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs)

VERSION 2002.1

A Member of The Texas State University System

Table of Contents

.............................................................................. . Part 1 Introduction 1

..................................... . Part 2A Degree and Certificate Programs Exported 2

..................................... Part 2B . Degree and Certificate Programs Imported 3

........................................................................ Part 3 . Institutional Plan 4

.......................................................... Section 1 . Institutional Issues 4

...................................................... Section 2 . Educational Programs 7

........................................................................ Section 3 . Faculty 10

................................................. Section 4 . Student Support Services 12

Section 5 . Distance Education Facilities and Support Services ................. 15

Appendices ......................................................................................... 17

Item A . Memorandum on Principles of Good Practice .......................... 17

Item B . BSN Student Handbook Excerpt of Student Policies .................. 18

Item C . Additional Question in IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction ....... 30

Item D . Tenure and Promotion Policy Excerpts ................................... 31

Item E . Texas State University System Copyright Policy ....................... 36

Item F . Listing of Contracted Clinical Agencies .................................. 41

Angelo State University Institutional Plan for Distance Learning

and Off-Campus Instruction, Version 2002.1 2002-2007

Part 1. Introduction

As part of its ongoing efforts to provide quality distance education programs and courses to students across the state of Texas and beyond, Angelo state University has developed its Institutional Plan for Distance Learning and 08-Campus Instruction. The plan serves as both benchmark and guide for ASU's distance education program. It was generated through the collective efforts of the Distance Learning Committee, a representative campus body with broad-based participation as highlighted below.

Ms. Elaine Beach Dr. Richard Beck, Chair Dr. Carol Diminnie Dr. Maurice Fortin Mr. Doug Fox Dr. Deborrah Hebert Ms. Mitzie Keeling Maj. Darcy Maloney Dr. John Miazga Dr. Edward Russell Dr. June Smith

Information Technology Center for Academic Excellence Graduate School Porter Henderson Library Information Technology Student Life Admissions Department of Aerospace Studies School of Education Department of Nursing Department of Communications, Drama, and Journalism

The plan was reviewed by the Council of Deans, the Council of Deans and Department Heads, and the Administrative Council prior to receiving final approval. It is updated every five years and serves as a reference for the institution's submissions to other state and federally recognized accrediting and credentialing agencies.

Part 2A. Degree and Certificate Programs Exported Via Distance Education and Off-Campus Delivery

*Distance Education is defined in CB Rules 5.152 as: Instruction in which the majority of the instruction occurs when the student and instructor are not in the same physical setting. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous to any single or multiple location(s): (A) Other than the "main campus" of a senior institution (or "on campus"), where the primary office of the chief executive officer of the campus is located; (B) Outside the boundaries of the taxing authority of a community/junior college district; or (C) Via instructional telecommunications to any other distant location, including electronic delivery of all types.

Program Name and Degree Designation

BS in Nursing

Off-campus Education is defined as: Instruction in which one-half or more of the instruction is delivered with the instructor and student in the same physical location and which meets one of the following criteria: for senior institutions, Lamar state colleges, or public technical colleges, off-campus locations are locations away from the main campus; for public community/junior colleges, off-campus locations are locations outside the taxing district

Program CIP Code

51.1601.00

Credit [C]/ Non-Credit

[NCl

C

Current [C] or Next

Year [NY] Program

C

Percent Delivered by Distance or Off-Campus Education

48

Type of Delivery

Internet

Delivered Where and to Individuals [Il or

Groups [GI

Computers [I]

Part 2B. Degree and Certificate Programs Imported Via Distance Education and Off-Campus Delivery

*Distance Education is defined in CB Rules 5.152 as: Instruction in which the majority of the instruction occurs when the student and instructor are not in the same physical setting. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous to any single or multiple location(s): (A) Other than the "main campus" of a senior institution (or "on campus"), where the primary office of the chief executive officer of the campus is located; (B) Outside the boundaries of the taxing authority of a communityljunior college district; or (C) Via instructional telecommunications to any other distant location, including electronic delivery of all types.

Off-campus Education is defined as: Instruction in which one-half or more of the instruction is delivered with the instructor and student in the same physical location and which meets one of the following criteria: for senior institutions, Lamar state colleges, or public technical colleges, off-campus locations are locations away from the main campus; for public cornmunity/junior colleges, off-campus locations are locations outside the taxing district

Program Name and Degree Designation

Not Applicable

Current [C] or Next Year [NY]

Program

Program CIP Code

Percent Delivered by Distance or Off Campus Education

Credit [C] or Non-Credit [NC]

Type of Delivery Received From

Part 3. Institutional Plan

Section 1. Institutional Issues

1. (YES) The institution documents compliance with The Principles of Good Practice for Electronically Offered Academic Degree and Cerh$caie Programs.

Angelo State University (ASU) hereby affirms that it is in compliance with The Principles of Good Practice for Electronically Offered Academic Degree and Certificate Programs as stated in the attached memorandum from the Vice President for Academic Affairs (Appendix Item A). Additionally, as of June 2002, each distance education course proposal will include a completed Checklist for Incorporating the Principles of Good Practice into Electronically-Based Courses, which will verify and document compliance. Documentation will be archived in the Office of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs.

2. (YES) Distance education is consistent with the institution's educational mission.

"Both traditional and technological learning resources are utilized in instruction and research and to provide special services and programs of continuing education and distance education, which contribute to the cultural and economic welfare of the region served by the University." ASU Mission Statement

ASU's web-based Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) program and Master of Science in Nursing courses play a primary role in fulfilling this portion of the institutional mission, specifically by addressing the needs of nontraditional students through distance education.

3. (YES) The institution has an assessment process for evaluating the rationale behind the proposal of complete degree and certificate programs for delivery via distance education.

A number of factors have influenced the scope and direction of ASU's distance education program. The institution ran its first needs assessment in 1995, which resulted in the identification of certain types of classes, particularly professional (graduate) and continuing education classes that had a distance education market in the fifteen county area surrounding San Angelo. In 1997, the University of Texas of the Permian Basin requested that ASU consider an exchange of courses in criminal justice and public administration. In the same year, Stamford Independent School District requested that graduate course work be offered by ASU for teachers in the surrounding school districts. During the 1998 fall 'semester and following a regional needs assessment, the Nursing Department test marketed an upper-division nursing course that ultimately led to the online BSN.

In all instances, the department head is the first to evaluate the validity of the rationale for the proposed program. If approved, the proposal filters through the

college or school dean to the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, who oversees distance education at ASU. Once approved, the proposal is forwarded to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who then reviews it with the President. Typically, independent confirmation is sought from students, faculty, administrators, and employers as to the need for and the projected viability of the proposed program. Upon approval of the President, programs are subject to curricular development and approval procedures as outlined in section 2, item 1 of this document.

4. (YES) The institution evaluates the overall effectiveness of its distance education program by assessing progress toward meeting its institutional goals. The evaluation outcomes are incorporated into the institution's overall institutional effectiveness efforts.

Elements of the institution's traditional and technological learning resources have been melded to provide programs in distance education that contribute to the economic welfare of the region. Through its Institutional Effectiveness process, ASU monitors programmatic outcomes and their associated impact on institutional mission and goals. Programs, such as the online BSN, typically track course completion, state licensure examination rates, job placement rates, and employer satisfaction. Outcomes of these assessments are furnished to the Institutional Effectiveness Oversight Committee and subsequently compiled in the Annual Report on Institutional Effectiveness. The president reviews the findings with each of the vice presidents, and they in turn review the findings with their constituent programs. Opportunities for the overall advancement of the institution are identified, corresponding institutional effectiveness plans are developed, and the cycle of Institutional Effectiveness begins anew.

5. (YES) The institution has an officer responsible for distance learning in a position that is appropriate for the institution and the size of the distance education program.

The Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs (AVPAA) is the officer responsible for the distance education program at ASU. The AVPAA reports directly to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and has line responsibility for the Center for Academic Excellence. Distance education responsibilities are well placed in that the AVPAA is heavily involved in matters relating to cumculum, budget, technology, retention, and academic excellence. The AVPAA is a member of the Administrative Council, the Advising Committee, the Budget Committee, the Deans Council, the Deans and Department Heads Council, the Distance Education Committee, the Retention Committee, the University Cumculum Committee, and the University Technology Committee. Given the scope of activities of these various committees, the AVPAA is well informed and uniquely positioned to provide leadership over the many facets inherent in distance education.

A recent restructuring has also brought the area of Student Life under the Office of ~cadernic Affairs, thereby facilitating the amalgamation of academic affairs and

student affairs. It is anticipated that this restructuring will increase the level of service for all ASU students, including those involved in distance education.

6. (YES) The institution has established requirements for admissions, satisfactory student progress, and graduation requirements for distance education.

Admission criteria, satisfactory student progress expectations, and graduation requirements are the same for distance education and on-campus students. The BSN online completion program is the only currently active distance education program at ASU (although the MSN program offers one online distance education course per semester, it is not an online program). Admission criteria, course requirements, syllabi, clinical practicum instruction, and requirements for satisfactory student progress and for graduation are outlined in the Bachelors of Science in Nursing Student Handbook, which is readily available to students via the web. (Appendix Item B) http://www.angelo.eduldeptlnursing/bsn~bsnhandbook%20.pdf

7. (YES) Policies relevant to transcripting, grading, and transfer credentials are in place.

General statements and corresponding policies relevant to transcripting, grading, and transfer credentials are included in the Angelo State University Bulletin, which is available to student in print form through the Office of Admissions or in electronic form via the ASU web site. These statements and policies are equally applicable to distance education students and on-campus students. ASU transcripts do not differentiate between courses earned on-campus and courses earned via distance education. http://www.angelo.edu~cstudent/university~catalog_2001.htm

8. (YES) The institution has a process in place to address the needs of distance learners who fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

ASU is committed to the principle that no qualified individual with a disability shall, on the basis of disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of the University, or be subjected to discrimination by the University, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

Distance education students with a documented disability, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act, may contact the Office of the Associate Dean of Student Life. To the extent possible, the faculty and administration will make a reasonable accommodation to assist qualified disabled individuals in meeting their degree requirements. The office is accessible by e-mail, phone andlor the "disability services" portion of the ASU web site. http:Nwww.angelo.edulservices/student~life/disabili ty-services.htm

9. (YES) SACS and other professional credentialing agencies have been notified, as appropriate.

On July 21, 1998, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) was notified by Angelo State University of a substantive change in technology-based instruction. In its reply, SACS found that given the limited scope of ASU1s activities, no further action would be required until the institution offered 50% or more of the credits in an educational program via distance learning. On July 29,2001 and in advance of its on-site reaccreditation visit, SACS was notified by ASU that forty- eight percent of the BSN program was offered online. SACS, in its reply, reiterated the need to complete a substantive change once the threshold had been crossed.

The National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (NLNAC) has accredited the online BSN and MSN programs through fall 2007 and fall 2004 respectively.

10. (YES) The institution has sufficient financial resources to initiate and sustain quality distance learning courses and programs, and the support services that accompany them, and a process by which funding is distributed to support distance education.

To provide financial assistance to faculty members who are interested in developing distance education courses, ASU offers funding through its Technology Development Grant Program and Faculty Development and Enrichment Program. These programs are annually funded at $40,000 and $50,000 respectively. Faculty members who have been funded through these programs typically receive a one or two course load release during the summer and financial assistance to cover associated professional development expenditures.

It is the responsibility of the associated academic and support service departments to request sufficient funds to support quality distance education offerings. Through an annual budget process that is linked to institutional effectiveness, departments receive education and general (E&G) support from both state and local funds. The bulk of the technological infrastructure is supported through Higher Education Assistance Fund (HEAF) allocations.

Given the relatively small size of the ASU distance education program, funding is sufficient to maintain current operations. However, should the program be slated for growth, additional sources of revenue would be necessary. It is anticipated that a distance education fee would be instituted in support thereof.

Section 2. Educational Proprams

1. (YES) The institution has procedures in place for planning, development, approval and review of quality distance education programs; and for meeting external accrediting bodies standards.

As with all matters pertaining to curriculum planning, development, approval and review, the processes at ASU are rigorous. Proposed distance education programs are planned and developed by the faculty in consultation with their peers, the administration, and appropriate accrediting agencies. Completed proposals are delivered to the department head for approval and then forwarded to the college or school dean as appropriate. Upon receipt the dean will forward the proposal for a distance education program to the college or school curriculum committee. After review by the committee, the proposal is sent to the dean for approval. The proposal then is forwarded to the university curriculum committee for approval. The registrar then reviews and forwards distance education programs to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Once approved by the Vice President and President, distance education programs are then forwarded to the Board of Regents of The Texas State University System for review. Upon approval, the distance education programs are submitted to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and ultimately to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and/or other accrediting bodies as appropriate.

ASU's method for the assessment of distance education offerings is multifaceted. Course instruction is assessed via the online version of the IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction. Use of this instrument has allowed the Nursing Department to include an additional ten online-specific questions that cover overall student satisfaction with their distance education experience. Based on evaluative feedback, curricular improvements have been implemented in NUR 3601 and 4602, which included a modification of student project requirements; and in NUR 4302, which included a modification from a non-clinical to a clinical format.

Since 1997, the University has completed annual cycles of planning and reporting via a web-based institutional effectiveness system. All departments are required to submit two documents: a plan that outlines the department's connection to the mission statement and the objectives it wants to achieve, along with two separate means of assessing each objective; and a report that lists the results of the assessment and how these results will be used to improve unit quality. The departments submit their reports to the Institutional Effectiveness Oversight Committee, which then provides suggestions to each department and presents an annual report on overall institutional effectiveness to the President.

In the 2001 fall semester, ASU implemented the process of programmatic review, the primary purpose of which is to examine such factors essential to the improvement of academic programs, as measured by the quality of the faculty, student learning, library and other educational resources, the curriculum, and available facilities. Program review is closely linked to institutional mission, effectiveness, planning, and budgeting. Through an examination of programmatic strengths and weaknesses, plans are developed, implemented, assessed, and renewed to support a campus culture of continuous quality improvement. Departments undergoing review will address their distance learning components as appropriate.

2. (YES) The institution has plans/procedures for assessing student learning outcomes, student retention, and student satisfaction in its distance education programs and courses; and for using the results of the assessment to improve courses and programs.

The Policy and Procedure Guide for Institutional Efectiveness, developed in 1998, outlines the guidelines for developing and submitting institutional effectiveness plans and reports. Each academic unit must have a purpose statement and three to five objectives statements addressing quality of education. These are assessed both quantitatively and qualitatively, and at least one means of assessment must rely on student performance.

The BSN program, with the assistance of the Office of Institutional Planning, Research, and Assessment, has assessed three student learning outcomes. 87.5% of BSN graduates had found employment at the time the survey was completed. Employers had rated BSN graduates between "above average" and "well above average" in the level of competency and professionalism displayed. 63% of BSN graduates had supported professional nursing associations and were active at the state, regional, and national levels. Each of these student learning outcomes exceeded the established benchmark. It is anticipated that the assessments performed by the BSN program will serve as a model and template for future distance education programs.

As with on-campus programs, student retention in the distance education program is tracked by the academic department. Semester by semester, course enrollments are monitored by the department head as cohorts progress through the program. Significant levels of attrition are noted and steps are taken to address any discrepancies.

Student satisfaction with their distance education program has been tracked through the use of the IDEA Rating of Student Instruction. This instrument allows for the inclusion of questions to assess student satisfaction. A representative sample of these questions and a composite average of student responses have been included as Appendix Item C. Overall student satisfaction in the online BSN has been very positive.

Results of these assessments have led to a number of curricular changes in the online BSN program including a reapportioning of the practicum and lecture components in NUR 3301,3303, and 4302. Additionally, the Department has chosen to use the HESI exam over the NLN CAT exam, as it is more reflective of programmatic goals.

3. (YES) Explain procedures that are in place to evaluate all instructional materials developed by other organizations or institutions prior to use in distance education.

ASU faculty members have developed all courses delivered via distance education. All associated media and textbooks used in the program have been reviewed by the

faculty, usually by committee, prior to purchase and implementation. This process is mirrored in the development of on-campus courses.

Section 3. Faculty

1. (YES) The qualifications for distance education faculty are the same as faculty teaching the same courses in a traditional on-campus format.

Distance education faculty qualifications are the same as for on-campus instructors. In the case of those faculty members involved in the delivery of the online BSN, there are no exceptions to ASU's required qualifications, which meet SACS and THECB guidelines.

2. (YES) The institution provides orientation and training for faculty involved in distance education programs.

Faculty members interested in developing and teaching distance education courses are provided with access to a wide variety of distance education workshops. A satellite downlink is available to receive educational programming and satellite-delivered teleconferences. On-campus events (such as sessions with consultant trainers) are available as are mini-courses offered under the auspices of ASU's Office of Information Technology.

A Multimedia Instructional Support Center is available to faculty for developing multimedia presentations and interactive learning modules that enhance the distance learning experience. The training center, staffed by student technology assistants, is open for faculty use every workday afternoon and at other pre-arranged times. The student assistants are available to help the faculty with web page design and creation, image scanning and rendering, audio and video recording and compression, and basic technical support.

As previously mentioned, ASU also promotes the off-campus professional development of its distance education faculty through departmental travel funds and the awarding of Technology Development Grants and Faculty Development and Enrichment Grants.

3. (YES) Procedures are in place for appropriate evaluation of faculty involved in the distance education program (such as procedures that evaluate faculty- student interaction).

ASU's distance education faculty is evaluated in the same fashion as its faculty involved in on-campus instruction. Through procedures that have been formalized at the departmental, institutional, and system-wide levels, ASU observes a stringent evaluation process, which is documented in its Faculty-StafSHandbook and included in this document as Appendix Item D. Tenure-track and tenured faculty are evaluated in the areas of teaching, research (scholarly and creative activity), and service.

Since 1999, ASU has used the IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction form as a primary means for the evaluation of teaching. All courses offered by ASU are evaluated each fall and spring semester. Originally, only a paper version of the IDEA instrument was available and it was mailed to students. With the advent of the fall 2001 semester, the survey was made available in a web-enabled version, which achieved a response rate in excess of eighty-two percent.

In the Fall 2001 Group Summary Report for Nursing, four items specifically assess student and faculty rapport. Each item appears below with its average score, which is based on a five-point rating scale (l=hardly ever, 5=almost always).

Displayed a personal interest in students and their learning. (4.5) Found ways to help students answer their own questions. (4.4) Explained the reasons for criticisms of students' academic performance. (4.1) Encouraged student-faculty interaction outside of class. (4.4)

Department heads consult with faculty about their evaluations. Suggestions for improvement are offered and peer counseling or mentoring are used when appropriate. Faculty who wish to compete effectively for promotion remain mindful of their annual evaluations and continuously seek to improve teaching and overall performance.

4. (YES) Please describe the role of faculty in development and evaluation of courses and their role in affirming adherence to the Principles of Good Practice.

As with all curricular courses, ASU faculty members bear the responsibility of distance education course development and evaluation. Faculty members typically attend web course development workshops and consult with their distance education peers. They make full use of available IT resources, including the Multimedia Instructional Support Center, which offers instruction in Blackboard, the institution's platform for distance education course delivery. As course development progresses, faculty members typically consult with departmental faculty and faculty on the various curriculum committees to secure valuable input that contributes to the quality of their proposed course.

Once again, evaluation of the course primarily takes place through the IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction. This instrument provides vital input as to the successful and unsuccessful elements within a course. Prior to IDEA, the nursing faculty had used a survey that was built into course materials.

Affirmation to the Principles of Good Practices was initially an administrative verification of the developed course's level of high quality. With the change in THECB requirements from "affirmation" to "documentation" and as of June 2002, ASU faculty who are developing a distance education course must now complete the Checklist for Incorporating the Principles of Good Practice into Electronically-Based

Courses. This document will accompany the proposed course as it journeys through the many steps of approval and it will remain on file in the Office of Academic Affairs to document compliance.

5. (YES) A policy exists that addresses faculty teaching load for those involved in distance education.

A class delivered via distance technology is part of the faculty member's regular load. These classes are not taught as overloads nor is release time given to present a class via distance technology. However, many of the current distance education courses at ASU have been developed by faculty members who, through a summer grant, have received a one or two course release.

6. (NO) A process exists for evaluating the credentials of faculty employed by other institutions who are teaching courses for which your institution is awarding credit. .

Angelo State University does not use faculty from other institutions to deliver its distance education courses. Should this become necessary in the future, it is anticipated that these faculty would meet the criteria established by the THECB and SACS.

7. (YES) The institution has policies on intellectual property, faculty compensation, copyright guidelines, and the distribution of revenue (if applicable) that are appropriate for distance education.

The copyright policy for Angelo State University, as presented in the Rules and Regulations of The Texas State University System, addresses matters pertaining to ownership of copyright, mediated coursework, competitive use of employee-owned mediated courseware, distribution of copyright royalties, use of copyrighted software, and revision and withdrawal of course materials. The complete copyright policy has been included in this document as Appendix Item E and is available through the TSUS web site. In addition, the Office of Information Technology publishes a number of policies that govern appropriate faculty and student use of e-mail, software, server, and web resources. http:Nwww.swt.edu/tsus/rules.html http:Nwww.angelo.edu/services/technology/policy.htm

Section 4. Student Support Services

1. (YES) The institution provides distance learners access to appropriate student services.

Admissions. Prospective students may access the Office of Admission through the ASU website by email or regular mail, and by phone via an 800 number. General admission requirements are available at the Admissions web site while more specific requirements for the online BSN are included at the Nursing web site. The Office of

Admissions, as with all administrative services, is assessed annually via the aforementioned Institutional Effectiveness system. http://www.angelo.edu/pstudent/admissions.htm

Registration. In order to complete successful registration, distance education students may access the Bulletin, Class Schedules, and the RAMS registration system via the ASU web site. While the Bulletin and Class Schedules are available 2417, the registration system is available from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM, Monday through Friday and from l:00 PM to 4:00 PM, Saturday. The Office of the Registrar is assessed annually via the ASU Institutional Effectiveness system. http://www.angelo.edu/cstudent/university~catalog_2001 .htm http://www.angelo.edu/publications/scheduling_information.htm http://rams.angelo.edu

Academic Advising. Advising services are provided for students in the online BSN program directly by the online faculty. They are accessible by phone, email, and in- person appointments. The Nursing Department maintains all necessary contact information on the campus web site. In addition, ASU has recently established a new Office of Academic Advising. As the need arises, advisors within this office will be assigned responsibilities within the distance education program. Both the Nursing Department and the Office of Academic Advisement are annually assessed via the Institutional Effectiveness system. http://www.angelo.edu/dept/nursingl

Remedial Services. No remedial services are provided at this time as those involved in the online BSN have completed an associate degree program prior to admission. Hence the need for remediation is nonexistent.

Placement Services. The Office of Career Development handles all services associate with career planning, including testing and assessment, and job placement. Both on- campus and distance education students have access to such services as resume and interview skills development, job search strategies and information, and appropriate contact information. Both students and employers may register with the Office of Career Development online. Like other campus administrative areas, Career Development is assessed via the Institutional Effectiveness system. http:Nwww.angelo.edu/services/career/

Testing and Assessment. The Division of Continuing Studies coordinates ASU's various campus testing and assessment services including CLEP, correspondence examinations, registration for local ASU examinations, GRE Subject Examinations, LSAF, MRT, TEXES, TCLEOSE, and other specialized examinations. Continuing Studies may be reached via phone or e-mail, but it does not currently maintain a web page on the campus server. Due to the required level of security, the BSN exit exam is administered on campus by Nursing Department faculty. http://www.angelo.edu/directory/office/index.htm#C

Orientation. An intensive on-campus orientation at the beginning of the online BSN program instructs students in the use of technology. They are shown how to register online, how to access course materials, how to navigate their way in Blackboard, and how to use the library. These items are also included for reference in the online BSN handbook, which also lists minimum hardware and technological skill requirements including such abilities as Internet browsing, sending email with attachments, and using a word processor. A detailed online help menu is also available to students at the Nursing web site, and additional assistance is located within the online Blackboard program. The on-campus orientation is regularly assessed via a survey instrument that is circulated to students while they are attending orientation. http://www.angelo.edu/dept/nursing/bsn/competencies/index.htm

Computing Departments. The Office of Information Technology maintains a complete listing of all computer labs available for ASU student use. Through its web site, it also provides information on dial up and email access, proxy services, Blackboard, and software agreements. Information Technology is assessed annually through the Institutional Effectiveness system and biannually via the State Strategic Plan for Information Resources. http://www.angelo.edu/services/technology

Financial Aid Office. Distance education students may access the Office of Financial Aid through the ASU web site. General information, a list of frequently asked questions, scholarship information, forms, and contact information are available online. The Office of Financial Aid is annually assessed through the Institutional Effectiveness system. http:Nwww .angelo.edu/services/financial-aid

Counseling. Due to the sensitive nature and requisite confidentiality involved, counseling services are not available through the ASU web site. Students may schedule an appointment with a counselor by phone and they are encouraged to bring forward their concerns involving relationship issues, adjustment, problem-solving, decision-making, stress management, test anxiety, and depression. Counseling services is assessed annually through the Institutional Effectiveness system. http:Nwww .angelo.edu/services/studentlife/counselingl

Help DeskIHot Line. The ASU Help Desk is available to assist distance education students with hardware and software concerns. Students may refer to the Help Desk web site, which provides phone and email contact information. Help Desk services are available from 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Monday through Thursday, 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Friday, and 9:00 AM to l:00 PM, Saturday. Help Desk services are assessed annually through the Institutional Effectiveness system. http://www.angelo.edu/services/technology/helpdesk.htm

(YES) Distance learners have access to library resources of an appropriate breadth and quality for the distance education program(s) offered.

Information Technology provides access to library services for online students. Dial- up and proxy server access provide availability, via the RamQuest gateway, to the online catalog, database search systems, electronic journals, Internet resources, and other library services. Additionally, TexShare cards allow students to use any participating Texas public or academic library, subject to local restrictions. Interlibrary Loan is available to distance education students as well. During their most recent reaccreditation visits, the Texas State Board of Nurse Examiners and the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission found current library resources sufficient to support the online BSN program. http:Nwww .angelo.edu~services/library/ramquest.htm

3. (NO) Creating learning communities for distant students is an emerging distance education trend.

ASU is not currently involved in the development of non-content oriented learning communities for distance education students.

Section 5. Distance Education Facilities and Support Services

1. (YES) The institution has available the facilities and equipment necessary to deliver its distance learning program.

Angelo State University's distance education program is focused on Internet accessible course materials and related resources. Angelo State University students enrolled in courses utilizing distance education may access online resources and course materials with a computer, web browser and an Internet connection. These Internet accessible distance education course materials are accessible to students at anytime from both on and off campus.

Angelo State University students may utilize the free campus dialup network or any other Internet Service Provider to access the online course resources. The campus dialup network consists of 96 modem connections each with a maximum speed of 56 kbs. Expansion of this service is planned for early fall 2002. In addition to dialup access, a majority of students in the residence halls may access the online course resources directly through the campus network via high-speed network connections in student living areas. Students without computer access at home may utilize one of the over 300 student use computers available throughout the campus in seven computer lab facilities.

The local Angelo State University network is connected to the Internet via a nine (9) megabit bi-directional link to the Texan2000 statewide data network. Through our partnership in the West Texas Disaster Recovery and Operations Center (WTDROC), the wide area network is fully redundant between our campus and the point of convergence on the Texan2000 network. Throughput on the wide area network is continually monitored to ensure response time consistent with established service objectives. The capacity plan for the wide area network has included bandwidth and supporting electronics upgrades annually over the past five years.

Specialized classroom management software is utilized to provide students with online course content and an array of services that enhance interaction between students and faculty. Software systems from Blackboard and Anlon are currently available to all Angelo State University faculty members interested in offering online course content. The software systems are operated from the campus Computer Center. The Computer Center is physically and electronically secured with complete climate and power conditioning to ensure continuous operation. The hardware platforms supporting these individual software systems are fault tolerant, high- availability servers with redundant power distribution and disk array subsystems. All hardware resources supporting distance education online services are part of an overall capacity planning process that includes replacement of any equipment outside the targeted service cycle. Currently, production servers that support Blackboard and Anlon are replaced every three years. To ensure complete recovery of all student and faculty data in the event of a disaster, these systems are physically backed up to tape each night and rotated off-site per our technology disaster recovery plan.

In addition to classroom management software solutions available to Angelo State University faculty, a campus web server is provided to allow faculty the ability to create course related web pages. A faculty member may choose to create individual web pages and also utilize Blackboard or Anlon classroom management software. The hardware resources supporting the web server reside in the campus Computer Center and receive the same capacity planning, replacement and backup services as the classroom management software servers. All hardware and software systems associated with distance education offerings have service availability objectives that are closely monitored for performance.

2. (YES) Arrangements have been made for off-campus delivery of required laboratories, clinical placement sites, workshops, seminars, etc., associated with distance learning activities.

Nursing clinical placements of distance education students follow the same process as was utilized when the program was offered on-campus. Faculty and students work together to identify an appropriate clinical site and preceptor that satisfy BNE requirements. A cooperative agreement is signed with the host agency ensuring that the host administrator and preceptor will provide and facilitate student experiences consistent with course objectives. At minimum, nursing faculty maintain weekly contact with students and preceptors, and faculty retain the responsibility of all student clinical evaluations with input from the preceptors. A list of participating agencies has been included as Appendix Item F.

17 ANGEL0 STATE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

Box l l W , ASU Station . San Angela Texclr 76909 Phone 915-942-2165 Fax 915-942-2128 . Emad: acndemic.affairs&ngelo.rdu

Appendix Item A Memorandum: Principles of Good Practice

July 1 1,2002

MEMORANDUM

To: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

From: Don Coers

Subject: Principles of Good Practice

Angelo State University hereby affirms that it is in compliance with The Principles of Good Practice for Electronically Offered Academic Degree and Certificate Programs. The institution's development of quality distance education offerings has consistently met the standards as defined by the THECB in its publication, Guide for Incorporating the Principles of Good Practice into Electronically Based Courses. Our faculty has been diligent in providing appropriate learning outcomes and opportunities for interaction in courses that are coherent and academically mirror the rigor of their on-campus counterparts.

The institution is committed to provide programs of distance education that contribute to the cultural and economic welfare of the region. To this end, ASU offers requisite informational and support services to its faculty and students that enrich the development, delivery, and understanding of academic content. Ongoing assessment and evaluation by students, faculty, staff and administration contribute to a cycle of continuous quality improvement that advances program offerings.

Beginning in June 2002, ASU will now document its efforts through the use of the Checklist for Incorporating the Principles of Good Practice into Electronically Based Courses. This documentation will be housed in the office of the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and will serve as both record and reference.

Should you require additional information, please contact me at your convenience.

A MEMBER OF THE TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM . EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ",

Appendix Item B BSN Student Handbook Excerpt: BSN Student Policies

(1) Admission criteria

Eligible registered nurses anywhere in the world can take the online BSN courses. Students who successfully complete the program will receive the Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree. The degree cannot be awarded to international students abroad, but those international students may complete the non-clinical portion of the BSN curriculum.

Entrance into the Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree program requires admission to both the University and the Department of Nursing. The educational experience of each registered nurse will be evaluated on an individual basis.

The application deadline for admission to the BSN program is: Fall term -- April 1st or until filled; Spring term -- October 15th or until filled.

The applicant must have a current license to practice as a registered nurse in the State of Texas or the state where the applicant will do clinical practice. Validation of current license or interim permit must be in the student's file before admission is final.

The new graduate who has taken the National Council Licensure Examination - Registered Nurse (NCLEX-RN) may be admitted to the BSN program before the test results are available (non-clinical courses only); however, in the event acceptable test scores and Registered Nurse licensure are not received, withdrawal from the BSN program is mandatory at the end of the current semester.

The applicant must have completed an NLNAC-accredited associate degree in nursing program.

Applicants who completed an NLNAC-accredited hospital diploma nursing program will need to complete placement examinations for evaluation of their knowledge base in courses that are prerequisite to entrance into the BSN program.

Official transcripts from all colleges attended, nursing schools, etc., must be on file in the Department of Nursing and the Registrar's Office.

The applicant must have a cumulative grade point average (GPA) of 2.50 (based on a 4.00 scale) on all college work. Petitions for provisional admission will be considered on an individual basis by the BSN faculty, BSN level director, and the Nursing Department head. Applicants who are given provisional admission will be on probation, with the requirement that they achieve at least a 2.5 cumulative GPA on all work until they have completed 10 semester credit hours in the BSN program at ASU. No applicant with a cumulative GPA below a 2.00 will be granted provisional admission. The student must also seek regular admission to the university.

(2) Licensure and other documentation requirements

o The student is responsible for maintaining a current RN licensure throughout the length of the program and will notify the ASU Nursing Department of any change in registration status.

o Current CPR card from the American Heart Association or the American Red Cross that includes infant, child and adult 1- and 2- rescuer procedures. The student is responsible for maintaining current CPR certification throughout the length of the program.

o Evidence of personal liability insurance of at least $1,000,000/$3,000,000 (Available through the ASU Nursing Bepartment and automatically paid with student fees).

o Evidence of ASU-required immunizations within the last 10 years: (tetanus, diphtheria, MMR, PPB skin test, and hepatitis B series). Additional immunizations may be required by the clinical facility. The student is responsible for acquiring and cost of all required immunizations.

(3) References

The applicant will submit three professional letters of reference with the application materials. The letters must be from (1) the student's immediate RN nursing supervisor at the student's place of employment, (2) a second RN with at least a BSN, (3) a clinical instructor or nursing deanldirector from the student's ADN or Diploma nursing program. Each letter must address:

o how long the applicant has been known to the person writing the letter, and in what capacity,

o the applicant's abilities as a competent, safe registered nurse in regards to assessment, planning, interventions, and evaluating nursing care,

o a description of the applicant's professionalism, o the applicant's communication abilities, oral and written, o examples of the applicant's self-directedness and self-motivation, o the applicant's characteristics that will facilitate his or her success in higher

education.

(4) Online technology requirements

The student is responsible for having a quality, reliable computer, printer and Internet and email connections. Students without immediate access to the ASU campus must have a personal email address. It is strongly recommended that students have a computer with a CPU of at least 233 MHz, 32Mb RAM memory, Windows 98 or higher operating system, Microsoft Word 97 or a higher version of this word-prqcessing program, and a 56kps or faster modem. Faculty often use Microsoft PowerPoint presentation software to present course content and students will need the software to read the PowerPoint files e-mailed to them. However, a free PowerPoint viewer may be downloaded from the Microsoft web site (http://office.microsoft.com/downloads) so that students do not have to purchase

the full software product. A recent version of MS Internet Explorer web browser is also required, and can be downloaded free at the Microsoft web page. Computer hardware and software that are less than the above specifications may cause technical problems that the student is solely responsible for getting fixed or upgraded. The online courses cannot be altered to work on older systems. Students are solely responsible for knowing how to operate their computer system and software. The nursing department cannot provide technical assistance for personal computers and software. A full orientation to the ASU interactive online course web pages will be provided during the initial on-campus orientation.

(5) Identifying a preceptor

The faculty will work with the student in identifying a qualified preceptor. Prior to selection of the preceptor, the preceptor's agency must have a current "Contract of Association" in place with the University. The preceptor must agree to serve in that role for the duration of the clinical course. (See the Preceptor Manual for additional qualifications). Angelo State University follows the Texas Board of Nurse Examiners' preceptor qualifications Regulations 21 5.10(9(5) in requiring that the preceptor:

1. Have a bachelor's degree in nursing (preferred) and current licensure as a registered nurse in Texas or the state where nursing is practiced, or

2. Have a bachelor's degree as a health care professional and is practicing in that area of degree preparation in Texas or the state where the profession is practiced, and

3. Is competent in the designated area of practice (at least one year of practice in the clinical area the student will be doing clinical practice),

4. Have a philosophy of health care congruent with that of the nursing program, 5 . Sign the Preceptor Agreement form located in the Preceptor Handbook, 6. Provide written support from both hislhere immediate supervisor and the facility

CNO to serve in the capacity of ASU student preceptor (form is in Preceptor Handbook).

(6) Library resources

To supplement ASU's online library resources, the student should obtain access at hidher local city, college, andlor hospital libraries. See Student Facilities and resources section later in this manual for additional online library information.

(7) Clinical facility substance policies and procedures

Students are subject to all clinical agency policies and procedures regarding drug and alcohol use, which may include drug screening prior to starting a clinical rotation, and random drug screenings. Students may also be subject to background checks by the agency.

(8) Problem management

The student will immediately notify faculty by telephone of any problems or concerns with clinical experiences, patients, preceptor, clinical site, or any other clinical or course related problem.

(9) Student identification

The student must purchase a student name badge through a private source. The badge must meet the following characteristics:

1. Blue background with white letters 2. First initial, last name, and RN on first line 3. School and program affiliation on second line 4. Example:

J. Doe, RN ASU B.S.N. Student

No other degrees, credentials, certifications or other information can appear on the name badge. Wear the designated ASU nursing student ID badge at all times during school- related clinical experiences. Wearing ASU identification in a clinical area when not working in a student capacity or while working in one's usual professional nursing role is strictly prohibited. Identifying one's self as an on-duty ASU nursing student outside of specific ASU-sanctioned clinical experiences warrants immediate course failure and permanent removal from the nursing program.

(10) Uniform

Basic white lab coat will be worn as designated by individual clinical faculty, the agency, or specific requirements of the clinical area. Some clinical areas may require a full, traditional nurse uniform, others may require scrub clothes, etc. All clothing should be clean and project an image consistent with the professional nurse.

(1 1) Preceptor physical presence

The student will participate in clinical activities only when the designated preceptor has physical presence in the clinical facility and can provide regular before- during- and after- clinical contact with the student during that clinical period.

(12) Clinical hour limitations

The clinical student will not work greater than eight consecutive clinical hours, and no more than eight clinical hours in a 24-hour period without specific permission from the ASU nursing faculty.

(13) Completion and submission of assignments

Complete and submit all course assignments within the time frame designated by course faculty. The student is responsible for points on assignments and exams that are lost or delayed due to computer or other technical problems that did not originate from the ASU university system.

(14) Required on-campus activities

The first online course has a required on-campus orientation activity. The last course has a required on-campus exit exam. Other courses may have concentrated on-campus activities such as physical assessment practice or competency testing on a weekend. The student is solely responsible for attenrllng required on-campus activities, and is responsible for any and all travel and lodging costs associated with attendance. Lack of attendance at required on-campus activities will lead to an "I" (incomplete), " W F (withdraw failing), or " F (fail), depending on the course andlor semester time period the absence occurs. A grade of "I" converts to an " F if the course requirements are not satisfied by the end of the following semester. Note: not all courses are offered each semester.

(15) Clinical documentation

All clinical courses will require a log of student activities. Each course will have different objectives and requirements for the log, but at a minimum each log will be typed and include dates, times, how objectives were worked on or satisfied on any given day(s), signature of student and signature of student's approved preceptor. The logs will be faxed at least weekly to the nursing faculty.

(16) Professional behavior

The student as a representative of ASU will act and perform in a manner consistent with the professional nurse at all times, as published in the Texas and other states' Nurse PracticelActs. Likewise, the student must at all times perform within the guidelines published in this ASU BSN Student Handbook. Each student will receive a copy of this document. The Texas Nurse Practice Act and accompanying Rules & Regulations are available at the Texas BNE web site: http:Nwww.bne.state.tx.us/nparr.htm

(17) Student incident

Any student involved in a clinical incident (e.g. accidental needle stick, fall, etc.) must notify the clinical instructor and preceptor immerllately. The instructor will then provide information on appropriate action to be taken. Reporting of any incident must be done immediately for the safety of all persons involved.

(18) Student's clinical experiences at hisher place of employment

To help ensure a broad range of clinical experiences, the student, in general, may not have clinical experiences at his or her arealunit of employment. The student is obligated to inform the instructor immediately if this conflict occurs so the instructor can review the situation and determine if an alternate clinical site is indicated. Additionally, the student may not do clinical activities at the same time he or she is performing employer-related work for compensation.

(19) Other

Students are responsible for being prepared for their clinical experience by identifying their learning needs, seeking learning opportunities to meet course objectives, and being accountable for their clinical practice. The student will:

Work with faculty to facilitate establishment of the Contract of Association with the participating agency prior to beginning the clinical experience, Facilitate the preceptor's signing and returning of the Preceptor Agreement form (in the Preceptor Handbook) prior to initiation of the clinical experience, Discuss specific clinical objectives and personal learning goals with the preceptor and instructor at the beginning of the clinical experience, Provide the preceptor with course objectives and guidelines, Provide the clinical site with necessary licensure, liability insurance and educational information as requested, Perform under the guidance and supervision of the preceptor, complying with standards and policies of the agency, Demonstrate professional role behaviors of the Registered Nurse, Notify the agency, preceptor, and instructor prior to the designated clinical time if unable to attend on a scheduled clinical day, Maintain regular communication with instructor and preceptor, Complete a written evaluation of the clinical site, preceptor, and instructor at the end of experience.

(20) Program progression

A grade of C or above in each nursing course and a minimum 2.0 overall grade point average at the completion of each semester is required to register for the next nursing course. A minimum 2.0 overall grade point average for all college work and a minimum 2.0 grade point average for all work taken at ASU in order to graduate. A minimum of thirty semester hours in residence, including twenty-four semester hours of advanced work. Included in this total are twenty advanced semester hours in nursing courses in residence. See the ASU University Bulletin for additional requirements.

Each student must demonstrate satisfactory performance in the clinical laboratory at all times. All students must adhere to the rules and regulations as defined in the current Nurse Practice Act for the State of Texas (or similar rules and regulations in their other

state's NPA ), and must subscribe to the Code of Ethics of the American Nurses Association while in the performance of duties in the BSN program.

Complete details on standards for retention in the program and criteria for admission can be found in the Angelo State University Bulletin, and can be accessed via the Internet through ASU's home page < http://www.angelo.edu >.

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NURSING (64 semester hours)

The Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree program at Angelo State is designed for the registered nurse that has earned an Associate Degree in Nursing or a diploma from a hospital school of nursing. The baccalaureate program provides a broadened base in the biological and behavioral sciences as well as in-depth nursing skills needed to promote and provide professional nursing care. Community health nursing, research, and full length courses in leadership and management are content areas addressed in the baccalaureate curriculum that are not addressed in the preceding levels of education. Baccalaureate education builds and enhances clinical scholarship preparing graduates to advance to an area of specialized nursing practice.

Academic Major

Nursing 3301,3303,3402,3601,4301,4302,4601 Nursing Elective

Other Requirements

Biology 3324 English 1302 Mathematics 3321 or Psychology 3305 or Nursing 4337 Art, Drama or Music (lower division) History 1301, 1302 Government 230 1,2302 Communication 2301 Computer Science 1331, or Finance 2323 or University Studies 2323

Elective 3 3

Total Hours ......................................................................................................... 64

For the student who has completed the ASU Associate Degree program, the above plan meets all curriculum and general requirements for the Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree. Students who did not complete the ADN degree at ASU, or students with a hospital Diploma in nursing, may need to complete additional courses.

3301 Trends and Issues in Professional Nursing (3-0-0). Addresses pertinent trends and issues impacting professional nursing and the health care delivery system in general. A framework for ethical decision making is also presented. Prerequisite: Nursing 2830/2831 or equivalent

3303 Professional Role Development (2-2-0). The course focuses on the theoretical basis of role development of the professional nurse including communication skills, teaching techniques, counseling methodologies, and political action. All topics are presented with practical applications for health care. May be taken concurrently with Nursing 3601.

3402 Introduction to Community-Based Care (2-2-3). Focuses on the theory and skills necessary to provide community-base care to clients across the life span including comprehensive health and physical assessment, case management, and home health care. Prerequisite: Nursing 2830/2831 or equivalent

3601 Case Management of Individuals and Families (3-0-9). Application of the nursing process in the care of well and ill individuals and families in a variety of settings. Emphasis is on theoretically based nursing interventions. Prerequisite: Nursing 3402. May be taken concurrently with Nursing 3303

4301 Research Process in Nursing (3-0-0). Provides the student the opportunity to evaluate research studies for applicability of the findings in nursing interventions as well as to apply the basic steps of the research process to a project of hisfher choice. Prerequisites: Mathematics 3321

4601 Community Health Nursing (3-0-9). This course focuses on theory-based nursing care of aggregates, communities, and society. Roles and functions of the community health nurse as well as settings for practice are examined.

Prerequisites: Nursing 3301, 3303,3402 and 3601. May be taken concurrently with Nursing 4602.

4302 Management in Nursing Practice (3-0-0). Current theories of management, leadership, and change are explored and related to the nursing process in organizing and providing health care to individuals, families, aggregates, community, and society.

Prerequisites: Nursing 3301and Nursing 3601. May be taken concurrently with Nursing 4601.

4333 Critical Care Nursing (2-0-3). Explores the interrelationship of human biopsychosocial dimensions of critical care nursing and examines the theoretical basis and nursing process for alterations in human functioning as consequences of critical illness and care.

4334 Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation (3-0-0). This course provides a basic understanding of exercise physiology of cardiorespiratory system, and in-depth study of diagnostic assessments, clinical care and post-event rehabilitation methodology of the coronary patient. The student will develop skills to assess and monitor rehabilitative therapy for various levels of function. Psychological needs and support systems for the families of coronary patients are also discussed.

4335 Home Health Care (2-0-3). This course will present an analysis of selected issues and trends in home health care. Students will participate in a variety of clinical experiences with home health care clients.

4336 Pain and Therapeutic Interventions (3-0-0). Pain, perceived and diagnosed, is explored from the patient's perspective. Anxiety's effect on pain, the difference between pain and suffering, and therapeutic approaches will be discussed.

4337 Statistical Techniques for Health Professionals (3-0-0). Examines statistical techniques required to analyze data with specific applications for health professionals. Emphasis is placed upon developing SPSS computer databases, data analysis and interpretation of findings. Techniques include measures of central tendency and variability, correlation, regression, t-tests, ANOVA, chi square and multivariate analysis.

Prerequisite: Math 3321, or Psych 3305, or equivalent

4391 Research (0-0-0). A specialized course providing research opportunities for superior students enrolled in the nursing program.

Prerequisite: Junior standing

Bachelor of Science in Nursing Elective Courses

NUR 233 1 - Women's Health Care NUR 2332 - Nursing Aspects of Aging NUR 2334 - Basic Concepts in Identifying the Health Needs of Adolescents NUR 2335 - School Health Care NUR 2336 - Computer Applications in Nursing Science NUR 4333 - Critical Care Nursing NUR 4334 - Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation NUR 4335 - Home Health Care NUR 4336 - Pain and Therapeutic Interventions NUR 4337 - Statistical Techniques for Health Professionals NUR 4391 - Research

ANGEL0 STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Nursing

SUGGESTED CURRICULUM SCHEDULE

UPPER LEVEL BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NURSING DEGREE SUMMER - 1112 YEARS

SPRING SEMESTER

BIO 3324 NUR 3601 NUR 4301

lST SUMMER SESSION

HIST 1301 GOVT 2301

lST SUMMER SESSION

ART/DRAMA/MUSIC ENG 1302

NOTE: *In addition to this 3 hour statistics requirement, students who did not complete math 1302 or 13 11 in their lower division program must complete MATH1302 or 1311 if NUR 4337 or PSY 3305 is selected.

2nd S W R SESSION

COMM 2301 NUR 3303

2 N D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SESSION

HIST 1302 GOVT 2302

FALL SEMESTER

NUR 3301 NUR 3402 *MATH 3321 or

NLJR 4337 or PSY 3305**

CS 1331, or USTD2323, or FIN 2323

FALL SEMESTER

NLTR 4601 NUR 4302 NUR (Elective) ELECTIVE - 3 - hrs.

UPPER LEVEL BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN NURSING DEGREE FALL ENTRY - 2 YEARS

2 N D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SESSION

HIST 1302 GOVT 2302

FALL SEMESTER

NUR 3301 NUR 3402 COMM 2301 CS 133 1 FIN 2323 or USTD 2323

FALL SEMESTER

NUR 4601 NUR Elective *MATH 3 3 2 1, or NUR 4337, or PSY 3305**

NOTE: *In addition to this 3 hour statistics requirement, students who did not complete math 1302 or 13 11 in their lower division program must complete MATH1302 or 1311 if NUR 4337 or PSY 3305 is selected.

SPRING SEMESTER

NLTR 3303 NUR 3601 BIO 3324

SPRING SEMESTER

NUR 4301 NUR 4302 ELECTIVE ENG 1302 ARTIDRAMAIMUSIC

lST SUMMER SESSION

HtST 1301 GOVT 2301

Appendix Item C IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction: Additional Questions

1 = Definitely false 2 = More false than true 3 = In between 4 = More true than false 5 = Definitely true

1. The online format made it possible for me to continue my education. = 4.5

2. Given a choice, I prefer the online format to the traditional classroom. = 3.9

3. I am comfortable with the computer technology used in this class. = 4.4

4. Support services were readily available and helpful in overcoming technologic difficulties. = 4.3

5. Course responsibilities were clearly presented by way of the syllabus, on-campus orientation, discussion board and other forms of online communication. = 4.2

6. Online group discussion is effective in developing student interaction and promoting professional relationships. = 4.1

7. Online group discussion increased my level of knowledge and enhanced my ability to think critically. = 4.0

8. My clinical experience was effective and I was able to meet course objectives. = 4.4

9. The preceptorlstudent relationship was beneficial and enhanced my learning experience. = 4.1

10. I was satisfied with the online evaluation process. = 4.3

Appendix Item D Tenure and Promotion Policy Excerpts

V. Criteria For Tenure

Tenure denotes an entitlement to continuing appointment as a member of the faculty at Angelo State University in accordance with the provisions of Chapter V, Subsection 4.2. of the Regents' RULES AND REGULATIONS. Colleges/School and departments are encouraged to develop more specific guidelines to help faculty meet these criteria. Notwithstanding departmental and collegiate guidelines, the criteria below will serve as a University minimum. These guidelines rely heavily on "The Core of Academe: Teaching, Scholarship, and Service," originated by James E. Gilbert, which is included in its entirety as Appendix B of the Tenure and Promotion Regulations and Guidelines. A copy of this document is available in the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

A. General Eligibility for Tenure

Faculty members who hold the rank of Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor are eligible for tenure upon completion of a required probationary period. The maximum probationary period is six years of full-time service at the rank of Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor. Faculty members seeking tenure must apply at the beginning of their sixth year of full-time service. As specified in Chapter V, Subsections 4.22 and 4.26 of the Regents' RULES AND REGULATIONS, periods during which a faculty member is on leave of absence may not be counted toward fulfilling the probationary requirement; in addition, if a faculty member is appointed to a tenure-track position after the beginning of an academic year, the period of service from the time of appointment to the beginning of the next academic year shall not be counted toward fulfilling the probationary requirement. At the discretion of the University, up to three years' probationary service can be credited toward tenure for service at other academic institutions or in non-tenure track service at Angelo State University. Such credit must be specified in writing at the time of the faculty member's employment in the tenure track. In exceptional circumstances, distinguished senior faculty may be granted tenure at the end of one academic year if recommended following all the procedures in these regulations.

B. Faculty Responsibilities

1. Teaching. Teaching has four components: (1) academic program planning and development; (2) classroom instruction and evaluation; (3) mentoring and other forms of colleague and student interaction; and (4) advising. The process of evaluating teaching will be specified by each department but will likely involve self-evaluation, peer review, department head evaluation and student evaluation of as many of the four components as feasible.

Academic Program Planning and Development involves assessing the educational goals of a particular field of study. With goals established, objectives are identified that define the course of instruction. The task of planning any course of instruction is to specify the desired results of the course and the best and most effective methods to achieve those results. The faculty member is expected to demonstrate effective planning in courses of instruction.

Classroom instruction consists of using all appropriate techniques and resources to assist students in achieving classroom objectives. It is not a random encounter, but is an orderly, sequential process. The faculty member should demonstrate knowledge of the subject material, skills, and theory to be taught, learning experiences, instructional media, and facilities available. The faculty member should aspire to guide students into a lifetime habit of learning. A teacher at Angelo State University should have a positive influence on students. The faculty member should periodically review course materials to incorporate current scholarship, texts, evaluation instruments, and instructional media. The faculty member should evaluate students effectively, fairly, and promptly.

Mentoring more junior faculty, interacting with academic colleagues and helping students are essential components of effective teaching. Faculty should seek opportunities to interact with colleagues to improve instruction. Such interaction is demonstrated by attendance at professional conferences, conventions, and meetings relevant to teaching, discussion of pedagogy and course subject matter with senior colleagues, and helping less experienced faculty. The faculty member should demonstrate a desire to include students in academic research or creative projects, out of class discussions in the faculty member's academic subject area, and to assist students outside of the classroom in learning both course and noncourse material.

Student advisement goes beyond the normally expected tasks of reviewing academic regulations, assessing student compliance with degree requirements, assisting students in making out a class schedule, or student discipline. It is a means by which the faculty member can assist the student's development as an independent thinker and learner. It is an active process of sharing between the faculty member and the student concerning any topic relevant to the student's academic program. The faculty member should not only be willing to advise students, but should demonstrate a genuine concern for advising them.

2. Scholarly/Creative Activity. The term "scholarship" covers a wide variety of activities, but taken together, scholarly activities are exemplified by dedication to the life of the mind and a continual and organized effort to expand understanding of the academic discipline. The scholar should be willing to subject the results of investigative or creative processes to peer evaluation and to share these results with colleagues, students, or the general public. Thus, scholarship complements teaching as well as fostering professional growth and development for individual faculty members. It should therefore be initiated during the first year of

probationary service and assume increasing sophistication in each subsequent year. Scholarship may be demonstrated by, but is not limited to, the following:

An ongoing program of organized research. This research may seek to discover new knowledge (fundamental research), utilize knowledge to solve specific problems (applied research), or develop more effective means of communicating knowledge to others (pedagogical research).

Analytical writing. This writing may lead to conventional publications in journals, monographs, textbooks, abstracts, and critical book reviews. It may also produce teaching aids such as computer-assisted instruction, scripts for distance learning, or self-instruction modules. In addition, it may produce documents that, while not suitable for formal publication, are nevertheless valuable contributions in a specialized field of study.

Other kinds of scholarly/creative activity, which should be mentioned include the following:

Creative activity in literature and the arts Professional consultation Editorial activity for commercial presses or professional journals Participation in professional organizations leading to direct benefits to the academic mission of the University Applying for and receiving grants Obtaining regional, national, or international recognition for the University as a result of invitations to deliver presentations, of service as a visiting scholar, of participation in institutes or workshops, and of acknowledgment of contributions to a particular field of study.

3. LeadershipIService. Faculty members should strive to make meaningful and useful contributions through service to the University, their professional area, and the community. Credit for service outside of the University should not supersede credit for service within the University; rather, service to the community should augment service to the University. Whenever possible, community service to be cited in support of promotion and tenure should relate specifically to the faculty member's area of expertise, be performed in the capacity as a designated representative of the University, or be a part of a University-sponsored effort. Creditable University service could include:

College/School, University, and ad hoc committees; Governance bodies; Conducting continuing education courses and other non-credit courses; Contributions through professional service in an official capacity in a professional organization; Pro bono public0 consultation in the area of the faculty member's area of expertise;

Service in the faculty member's area of expertise; Service related to recruitment, retention, or orientation of students; and Sponsorship of student professional and honorary organizations.

C. External Evidence of Merit

Honors, Awards, and Achievements. The faculty member may note evidence of honors, awards, and achievements that attest to excellence in teaching, research, scholarly and creative activity, and service. This evidence of merit or recognition should attest to the quality of the faculty member's work. Data may include but need not be limited to the following:

Citations received for service to the local community; Recognition of excellence in teaching; Prizes and awards received for outstanding research or creative activity; Awards by professional organizations for editing responsibilities; Citations received from local, state or national civic organizations; Recognition by professionally affiliated peers for outstanding service; Certificates of award; and Awards for publications, presentations, or exhibitions.

VI. Procedures For Tenure Application

Each faculty member is responsible for initiating the process of applying for tenure. Upon notification of eligibility at the end of the fifth year of probationary service, the applicant should complete the portfolio and apply at the beginning of the sixth year of probationary service as outlined below. The forms needed for this process can be obtained from the Department Head.

Once the application has been submitted, it will continue through the process to the President of the University. The single exception to this procedure is that the applicant can withdraw the application at any time. The actual dates for the process will be fixed each year by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

VII. Definition of Ranks and Criteria for Promotion

Promotion and the granting of tenure are two separate and distinct actions, although the performance expectations are similar. Salary increases for faculty are to be awarded on the basis of merit and performance in accepted activities including teaching, scholarly or creative activity, and service, as established in statute. A faculty member must demonstrate an increased degree of commitment to standards of teaching, scholarlylcreative activity, and leadershiplservice in order to be considered for each successive advancement to a higher step or promotion in academic rank. Further, the following criteria for promotion represent minimum requirements of eligibility and do not guarantee promotion if met.

The tenure-track ranks and the professional specialist position include multiple steps for performance-based advancement. Faculty who are applying for promotion in step must have completed one full year in step prior to application. Faculty who are applying for promotion in rank must have completed two full years in the highest step prior to application. Faculty members in tenure-track positions may be considered for salary advancement and promotion only after all of the requirements and qualifications described below have been met. Faculty in the instructor positions can advance in salary based upon criteria proposed by each department and established by the University. In most cases, promotion to a higher academic rank, particularly to those of associate and full professor, will require a greater length of successful teaching service than the minimum number of years specified.

In accordance with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and state mandates, each full-time and part-time faculty teaching credit courses counting toward the baccalaureate degree, other than physical education activities courses, must have completed at least 18 graduate semester hours in the teaching discipline and hold at least a master's degree, or hold the minimum of a master's degree with a major in the teaching discipline (Criteria for Accreditation, Commission on Colleges, Section 4.8.2.2).

Appendix Item E Texas State University System Copyright Policy

10.1 Policy Statement and Purpose.

Copyright is the ownership and control of the intellectual property in original works of authorship that is subject to copyright law. The purpose of The Texas State University System copyright policy is to outline the respective rights, which a component and members of its faculty, staff, and student body have in copyrightable materials created by them while affiliated with the component.

All rights in copyright shall remain with the creator of the work except as otherwise provided by Section 10.2 of this policy

10.2 Ownership of Copyright.

10.21 The System and its components claim no ownership of fiction, popular nonfiction, poetry, music compositions, or other works of artistic imagination that are not component works. For other materials that are totally faculty generated with no university equipment or aid other than that routinely used by faculty in duties associated with teaching, the faculty member holds the copyright and complete intellectual property rights.

10.22 If the work is contracted in writing by the component of the employee on a work for hire basis, the component then owns the copyright and all benefits of the materials

10.23 Copyright of all materials (including software) that are developed with the significant use of funds, space, equipment, or facilities administered by a component, including but not limited to classroom and laboratory materials, but without any obligation by the component to others in connection with such support, shall be held by the component.

The provision of office or library facilities alone shall not be construed as providing substantial resources, which shall include, for example, the purchase of new technology software or equipment not normally needed for the employee's duties, andlor a substantial monetary award explicitly for the creation of the work.

10.24 Copyright ownership of all material (including software) that is developed in the course of or pursuant to a sponsored research or support agreement (i.e., an agreement which provides funds, space, equipment, or facilities for research purposes) shall be determined in accordance with the terms of such agreement, or, in the absence of such terms, the copyright shall be held by the component. The agreement may grant the employee a non-exclusive educational license allowing the employee to share royalties from third parties using the materials.

10.3 Mediated Coursework.

10.31 Mediated courseware includes, but is not necessarily limited to, instructional materials delivered over the Internet, synchronous or asynchronous video or audio courses, components of course, or instructional support materials.

10.32 Copyright of mediated courseware developed without specific direction or significant support of the component shall remain with the employee. No royalty, rent, or other consideration shall be paid to the employee or former employee when that mediated courseware or a modification thereof is used for instruction by the component. The employee or former employee shall take no action that limits the component's right to use the instructional materials and shall provide written notice on the courseware itself if the component's right of use. See Chapter V, Paragraph 4.75 of these Rules for the policy on noncompetitive use of employee-owned, mediated courseware.

10.33 Copyright of mediated courseware, developed at the specific drection or with the substantial resources of a component shall be jointly held by the component and the employee, unless otherwise specified at the time of commissioning of the work, and shall not be used without written consent of the component. The component shall have the right to modify the courseware and decide who will utilize it in instruction. Royalties or revenues generated from the licensing of such mediated courseware may be jointly shared with the employee as noted in this Paragraph 10. The component may specifically agree to share control rights with the employee.

10.4 Distribution of Copyright Royalties.

10.41 Creators of copyrightable material not owned by a component, or to which a component has relinquished any ownership claim, own the copyrights in their works and are free to publish them, register the copyright and receive any revenues, which may result there from.

10.42 Royalty income received by a component through the sale, licensing, leasing, or use of copyrightable material in which a component has a property interest will normally be shared with the author and the component where the material originated.

10.421 The net royalties or other net income received by the component will, in most instances, be distributed under a formula of fifty percent (50%) to the author and fifty percent (50%) to the component.

10.422 Any distribution which grants the author more than fifty percent (50%) of net royalties shall require approval of the Board of Regents.

10.423 In the event of multiple authors, the proper distribution of the fifty percent (50%) author's share shall be determined by their component president, as appropriate.

10.424 The disposition of the fifty percent (50%) dedicated to the component is within the discretion of the component president.

10.43 In the event that an author contributes a personal work to a component, a written agreement accepting such contribution shall be executed. The terms of the agreement shall include a statement governing the division of royalties between the component and the author.

10.44 In cases of extramural funding, the terms of the funding agreement shall govern the division of any royalties that may result from commercialization of materials resulting there from. In the event that the funding agreement vests royalty rights in a component, and does not provide any royalty share for the author, the author shall be entitled to the same proportionate share he or she would have received if the work had not been extramurally funded. Such a royalty payment to the author, however, may not violate the terms of the funding agreement. Such share shall be a proportion of whatever share is owned by the component under the terms of the funding agreement and this policy.

10.5 Revision of Materials. Materials owned by a component under the terms of this policy shall not be altered or revised without providing the author a reasonable opportunity to assume the responsibility for the revision. If the author declines the opportunity to revise such material, the assignment of responsibility for the revision will be made by the president.

10.6 Withdrawal of Materials. Materials owned by a component shall be withdrawn from use when the component in consultation with the author deems such use to be obsolete or inappropriate. No withdrawal or other discontinuance shall take place that would violate the terms of any licensing or other agreement relating to the materials.

10.7 Use of Copyrighted Software. Texas State University System and its components are committed to: (1) providing faculty, staff and students with the computer hardware and software necessary to perform their respective job tasks and instructional assignments; (2) protecting its computer environment from viruses; and, (3) maintaining compliance with the U.S. copyright laws and software license agreements and discouraging copyright infringement. This policy applies to all component computer users, including faculty, staff, and students. Employees and students, who illegally duplicate software andlor its documentation or otherwise fail to comply with component third party software license agreements, will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment or expulsion from school.

10.71 The use of component-owned or leased hardware or software is limited to component business or instruction- related activities. Software that has not been purchased or licensed by the component or for which the individual user cannot demonstrate or certify purchase or license for business or instructional use may not be loaded onto component-owned or leased computers.

10.72 Copyright Compliance. Users of licensed software must read and comply with the license agreement. When a component has contracted for a site or enterprise license, copying of the software media up to the number of licenses may be allowed, depending on the license agreement. The software user generally may:

Make only one backup copy of the software for archival purposes. If the underlying license is discontinued, this copy must be destroyed. Make a copy if it is required as an essential step (and NOT AS A MERE CONVENIENCE) in installing the software on the computing equipment.

10.73 Federal law requires compliance with the following restrictions when using software acquired by the component:

A user shall not install software on more than one computer, unless written evidence exists that the component has purchased the software and the license gives the purchaser the right to install it. Should a user find such software, the user should immediately uninstall the software, remove the files from the computer, and destroy any media copies. Manuals, and other copyrighted materials, shall not be copied without specific, written permission of the publisher. Upgrading a software package does not release the software user from the terms of the original agreement, unless the software developer changes the license agreement. The old version of the software may not continue to be used on a different computer or be distributed for use to others. When concurrent use is allowed by the license agreement, the number of concurrent users of a local area network (LAN) version of purchased software may not exceed the number of licensed users.

10.74 License Agreements. Each manufacturer includes a license agreement package with its software that details any restrictions on its use. Component users must comply with the vendor's license provisions regarding the use of the software, even though the individual user has not personally signed the license agreement. License agreements differ among the various software vendors and some may grant additional rights, such as allowing use on a portable or home computer. The component shall hold the user responsible for reading, understanding and complying with provisions of the license agreement for each software package.

10.75 Component Responsibility. Each component shall publish software copyright policies and operating procedures that articulate specific steps

implementing this Subparagraph 10.7 and covering, at a minimum, the following topics:

Guidelines for use of component computer hardware and software; Computer and Software Use-User Education; Software Selection, Budgeting & Acquisition; Software Inventory, Audit & Copyright Compliance.

Appendix Item F Listing of Contracted Clinical Agencies

Hospitals/Medical CentersIClinics - San An~elo San Angelo Community Medical Center West Texas Medical Associates Shannon Medical Center Shannon Clinic Baptist Memorial Geriatric Center River Crest Hospital SCCI Hospital - St. John's Campus Goodfellow Air Force Base Clinic

Other HealthlClinic Facilities - San Anrrelo Adult Day Care of San Angelo Angelo Health Care Services Concho Valley Home for Girls Ethicon, Inc. Hospice of San Angelo La Esperanza Clinic MHMR Services for the Concho Valley Planned Parenthood of West Texas S AISD San Angelo State School San Angelo-Tom Green County Health Department AIDS Foundation of San Angelo Angelo Dialysis Center Cardiothoracic & Vascular Surgeons Family Planning of San Angelo Head Start - Tom Green Action Council Institute of Cognitive Development Lighthouse for the Blind San Angelo Developmental Center Texas A&M Agricultural Extension West Texas Rehabilitation Center Vista Care Family Hospice Early Childhood Intervention - Reg. XV

Out of Town Hosuitals/Health Clinic Facilities Abilene Adult Day Care Abilene Regional Medical Center Abilene State School American Cancer Society - Austin Angels At Home - Corsicana

Out of Town Hos~italsIHealth Clinic Facilities (continued) ARRT Program - Abilene Big Spring School District Big Spring State Hospital Christus Spohn Shoreline Hospital Cisco Elementary School Crockett County Care - Ozona Cross Timbers Clinic - DeLeon Day Nursery of Abilene Dialysis Center of Abilene Dora Roberts Rehab. Center - Big Spring Dr. Debbie Dorie Clinic - Eldorado Dr. Marc Schwarz Clinic - Big Spring Dr. Oswalt/Family Health Clinic - Eastland Harris Methodist Erath County Hospital - Stephenvillle I-Iendrick Medical Center - Abilene EIS Hospital - Dallas Kimble Hospital - Junction Lifeline Home Health - Richardson Medical Care Mission - Abilene Merkel School District Mesquite ISD Methodist Hospital - San Antonio Wd1ant.l Memorial Hospital Midland Orthopedic Clinic Mitchell County Hospital - Colorado City Odessa Regional Hospital Outreach Health Services -Abilene Park Haven Nursing - Greenville Pennian General Hospital - Andrews Presbyterian Hospital - Dallas (MSN) Rolling Plains Rural Health Clinic - Sweetwater Scenic Mountain Medical Center - Big Spring Scott & White - Temple Sears Methodist Centers - Abilene Soleus of the Hill Country - Austin South Austin Hospital Stephenville Medical-Surgical Clinic SweetwaterAVolan County Health Dept. Texas Cancer Center - Abilene The House That Kerry Built - Abilene TWU Student Health Clinic VA Medical Center - Big Spring Windcrest Alzheimers Center - Abilene

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee X-1

Article X

Recommendation 10 (5.5.1). The committee recommends that official institutional

approval be given to a written statement of goals and objectives for athletics which

has been developed by the administration, in consultation with the athletic directors,

with appropriate input from the faculty.


The Committee noted that a statement of goals and objectives is a part of the

Master Plan for University Relations and Development which has yet to be given official

institutional approval.

Because the University is undertaking a reorganization (see Recommendation 11),

some parts of the Master Plan for University Relations and Development will no longer

belong to that document. However, since the athletics programs will stay with the current

Vice President for University Relations and Development (to be redesignated “Vice

President for Advancement and Relations”), it was appropriate to consider the statement

of goals for athletics separately.

The statement of goals and objectives for athletics was approved by the President

on July 3, 2002. A copy of the document as approved is attached (Attachment 10A). On

this matter, the approval of the Board of Regents is not required.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee X-2

Attachment 10A UNIVERSITY RELATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN Athletics Goal

Enhance and promote the consistent successes of the University’s athletic programs and the student athletes as a means for building support for the programs and for attracting scholar athletes to ASU.

Over the years, Angelo State University has enjoyed consistent levels of success in its athletic programs. Competing in the Lone Star Conference as a Division II member of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, programs in both men’s and women’s sports have earned numerous playoff and championship berths. These programs have attracted numerous scholar athletes who have brought honor and recognition to the University through their efforts in the classroom as well as on the playing field. The University should enhance the opportunities for success in athletics and increase efforts to promote them. Recommendations:

Establish a permanent Hall of Fame. 2. The athletic program has only one full-time staff member whose job it is to

promote an athletic program that has grown considerably in recent years. Consideration must be given in the near future for an additional person to assist with these efforts. Perhaps less immediate, but nonetheless essential, would be the addition of a person to market the ASU athletic programs and perform related duties such as assisting with fund raising and helping with program and scoreboard advertising.

3. Review the fund-raising efforts of the Ram Club and Belle Associates to

formulate a more active program to increase financial support brought in by the women’s programs.

4. Monitor the athletic interests of current and future students to determine the need

for any additional programs that might be needed to serve those interests bearing in mind the potential impact on financial resources, facilities, and gender equity in athletics.

5. Provide appropriate facility and equipment upgrades to keep programs current and

competitive. 6. Continue to work toward full scholarship funding at authorized NCAA levels.

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee XI-3

Article XI

Recommendation 11 (6.1.1 and 6.1.5). The committee recommends that the

university review and, where appropriate, modify the titles of chief administrators

and the designations of administrative divisions to ensure that they are accurate,

descriptive, and appropriate.


The title and unit designation “Vice President for University Relations and

Development” did not seem accurate. A broad range of functions is included under the

title, and some of them do not appear appropriate.


Draft revisions of a reorganization plan were sent to administrators in April and in

May for discussion and comment. The third draft was approved by the Administrative

Council at its July 9, 2002, meeting. The plan is attached as Appendix 11A.

The title “Vice President for University Relations and Development” was changed

to “Vice President for Advancement and Relations.” The student services functions

formally a part of this division were transferred to Academic Affairs as related functions;

the title “Vice President for Academic Affairs” was changed to “Provost and Vice

President for Academic and Student Affairs.” The title “Vice President for Fiscal

Affairs” was changed to “Vice President for Finance and Administration.” These titles

more accurately describe the functions of the reorganized units than did the former titles.

In addition to relocating Student Services to Academic and Student Affairs, the

reorganization moves Financial Aid and the Carr Scholarship to Finance and

Administration. This puts all the fiscal functions in the same unit.


A major consideration in the reorganization was the necessity to restrict the

number of vice presidents to three. To add a fourth vice president would mandate a

budget increase of about $250,000. Administrative cost increases are not feasible in the

current financial climate. Moreover, one of the performance measures from the

Legislative Budget Board is administrative cost as a percentage of budget; an increase of

this magnitude would raise that number unacceptably.

Approval by the Administrative Council is the final stage for this reorganization.

However, the President has informed the Board of Regents of the Texas State University

System by means of a memorandum to the ASU Local Committee. A copy of that

memorandum is attached (Attachment 11A).


Attachment 11A Reorganization Plan

-, ,-4 8 I ,... ,

ANGELO STATE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

July 12,2002

MEMORANDUM

TO: ASU Local Committee Regent Pollyanna Stephens, Chair Regent Nancy Neal RegentJames Sweatt 111, M.D.

FROM: James Hindman President

- SUBJECT: Angelo State University Administrative Reorganization

Regents Stephens, Neal and Sweatt: After considerable review, Angelo State University plans to implement a new administrative structure on September 1,2002. Two important factors and several related opportunities have provided the impetus for administrative reorganization at Angelo State University.

First, the University undertook a major initiative, in partnership with STAMATS, to develop a comprehensiveMarketing Plan. In it, Angelo State University's Marketing Team recommended that the University's current administrative structure be studied.

Secondly, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation Committee, during their April visit, noted that the title and unit designation "Vice President for University Relations and Development" does not seem accurate and may not be appropriate. According to t h e SACS team, an unusual breadth of functions is included under this title, and some of these functions do not belong to the title, as commonly understood. Therefore, the SACS Reaffirmation Committee adopted Recommendation 11 (6.1.1 and 6.1.5). The Recommendation reads: "The committee recommends that the university review and, where appropriate, modify the titles of chief administrators and the designations of administrative divisions to ensure that they are accurate, descriptive, and appropriate."

Additionally, administrative reorganization allowed the University to unite academic and student affairs, thereby facilitating interaction and coordination of teaching, learning and co-cumcular activities. Also, the University's fiscal functions are now in the same administrative unit. Moreover,

A LIFMRFU OF THF. TEXAS STATE UNlVERSlTY SYSTEM . EQUAL OPPORTUNln EhfPLOYER li

Angelo State University Local Committee Page 2 July 12,2002

the reorganized structure allows the Vice President for Advancement and University Relations' division to concentrate more intensely on development, fundraising and revenue generation, than under the previous organizational structure.

Related opportunities were provided by reorganization to allow modernizing or updating the names of some units - i.e., the Personnel Office becomes Human Resources, the Vice President forFisca1 Affairs becomes the Vice President for Finance and Administration, Provost appropriately becomes a part of the Vice President for Academic Affairs title, etc.

Obviously, there are numerous administrative organizational possibilities. Options multiply, with additional vice presidents. This new organizational structure is based upon the University's desire to maintain three vice presidents. Restricting the University to three vice presidents limits the available options, but does not add significant new administrative costs. Adding a fourth vice president would cost approximately $250,000 in new administrative expenses. Therefore, a fourth vice president will not be added.

The administrative reorganization was approved by ASU's Administrative Council on July 9,2002. The new administrative structure will be included in our formal response to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Reaffirmation Report which must be submitted to SACS in early August. The reorganization structure will be included in the University's new catalog, also.

A narrative of the changes, a current organizational chart and a revised organizational chart are enclosed to explain the new administrative structure.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Best wishes.

Enclosures

xc: Regent Dionicio "Don" Flores, The Texas State University System Chairman Chancellor Lamar Urbanovsky, The Texas State University System Dr. Don Coers, Vice President for Academic Affairs Mrs. Sharon Meyer, Vice President for Fiscal Affairs Mr. Michael P. Ryan, Vice President for University Relations and Development Dr. Kathleen Holcomb, SACS Self-study Director J Dr. Larry Guerrero, ASU Faculty Senate President

NARRATIVE OF THE CHANGES

A. PRESIDENT

SAME AS NOW CONFIGURED, EXCEPT:

1. Institutional Effectiveness becomes lnstitutional Planning and Effectiveness 2. West Texas Training Center moves to Vice President for Finance and Administration 3. Marketing (new unit to be added when budget permits)

B. VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS becomes PROVOST AND VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AND STUDENT AFFAIRS

SAME AS NOW CONFIGURED. EXCEPT:

1. Institutional Planning, Research, and Assessment becomes Institutional Research and Assessment.

2. Dean of Student Life moves from Vice President for University Relations and Development. a. Associate Dean -Student Services (added to chart) b. Assistant Dean - Student Development (added to chart) c. Student Government (changed from Student Senate) d. Residence Life e. Health Clinic and Counseling f. University Recreation and Intramurals g. Program Office

3. Center for Career Development becomes Career Development and moves from Vice President for University Relations and Development.

4. International Studies Programs moves to Center for Academic Excellence and becomes International Studies.

5. The four areas denoted under the Information Technology, Computer Center, Telecommunications, Technical Services, and Customer Support and Instructional Technology were removed from the Organization Chart and will now be noted under a single heading.

C. VICE PRESIDENT FOR UNIVERSITY RELATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT becomes VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADVANCEMENT AND UNIVERSITY RELATIONS

SAME AS NOW CONFIGURED, EXCEPT:

1. Auxiliary Facilities becomes Special Events Facilitieslservices. 2. Dean of Student Life moves to Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs. 3. Financial Aid and Carr Scholarship Office moves to Vice President for Finance and Administration. 4. Center for Career Development moves to Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs.

D. VICE PRESIDENT FOR FISCAL AFFAIRS becomes VICE PRESIDENT FOR FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

SAME AS NOW CONFIGURED. EXCEPT:

1. Personnel Office becomes Human Resources. 2. Financial Aid and Carr Scholarship Office moves from Vice President for University Relations and

Development. 3. West Texas Training Center moves from President's Office.

Angelo State University Administrative Organization

EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 20,2002

CARR SCHOLARSHIP I ----- FOUNDATION AUDITOR

I INSTITUTIONAL 1 ASSISTANT TO EFFECTIVENESS THE PRESIDENT

DIRECTOR. WEST TEXAS UNIVERSITY NEWS AND TRAINING CENTER INFORMATION SERVICE

VlCE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS 1

I

ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE

DEVELOPMENT

ALUMNI RELATIONS

INVENTORY I I DEAN OF STUDENT LlFE

I BUSINESS SERVICES

PURCHASING

I 1

STUDENT SENATE b===l INTERNATIONAL I 1 1( STUDIES PROGRAMS I IACCOUNTING. ECONOMICS. 11 I RESIDENCE LlFE c I I , ' I JI I I AND FINANCE

ART AND MUSIC PHYS!CAL PLANT H i I AEROSPACE STUDIES 4

UNIVERSITY THEATRE m AUXILIARY FACILITIES - ENGLISH I COMPUTER SCF~

STEPHENS ARENA

(CONTRACTED) KlNESlOLOGY

GOVERNMENT I PROGRAMS I

i HISTORY

MODERN LANGUAGES

PROGRAM OFFICE - 1 - INTERNATIONAL

AND ASSESSMENT

SMALL BUSINESS UNIVERSITY POLICE u DEAN OF THE

COLLEGE OF SCIENCES

RISK MANAGEMENT DEAN OF THE

SCHOOL OF D1ICATON I

FACULTY SENATE c J AGRICULTURE

MIR CENTER

BIOLOGY

CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY

I

WOMEN S INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS

1 MATHEMATICS REGISTRAR'S OFFICE

k NURSING VETERANS AFFAIRS t' I

PHYSICAL THERAPY

4 PHYSICS

PLANETARIUM

CONTINUING STUDIES I TECHNICAL SERVICES

CUSTOMER SUPPORT AND INSTRUCTIONAL

TECHNOLOGY P

Angelo State University Administrative Organization

EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1,2002

CARR SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION MARKETING

UNIVERSITY NEWS AND INFORMATION SERVICE

SPORTS INFORMATION

I

BUDGET AND INVESTMENl ALUMNI RELATIONS

DEVELOPMENT

- - . . . -. . . - . . 1 ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE (

ACCOUNTING I l I ~ c u ~ T . ) ) ~ ~ ~ ~ DEVELO>MENT CENTER OPPORTUNITY StHVlCES STUDIES PROGRAMS

ATHLETICS-MEN'S

BUSINESS SERVICES ART AND MUSIC Y RISK MANAGEMENT

FACILITIESISERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES - UNIVERSITY THEATRE I AEROSPACE STUDIES

POST OFFICE

PRINT SHOP

PURCHASING

ENGLISH Y COMPUTER SCIENCE

1 GOVERNMENT H UNIVERSITY LAKE

1 HISTORY H 1 THE PAVllLlON 1

PROGRAMS - (CONTRACTED)

UNIVERSITY POLICE LC__]

' D U N OF THE COLLEGE OF SCIENCES I INTERNATIONAL STUDEhT

FACULTY SENATE --

UNIVERSITY RANCH 1- CONTINUING STUDIES

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY F PROGRAM OFFICE

RESIDENCE LIFE

STUDENT SENATE

1 COMPUTER C E & R ~

BIOCHEMISTRY AND INSTRUCTIONAL

MATHEMATICS TECHNICAL SERVICES

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH

REGISTRAR'S OFFICE

PHYSICAL THERAPY

PHYSICS

PLANETARIUM

DEANOF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION VETERANS AFFAIRS

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee XII-1

Article XII

Recommendation 12 (6.2.2). The committee recommends that a fundraising

strategy and plan be incorporated into the university planning process and be

regularly evaluated.


The Committee noted that the draft Master Plan for University Relations and

Development recommends that a development strategy be written and that the Self-Study

assumed that fundraising policies would be in place and available throughout the campus.

The Committee therefore recommended that a fundraising strategy and plan be

incorporated into the university planning process and be regularly evaluated.


The University will hire a Director of Development. The writing of a

development plan will be one of the first responsibilities of the person hired. The

position announcement is attached (Attachment 12A).

However, it is possible at this time to sketch some of the elements of a

development plan. These will begin with a strategy for initiating an annual campaign, the

writing of materials to support the annual campaign, and implementing the annual

campaign. The second stage depends on the evaluation of the success of the campaign

and recommendations for improving it; the third stage is to implement the second year of

the annual campaign with provisions to continue it.

The experience with the annual campaign will lead to a feasibility study to

determine the merits of implementing a major capital campaign.


The process described in this preliminary plan will take four years. Its success

will be measured by the results of the annual campaign, which will bring in monies to be

used for academic enrichment and general campus enhancement.


Attachment 12A Job Announcement, Director of Development

POSITION:

DATE O F APPOINTMENT:

SALARY:

RESPONSIBILITIES:

QUALIFICATIONS: Academic:

Experience:

SPECIAL SKILLS1 REQUIREMENTS:

APPLY TO:

APPLICATION DEADLINE:

Angelo State University San Angelo, Texas 76909

Announcement of Staff Vacancy (Unclassified Staff P osition)

Director of Development University Relations and Development Job Posting #: 020493

August 19,2002

$50,000 - $57,000 annual salary, plus attractive employee benefits package.

Essential Functions: Works cooperatively with others engaged in development activities to plan, organize, implement, and evaluate a variety of fund raising programs and campaigns to encourage individuals and groups to donate money or other gifts to the University; assists University support groups, such as President's Circle, Alumni, Ram Club, and other support groups; creates and participates in activities and programs to acquire other assets for the University, such as manuscripts, books, art work, and equipment.

Develops fund raising materials and publications; composes a variety of correspondence related to the development and enhancement of donations and gifts to the,University; reviews and approves purchase requisitions and other administrative documents; prepares and administers the annual budget for the program; ensures that expenditures comply with budget limitations and University policies; attends a variety of hnd raising and University events, including evenings andlor weekends; researches legal and financial records to determine ownership, revenues, assets, and other information. Must be willing and able to travel.

Other Functions: Ensures that donations and program activities and events comply with State, Board of Regents, NCAA, and IRS rules and regulations; prepares the President's Report, a newsletter containing articles, donor lists, and other promotional and fund raising information; attends training, seminars, workshops, conferences, and other meetings; performs related duties as assigned.

Possession of a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university.

Three years of professional level marketing, public relations, fund raising, or directly related experience. Experience in college/university development programs preferred.

Knowledge of annual and capital campaign procedures; knowledge of wills, trusts, and related legal documents; knowledge of the principles and practices of program and of ice administration; knowledge of business communication, including spelling, grammar, and punctuation; ability to manage donation and endowment records; ability to operate a personal computer and utilize word processing/database software and Internet resources; ability to organize and complete tasks in an accurate and timely manner; ability to perform work requiring accuracy and attention to detail; skill in oral and written communication; skill in interpersonal relations.

Send staff application, resume, letter of interest, and letters from three professional references to: Personnel Office Angelo State University P.O. Box 11009 San Angelo, TX 76909

APPROVED: VICE PRESIDENTFOMR UNIVERSITY AEIATIONS

Open, but may be filled anytime after July 22,2002.

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITYIAFFIR~~ATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER

Response to the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee XIII-1

Article XIII

Recommendation 13 (6.4.3). The committee recommends that the university take

reasonable steps to assure a healthful, safe, and secure environment for all members

of the campus community.


In two facilities, the Committee found areas in need of attention to ensure a

healthful and safe environment.

In the Carr Building, one of the art studios requires improvements in ventilation.

A room in the Cavness Science Building being used to teach chemistry is without

an emergency shower.

Response to Narrative Elements Carr ventilation

The Carr Building is scheduled for renovation. Plans will be presented to the

Board of Regents at its November meeting, and bids will be let as soon as possible

thereafter. Construction should begin in Spring 2003 and finish by the fall of 2004.

As part of this renovation, a new major studio will be constructed on the ground

floor. It will be separately ventilated with proper equipment. It will also have access to

outside air circulation. The jewelry studio, which has particular ventilation requirements,

will be located there. The other studios will then shift.

When the ventilation system in the present building is operating normally, the air

quality in the art studios is satisfactory, according to an Industrial Hygiene survey

conducted by Argus Environmental Consultants in 1998. However, the ventilation

apparatus in the printmaking studio has been inoperable for some months. Parts have


been on order since early in the spring semester, but the system is old and not easy to

repair.

The printmaking studio has had the most urgent toxicity problem in any case, as

turpentine was used as a solvent in the past. Both instructors who use that room have

changed from oil-based to water-soluble inks. This has eliminated the worst of the

problem. The printmaking studio will move to a larger room with a newer ventilation

system when the renovation is complete.

Cavness emergency shower

When the laboratory annex to the Cavness Science Building is finished, this will

cease to be a problem. Completion is scheduled for the fall of 2004.

Two steps have been taken to alleviate the problem until then. The Risk Manager

believes these will suffice.

(1) The room has been equipped with eyewash hoses on the faucets, which are

actually more effective than an emergency shower for the kind of experiments conducted

in the room. The laboratory is being used for a class in chemistry for non-majors, which

has a very small laboratory component. There are also emergency showers in the two

adjacent rooms accessible either through the main door of the classroom or through a

storeroom adjoining the rooms.

(2) The chemistry department undertakes not to conduct any experiments in this

room which use any agents stronger than those found in any common household kitchen.

Such experiments will be moved to another room.



The recommendation mentions a healthful, safe, and secure environment for all

members of the campus community.


Angelo State University is committed to providing a healthful, safe, and secure

environment. Although this becomes more difficult as the buildings age, the university

has invested significantly in this effort.

One of seven goals of the University Relations and Development (now

Advancement and University Relations) Master Plan is “Develop new activities and

improve physical conditions or facilities, which will lead to enhancement of the campus

safety, health, and security.” Thirteen recommendations support this goal.

The master schedule for building projects has been posted on the University’s

Web Page. A copy of that schedule appears as Attachment 13A.


Attachment 13A Master Schedule of Building Projects

CURRENT ACADEMIC BUILDING PROJECTS

Project Summary

Project Name Architect Funding Source Departments Involved Individuals Involved

Porter Henderson Library

Third Floor (Addition) 41,369 square feet

Darrow, McSpedden and Sellars

(San Angelo)

Tuition Revenue Bond 2001 Approval

$7,000,000

Comm., Drama, & Jour.; Center for Acad. Excel.;

Library; Info. Tech.

N. Allen, R. Beck, D. Coers, J. Eli,

N. Flynn, M. Fortin, D. Fox, J. Holland, J. Moore, P. Turner

Carr Education-Fine Arts (Addition/Renovation)

Education; Comm., Drama, & Jour.; Art & Music; Info. Tech

D. Coers, B. Doll, J. Eli, D. Fox

J. Holland, P. Lee D. Scott, J. Vinklarek

Cavness Science and Human Anatomy Lab (Addition/Renovation)

Biology; Chemistry; Physical Therapy;

Info. Tech

K. Cegles, D. Coers D. Fox, J. Hubbard, D. Loyd, K. McCoy,

G. Shankle Center for Human

Performance (Partial Renovation)

Kell Munoz (San Antonio)

Tuition Revenue Bond 2001 Approval

$8,763,000

Kinesiology Physical Therapy

K. Cegles, M. Croy, D. Coers, D. Loyd

Food Product Safety Lab (Addition)

Torres Architects (San Angelo)

San Angelo Health Foundation Grant;

Federal Grant*; Dodge-Jones

Foundation*; HEAF $975,000**

Agriculture M. Carr, D. Coers, G. Engdahl, D. Loyd

Hardeman Building (Renovation) tba HEAF tba tba

*pending **not including possible federal grant of $650,000


Construction Stages

Project Name Selection of Architect

Campus Input Into Preliminary Plans

Preliminary Plans Presented to TSUS

Regents

Bids for Construction

Presented to TSUS Regents

Construction Begins/Ends

Porter Henderson Library August 2001 September 2001-

November 2001 February 2002 November 2002 December 2002 April 2004

Carr Education-Fine Arts

Cavness Science Human Anatomy

Lab Center for Human

Performance

February 2002 April 2002 - July 2002 August 2002 November 2002

Food Product Safety Lab February 2002 March 2002 -

July 2002 August 2002 November 2002

Hardeman Building

Bid Stages

Project Name Advertise Bids in Major Newspapers

Plans Out for Bid

Bids Due and Opened

Recommendations and Board Motions

Forwarded to TSUS Office

Board Review of Recommendtions

and Motions

Porter Henderson Library September 1, 2002 September 5, 2002 October 3, 2002 October 10, 2002 November 7-8, 2002

Carr Education-Fine Arts

Cavness Science Human Anatomy

Lab Center for Human

Performance

September 1, 2002 September 5, 2002 October 1 & 3, 2002 October 14, 2002 November 7-8, 2002

Food Product Safety Lab September 1, 2002 September 5, 2002 October 1 & 3, 2002 October 14, 2002 November 7-8, 2002

Hardeman Building

Meeting Dates with Pat Sullivan, Director of Planning and Construction, Texas State University System

Pat Sullivan will be on our campus on the second and fourth Thursday of each month. Academic representatives may meet with him during those times to discuss any issue that may arise during the planning and construction of our various projects.

ASU Home .:. Academic Affairs .:. Academic Resources .:. Colleges and Schools .:. Faculty Resources .:. Student Resources Last Updated June 21, 2002 .:. Contact [email protected] .:. Office of Academic Affairs .:. Comments [email protected]


Article XIV Timetable

The following section contains charts for each recommendation showing the

deficiency, identified from the narrative of the report, the person(s) or department(s)

responsible for remedying the deficiency, a summary of the elements of the remedy, and

a timetable of accomplished and projected tasks.

Recommendation 1. (Section 3.1) The committee recommends that ASU implement a systematic, broad based, interrelated, consistent, and appropriate process to evaluate all educational programs, that it use evaluation results to improve these programs, and that such uses be documented.

Timetable

Timetable

June 02. Changed instructions in June 02 for AY 03 plans (to be filed Nov. 02).

June 02. Changed forms to show this.

Include in review letters (copies to deans, VPAA) sent post-report (Nov. 02).

Aug. 02. Program Review revised for fall Deans & Department Heads' approval.

Deficiency (from narrative)

Some departments are submitting plans which are not satisfactory for one reason or another

Not all departments are using a standardized test

Responsible Agent

IE Advisory comrnittee-

What makes plans unsatisfactory?

Should we recommend a uniform plan?

Action

The plans are unsatisfactory because departments are marlung time-too many measures that mean too little.

We should standardize the plan to include ( I ) a test of knowledge to measure the validity of the major program and (2) responses of alumni to help align curricula to practice in the field or to graduate programs. A third indicator would be designed by the department.

We should make it easier to document that the loop has been closed.

We should not force closure too early or for too few cases, but it should be clear that adjustment is expected.

Program review should be incorporated into this cycle. Specifically, the external reviewer should be asked to check the subject matter of any local "standardized" test for content validity.

Timetable

IE will administer METs beginning F 02. A new part-time secretary will assist.

Dual Credit / Early Admission was included as part of a retention study. Preliminary results on a small number of students indicate a lower retention rate than for all students. The study of the next cohort (1995, scheduled for fall 2002) should give us a better idea.

Some academic partnerships have been evaluated "informally" up to 2001. (Dual Credit program cited.)

IE Advisory committee- What process is now being used? Is it worlung? Are improvements being made?

Institutional Research

The current system for administration of the standardized tests is not satisfactory.

We should start with the partnerships mentioned and assess them incrementally by designing processes that will get information that will be useful to us.

For example, for the dual credit program: How well do the students do? How many do we get as freshmen? How many do we retain? Is this experience hurting their high school grades or experience?

Recommendation 2 (3.1). The committee recommends that ASU implement universally a plan to evaluate its educational success with respect to student achievement, including, as appropriate, course completions, state licensing examinations, job placement rates, and follow-up studies of alumni.

Deficiency Responsible Agent Action Timetable

Not consistently and IE Advisory committee- systematically using job placement rates and career advancement data to IPRA, Alumni Relations evaluate educational (surveys, esp. Master's success with respect to student achievement.

Follow-up studies of alumni not effective

level graduates)

Getting this information is not easy, but it's a particularly good to measure the effectiveness of programs. It's no longer supplied by THECB or TWC, so we will have to get it through alumni surveys. We will have to get better results than

I we have been getting.

Perhaps we should concentrate on helping one or two departments per year set up methods for getting this information. The Physics Department's use of an interactive website could help other departments'. The Art Department needs such information for its reaccredidation.

It's more effective if we get some information before they leave. That way, we will have a little-and the alums will know we might be

I asking them for more information later.

Summer 2002. Used Physics model for Art & Music and Computer Science.

July 02. Asked departments to get addresses or permanent e- mails. Will also get this ' information

1 during graduation I practice (Aug.

Timetable 3

Timetable

Course Completions

State licensing exams

IE Advisory Committee

Nursing, Physical Therapy, Biology (for Medical Technology), Education, Teacher Certification progs

The data are reported to the Legislative Budget Board but are not disaggregated for the departments, who have not requested them. Every department with licensure for its graduates currently uses that information to adjust curricula.

July 02. Worked with Career Services to write better graduating student surveys and to design some templates for targeted surveys. Not relevant.

In place.

Recommendation 3 (3.2). The committee recommends that for each administrative and support service unit, the university: a) establish a clearly defined purpose in support of the university's mission and goals; b) formulate goals in support of each unit; c) develop and implement procedures to evaluate the extent to which these goals are being achieved in each unit; and d) document the use of these results to improve services provided by each unit.

Timetable

Timetable

June 02. Redesigned IE format for July 31 submission deadline. June 02. Redesigned IE requirements for administrative departments during for July 31, 2002, submission deadline.

June 02. Revised reporting form to show connection with previous year's assessment. In place

Action

For both administration and student support groups, the only missing compliance piece mentioned was benchmarks.

The standard IE procedure for administrative and student support units was revised to make a benchmark mandatory. Either a unit must show how it is doing in comparison to a professional standard or a best practices standard, or it must show that it sets such standards.

Additionally, because the Legislature mandates a Customer Service survey every other year, a second recommended procedure for every office is a satisfaction survey. The results of individual surveys can be combined to provide data for the university as a whole The IE Committee has generated a list of service activities that should be formally assessed, and responsibility for each one is now designated.

Deficiency

Not all administrative units are in complete compliance

Not all student support units are in complete compliance

Not all service activities are formally assessed

Responsible Agent

IE Advisory committee- Benchmarks

IE Advisory committee- Benchmarks

IE Advisory committee-

Recommendation 5 (4.2.5). The committee recommends that ASU conduct a systematic program of undergraduate academic advising for all programs.

Number of advisees ranges from 10 to 80 per [faculty] advisor

Deficiency

Each academic department maintains its own system of advisement and of assignment of students to advisors.

Office of Academic Advising Center for Academic Excellence

Responsible Agent

Hire a Director of Academic Advising

f i r e one more Academic Advisor (four in total)

Action

Transfer the advising of undeclared students to the Office of Academic Advising, thereby freeing 30 faculty advisors for advising in their departments.

Timetable

August 1,2002 -7 September 1, 2002 September 1, 2002

I Undertake the advising of all at-risk students: 1 Fall 2002 I

Academic Departments

Publish in the Bulletin and class schedule the following standardized information:

1. Academic advising period 2. Who will advise students in each program 3. Preferred method of contact

Administrative Council's approval of plan

Sept. 13,2002. 2003-2005 Bulletin to publisher. Oct. 7,2002. Spring 2003 Class Schedule to

-

undeclared, probationary, provisional. Deans' and Department Heads' approval of plan

July 9, 2002

Timetable

June 20,2002

Recommendation 6 (4.3.4). The committee recommends that the university assess placement of graduate students in their fields of study and demonstrate the effective relationship between curricular content and current practices in those fields of specialization.

Timetable

Timetable

There is no systematic follow-up of graduates and assessment of graduates' placements in the field

Action Deficiency Responsible Agent

Graduate Dean

Institutional Research

As of July 1, the following procedures will be in place: 1. Recent graduates will be sent a survey 30 days

after graduation asking for employment information, including questions about preparation for employment

2. Based on responses to the survey, the departments will re-examine and adjust curricula. Each program will submit a report to the Graduate Council by December 15 of each year.

3. The survey will focus on the cumculum. Institutional Research/Assessment officer will be consulted about how to word the curriculum-career questions.

4. Departments with Advisory Boards will collect information about current practices in the field. These include some of our biggest graduate programs: Education, Agriculture, MBA, and Physical Therapy.

1

July 1,2002

December 15, 2002 (and subsequent years)

March 1, 2003 (and subsequently)

Recommendation 7 (4.3.5). The committee recommends that the university implement the frequent systematic evaluation of graduate curricular offerings and program requirements.

Timetable

Timetable

May 2002

Action

Program review for graduate and undergraduate programs.wil1 be separated. A graduate program reviewer will be invited in addition to the one for the undergraduate programs.

The program reviews should use the survey results mentioned in Recommendation 6 above.

The reviews should focus on the future, rather than the past, of the program. That is, they should identify improvements that should be made.

The schedule established in the Academic Master Plan (one department from each college per year) should be maintained. The School of Education's review is ongoing until NCATE accreditation is achieved, after which it will follow that body's schedule.

Deficiency

Systematic and frequent review of graduate programs not documented

Responsible Agent

Graduate Dean

Graduate Council

Department Heads

Recommendation 8 (4.3.5). The committee recommends that the university implement frequent, systematic evaluation and data gathering to test the effectiveness of graduate instruction, and if appropriate, revise the instructional process based on the results of the evaluations.


No regular and systematic Graduate Dean The IDEA evaluation of instruction should occur Summer 02 evaluation or follow-up of each time a graduate course is offered. graduate students and their Department Heads Ongoing, as soon as employers Employers with more than 5 ASU master's any such employer is

IPRA program alumni will be surveyed about the identified from the performance of those alumni in the aggregate. survey returns.

Timetable

Recommendation 9 (4.5). The committee recommends that the university formulate clear and explicit goals for its distance education program and demonstrate that they are consistent with the university's purpose.

Timetable 11

Timetable

June 20,2002

July 9,2002

In advance of September 2003 deadline

Deficiency -

No university-wide formulated goals for distance learning

Responsible Agent pp

Associate VPAA Ad hoc distance learning committee

Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

Action

Distance Education Plan approved by Deans and Department Heads Distance Education Plan approved by Administrative Council Distance Education Plan to THECB

Recommendation 10 (5.5.1). The committee recommends that official institutional approval be given to a written statement of goals and objectives for athletics which has been developed by the administration, in consultation with the athletic directors, with appropriate input from the faculty.

Deficiency

Timetable

Statement of goals and objectives for athletics, part of URD Master Plan, has yet to be given official institutional approval

Timetable Responsible Agent

VP URD

President

Action

Statement drafted

Statement approved

June 2002

July 2002

Recommendation 11 (6.1.1 and 6.1.5). The committee recommends that the university review and, where appropriate, modify the titles of chief administrators and the designations of administrative divisions to ensure that they are accurate, descriptive, and appropriate.

Timetable


"VP URDnot accurate President Reorganization presented to July 9,2002 Administrative Council for final approval

"VP URDnot appropriate President Renamed "Vice President for July 9,2002 Advancement and University Relations"

Organizational structure President Reorganization moves student services should be re-examined re VP URD unit-variety, depth, and breadth of the operations within this unit may cause difficulty from a planning, assessment, and implementation perspective

to Academic Affairs and Financial Aid to Finance and Administration.

Recommendation 12 (6.2.2). The committee recommends that a fundraising strategy and plan be incorporated into the university planning process and be regularly evaluated.

Timetable

Timetable

2002-2003

2003-04

2004-05

Deficiency

Fundraising strategy and plan not available.

Responsible Agent

VP URD

Action

First Year I. Employ a new Director of

Development 2. Develop a strategy for initiating

an annual campaign 3. Develop materials to support the

annual campaign

Second Year I . Employ a secretary 2. Implement the annual campaign 3. Evaluate the success of the

campaign 4. Make recommendations for ways

to improve the campaign 5. Revise where necessary the

campaign materials and prepare materials for 2004-05 campaign

Third Year I. Implement second year of annual

campaign 2. Evaluate and where appropriate

make adjustments to campaign process

3. Prepare campaign materials for 2005-06

Timetable 15

Fourth Year 1. Conduct annual campaign (third

cycle) 2. Using results from first three

annual campaign cycles, do a feasibility study to determine merits of implementing a major capital campaign

3. Employ an outside firm to help conduct this study and prepare recommendations

2005-06

Spring 2006

Recommendation 13 (6.4.3). The committee recommends that the university take reasonable steps to assure a healthful, safe, and secure environment for all members of the campus community.

Art studios in Can require improvements in ventilation

Building Coordinator Art faculty

Timetable Deficiency

Risk Management

The Carr building is scheduled for renovation. Plans will be presented to the Board of Regents at its November meeting, and bids will be let as soon as possible thereafter. Construction should begin in Spring 2003.

Responsible Agent

Both instructors who use that room have changed from oil-based to water-soluble inks. This has eliminated the worst of the problem. The printmaking studio will move to a larger room with a newer ventilation system when the renovation is comulete.

Action

November 2002

Summer 2002

Fall 2004

A chemistry lab is without an emergency shower

Building Coordinator Chemistry faculty

Risk Management

VP URD

When the laboratory annex to the Cavness Science Building is finished, this will cease to be a problem. That is expected to be Fall 2004.

Two steps have been taken to alleviate the problem until then. The Risk Manager believes these will suffice.

(1) The room has been equipped with eyewash hoses on the faucets, which are actually more effective than an emergency shower for the kind of experiments conducted in the room. The laboratory is being used for a class in chemistry for non-majors, which has a very small laboratory

Fall 2004

May 2002

Timetable

Timetable

component. There are also emergency showers in the two adjacent rooms accessible either through the main door of the classroom or through a storeroom adjoining the rooms.

(2) The chemistry department undertakes not to conduct any experiments in this room which use any agents stronger than those found in any common household kitchen. Such experiments will be moved to another room.

May 2002

angelo state university’s responses to the reaffirmation ... 2002...showing the deficiency...

Documents