ilt-abhe.orgilt-abhe.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2017-05-04-insti… · web viewinstitutional...

Institutional Assessment 3rd Quarter Report

ContentsExecutive Summary6Introduction6Office of the President6Office of Academic Affairs7Office of Academic Affairs Library8Office of Educational Ministry8Office of Student and Religious Life9Office of Admissions9Office of Institutional Advancement9Office of Business, Finance, and Administration9Office of the President10Mission Statement10Objectives10Assessment Instruments10Administration11Staffing11Board Membership12Strategic Plan12Annual Report13Plans18Budget18Summary19Office of Academic Affairs21Mission Statement21Objectives21Assessment Instruments21Administration22Staffing22Strategic Plan25Annual Report26Benchmarking36Plans36Budget36Statistics and Reports37Summary50Office of Academic Affairs - Library51Mission Statement51Objectives51Assessment Instruments51Staffing52Strategic Plan52Annual Report53Benchmarking65Budget66Statistics and Reports66Summary71Office of Educational Ministry72Mission Statement72Objectives72Assessment Instruments72Administration73Staffing73Strategic Plan74Annual Report75Budget81Statistics and Reports82Summary91Office of Admissions92Mission Statement92Objectives92Assessment Instrument92Administration93Staffing93Annual Report94Plans97Budget97Statistics97Summary102Office of Student and Religious Life103Mission103Objectives103Assessment Plan103Administration104Staffing104Strategic Plan104Annual Report105Budget114Statistics and Reports115Summary118Office of Institutional Advancement120Mission Statement120Objectives120Assessment Instruments120Administration121Staffing121Strategic Plan121Annual Report122Benchmarking126Analysis of Income Streams126Major Donor Identification127Plans129Budget129Statistics and Reports131Summary133Office of Business, Finance, and Administration135Mission Statement135Objectives135Assessment Instruments135Administration136Staffing136Strategic Plan137Annual Report139Benchmarking152Plans154Budget155Statistics and Reports159Financial Aid159Financial160Personnel170Summary181

Executive SummaryIntroduction

The Institute of Lutheran Theology is a candidate for accreditation with the Associate of Higher Biblical Education. As a part of the accreditation process and in preparation for a site visit in the fall of 2017, ILT has accelerated the assessment process where possible and prepared this third quarter report.

The 2016-2017 Institutional Assessment Third Quarter Report reports all the assessment information available at the end of the third quarter of the 2016-2017 fiscal year (March). This report did not strictly follow the Institutional Assessment Plan as it was prepared for this assessment cycle. In the first place, the plan was revised. It became clear once the initial plan was put into place for the 2014-2015 fiscal year that the useful information for the budgeting process could not all be collected and evaluated before the budget needed to be finished. The new assessment plan allows the assessment data to have a strong influence on the Strategic Plan, the departmental plans, and the budget. Secondly, many of the assessment instruments were implemented earlier than scheduled for the sake of creating as comprehensive and complete a third quarter report as possible.

Each department of ILT has been evaluated according to its own mission and objectives. The conclusions found here report the result of the overall data collection for each department. In general, ILT accomplishes its institutional mission. The students believe the courses provided relevant information for the degree or certificate they are endeavoring to earn. The students and the administration evaluate both the faculty and the services offered to the students very highly. The staff and faculty work together to provide a high-quality education to students and to prepare them to work in congregations within the church.

There are some weaknesses which ILT must address. The two primary weaknesses are staffing and cashflow. The fulltime staff of ILT typically have more than one responsibility as staff members. Many have responsibilities which cross over from one department to another. ILT does not have enough staff to reasonably accomplish all the regular tasks which are common for an educational institution. The cashflow has been a concern for many years. ILT has struggled to keep up with its growth and with the revenue being primarily dependent upon donations. Because of how quickly ILT has grown in the last few years and the growing needs of the institution, ILT has not been able to create a cash reserve.

ILT has promise for a bright future. It has a dedicated staff, a highly qualified and effective faculty, and an innovative educational model which can serve to raise up Christian pastors, teacher, and lay people to proclaim the gospel of Jesus to the secular world. This report shows that ILT is already doing this and that its influence is already being felt among those congregations where its student serve.

Office of the President

The Office of the President is dedicated to the mission and future of the Institute of Lutheran Theology. The President meets regularly with board members and the administration to plan and strategize the best ways in which the students and constituents of ILT can be served. Changes in the institutional structure and staffing created significant changes in the operations of the Office of the President. The Office of the President was concerned with Board relations, institutional structure and administration, and donor management and development. Because of the institutional changes, primarily with the addition of the Office of Institutional Advancement and the Director of Institutional Advancement, the Office of the President is taking a supervisory role with donor management and development. It is important to note that the President remains active in the work of donor development and planning. He works closely with the Office of Institutional Advancement and its director to cultivate the ILT donor relations and database. The President is now fully and only involved with board relations and administrative oversite. He is a part of the decision-making process of each part of the institution without being directly involved in the donor data management.

Objective One: The President effectively leads ILT in fulfilling its mission.

The President of ILT is deeply committed to the mission of ILT. He consistently holds the mission of ILT before the board, the administration, the faculty, and the staff. He leads ILT to make strategic decisions in all its functions which are in accord with that mission.

Objective Two: The President assures that administrative personnel are effectively leading their departments in fulfilling ILTs mission.

The President, through formal performance evaluation and regular administrative meetings, evaluates and directs the efforts of the administration. His evaluation helps to focus the efforts of all the administrators toward the mission and goals of the institution.

Objective Three: The President recommends to the Board of Directors a Strategic Plan that is responsive to ILTs constituencies, realistic in its goals, and in accord with ILTs mission.

While informal strategic planning has been done since the beginning, the formal five-year Strategic Plan is in its first year. The revised Institutional Assessment Plan allows for the Institutional and Academic Assessment Reports to inform proposals which the administration can bring to the President for strategic planning. The President takes these into consideration and meets with the Board of Directors in January to create the Strategic Plan for the next five year. This meeting will happen according to this plan for the first time in January of 2018. The Strategic Plan is a central document of the administration as it makes decisions throughout the year.

Objective Four: The President effectively communicates with and develops the Board of Directors.

The President has a good relationship with the Board of Directors. He meets regularly with the Board Finance Committee and as scheduled with the Board Executive Committee. He keeps the board informed with the operation of the institution in a timely and efficient way. The board trusts the President and works with him to fulfill the mission of ILT.

Objective Five: The President assures the excellence of the academic programs.

The President is active in the administration of both the graduate and certificate schools. He participates as a faculty member in the faculty senate for the graduate school. The president also teaches a fulltime load of courses.

Objectives Six: The President effectively oversees ILTs finances and other resources.

The President meets regularly with the Comptroller and participates in the major financial decisions which ILT faces. He is an active participate in the Board Finance Committee. He also reviews and give an evaluation of the Comptrollers work with the finances.

Office of Academic Affairs

The Office of Academic Affairs is dedicated to the development of students through educational excellence. It has staff and faculty who are qualified and excel in providing programs of study which help prepare students for congregational life and develop them as theologians and ministers of the cross. The Office of Academic Affairs has significant growth in the programs offered over the last year. The development of contextual education, revision of the programs offered, revision of the Faculty Handbook, and proposal for awarding scholarships have changed and expanded the work which this department does as a part of the institution.

Objective One: The Office of Academic Affairs provides high-quality instruction to ILTs graduate students.

The opinion of the students and the evaluations of both faculty and the syllabi indicate that ILT offers a high level of quality education to its students in the graduate programs. The students are generally very happy with the content and quality of the courses in which they participate. The faculty evaluations show that the faculty are competent and professional with the students. There have been no formal complaints by a student against any faculty member.

Objective Two: The Office of Academic Affairs assures that its personnel provide students, faculty, and staff with professional and competent service.

The staff evaluations are not yet complete. The Faculty evaluation and student opinion, however, show excellence in the facultys ability to communicate and relate to the students. No formal complaints have been made concerning the personnel of the Office of Academic Affairs. The personnel make every effort to accommodate the needs of those who they serve.

Objective Three: The Office of Academic Affairs provides effective support to the faculty in designing and administering its academic programs.

The Office of Academic Affairs faces some challenges regarding this objective because the faculty are part-time and deployed. To some degree these challenges are unique to ILT because the primary method of course delivery is online conferencing. While this give ILT the opportunity to bring scholars together from all over North America, it creates challenges in supporting and collaborating with the faculty. The Dean of Academic affairs convenes regular faculty meetings to overcome these challenges. The Department Heads make evaluations of the syllabi for their departments toward this same goal. The Office of Academic Affairs is meeting the challenges using the resources available to it.

Objective Four: The Office of Academic Affairs works to assure that ILTs graduate programs have satisfactory retention and graduation rates.

The Office of Academic Affairs has an exemplary record concerning graduation and retention rates. It is significantly above the ABHE average in both categories. This year the Master of Divinity program had a retention of 100%. Students who take classes at ILT can expect classes relevant to their employment goals and employment after graduation.

Office of Academic Affairs Library

The library services and collection are a power tool for the student body to use. The library collection itself is a testament to the desire for the ILT constituents to see the school succeeds. The whole library collection was received through the generosity of donors and the hard work of library staff to build a collection which would support the studies of the students. Despite the obstacles inherent in the ILT educational system, the library functions effectively to bring these resources to the student in a useful way. The library stands as the greatest services offered to students.

Objective One: The Library maintains a collection of resources adequate to support all the educational programs of ILT.

The ILT collection is sufficient to meet the educational needs of the student body. Future challenges will be to add collection development to the budget and to develop a collection development plan which strategically address any weaknesses in the collection.

Objective Two: The Library staff provide competent and efficient service to students and faculty.

David has the education and experience to lead the library services and to provide resources to students in an efficient and competent way. Penny also has many years of experience and competency in library technical services and public services and competency to train and manage the students and volunteers.

Objective Three: The Library is used by faculty and students to such an extent that it can be regarded as a vital part of the fulfillment of ILTs mission.

Based upon the library public services statistics and student evaluation, the ILT library is a vital and useful part of ILTs mission to its students. On average only 23% of students say that they do not use the library at all. 24% say that they use the library collection and 46% say that they use the library databases.

Office of Educational Ministry

The Office of Educational Ministry is dedicated to the development of students through educational excellence. It has staff and faculty who are qualified and excel in providing programs of study which help prepare students for congregational life and develop them as theologians and ministers of the cross. The Office of Educational Ministry serves laity in their desire to grow and work in the congregational and evangelistic work of the church.

The primary concern identified in the assessment process is staffing. With no fulltime staff and the administrator of this department serving also as the administrator of another department, there is no one on staff who is dedicated solely to the care of the programs offered here. At the current student body size, however, the program does not seem to be offering a lower quality because of this.

Objective One: The Office of Educational Ministries provides high-quality instruction in ILTs Educational Ministries programs.

According to the student opinions, the programs offered are high-quality and offer a high level of expertise. The students generally enjoy the classes and feel they learn new information by participating in them. No formal evaluation has been done of the faculty by the administration.

Objective Two: The Office of Educational Ministries assures that its personnel provide students, faculty, and staff with professional and competent services.

No formal student complaints or formal complaints by the faculty or staff have been made. From the data available, the students, faculty, and staff have the necessary resources to fulfill the demands of these programs.

Objective Three: The Office of Educational Ministries provides effective support to the faculty in designing and administering its academic programs.

This is the first school year in which the faculty have meet on a regular schedule. This is in response to the facultys desire to be more involved and to be more informed as to the business happening in Brookings. (Only three of the faculty and adjunct faculty live in Brookings.) These meetings have been effective in bringing the faculty together, focusing the faculty on the goals the program is designed to achieve, and helping the faculty to work toward the same goals.

Objective Four: The Office of Educational Ministries works to assure that ILTs Educational Ministries programs have satisfactory retention and graduation rates.

The Dean of Educational Ministries remains in constant contact with student body of the certificate school with the desire to help retain students and help them to meet their educational goals. Financial aid continues to develop the ways in which students financial concerns can be addressed.

Office of Admissions

It was decided by the Administration to add the Office of Admissions as a department within ILT at the Presidents Table Meeting on February 22, 2017. In working together to prepare the Enrollment Plan and to plan assessment of this plan it became clear that the Office of Admissions should be its own department reporting directly to the President. Admissions was a part of Student Services, but had been working under the Office of Academic Affairs. At this time, ILT cannot hire a person to fill the position so the Dean of Academic Affairs will be responsible for Admissions until the position is filled. The filling of this position will be added to the Strategic Plan.

The admissions efforts of ILT are having success. Qualified and dedicated students are recruited into both graduate and certificate programs each year and each year the number typically increases. The process does not over whelm or turn potential students away from ILT. Each year the student body shows growth.

While there is no one currently heading this department and oversite is designated to the Dean of Academic Affairs. The Dean works with Threasa to oversee the application process and to make sure that the policies are being followed in general.

Again, like with other departments not being served by fulltime staff who are dedicated solely to that department, the Office of Admissions can continue to successfully serve applicants and potential students only so long as the volume of new students does not overwhelm those who are working in this department.

Objective One: The Office of Admissions recruits an increasing number of students for ILTs graduate and certificate programs who are good candidates for fulling the Program Learning Outcomes of their program.

The recruitment and admissions efforts at ILT have produced a growing number of students who attend classes each year. ILT continues to make slow progress by adding new students each semester. The retention numbers show that students who are recruited and accepted into programs at ILT are qualified and able to work at the level required by their program.

Objective Two: The Office of Admissions administers an effective process for admitting students to ILTs programs.

Based upon student opinion and the retention rates, the recruitment and admissions efforts have been effective and successful in not only bring students through the process but identifying student who will be successful in studies at ILT. In April, which is not reported here, another 12 applications have been started. This only increase the difference between this year and previous years as a mark of progress and success.

Office of Student and Religious Life

The Office of Student and Religious life serves the ILT community by providing chapel services, graduation services, and spiritual and discernment counseling. Many of the spiritual or religious concerns for each student are dealt with as a part of the curriculum of the ILT programs. ILT takes this aspect of the students development very seriously. So that no student is missed the Dean of Student and Religious Life make regular contact with ILT students. It is a challenge for the Dean of Student and Religious Life to connect with every student at ILT because of the distance learning environment common to ILT students. While weekly chapel is posted online and the Dean is available to discuss concerns with student, the Dean makes every attempt to travel to many of the locations students are and meet with them.

Most student have the support of a congregation to supplement the educational experiences provided by ILT. The Dean works with students to ensure that this is true for each student. Because most of the students at ILT will work in a congregational or missionary setting, it is important for each of them to participate in the congregation of believers. The strengths of the Office of Student and Religious Life are its engagement with students and their congregations, with students and their church bodies, with students and their studies. One weakness is the loss of video and programming staff.

Objective One: The Office of Student and Religious Life provides effective pastoral care and leadership for the entire ILT community.

The Dean of Student and Religious Life is an active member of the administration. As such he continually brings to the attention of the administration the foundational theological principles upon which ILT as a Lutheran institution is built. He also works with students, faculty, and other staff to do the same. This is done through weekly chapel during the semester, weekly text study, and regular counseling throughout the year.

Objective Two: The Office of Student and Religious Life provides guidance and pastoral care for students and prospective students in vocational discernment.

The Dean of Student Life is available and makes himself visible to the student community so that they might have a resource to help them with vocational discernment and pastoral care. The Dean deals with the needs of the student body, however, when the student body increases so will the demands on the Dean.

Objective Three: The Office of Student and Religious Life fosters the continued participation of alumni the ILT community.

The Dean of Student and Religious Life meets with Alumni at the various denominational gathering planned throughout the year. He is also working toward creating an alumni association.

Office of Institutional Advancement

The Office of Institutional Advancement is in some ways a new thing for ILT. Although the mission and objectives of the department are not new and work has been done in this area in the since the very beginning, new energy and initiatives are being undertaken. These new initiatives began in January 2017. With only one quarter to see the effect this has on the institution, the information here does not reveal any significate data. There are new donors and new programs which are reaching people and congregations who did not know about ILT previously. However, it will take some time before the data can give any conclusive results.

Objective One: The Office of Institutional Advancement maintains a growing and diverse list of donors and potential donors.

Through the work of new mailing list and Word at Work Events the Office of Institutional Advancement brought in new donors and has gone into new markets to seek new donors and students. A donor development plan and a marketing plan will help to identify new donors and to evaluate more closely the efforts of the Office of Institutional Advancement.

Objective Two: The Office of Institutional Advancement strengthens ties between ILT and an increasing number of congregations.

The Word at Work Events planned for the next year have served to strengthen ties with and bring new congregations into the ILT donor data base. Congregations like Stavanger has decided to support ILT in new ways.

Objective Three: The Office of Institutional Advancement increases the amount of scholarship funds available to students each year.

No additional efforts were made this year to target scholarship funds. Two significant gifts were pledged. Stavanger Lutheran church pledged to fund an account for support LCMC student in the M.Div program. An initial donation of $2,500.00 was given with the promise of gathering more funds and adding to it every year. Knud Grosen also gave a pledge to establish a scholarship Endowment for ILT as a part of his estate.

Objective Four: The Office of Institutional Advancement diversifies incomes streams.

The Office of Institutional Advancement has continued to develop the current revenue streams. The addition of Word at Work Events gives a new revenue stream which show the ability to add $15,000.00 each year to the ILT income.

Objective Five: The Office of Institutional Advancement elicits a satisfactory increase in overall donations each year.

This year the donations do not exceed those of last year. Of course, the onetime donation for the purchase of the facility inflated the income from donations for last year. However, the new energy and number of new donors added just in the one quarter in which Jamie served as Director give promise for a continued steady increase in the donations every year.

Office of Business, Finance, and Administration

Generally, the Office of Business, Finance, and Administration is successful in providing services for the board, staff, faculty, and students of ILT. It serves the institution by providing accurate information, financial responsibility, and services to ensure the success and future of the ILT mission. It works to provide all the resources necessary for the efficient functioning of the school.

The needs of the institution as they are revealed by the assessment are more staff and less spending. Obviously, these two work against each other. The major financial concern is liquidity and the ability to build a reserve fund. Balancing the financial needs of the institution with the staffing needs is very difficult. ILT needs more staff to do the work that will lead to successful education of the students and a successful completion of the accreditation process. At the same time, there is not sufficient financial stability to add the new staff.

The accreditation process has been particularly helpful for the Office of Business, Finance, and Administration. The planning process along with the institutional assessment, auditing, regular reporting of the dashboards, and general tracking of information is increased and give better data for decision making and budgeting. This office increased its ability to plan and to accomplish its mission as a part of the institution.

Objective One: The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration provides accurate and timely financial information to the Board of Directors, President, and Administration.

The Comptroller ensures that all financial information is current and reports to the administration once a week, to the Treasure once a month and to the board two times a year. The President is in constant communication with the Comptroller concerning financial spending and cashflows.

Objective Two: The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration allocates ILT-provided financial aid in a fair manner.

The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration follows all the policy given concerning financial aid given to students. Students are treated fairly and without discrimination.

Objective Three: The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration manages facilities to maximize safety, usability, and economy.

The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration works with the facility managers to ensure that the facilities meet the need of the staff, faculty, and students as well as meet the needs of those who rent space. Employees are provided with workstations and safe working environment.

Objective Four: The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration makes sure that ILT is adequately staffed and assures employee satisfaction and effectiveness.

ILT generally is understaffed. The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration helps other administrators publicize and find applicants for job openings as they become available in the budget. This has been done very infrequently and with mixed success. Employees are generally satisfied with the work that they are given to do and with the environment they are given to work in. Employees are very engaged in the mission of ILT and believe strongly in it.

Objective Five: The Office of Business, Finance, and Administration coordinates the implementation of the Strategic Plan in a timely manner.

The Comptroller reports on the progress of the Strategic Plan once a month to the administration and twice a year to the board. The tactics described in the plan, including their progress and completion, are a part to the assessment report. The comptroller works with every department of the institution to prepare a preliminary report of the administration, President, and board to consider when updating the Strategic Plan.

Office of the PresidentMission Statement

The Office of the President serves the mission of ILT by creating a functioning administration, staff, and faculty which fulfills its mission and complies with the polices set by the Board of Directors.

Objectives

The President effectively leads ILT in fulfilling its mission.

The President assures that administrative personnel are effectively leading their departments in fulfilling ILTs mission.

The President recommends to the Board of Directors a Strategic Plan that is responsive to ILTs constituencies, realistic in its goals, and in accord with ILTs mission.

The President effectively communicates with and develops the Board of Directors.

The President assures the excellence of the academic programs.

The President effectively oversees ILTs finances and other resources.

Assessment Instruments

Instrument: Annual Report

Frequency: July

Description: The annual report is both a quantitative and qualitive instrument built from the ABHE annual report, ABHE institutional Standards, and office objectives.

Objective: The annual report provides the data ILT requires for its own annual reporting, its ongoing self-study, and the office administrators perception of the offices effectiveness in meeting its objectives and contributing to ILTs mission.

Responsibility: President

Instrument: Board Performance Evaluation of the President

Frequency: August

Description: Annual performance review of the President completed by the Board Executive Committee and received by the Board of Directors.

Objective: The Board Evaluation of the President is to grant insights regarding the overall effectiveness of the President to achieve the mission of ILT.

Responsibility: Board Executive Committee

Instrument: Presidents Evaluation of Administration

Frequency: February

Description: The personnel evaluation is an annual review (by both the staff member and the supervisor) of staff members efforts to effectively carry out the objectives of the office and contribute to the mission of ILT.

Objective: As personnel evaluations are considered confidential, the actual personnel evaluations are not included in the assessment report. However, personnel evaluations are reviewed by supervisors for insights regarding overall office effectiveness and those insights are included with no reference to any individual staff member.

Responsibility: President

Instrument: Strategic Plan Survey

Frequency: November

Description: The annual strategic plan survey is conducted to provide stakeholder input on strategic planning priorities defined by ILTs president and administration.

Objective: Stakeholder opinion is reviewed by the Institutional Assessment Director for insights into the effectiveness of current institutional strategic planning.

Responsibility: Institutional Assessment Director

Administration

The 2016 evaluation of President Bielfeldt was held on August 16, 2016. The next scheduled evaluation will take place in connection with the Institute of Theology Executive Committee meeting in June or July of 2017.

The evaluation in August of 2016 was done by the Executive Committee made up of Eugene W. Bunkowske, Chair of the ILT BoD, Dr. Phil Wold, Vice Chair of the ILT BoD, Debra Hesse, Secretary of the ILT BoD, and Fred Schickedanz, Treasurer of the ILT BoD.

The instrument used for the evaluation was made up of 32 statements which were initially marked independently by each of the four participants in the evaluation process and then after being talked through together were given a joint evaluation mark on the basis ofExcellent,SatisfactoryorNeeds Improvement.

The results of the evaluation is that there were no categories that were markedNeeds Improvement, ten categories that were markedSatisfactoryand twenty two categories that were markedExcellent.

It was recognized that Dr. Bielfieldt is a dedicated and hard-workingpresident who delegates work well. It was also recognized that 2016 had been an extraordinary year of organizational work in preparation for accreditation. This means that in 2017 the evaluation committee will have a much better time frame over which to judge the overall process of visioning, administration, organization, and management.

The Evaluation Committee reported their work to the full Board of Directors on August 17, 2016. Dr. Bielfieldt was also present for the report to the Board. Included in the report was sharing the evaluation questions of the performance review sheet with all of the members of the Board of Directors. The minutes of the August 16-17, 2016 meeting the ILT BoD reflect the following:

1 The BoD appreciated the performance review sheet.

2 The BoD appreciated the methodology used by the Executive Committee for the evaluation.

3 The BoD approved the performance review sheet for further use.

4 The BoD also formally accepted the positive review of the president by the Evaluation Committee with thanks.

Rev. Dr. Eugene W. BunkowskeHoffmann InstituteFiechtner Endowed ChairProfessor of Christian Outreach [email protected]

Staffing

Staff Member

Job Titles

Bielfeldt, Dennis

President

Vacant

Assistant to the President

Comments: Vacant staff position: Assistant to the President; presently, covered by a personal assistant who coordinates with the Assistant to the Comptroller. This position has existed in the past as a vital part of the operations of this office. Donation letters, fundraising campaigns, and donor data, along with thank yous and tax receipts, all came from the Office of the President. With the addition of a Director of Institutional Advancement and the establishment of this as an independent office in the institutional structure, the demands which required this position have been lessened.

Board Membership

Board Member Terms of Service

Board Member

Title

Term

Start Date

End Date

Baltz, Fred

Board Member

Second

2011/2015

2019

Bent, John

Board Member

First

2014

2018

Bunkowske, Eugene

Chairman of the Board

First

2013

2017

Hesse, Debra

Secretary

Second

2011/2015

2019

Rew-Werling, Janine

Board Member

First

2014

2018

Schickedanz, Fred

Treasurer

Second

2009/2013

2017

Wold, Phil

Vice-Chairman of the Board

First

2014

2018

Comments: Three new members have been nominated to the board and will be voted on at the next annual meeting, September 2017. One major change to the executive committee will be to elect a new Treasure at the next annual meeting.

The Current Term for the President began in 2015 and will end in 2020.

Board Diversity Information

Board Member

Title

Gender

Profession

Race

Denomination

Baltz, Fred

Board Member

Male

Pastor

Caucasian

LCMC

Bent, John

Board Member

Male

Pastor

Caucasian

LCMC

Bunkowske, Eugene

Chairman of the Board

Male

Retired

Caucasian

LCMS

Hesse, Debra

Secretary

Female

Business

Caucasian

ALC

Rew-Werling, Janine

Board Member

Female

Pastor

Caucasian

LCMC

Schickedanz, Fred

Treasurer

Male

Business

Caucasian

CALC

Wold, Phil

Vice-Chairman of the Board

Male

Retired

Caucasian

LCMC

Comments: There are currently no board members who are members of NALC. 14% are ALC, 14% are CALC, 14% are LCMS, and 58% are LCMC. 29% are female and 71% are male. 100% are Caucasian. 42% are pastors, 29% are in business, and 29% are retired. The Chairman of the Board, Eugene Bunkowske, has experience in both ministry and in academics. Vice-Chairman, Phil Wold, is a retired physician.

Strategic Plan

Admin

Initial assessment of the Fellowship Program and determination of resources for 2017-2018

January

Staff Time

Dennis Bielfeldt

Complete

Comments: It is determined by the administration that, even without the support of the donor who initiated the creation of this program, the program will continue to be offered at ILT. Because of the withdrawal of the donor, however, half of the cost of the tuition must be funded in some other way. ILT will establish a grant to be given to fellowship students. This grant will simply be tuition credit. In the future, however, it should be funded by donors. (Possible Task: Establish Fellowship Grant Fund)

167

Annual Report

Question

2014-2015 Responses

2015-2016 Responses

2016-2017 Responses

1. Please provide the following information for the ILT Board Chair: Name, Address, City, State, Zip, Home Phone, Work Phone, and Email Address.

Eugene Bunkowske

1249 Highridge Ct.

St. Paul MN, 55109

(H) 651-340-3366

(C) 651-603-6252

Eugene Bunkowske

1249 Highridge Ct.

St. Paul, MN 55109

(H) 651-340-3366

(C) 651-603-6252

Eugene Bunkowske

1249 Highridge Ct.

St. Paul, MN 55109

(H) 651-340-3366

(C) 651-603-6252

[email protected]

2. Please provide the name, phone, and email address for the following individuals: President, ABHE Accreditation Liaison and Chief Finance Officer.

Dennis Bielfeldt, President

605-690-3723

[email protected]

Jonathan Sorum, Accreditation Liaison

320-304-4985

[email protected]

Leon Miles, Chief Financial Officer/Comptroller

319-471-6260

[email protected]


605-690-3723

[email protected]


320-304-4985

[email protected]


319-471-6260

[email protected]


605-690-3723

[email protected]


320-304-4985

[email protected]


319-471-6260

[email protected]

3. In the last year, has ILT entered into any agreement with any denomination by which ILT is controlled or with which it is closely affiliated?

No

No

No

4. How often is the ILT Mission Statement reviewed?

We employ the Mission Statement and continually reflect upon it informally. It is formally reviewed annually with Board members, staff, faculty, students, alumni and donors.

All areas of ILT faculty, students, and staff continually reflect upon the Mission Statement. It is formally reviewed annually with Board members, faculty, staff, students, alumni, and donors.

All areas of ILT faculty, students, and staff continually reflect upon the Mission Statement. It is formally reviewed annually with Board members, faculty, staff, students, alumni, and donors.

5. What stakeholders are consulted in the review of the ILT Mission Statement?

Board members, staff, faculty, students, alumni and donors.



6. When was the last time the ILT Missions Statement was reviewed?

July 24th, 2015

ILT Board Meeting, August 2016

ILT Board Meeting, August 2016 (to be addressed September 2017)

7. Where is the ILT Mission Statement published?

Word at Work magazine, brochures, web site, email signatures.

Word at Work magazine, brochures, web site, email signatures.

Word at Work magazine, brochures, website, email signatures, building signs, letterhead, physical mailings.

8. Does each office have a Mission Statement, goals and objectives derived from the ILT Missions Statement? If no, which offices are lacking?

Institutional Advancement at ILT is done by those who work in other areas, for instance, the President leads the effort assisted by the Director of Student and Religious Life. Also in Institutional Advancement are our Director of Congregational Relations, our International Relations person, and our Institutional Advancement Coordinator. Because it is newly created, we have not had the opportunity to put together goals and objectives for each person.

The Presidents Office houses Institutional Advancement. In the interim our President in cooperation with the Director of Congregational Relations and International Relations, as well as several other staff members from other areas, lead Institutional Advancement. The President is leading these staff, while looking for opportunities to expand Institutional Advancement staffing.

A mission statement and objectives for each department was formally created this year and the institutional assessment instruments are keyed to these.

9. Does ILT have clearly articulated institutional outcomes that relate directly to the Mission Statement?

Yes

Yes

Yes

10. Where are the institutional outcomes publicized?

Handbooks and on the web page.

Handbooks and on the web page.

Handbooks, website, and academic catalog.

11. What evidence does ILT have that it is operating legally in South Dakota?

Certificate of Incorporation Nonprofit Corporation dated January 8, 2008

Letter from the Secretary of State indicating that religious institutions are exempt from filing dated December 9, 2013.

Certificate of Incorporation Nonprofit Corporation dated January 8, 2008.Letter from the Secretary of State indicating that religious institutions are exempt from filing dated December 9, 2013.

Certificate of Incorporation Nonprofit Corporation dated January 8, 2008.Letter from the Secretary of State indicating that religious institutions are exempt from filing dated December 9, 2013.

12. In the last year, has the administration or board identified any issues for which the constitution and bylaws place the administration in an ambiguous or conflicted position? If yes, please explain.

We have tried to clarify the status of the ILT President. Should he be a member of the Board of Directors or not? Presently he is not, but our discussion at the last Board meeting was that he should be. No action has yet been officially taken on this matter.

The President of ILT is now an ex-officio member of the Board of Directors.

No instances have been identified this year.

13. In the last year, how much donation income was generated for ILT by or from each member of the ILT Board?

Seven board members gifted a total of $91,916.80.

Seven board members gifted a total of $77,865.00.

3Q: Five board members have gifted a total of $69,917.35

One board member gifted to ILT through the Canadian charity ILT-CS. Approximately, 2/3 of this donation came to ILT.

14. In the last year, has the administration or board identified any conflict of interest issues among members of the board? If yes, please explain.

No

No

No

15. In the last year, has the ILT Board of Directors, individually or collectively, involved themselves in any aspects of institutional administration? If so, please explain.

No

The Finance Board met to exercise fiduciary responsibility over ILT.

No

16. In the last year, how many average hours per week has the President dedicated toward leading ILT toward the accomplishment of its mission?

The President is doing this whenever he is engaged in the business of ILT. Conservatively, the President works about 50 hours per week.

The President is working full-time toward the advancement of ILTs mission.

The President is working full-time toward the advancement of ILTs mission.

17. In the last year, has the President identified any inadequacies in the organizational structure for his purpose in leading ILT toward the accomplishment of its mission? If so, please explain.

The President identified that the communications table was aggregating staff that were working in clearly defined ways, but that it was not important institutionally that these people work together closely. Also, the status of the relationship between Student Affairs and Admissions had not yet been clarified.

No

ILT needs to have a Director of Admissions who sits at the Presidents Table and is engaged with the other administrators in recruitment and admissions.

18. Please document any changes in the organizational structure (encompassing all units and roles) which have occurred in the last year.

In the last few months the composition of the communications table has been clarified. It is headed by the ILT comptroller with video and print productions falling under it. The ILT Ambassador, because he is working mostly with international students, has migrated and now falls under the Dean of Educational Ministries. Congregational relations, fundraising and social media now fall under Institutional Advancement led by the President. Admissions has moved to fall under the Dean of Student Life. The cantor of the chapel also reports to that Dean.

The communications table was disbanded, went away, because it was not effective. Instead, there is an Academic Table, Faculty Senate and Institutional Advancement Table.

Doug Morton the Dean of Educational Ministries (OEM) retired in the Fall of 2016. Jamie Strickler took his place. It became clear very quickly that Jamie was more comfortable and would work better in Institutional Advancement (IA), thus IA was made into its own department separate from the Presidents Office. Tim Swenson, Dean of Chapel, was given OEM. The Business Office took over responsibility for student services and student life and chapel are now the same department.

Plans

Strategic Plan

The Strategic Plan is a five-year plan which lays out ILTs strategy for accomplishing its mission. The Strategic Plan was developed by the administration, and presented to and approved by the Board of Directors in the 2015-2016 school year for the 2016-2017 school year. Details on the accomplishment of each tactic in the Strategic Plan can be found in each departments report.

This is the first year of formal strategic planning by ILT. This has been a learning experience which has granted insight into ways that the plan could be improved to fit the flow of the ILT school year. Revisions are planned for the goals, tactics, and planning process to ensure that the most efficiency and usefulness can be made from the Strategic Plan.

Budget

Budget vs. Actuals 3Q: FY17

Annual Funds

Actual

Budget

over Budget

% of Budget

61000 Office of the President

61100 Staff

61101 President

57,165.03

57,159.00

6.03

100.01%

61102 Assistant to the President

10,899.39

15,666.00

-4,766.61

69.57%

Total 61100 Staff

$ 68,064.42

$ 72,825.00

-$ 4,760.58

93.46%

61200 Travel & Lodging

61201 President Travel

2,640.88

700.00

1,940.88

377.27%

61202 Board Meeting Expenses

6,800.49

11,300.00

-4,499.51

60.18%

61203 Conf, Conv, and Meeting

1,043.11

1,000.00

43.11

104.31%

Total 61200 Travel & Lodging

$ 10,484.48

$ 13,000.00

-$ 2,515.52

80.65%

61300 Office Expenses

61301 Supplies

168.09

1,872.00

-1,703.91

8.98%

61303 Postage

329.41

369.00

-39.59

89.27%

Total 61300 Office Expenses

$ 497.50

$ 2,241.00

-$ 1,743.50

22.20%

61400 Institutional Advancement

61401 Advertising Expense

5,277.10

4,500.00

777.10

117.27%

61402 Mailing Expense

3,789.17

3,498.00

291.17

108.32%

61403 Calling Expense

381.11

372.00

9.11

102.45%

61404 Hospitality

1,233.86

120.00

1,113.86

1028.22%

61405 Cost of Give Away Items

246.00

-246.00

0.00%

61406 Institutional Advancement Travel

2,250.00

-2,250.00

0.00%

Total 61400 Institutional Advancement

$ 10,681.24

$ 10,986.00

-$ 304.76

97.23%

61500 Other Misc Expenses

180.00

-180.00

0.00%

Total 61000 Office of the President

$ 89,727.64

$ 99,232.00

-$ 9,504.36

90.42%

Comments: At the end of the third quarter, the Office of the President has spent only 90.42% of the budgeted expenses for that period. Expense line 61400 and all the sub accounts are now separate from the Office of the President. These lines were used here for Institutional Advancement expenses until the end of December. Starting January 1st, Expenses line 67000 and related sub accounts were created for the Office of Institutional Advancement. All expenses for Institutional Advancement on December 31, or before, are recorded here. All expenses on January 1st, or after, are recorded in the appropriate place under 67000.

The Assistant to the President, expenses line 61102, has been vacant since January 1, 2017.

Summary

The Office of the President is dedicated to the mission and future of the Institute of Lutheran Theology. The President meets regularly with board members and the administration to plan and strategize the best ways in which the students and constituents of ILT can be served. Changes in the institutional structure and staffing have led to significant changes in the Office of the President. In the past, the Office of the President was concerned with Board relations, institutional structure and administration, and donor management and development. Because of the changes in January, primarily with the addition of the Office of Institutional Advancement and the Director of Institutional Advancement, the Office of the President is taking a more supervisory rather than hands on position. It is important to note that the President remains active in the work of donor development and planning. He works closely with the Office of Institutional Advancement and its director to cultivate the ILT donor relations and data base. The President is now fully and only involved with board relations and administrative oversite. He is a part of the decision-making process of each part of the institution without being directly involved in the donor data management.

Objective One: The President effectively leads ILT in fulfilling its mission.

The President leads weekly administrative meetings (Presidents Table) and is engaged in all parts of the administration of ILT. He also is engaged with the board members regularly. The President holds the mission of ILT before both the board and the administration leading ILT to make strategic decisions in all its functions which are in accord with that mission.

Objective Two: The President assures that administrative personnel are effectively leading their departments in fulfilling ILTs mission.

The President, through formal performance evaluation and regular administrative meetings, evaluates and directs the efforts of the administration. His evaluation helps to focus the efforts of all the administrators toward the mission and goals of the institution.

Objective Three: The President recommends to the Board of Directors a Strategic Plan that is responsive to ILTs constituencies, realistic in its goals, and in accord with ILTs mission.

This part of the Presidents responsibilities is new to the institution. Of course, informal strategic planning has been done since the beginning. The formal five-year Strategic Plan is in its first year. The revised Institutional Assessment Plan has the recommendation of the Strategic Plan to the board in January. However, there has been constant reference to the Strategic Plan in the administrative meetings. It is at the center of the planning done by the President and the administration.

Objective Four: The President effectively communicates with and develops the Board of Directors.

In the last year, the President meet regularly with the Board Finance Committee and as scheduled with the Board Executive Committee. The Board has identified potential members for the Board of Directors and the President contacted them to determine their willingness to serve on the board.

Objective Five: The President assures the excellence of the academic programs.

The President is active in the administration of both the graduate and certificate schools. He participates as a faculty member in the faculty senate for the graduate school. The president also teaches a fulltime load of courses.

Objectives Six: The President effectively oversees ILTs finances and other resources.

The President meets regularly with the Comptroller and participates in the major financial decisions which ILT faces. He is an active participate in the Board Finance Committee. He also reviews and give an evaluation of the Comptrollers work with the finances.

Office of Academic AffairsMission Statement

The Office of Academic Affairs serves the mission of ILT by providing graduate degree programs and the resources and services required for students to successfully complete these programs.

Objectives

The Office of Academic Affairs provides high-quality instruction to ILTs graduate students.

The Office of Academic Affairs assures that its personnel provide students, faculty, and staff with professional and competent service.

The Office of Academic Affairs provides effective support to the faculty in designing and administering its academic programs.

The Office of Academic Affairs works to assure that ILTs graduate programs have satisfactory retention and graduation rates.

Assessment Instruments

Instrument: Annual Report

Frequency: July

Description: The annual report is both a quantitative and qualitive instrument built from the ABHE annual report, ABHE institutional Standards, and office objectives.

Objective: The annual report provides the data ILT requires for its own annual reporting, its ongoing self-study, and the office administrators perception of the offices effectiveness in meeting its objectives and contributing to ILTs mission.

Responsibility: Dean of Academic Affairs

Instrument: Personnel Evaluations

Frequency: March/May

Description: The personnel evaluation is an annual review (by both the staff member and the supervisor) of staff members efforts to effectively carry out the objectives of the office and contribute to the mission of ILT.

Objective: As personnel evaluations are considered confidential, the actual personnel evaluations are not included in the assessment report. However, personnel evaluations are reviewed by supervisors for insights regarding overall office effectiveness and those insights are included with no reference to any individual staff member.

Responsibility: Dean of Academic Affairs

Instrument: Course Evaluations

Frequency: Each Semester

Description: All students are asked to complete a course evaluation at the end of each course. These evaluations are reviewed by the Institutional Assessment Director for insights regarding the students perception of course, faculty, technical services, and library services effectiveness.

Objective: Student opinions regarding the effectiveness of ILT courses, faculty, technical services, and library services provide informed insight into the effectiveness of it programs, faculty, and services.


Instrument: Mission and Outcomes Opinion Survey

Frequency: April

Description: ILT stakeholders are asked to complete an annual Mission and Outcomes Opinion Survey. This data gathered through this survey is reviewed by the Institutional Assessment Director for insights regarding the stakeholders perception of ILTs effectiveness related to its mission and outcomes.

Objective: Stakeholder opinions regarding ILTs effectiveness in fostering student growth relative to ILTs mission and outcomes provides insight into stakeholder perceptions of ILTs effectiveness in fulfilling its mission and the relevance of that mission to the stakeholders.


Instrument: Dashboards

Frequency: Perpetual

Description: Dashboards track the regular and continual data for each department. This includes data which is gathered daily, weekly, or monthly.

Objective: Data is gathered continuously to give insight into the immediate changes in the institution as well as to give a historical look at the growth of the institution for future projections.

Responsibility: Comptroller

Administration

On April 5, 2017, I had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Jonathan Sorum, Dean of Academic Affairs at ILT. The occasion was to compare our understandings of the degree to which Dr. Sorum was performing the objectives specified in his Job Description. Dr. Sorum has done superb work in leading the process of academic assessment at ILT. He and I met for approximately one hour, talking about the opportunities and challenges facing the ILT Division of Academic Affairs, and discussing possible ways that we can better our academic programming. Dr. Sorum had done exceptional work in creating, implementing and revising the academic assessment plan while teaching two courses each semester.

President Dennis BielfeldtApril 23, 2017

Staffing

Staff Member

Job Titles

Bielfeldt, Dennis

Department Head EPR

Hopkins, Threasa

Assistant to the Deans

Lioy, Daniel

Department Head BT

Rynearson, Timothy

Department Head PT

Sorum, Jonathan

Dean of Academic Affairs

Sorum, Jonathan

Director of Graduate Programs

Sorum, Jonathan

Director of D.Min. Program

Sorum, Jonathan

Department Head HST

Sorum, Jonathan

Internship Director

Sorum, Jonathan

Director of Academic Assessment

Comments: Five people work to fill the staff positions required for this department. No fulltime staff person is dedicated solely to the work of this department. Dennis is the President and a professor, Threasa works with the admissions department as well as the Academic department. Daniel and Timothy are part-time faculty members who also work as department heads. Jonathan is the Registrar and takes responsibility for the Office of Admissions. Under the current workloads, staff meet the demands of this department and have good performance reviews and quality service to the students. As the school grows and these demands intensify, it will be necessary to consider additional personnel to cover these positions.

Faculty Member

Faculty Titles

Benne, Robert

Professor of Christian Ethics

Bielfedlt, Dennis

Professor of Philosophical Theology

Hillmer, Mark

Professor of Biblical Theology

Kilcrease, Jack

Associate Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology

Lioy, Daniel

Professor of Biblical Theology

Patterson, David

Librarian

Rynearson, Timothy

Associate Professor of Pastoral Theology

Sorum, Jonathan

Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology

Comments: The faculty is primarily part-time. Dennis and Jonathan both teach fulltime teaching loads along with the administrative positions they hold. The remaining faculty teach on a part-time basis. This does not appear to have a negative effect on the education of the students. The student opinion surveys show that both the instructors and the courses are well received and appreciated by the students. If the STM and D.Min programs grow, it will become necessary for more onsite fulltime faculty to help with the research and advising of major projects and theses. As the student body increases in size, it will also be necessary to have fulltime faculty who are dedicated assisting student through the various programs. If the Ph.D. is implemented, it will be necessary for one fulltime faculty member to administer the program. As the student body grows and the demands of the various programs intensifies, it will be necessary for the faculty to take on more responsibility because the current staff will not be able to meet these demands.

Adjunct Faculty Member

Faculty Titles

Baltz, Fred

Adjunct Associate Professor

Cobb, John Moser

Adjunct Professor

Fever, Kyle

Adjunct Professor

Grimminger, Daniel

Adjunct Professor

Hein, Steven

Adjunct Professor

Kinnard, Jo N.

Adjunct Professor

Knefelkamp, David


Miles, Leon


Nelson, David

Adjunct Professor

Rasmussen, John


Stadheim, Robert

Adjunct Professor

Swenson, Timothy


Theiss, Steven


Woodford, Lucas


List of Adjunct Faculty who taught in school year 2016-2017

Fall

R. David Nelson

Lucas Woodford

Steven Theiss

Spring

John Rasmussen

Steven Hein

Jo Kinnard

Steven Theiss

Mark Jamison

Summer

Leon Miles

David Knefelkamp

R. David Nelson

Staff Evaluations

Staff evaluations were not done before the end of the third quarter of the fiscal year. Staff evaluations will be added after the end of the year.

Faculty Evaluations

In February and March of 2017, the Dean of Academic Affairs evaluated the teaching of the faculty members (excluding the Dean) who taught in the academic year 2016-2017. A total of 12 faculty members are evaluated, 6 faculty members and 6 adjunct faculty. The Dean watched approximately one hour of recorded class sessions for each faculty member and evaluated the course syllabi. The results are tabulated in the following table:

Note: The numbers in the first five columns show the number of faculty members who scored as indicated. The average is the average score for all faculty members.

1 Poor

2 Less than satisfactory

3 Satisfactory

4 Good

5 Excellent

Average Score

Responsiveness to students

2

3

7

4.3

Clarity and orderliness of presentation

1

1

10

4.8

Relates material to ministry concerns

3

1

8

4.4

Appropriate selection of material

3

2

7

4.3

Engagement with Bible and primary texts

1

3

8

4.6

CLOs at appropriate level

1

11

4.6

Use of technology

3

4

5

4.2

Comments: The principle points of evaluation are pedagogical, with attention to ILTs institutional goals. The overall conclusion is that ILTs faculty are delivering an excellent education experience to their students. The courses are well-designed, with sharply-focused and appropriate Course Learning Outcomes and appropriate means for attaining those outcomes. The class sessions are engaging, well-organized, and intensely relevant to ministry concerns. Three areas show some weaknessrelevance to ministry concerns, selection of material, and use of technology. It may be that the ministry concerns didnt happen to arise very much in the hour of class time observed. However, the other two concerns are issues with particular courses and instructors. The faculty members who do not make optimal use of the technology tend to be older or, in one case, a new faculty member. This result does not suggest any particular remedial effort is necessary, but highlights the need for reinforcing the awareness of faculty members of resources available to them to help in this area.

Strategic Plan

Admin

Goal 1

Study the demand and feasibility of a shortened track from high school graduation to a full academic qualification or ordained ministry that fulfills the present M.Div. PLOs. (B.Div. Route)

Start: Nov

End: Jun 18

Staff Time

Jon Sorum

In Process

Comments: The Presidents Table has determined that working toward a PH.D. program is a higher priority and so the plan to research and develop a B.Div. has been put on hold for the time being. However, the Board has asked that ILTs constituency be surveyed regarding their opinions on the undergraduate program. This will be done in June.

Admin

Goal 1

Implement changes to the Internship Program

November

Faculty Time

Catalog

Jon Sorum

In Process

Comments: A comprehensive revision of the field education requirements for the M.Div. program is now in process. It should be completed in the Summer of 2017 and implemented in the Fall of 2017.

Admin

Goal 2

Add Biblical Concentration to STM

November

Staff Time, Faculty Time

Jon, Faculty

Complete

Comments: This was completed and the new program can be found on pages 37-39 of the 2017-2018 Academic Catalog.

Annual Report

Question

2014-2015 Responses

2015-2016 Responses

2016-2017 Responses

1. Which of the following best describes ILT?

Graduate studies only



2. Please list the graduate schools programs of study

Lutheran Theological Graduate Certificate

Master of Religion General Survey

Master of Religion Biblical Theology

Master of Religion Theology

Master of Divinity Biblical Track

Master of Divinity Doctrinal Track

Master of Sacred Theology

Master of Religion



Master of Divinity


Doctor of Ministry

Master of Arts in Religion

Master of Arts in Religion Biblical Studies

Master of Arts in Religion Theology

Master of Divinity


Doctor of Ministry

3. Does ILT offer Adult Degree Completion programs?

No

No

No

4. Does ILT offer Online Learning / Distance Education courses?

Yes

Yes

Yes

5. Please list all programs in which a student can complete 50% or more of the program via distance education/online learning at ILT.

Lutheran Theological Graduate Certificate

Master of Religion General Survey



Master of Divinity Biblical Track

Master of Divinity Doctrinal Track


Master of Religion



Master of Divinity


Doctor of Ministry

Master of Arts in Religion

Master of Arts in Religion Biblical Studies

Master of Arts in Religion Theology

Master of Divinity


Doctor of Ministry

6. Please indicate in which States ILT currently offers Online Learning / Distance Education Courses.

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin

All states except Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland

All states except Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland

7. Does ILT offer Correspondence courses?

No

No

No

8. Please list all programs in which a student can complete 50% or more of the program via correspondence education.

None

None

None

9. Does ILT offer Traditional courses?

No

No

No

10. Please list all programs where a student can complete 50% or more of the program via traditional face-to-face delivery at your institution.

None

None

None

11. Please list the total number of graduates conferred degrees for each of the programs during the last 12 months.

Lutheran Theological Graduate Certificate: 0

Master of Religion General Survey: 2

Master of Religion Biblical Theology: 0

Master of Religion Theology: 0

Master of Divinity Biblical Track: 0

Master of Divinity Doctrinal Track: 0

Master of Sacred Theology: 1

Master of Religion General Survey: 1

Master of Religion Biblical Theology: 0

Master of Religion Theology: 0

Master of Divinity: 2

Master of Sacred Theology: 0

Master of Religion: 1

Master of Divinity: 4

12. Fall Enrollment - Full-Time Graduate Students (individuals enrolled for 9 hours or more)

5

4

4

13. Fall Enrollment - Part-Time Graduate Students (individuals enrolled for less than 9 hours) - Headcount

19

26

35

14. Fall Enrollment - Part-Time Graduate Students (individuals enrolled for less than 9 hours) - Total Credits

88

102

147

15. Fall Enrollment - Audits - Headcount

6

3

1

16. Fall Enrollment - Audits - Hours Enrolled

21

12

3

17. Annualized Enrollment - Total Students Enrolled

30

46

42

18. Annualized Enrollment - Total Credit Hours

323

347

399.5

19. Percent taking courses at main campus

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

20. Percent taking online courses

100.00%

100.00%

100.00%

21. Percent taking correspondence courses

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

22. Total First Time Graduate Students (who have never attended any graduate school)

0

1

8

23. Total Transfer Graduate Students (who have earned graduate credit at another post-secondary institution)

5

6

9

24. Total Re-Entering Graduate Students

0

0

22

25. Does the Office of Academic Affairs have clearly stated Program Learning Outcomes derived from ILT's institutional outcomes?

Yes

Yes

Yes

26. How often are the Office of Academic Affairs' Program Learning Outcomes reviewed?

The Program Learning Outcomes were adopted in July of 2015, so they are quite new. They will be reviewed as the academic assessment process plays out. Any significant curriculum revisions will also be cause to revisit the Program Learning Outcomes.

Since our Program Learning Outcomes are still new, we have not yet scheduled a review date.

Since our Program Learning Outcomes are still new, we have not yet scheduled a review date.

27. Which stakeholders are consulted in the review of Program Learning Outcomes?

The Institutional Learning Outcomes were formulated by the Board of Directors with input from all stakeholders. These in turn became the basis for the faculty to develop the Program Learning Outcomes.



28. When were the Program Learning Outcomes last reviewed?

They were reviewed in July of 2015 prior to being approved.

They were reviewed in July of 2015 prior to being approved. The Master of Arts in Theology is a new program that began in the fall of 2016. Its PLOs were approved in January 2016.

They were reviewed in July of 2015 prior to being approved. The Master of Arts in Theology is a new program that began in the fall of 2016. Its PLOs were approved in January 2016.

29. Where are the Program Learning Outcomes publicized?

The Program Learning Outcomes will appear in the 2016-2017 Academic Catalog. They are appearing now in course syllabi.

The Program Learning Outcomes appear in the 2016-2017 Academic Catalog, on the website and in course syllabi.

The Program Learning Outcomes appear in the 2016-2017 Academic Catalog, on the website and in course syllabi.

30. In the last year, did ILT add any new adjunct or permanent faculty members? Please list their names, terminal degree, and courses they are each teaching.

Dr Daniel Grimminger, Ph.D. Worship, Christian Hymnody

None

New Faculty:

Jack Kilcrease, Ph.D. teaching History of Christian Thought II, Theology of Protestant Scholasticism, Erlangen School of Lutheran Theology, Theology of Martin Luther, and Creation and the Triune God.

New Adjuncts:

Jo Kinnard, Ph.D. teaching Theology and World Religions

Steven Hein, Ph.D. teaching Catechesis (D.Min.)

Lucas Woodford, M.Th., D.Min. teaching Proclamation in the 21st Century (D.Min.)

31. In the last year, what efforts were undertaken by the Faculty Senate to evaluate and improve the pedagogical effectiveness of all of the faculty?

The Faculty Senate held two Pedagogical Roundtables for all faculty members, in which faculty members discuss specific topics regarding pedagogical methods and approaches.

The Faculty Senate regularly discusses pedagogical issues, especially as those related to the online classroom.

The Faculty Senate regularly discusses pedagogical issues, especially as those related to the online classroom.

32. In the last year, what significant contributions have been made by faculty members to scholarship, ministry, community service or the development of ILT?

All permanent faculty members reported scholarly publications or presentations for 2015-2016. All are also involved in pastoral ministry and/or teaching at the congregational level. The faculty has done considerable work in helping to define the limits of ILTs theological spectrum to help guide the selection of future faculty.

All permanent faculty members reported scholarly publications or presentations for 2016-2017. All are also involved in pastoral ministry and/or teaching at the congregational level. The faculty has done considerable work in helping to define the limits of ILTs theological spectrum to help guide the selection of future faculty.

33. In the last year, what resources were allocated by ILT for the professional advancement and development of its faculty?

The Academic Dean attended two academic conferences with expenses paid by ILT and the Dean of Student services attended one at ILT expense.

None was offered in the last year, although several administrators attended theological conferences as part of their work to promote ILT. The 5-year plan proposes a budget line item for faculty development starting with 2017-2018, with increases every year after that.

None was offered in the last year, although several administrators attended theological conferences as part of their work to promote ILT. The 5-year plan proposes a budget line item for faculty development starting with 2017-2018, with increases every year after that.

34. In the last year, what professional advancement and development efforts were undertaken by the faculty?

The faculty did not undertake any efforts for professional advancement and development beyond the Pedagogical Roundtables. The faculty is part-time and engaged in such development activities through the other institutions where they teach and through their own personal initiatives (conferences, reading, etc.)

Faculty members attended professional and scholarly events,

Faculty is part-time and engaged in professional and development activities through other institutions where they teach and through their own personal initiatives (conferences, readings, etc.)

35. Please describe the actions made by the Faculty Senate in the last year related to admissions criteria, curriculum, student life, or graduation requirements.

1-29-2015 Voted to require the Bible Proficiency Exam prepared by the Biblical Theology department be given to students who begin the M.Div. and M. R. programs, along with a policy for a minimum grade and for retaking the exam if that grade is not attained.

7-26-2015 Formulated and approved Program Learning Outcomes for all graduate programs.

9-14-2015 Approved revised STM program to meet accreditation standards

9-25-2015 Approved revised D. Min. program to meet accreditation standards

1-27-2016 Approved new Master of Arts in Religion program

1-27-2016 Approved proctoring policy

2-17-2016 Approved 21 syllabi

2-20-2016 Tabled proposals to revise the M.Div.

8-26-2016 Approved new Contextual Education Handbook

10-28-2016 Revised Transfer of Credit Policy

10-28-2016 Revised two courses required for D.Min.

1-17-2017 Approved major revisions to Faculty Handbook

3-23-2017 Initiated formation of process for awarding scholarships

3-23-2017 Approved all syllabi as presented by department heads.

36. In the last year, what efforts were undertaken by the Dean and Faculty Senate to ensure that ILT's online graduate instruction and academic rigor is appropriate for graduate theological studies?

Examination of grading practices in the Pedagogical Roundtable.

Development and approval of Program Learning Outcomes for all graduate programs.

Upgrading of the Master of Sacred Theology and Doctor of Ministry programs to conform to standards for number of credit hours required.

Approval of new Master of Arts in Religion program that is more structured than the previous version.

Revision of transfer of credits policy to exclude substitution for certain core courses.

Adopted specific policy for admitting students to the D.Min. who dont have a bachelors degree.

Thorough review of all course syllabi.

Adoption of rubrics for grading D.Min. independent projects.

37. In the last year, what resources were allocated by ILT for the support of the staffing, facilities and technology of its online education programs?

Almost all ILTs educational program is online; a negligible percentage of the budget was used for its two face-to-face intensive courses.



38. Were the resources allocated by ILT in the last year for the support of the staffing, facilities and technology of its online education programs sufficient to meet the needs of the programs?

As stated above, virtually all ILTs educational program is online. Resources were sufficient for staffing, facilities and technology to support our online educational programs.



39. Please list any questions the Academic Affairs Office would like added to the coming year's stakeholder surveys. Include which specific stakeholder groups relate to each question.

How is ILTs Master of Divinity program perceived by potential and current students? Specifically, is it perceived as being too difficult or too long?

We do not contemplate any major changes for the current academic year and therefore have no specific questions to place in a survey of stakeholders. We soon will begin a feasibility study for instituting undergraduate studies and we no doubt will be surveying stakeholders when we are at a stage to formulate specific questions.

Do you think ILT should explore instituting an undergraduate theology degree?

Benchmarking

Graduate Enrollment

ABHE 2016

(1-76 HC)

ILT 2014-2015

ILT 2015-2016

ILT 2016-2017

Fall Enrollment

Total FT Students (HC)

15.6

5

4

4

Total PT Students (HC)

11.8

19

26

35

Total PT Credits

51.7

88

102

147

Annualized Enrollment

Total Students (HC)

31.7

30

46

42

Total Credits Enrolled

392.1

323

337

399.5

Annualized Enrollment Distribution

% Main Campus

80.0%

0.0%

0.0%

10.0%

% Off Campus

5.5%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

% Online Courses

55.6%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

% Correspondence Courses

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Note: ABHE information is based on the average of each school with a annual head count of between 1-76. (reporting graduate degree information). The ILT 2016-2017 number were gathered in March of 2016 and do not include the numbers for summer term. These will be added after the end of the school year.

Plans

Academic Assessment Plan:

The 2016-2017 Academic Assessment Plan was fully implemented during the academic year, using all the applicable instruments.The 2016-2017 Academic Assessment Report gives the results, with analyses and an executive summary, including possible areas the faculty should give attention to.(As ofMay 15, 2017, this Report was not fully complete, since the academic year was not yet over.The Report will be updated in July 2017 and the updated version will be forwarded to the faculty for their consideration.)

Budget

Budget vs Actuals 3Q: FY17

Annual Funds

Actual

Budget

over Budget

% of Budget

Revenue

42000 Student Tuition and Fees

42100 M.Div Tuition

80,500.00

60,000.00

20,500.00

134.17%

42200 MR Tuition

18,900.00

6,000.00

12,900.00

315.00%

42300 STM Tuition

10,800.00

8,500.00

2,300.00

127.06%

42400 Open Studies Tuition

4,900.00

12,000.00

-7,100.00

40.83%

42500 D.Min Tuition

20,250.00

28,600.00

-8,350.00

70.80%

42700 Graduate Auditor Tuition

1,365.00

4,000.00

-2,635.00

34.13%

42900 Graduate Application/Transcript Fees

3,981.45

4,000.00

-18.55

99.54%

42910 Degree Student Discounts

-6,750.00

-5,000.00

-1,750.00

135.00%

Total 42000 Student Tuition and Fees

$ 133,946.45

$118,100.00

$ 15,846.45

113.42%

Expenses

62000 Office of Academic Affairs

62100 Staff/Faculty

62101 Dean of Academic Affairs

46,665.09

46,665.00

0.09

100.00%

62103 Administrative Assistant to the Deans

19,158.30

19,400.00

-241.70

98.75%

62201 Faculty

34,821.29

34,120.00

701.29

102.06%

62202 Adjunct Faculty

16,234.00

9,000.00

7,234.00

180.38%

Total 62100 Staff/Faculty

$ 116,878.68

$109,185.00

$ 7,693.68

107.05%

62400 Accreditation

62401 Accreditation Fees

9,091.67

9,050.00

41.67

100.46%

62402 Accreditation Travel

8,086.55

4,000.00

4,086.55

202.16%

Total 62400 Accreditation

$ 17,178.22

$ 13,050.00

$ 4,128.22

131.63%

62500 Academic Expenses

62501 Academic Travel Expenses

1,639.29

1,494.00

145.29

109.72%

62502 Office Supplies

521.77

180.00

341.77

289.87%

Total 62500 Academic Expenses

$ 2,161.06

$ 1,674.00

$ 487.06

129.10%

Total 62000 Office of Academic Affairs

$ 136,217.96

$123,909.00

$ 12,308.96

109.93%

Comments: At the end of the third quarter the tuition revenue of the graduate school was $15,846.45 over the projected amount (113.42% of the budget projections). This is due to revenue over projections for M.Div., M.R., and S.T.M. tuition. The M.Div. and M.R. tuition is higher than expected, at least in part, because of the Fellowship Program. The Fellowship Program eventuated in four additional fulltime students for this school year.

The Office of Academic Affairs was $12,308.96 over budget in spending (109.93% of budgeted expenses). This is due to under budgeting of the Adjunct Faculty and the Accreditation Travel expenses. Adjunct Faculty pay is based upon the number of student in a course. A part of the reason why the Adjunct Faculty pay is higher than expected is connected to the fact that we had more students than expected in these classes. This is evident by the increase in tuition revenue.

Because this was the first year ILT participated in a site visit from ABHE, it did not have any previous information on which to base the Accreditation Travel expenses. These came in higher than expected.

Statistics and Reports

Registrar

Fall:

Graduate Program Fall 2016-2017

Head Count

Credit Hours

Master of Religion

5

33

Master of Divinity

18

117


5

21

Doctor of Ministry

10

30

Open Studies

1

3

Auditors

1

3

Totals

40

207

J-Term:

Graduate Program

Head Count

Credit Hours

Master of Divinity

7

21

Totals

7

21

Spring:

Graduate Program

Head Count

Credit Hours

Master of Religion

4

27

Master of Divinity

15

109


3

9

Doctor of Ministry

9

27

Auditors

2

2.5

Totals

33

174.5

Summer: Summer Term will begin on June 5, 2017.

Program Completion

Comments: The Doctor of Ministry is currently in its second year. No students have completed the program and with only one student graduated in the STM program (completion in five years) there is no way to predict what the average time for completion might be.

Because most students are part-time students, over 85%, it is not surprising that no M.Div. students have completed the program in three years, as it is designed. The majority however, 75%, can complete the program in four years and 87% are able to complete the program within five years. Although, ILTs intention is to replace the traditional onsite

ilt-abhe.orgilt-abhe.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2017-05-04-insti… · web viewinstitutional...

Documents