INSTITUTIONAL SELF-STUDY COMPREHENSIVE
Prepared for the Commission on Higher Education Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools
KEAN UNIVERSITY Union, New Jersey
March 2001 COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP FOR THE SELF-STUDY
Steering Committee Members Dr. Beverley T. Amick Self-Study Director and Steering Committee Chair Director, Center for Professional Development Professor, Instruction, Curriculum and Admin. Dr. Jose Adames Dean, School of Liberal Arts Professor, English Dr. Thomas Banit Associate Professor, Instruction, Curriculum, and Administration Dr. Margot Banks Professor, English Dr. Minnie Campbell Professor, Nursing Professor Ellen Comerford Associate Professor, Accounting Mr. Edgar Evans Budget Analyst, Budget Office Mr. John Marcinski Director, Learning Assistance Program Dr. Charles Murphy Professor, Geology and Meteorology Mr. George Sisko Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Assistant Professor, Instruction, Curriculum, and Administration
Self-Study Teams Planning Processes: Mission, Governance Financial Affairs, Goals, & Objectives Equipment, & Facilities Charles Murphy, chair Jose Adames, co-chair Ellen Comerford, co-chair Janet Allen Thomas Banit, co-chair Edgar Evans, co-chair Nancy Brilliant Brian Carlsen Ray Bandlow Richard Buncamper Robert Cirasa James Castiglione Sylvio Codella Rebecca Dawkins William DeGarcia Brian Des Rochers Victor Esquilen Glenn Hedden Ethel Eaddy Anne-Marie Feury Sherrell Holderman Jon Erickson Francine Glazer Henry Kaplowitz Janice Jackson Roye-Ann Hargrove Donna Meade Dennis Klein Joan Kastner Martha Mobley Alonso Losada Marjorie Kelly Betsy Rodriguez-Bachiller Irwin Nesoff Stephen Kubow Cecelia Rover Josh Palgi MaryLou Mayo Bruce Skoorka Anthony Scelba Anne Onufer George Thorn Karen Stern Dolores Shiposh Catherine Wehrer Heather Stokes-Huby Bert Wailoo Mary Zagorski Ernest Wiggins Human Resources Educational Programs Students Jose Adames, co-chair Margot Banks, chair John Marcinski, chair Thomas Banit, co-chair Polly Ashelman Suzanne Bousquet Deborah Allen Christin Buttner Eufronio Carreno Patricia Bridges Joseph Darden Faruque Chowdhury Larry Chang Gail Deustsch Beverly Desch Jesus Diaz Catherine Dorsey-Gaines Sharon Foushee Rita Dunbar Elsa Gomez Daniel Gover Anne-Marie Faury Patricia Hannish Jason Gregurovic Ray Ford Alice Kelly Patricia Gruytch James Jandrowitz Bryan Lees Sharon Haussman Scott Kinnie Joseph Marinello Lidija Kampa Carlon Krantz Eleanor McKnight Christopher Lynch Cyril Nwako Peter Ndoma-Ogar Vincent Merlo Angela Porta Frank Osborne Josephine Norwood Bonnie Potter Dula Pacquiao Carlos Rivera Joy Prescott Tanya Poteat Maria del Carmen David Treadwell Rafael Risemberg Rodriguez-Solis Ina White Judith Rosenthal Sandra Smith Carole Shaffer-Koros Heather Sullivan-Catlin Barbara Tomlinson Stuart Topper
Library and Learning Resources Editor Minnie Campbell, chair David Treadwell Beverley Baker Jose Baldassini Secretary Sharon Boyd-Jackson James Conyers Diane Bryan Ciphor Deavoars Walter Jablonski Caroline Jolly Hui Min Kuo Morgan Laury Rosa Lemel Angela Lopez Barbara Manger Jean Mattson Frank Morejon Bridget White Shing Yoh CONTENTS
Executive Summary 1 Preface 7 Chapter 1: Planning Processes: Mission Goals and Objectives Introduction 9 1991 Mission Statement 10 Perceptions of the Mission and Core Values 10 Implementation and Assessment of the 1991 Mission 12 Development of a New Mission Statement 13 2000 Kean University Mission Statement 14 Planning Processes at Kean University 14 Curriculum Procedures 16 Facilities Master Plan Development and Implementation 16 Perceptions of Planning 18 Assessment 19 Chapter 2: Governance Introduction 23 The State System of Higher Education 23 Kean University Board of Trustees 24 Responses to Survey 25 Senior Administrative Officers 30 Faculty Senate 36 Kean Federation of Teachers 39 Adjunct Faculty 40 Operations, Maintenance, Service, Crafts, Inspection, and Security Employees 40 Primary Level Supervisors 41 Higher Level Supervisors 41 Administrative and Clerical Services 41 Chapter 3: Financial Resources and Allocations Introduction 43 Summary of Findings 43 Financial Resources and Allocation 44 Budget and Strategic Planning Process 45 Accounting and Auditing Processes 48 Financial Trends and Concerns 49 Chapter 4: Human Resources Introduction 51 Faculty 52 Profile 52 Workload 53 Teaching 53 Advisement 54 Community Service 54 Recruitment 55 Reappointment, Tenure, Promotion 55 Five-Year Review of Tenured Faculty 56 Scholarly and Professional Development 56 Faculty Research and Presentation 56 Center for Professional Development 57 Grants and Foundation Office 57 Librarians 61 Profile 61 Evaluation and Promotion 61 Professional Development 62 Conclusions 62 Adjunct Faculty 64 Profile 64 Evaluation and Reclassification 65 Training and Development 65 Survey Response 65 Professional Staff 67 Profile 67 Training 68 Evaluation 68 Survey Responses 69 Clerical Staff 70 Profile 70 Evaluation 71 Training and Development 72 Survey Results 72 Department of Public Safety and Police 74 Profile 74 Evaluation 75 Training and Development 76 Survey Results 76 Maintenance and Facilities Staff 78 Profile 78 Training 78 Evaluation 79 Survey Responses 79 Relationship to University Mission and Goals 80 Summary 81 Chapter 5: Educational Programs Introduction 83 Advisement 85 Undergraduate Programs 86 Developmental Studies Program 87 General Education 89 General Education Learning Assistant Program (GELAP) 91 Major Courses of Study 92 Achievement of Major Program Goals 93 Achievement of Institutional Goals 93 Other Programs in Fulfillment of University Mission 94 Honors Program 97 Exceptional Educational Opportunities Program 99 English as a Second Language Program 101 Graduate Programs 103 Continuing Education 105 Outcomes Assessment 106 Undergraduate 107 Graduate 107 Additional Findings 109 Curriculum Development 109 Articulation Agreements 110 Academic Policy 110 Student Satisfaction 110 Diversity 111 Summary and Recommendation 114 Chapter 6: Students Introduction 115 Student Profile 116 Admissions 116 Undergraduate 116 Recruitment Process 117 Survey Results 118 Focus Group Results 118 Undergraduate Admissions Criteria and Programs 119 Post-Admission Services 121 Developmental Studies 121 Center for New Students 122 Passport Program 123 Spanish Speaking Program 123 Retention and Assessment 124 Graduate Admissions 125 Survey Results 126 Focus Group Results 126 Student Support Services 127 Academic Advisement 127 Registration 129 Financial Aid 131 Student Accounting 132 Student Life 133 Services 134 Health Services 134 Department of Public Safety and Police 135 Residence Life and Housing Office 135 Activities 136 Student Organization 137 Council for Part-Time Students 137 Graduate Student Government Association 137 Career Service Center 137 Child Care Center 138 Other Activities and Events 138 Athletics 139 University Center 140 Academic Support Services 142 Learning Assistance Program 142 EEO Learning Center 142 Departmental-Based Programs 143 Developmental Studies Program 143 Relationship of Student Services to University Mission and Goals 145 Outcomes Assessment 145 Summary 148 Chapter 7: Published Materials and University Relations Introduction 151 Catalogues 151 Undergraduate 151 Graduate 152 University Relations Office 152 University Publications 152 Kean University Web Site 153 Relationship to University Mission and Goals 154 Summary 154 Chapter 8: Library and Learning Resources Introduction 155 Nancy Thompson Library and East Campus Library 156 Space and Holdings 156 Tracking and Recall 157 Library Hours of Operation 158 Staffing 158 Services 158 Budget 158 Usage 159 Faculty Participation 159 Library Instruction 160 Library Self-Assessment 160 East Campus Library (Curriculum Materials Center) 160 Instructional Resource Center (IRC) 163 Services 163 Location and Hours of Operation 163 Student Computer Workstations 163 Carrel and Preview Area 164 Television Studio 164 Non-Print Production Laboratories 165 Classroom Support 165 Personnel 166 Equipment 166 Faculty and Student Usage 167 Technology Initiative at Kean University 169 Background 169 Major Area of the Technology Initiative 170 Network Infrastructure 170 Replacement of Minicomputers 170 New Student Computer Laboratories 179 Faculty Equipment 171 Faculty and Staff Training 171 The Nancy Thompson Library 172 Technology in Administration 172 Summary 174
Chapter 9: Physical Plant, Equipment and Materials Introduction 175 Facilities Management 175 Facilities Master Plan 175 Preventive Maintenance 176 Deferred Maintenance 177 Energy Management 178 Safety and Security 179 Strategic Plan 179 Physical Space 180 Space Utilization and Analysis 180 Equipment 182 Classroom Equipment 182 Facilities Equipment 182 Athletics and Recreational Equipment 182 Responding to Changing Technology 182 Completed Capital Projects 183 Future Capital Projects 184 Planning Process, Budgeting, and Resource Allocation 184 Relationship to University Mission and Goals 185 Outcomes Assessment 185 Summary and Recommendations 185 Chapter 10: Conclusion Mission, Goals, and Objectives 187 Governance 187 Financial Resources and Allocations 187 Human Resources 188 Educational Programs 188 Students 188 Published Materials and University Relations 188 Library and Learning Resources 188 Physical Plant, Equipment, and Materials 189 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Middle States Steering Committee and chair were appointed by President Ronald Applbaum, in consultation with Provost Livingston Alexander, the president’s cabinet, the Council of Deans, and the chair of the Faculty Senate. The Steering Committee cooperated with the provost in recommending to the president a comprehensive self-study design and rosters of members who would serve on the self-study teams. Seven self-study teams were formed, broadly representative of faculty, staff, and students. The self-study teams completed their work in spring 2000. The information gathered by the self-study teams provides the basis for the chapters of the institutional report to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Planning Processes A 1999 survey of the members of the campus community found there is widespread agreement regarding the importance of the major components of the 1991 mission statement. In fall 1998, a committee was convened to consider developing a new mission statement, since significant changes had taken place at the institution. The new mission statement was presented to the Faculty Senate in April 2000 and was approved by the Board of Trustees at its May l5, 2000, meeting. Strategic planning processes exist at the university and the goals are reflective of the mission of the university. The relationship between the University Planning Council, strategic planning, facilities planning, and budgetary planning is not understood by the majority of the faculty and staff. It is recommended that the feedback mechanism for the planning process be improved so that university personnel at all levels are kept better informed. Governance The Higher Education Restructuring Act of 1994 provided Kean University with greater autonomy from state oversight and gave the school’s Board of Trustees ultimate responsibility for the governance of the institution. It was found that the Board of Trustees’ accomplishments in fund-raising are only modest and it is recommended that the Board commit itself to a greater effort to raise large endowments for the university. More women and minorities need to be identified as prospective trustees and recommended to serve on the board. The self-study found, in general, a functioning governance structure. The senior administrative officers work as a team and work effectively with the Faculty Senate, Kean Federation of Teachers and student government organizations.
Financial Resources and Allocations The university’s financial resources appear to be adequate to ensure the continuity of programs and services. During the 1999-2000 academic year the institution received an increase of $1.6 million to its base appropriation. However, questions remain about continued funding for capital improvements. It is recommended that the institution improve communication so that the Kean community better understands the relationship between the strategic planning process and the budgeting process. Human Resources Diversity is a common thread throughout the human resources categories. The professional staff, clerical staff, and campus police have become increasingly more reflective of the student body in terms of gender, ethnicity, and race. The composition of the faculty has also followed this trend, but to a lesser degree. The maintenance staff remains largely male African Americans and Hispanics, with Caucasians predominating in the leadership positions. The number of faculty holding doctorates or terminal degrees has increased, and there is a widespread perception that recently hired faculty are of a high caliber. Quality teaching and scholarship are recognized through awards and released time. The university relies on a large number of adjunct faculty to provide instruction. While the adjunct faculty are well prepared to teach and enjoy their work, many feel isolated. Librarians, professional staff, campus police, clerical staff, and maintenance staff feel well prepared for their duties. Yet, these groups strongly believe that personnel staffing is inadequate. It is recommended that the number of full-time faculty and librarians be increased. Educational Programs Kean’s mission stresses access by a pluralistic population to challenging academic programs, with appropriate support to enable students to achieve career objectives and advanced academic endeavors. The quality and breadth of studies at Kean reflect the emphasis on acquisition of skills, respect for diversity, and academic excellence. The General Education program, which provides the academic foundation for all Kean students, is administered by the Office of the Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs. In addition, Kean’s five schools offer undergraduate and graduate degree programs covering a wide range of disciplines and career options. Students can gain expertise and specialization through major, minor, and collateral programs, and through classroom and distance learning. At the same time, practical professional experience can be gained through service-learning internships and externships. Kean has a long history in outcomes assessment in higher education. A university-wide schedule of program review through 1998 was in place. Changes in the administration of Academic Affairs created a transition period during which assessment processes were put on hold. In addition, such initiatives as integrating technology into the curriculum have taken the emphasis from assessment for the past two years. In spring semester 2000, the revised program review guidelines were approved for implementation beginning with the 2000-2001 academic years. The stated objective is to foster excellence in education by providing an opportunity for programs and academic service units to identify areas of strength and address areas that need improvements. The program review is an ongoing process based on student learning outcomes and the document sets forth a five-year cycle of program review. The new General Education Learning Assistance Program, which is being piloted in fall 2000, has an outcomes assessment component that is being developed and implemented with assistance from an institutional assessment coordinator. Although the strategic planning process calls for measurable outcomes, and the program review process focuses on outcomes assessment, the institution needs a more fully developed outcomes assessment plan. Students Essential student services and activities are distributed among three major administrative divisions of the university: Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, and Administration and Finance. Students perceive the university as an undifferentiated whole. This perception is fundamentally correct, since Kean’s mission statement firmly establishes the primacy of these educational and support services. Enrollment objectives have generally been met through the university’s recruitment and admission activities. The demographic characteristics of Kean’s student population are reflective of the region and meet most of the objectives articulated in the mission statement. The broad array of support services at Kean is dispersed across several administrative units and there is little coordination among the services. The restructuring and centralization of functions such as academic advisement, financial aid, and registration, began during the current (1999-2000) academic year. A "one-stop" center for these services will open in fall 2000. The retention rate of native freshmen to graduation has not fully met university expectations. Redesigned programs, including GELAP, and the establishment of an Office of Retention Services are recent initiatives focused on the issue of student retention. Student life services and the programming of events and activities reflect institutional diversity. There are many academic support programs and services available to Kean students. The programs offer a wide variety of assistance and extend across much of the curriculum. These services are only partially centralized, resulting in some duplication of services and limiting the efficient deployment of resources. Planned university-wide restructuring includes the consolidation and integration of services in this area. Outcomes assessment must be fully institutionalized in the Academic Support Services areas and in the Student Life areas. Published Materials and University Relations Kean’s published materials accurately inform the external and internal communities about the university’s mission, programs, policies and services. Publications are attractive in design and representative of the institution. The Kean Web site, while providing a broad spectrum of institutional information, does contain some outdated information. Personnel need to be assigned to monitor the Web site and continually update the information presented. Library and Learning Resources Kean’s library and learning resources are in a period of transition. The Nancy Thompson Library and the Instructional Resource Center have benefited from the technological improvements the campus has undergone in recent months. The campus-wide technology initiatives are moving the university into a new age of instruction, communication, and information management. The Instructional Resource Center in general is providing the university community with satisfactory services. The Nancy Thompson Library is in need of attention. It is not receiving the financial support needed to be the kind of study and research center that is vital to the mission of the university. Improvements have been made, such as the renovation of the physical structure and the introduction of new technology, but the budget, staffing, and holdings continue to be problematic. Physical Plant, Equipment, and Materials Kean’s academic programs and associated support services are housed in 27 different campus buildings, 25 of which are on the main campus and two of which are on the East Campus. These 27 buildings comprise 991,537 gross square feet and 672,507 assignable square feet of space. Seventy-nine percent of the University’s 102 departmental programs are currently short of space. Over the past decade Kean has increased its physical space and improved both its infrastructure and physical appearance with a series of capital projects. In March 2000, the capital projects in the Facilities Master Plan were prioritized into four levels, but funding is available only for the Level I projects. The existing Deferred Maintenance Plan is adequate to meet the university’s needs, but not enough funds are available to address all the needs of the physical plant. Preventive maintenance needs to be given a higher priority at the institution. Additional funding and staff should be provided.
PREFACE
Kean University continues to reflect the vitality of the region in which it is located, responding innovatively to the needs of the state and the region. The university has played a significant role in the history of higher education in New Jersey. It was in 1855 that the institution opened its doors in Newark as the state’s first normal school, providing preparation for Newark teachers and administrators. In 1958, the institution moved from Newark to Union Township and established a new campus on land purchased from the Kean family estate. Sixteen years later, the school’s name was changed from Newark State College to Kean College of New Jersey. On September 26, 1997, the New Jersey Commission on Higher Education granted "university" status to the college and it was renamed Kean University. Over the past 146 years, Kean has grown from an institution with 3 faculty, 85 students, and 2 academic programs to become New Jersey’s third-largest university, with more than 800 full-time and adjunct faculty, more than 12,000 students, and 70 undergraduate and graduate programs. Undergraduate major programs cover a wide range of disciplines in the liberal arts, natural and social sciences, health professions, teacher education, business, and applied disciplines, all organized within four schools. The Nathan Weiss School of Graduate Studies administers the graduate programs, which range from education to public administration to nursing. The faculty is recognized for both its teaching excellence and its involvement in scholarship and service. Kean continues to respond to the major demographic and social changes in this region of New Jersey. Exceptional academic support programs have been developed to meet the requirements of an increasingly multicultural undergraduate population, one of the most diversified in the state. As an interactive metropolitan institution, Kean is also positioning itself to meet the challenging educational and scholarly needs of New Jersey students and citizens. It remains committed to a mission that provides access, opportunity, and affordability. Kean is proud of its history, its tradition of service to the community, and its commitment to scholarship, excellence, and innovation by its faculty and professional staff. In the five years since Dr. Ronald Applbaum assumed the presidency, the physical plant has undergone renovation and expansion. A new academic building has been completed, and additions have been made to the Nancy Thompson Library, University Center, Bruce Hall, Technology Building, and Wilkins Theater. There is also a new football stadium, and a campus beautification and site improvement project has been completed. All of this has resulted in an attractive and hospitable campus environment. Construction of another new academic building is being considered, as are plans to renovate D’Angola Gym. In addition, the construction of a campus health and fitness center is under discussion. Academic technology has been a major focus of the institution since 1997. Computer laboratories have been upgraded and expanded. Students are supportive of the initiative, with Student Organization funding an open laboratory in the University Center. More than 10 "smart" classrooms are located on the campus. All faculty members have Pentium-class computers in their offices, and computer training is provided on a regular basis for faculty, administrators, and professional and clerical staff. Web-site registration is planned for summer 2001. Kean is currently engaged in revising its general education and learning assistance programs. Developmental studies will be integrated with the general education foundations courses. In addition, general education will be linked to the academic majors. A plan for the reorganization of the Division of Academic Affairs is being developed by a committee that is representative of the campus community. The purpose of the reorganization is to make the division more responsive to programmatic and student needs. It is anticipated that the reorganization plan will be presented to the Board of Trustees in December 2000. Kean’s vitality is reflected in both its faculty and students. Students have a positive view of the university, citing the faculty’s care and concern for them as a major factor in their high level of satisfaction. Classes are small, and faculty know their students. Contributions made by Kean students and alumni are profound. Kean is the major producer of teachers in New Jersey. Kean alumni are leaders not only in education but also in business, the arts and sciences, and in health professions. Faculty members like teaching at the school and enjoy the diversity of the student body and the staff. They possess strong professional and academic credentials. In addition, faculty members are dedicated to serving the university and the surrounding community while continuing their scholarly activities. The Kean community is optimistic about the future of the university.
CHAPTER 1 Planning Processes: Mission, Goals, and Objectives
Introduction The Planning Processes: Mission, Goals, and Objectives self-study team followed these accreditation standards:
The purpose of this self-study is to examine Kean University’s mission and the institution’s planning processes. The 1991 Mission Statement is described and then an examination is made of: (1) how the university community perceives the mission statement, (2) how the statement is translated into action, and (3) how effective the statement has been during the decade of the 1990s. The content and development process for the 2000 Mission Statement is also presented. In addition, this portion of the self-study considers the structure and effectiveness of the university’s planning processes and how these planning processes reflect and implement the institution’s mission.
1991 Mission Statement Kean University’s 1991 Mission Statement was developed in the 1989-90 academic year and was formally adopted in January 1991. The statement, the first ever of its kind at Kean, evolved from an earlier document titled "Statement on Human Relations Commitment at Kean College," which was composed during a 1987 faculty retreat and subsequently published in the 1990-92 catalogue. The 1991 statement guided the university through most of the decade of the 1990s and called for the university to:
Perceptions of the Mission and Core Values A survey conducted among faculty, senior administrators, professional staff, clerical staff, and maintenance staff in preparation for this self-study reveals the respondents’ impression of the mission and how they believe it guides the institution. The respondents were asked to rank five components of the mission in order of importance. Table 1 contains the results of this ranking. Most of the groups rated "To provide quality education to prepare students for their social and professional lives" as the most important component (faculty, 55%; senior administrators, 55%; professional staff, 66%; clerical staff, 41%; and maintenance staff, 43%) "To provide access to higher education for students with a potential for success" was rated as the second most important (faculty, 38%; senior administrators, 36%; professional staff, 41%; clerical staff, 46%; and maintenance staff, 29%). Rated lowest among the five components were "To interact with the surrounding community and region in cultural and collaborative efforts" and "To provide learning support for students not fully prepared for college-level work." When senior administrators were asked if the mission statement provides overall guidance for the university, 63% agreed and 27% were neutral. When asked if the Table 1 Survey Responses to Importance of Mission Components (Most Important)
NOTE: Percentages in the above table may not add up to 100% for each group because respondents may have given two or more components the same ranking A. To provide access to higher education for students with a potential for success B. To provide learning support for students not fully prepared for college-level work C. To offer programs of study that meet the needs of the region and the state D. To provide quality education to prepare our students for their social and work lives E. To interact with the surrounding community and region in cultural and collaborative endeavors
mission is consistent with the needs of our student population, 71% agreed and 18% disagreed. In none of the groups surveyed were there any substantial differences in the rating of the importance of the components of the mission. A line from its concluding paragraph summarizes the focus and spirit of the 1991 Mission Statement: "Kean University seeks to combine excellence and equity." From this unifying principle, five core values associated with the mission can be derived: (1) diversity, (2) equality of access and opportunity, (3) pursuit of academic excellence, (4) support of student learning and intellectual growth, and (5) community connections and partnerships. These core values support and interact with one another and have had a substantial influence on Kean’s growth and development over the past decade. Kean’s success as an academic institution appears to be due in part to a strong consistency in the perception that members of the campus community have of the school's mission. In the self-study survey, participants were asked to rank these core values in terms of their importance. Table 2 summarizes those responses. Pursuit of academic excellence, support of student learning and intellectual growth, and equality of access and opportunity were rated one, two, and three, respectively, by each of the groups. The lowest ratings were given to diversity and community connections and partnerships, with diversity in particular ranked first by only 6% of faculty and 9% of senior administrators.
Table 2 Survey Response to Importance of Core Values (Most Important)
NOTE: Percentages in the above table may not add up to 100% for each group because respondents may have given two or more components the same ranking A. Diversity B. Equality of Access and Opportunity C. Pursuit of Academic Excellence D. Support of Student Learning and Intellectual Growth E. Commuity Connections and Partnerships
Implementation and Assessment of the 1991 Mission The implementation of the mission statement should be evident in the university’s admission policies, programs, and support services. Implementation of the mission statement should also be intimately linked with planning processes. When asked if the long-range plans of the institution were guided by the mission statement, 47% of faculty, 91% of senior administrators, and 33% of professional staff agreed. By comparison, 21% of faculty, 9% of senior administrators, and 14% of professional staff disagreed. Senior administrators were asked additional questions. These administrators almost universally agreed that senior administrators implement the mission, goals, and objectives of the institution, and that they apply the resources to accomplish these aims. Asked if the mission statement provided overall guidance for the institution, 45% of the senior administrators agreed and 27% were neutral. Moreover, asked if the mission and goals can be easily translated into action, 63% agreed and 27% were neutral. The views of the professional staff differ, however. In response to the question of whether existing structures facilitate the implementation of the mission, only 19% agreed, 37% were neutral, and 31% disagreed. Moreover, on the question of whether the mission and goals are easily translated into action, 19% agreed, 32% were neutral, and 30% disagreed. Development of a New Mission Statement In fall 1998, the provost convened a committee to consider developing a new mission statement for the university. The existing mission statement had been in force for seven years, but over that period many significant changes had taken place at the institution. In 1996, for example, Dr. Ronald Applbaum became Kean’s president, bringing new leadership directions, including the concept of Kean as an interactive metropolitan university that uses advanced technology in support of its mission. President Applbaum delineated these leadership directions in his inaugural address and in subsequent state of the university addresses. Also in 1996, Kean was granted university status by the state Commission on Higher Education. These events–Applbaum’s becoming president and Kean’s being granted university status–had a significant effect on the institution and its members. What is more, the region in which Kean is located had undergone a significant change in demographics and career opportunities for Kean graduates. Such factors indicated the importance of revising the existing mission statement. The ad hoc committee convened by the provost was composed of a cross-section of the university community, including faculty, administrators, and staff. The committee’s charge was to develop a mission statement that would address the changing nature of the university and its role as an institution of higher learning. The charge also called for the committee to make the statement more concise than the existing one so that it would be appropriate for distribution in such new media as the Internet. The committee spent the better part of a year developing a draft statement. The draft was reported to the Faculty Senate in early fall 1999 and generated considerable response from the campus community. The brevity of the proposed statement was interpreted by many as an abandonment of the university’s long-standing values. The Faculty Senate, in turn, held several hearings soliciting both verbal and written responses from the campus community. These responses, almost 30 in number, were reviewed and considered by the ad hoc committee. The committee developed a revised draft that was longer and contained more explicit language to express the university’s values. This version was presented to the Faculty Senate in April 2000 and was subsequently approved by the Board of Trustees at its May 15, 2000, meeting. 2000 Kean University Mission Statement The essential components of the new Mission Statement call for the university to:
Planning Processes at Kean University Planning processes at Kean University have changed significantly since the last Middle-States Accreditation Report. In the late 1980s Kean established a College Planning Committee with representation from faculty, staff, students, and administrators. In 1987, the committee prepared a three-year strategic plan that was recommended to the president and Faculty Senate. Sometime after this, the committee became inactive and ultimately ceased to function. With the appointment of President Applbaum in 1996, however, the planning process was revitalized. Soon after Applbaum’s arrival, he and the Faculty Senate directed the University Planning Council to prepare a five-year strategic plan. The framework for this plan was the master plan approved by the state Commission on Higher Education in November 1996. In addition, the Interim Planning Council and the Periodic Review Report for Middle States identified many of the issues subsequently analyzed in the new strategic plan. The plan also incorporates the vision of the university described in President Applbaum’s first university address in September 1996. The 1997 Five-Year Strategic Plan provides 11 directions or themes that are grouped under four categories: (1) organizational, (2) resources, (3) academic, and (4) interactive. The initial draft plan included the following directions:
Organizational
Resources
Academic
Interactive
The Faculty Senate and the president adopted the Strategic Plan in May 1997. The plan includes a three-phase planning process for the five-year period. The first phrase began in May 1997 and focused solely on the interactive strategic direction. The next phase was completed in 1999 and was expanded to include all strategic directions. The funded projects include a variety of activities from all four schools of the university. The third phrase of the strategic initiative process is currently under way. Each department has prepared and submitted proposals to its respective school committee for review. The school committees review and prioritize the proposals and forward them to the provost or vice presidents for divisional review and prioritization. The provost and vice presidents report the outcomes of the strategic planning process of the University Planning Council. The projects funded under the Strategic Plan tend to support the overall mission of the university, but do not support the university’s core functions. Core functions continue to be funded through traditional budgetary processes and are not reviewed in the planning process. Curriculum Procedures Kean has established a process that guides the development and structure of all academic offerings. This process involves a concept-approval track for all new majors before they are submitted for formal approval. The concept-approval process, which is the university’s primary curricular planning process, is department based. All new programs are initially developed at the department level and are then forwarded up the organizational ladder in successive steps. The concept-approval process begins at the departmental level, with subsequent consideration and approval by the University Curriculum Committee. The Faculty Senate, the university president, the Board of Trustees, the Council of College Presidents, and the state Commission on Higher Education each then successively review the document. The completion of the process requires that the department, the University Curriculum Committee, and the Faculty Senate approve a Final Program Document. This process insures that all interested parties have an opportunity to comment on the proposed major. Among the concerns that can be voiced in the process is this process is the role of the new major in fulfilling the mission of Kean University. Over the past few years, the University Curriculum Committee and the Faculty Senate have approved a number of new majors and degree options. Among the new majors are industrial design, social work, biotechnology, and marketing. New options and joint degree programs include a joint nursing and public administration degree program and a physics minor. The approval of these new offerings appears to be consistent with the university’s mission and the Strategic Plan. However, at no point in the process does a proposed course, option, or major get reviewed for conformance with the university’s planning documents or planning processes separate from curriculum procedures. Facilities Master Plan Development and Implementation Kean University adopted a campus facilities plan in 1991. That plan included upgrading the campus infrastructure (including a co-generation plant), remodeling Bruce Hall, and constructing an addition to the University Center and a new academic building. By 1999 the major recommendations of the plan had been completed or were under way, and a new plan was proposed. In spring 1999, the Board of Trustees adopted a new facilities master plan as the guide for future capital improvements to the campus. This master plan outlines the actions required to ensure that future physical development suits the needs of students, faculty, and staff. The plan concludes, among other things, that Kean suffers a significant shortage of office, library, and classroom space. Twenty-four of the 29 academic departments have a shortage of space for faculty offices and library holdings, and a severe shortage of classroom and laboratory space at peak hours. In the 1999-2000 academic year, this space crunch translated into an overall shortage of about 345,000 square feet of space. This space shortage is expected to increase by another 60,000 square feet over the next 10 years. The master plan does not suggest altering existing university policies favoring small class sizes, and it recognizes a modest expansion over the next decade. The plan also includes campus-related landscaping and environmental concerns, but does not consider the community in which the university is located. The core of the master plan is a capital facilities development plan. Two groups or categories of capital projects are designated. The first group consists of $23.5 million worth of facilities and site improvements that are currently under way or have been recently completed. Among this group are the new academic building, the Bruce Hall renovations, and the steam-line and generator replacements. The second group consists of $75.6 million worth of roof renovations or replacements, utility and fire upgrades, and site-landscaping improvements. The master plan attaches no precise priority to the 21 site-specific projects involving either new construction or renovation, but it does divide the projects into four categories or clusters. Development within the clusters seems to follow some logic. The plan also cautions that changes in funding sources, institutional priorities, or aesthetic and symbolic concerns may call for alterations in the design. The four categories or clusters into which the plan is divided are:
As noted, the master plan does not include a five- or 10-year capital improvement plan, detailed plans for new or renovated buildings, a landscape improvement plan or detailed architectural environmental standards. What is more, it is not clear from the plan how the administration will approach the development of more detailed plans. The first step after the development and approval of the master plan has been the development of a planning process and procedure that would be followed by the administration. This process will include the University Planning Council. The facilities planning process should, thus, fully incorporate the directions outlined in the Strategic Plan, along with those included in the university’s new mission statement. But how these planning processes will be reviewed for consistency is not explicitly stated as policy. Perceptions of Planning The responses to survey questions on planning are given in Table 3. Among faculty respondents, less than one-third (27%) felt that major decisions are guided by the university’s planning process and slightly less than half (47%) felt that the university’s long-range plans are consistent with its central mission and goals. In addition, only 47% reported participating in the current planning process.
Table 3 Survey Responses to University Planning
Among professional staff respondents, about one-fifth (19%) felt that the existing structures at the university facilitate the implementation of the mission and goals and that they can easily be translated into action. Only one-third (33%) felt that the university makes an effort to have its long-range goals consistent with the mission, and just 16% believed that the major decisions are guided by the planning process. Only 10% indicated confidence in the current planning process. Among the clerical staff, only 35% of the respondents said they have a sense of the overall plan for the university. Assessment The strategic planning process serves as a catalyst for implementation of the institutions’ goals and objectives. From the departmental/program level on up, goals and objectives for each unit are developed. Currently, the only mechanism to assess the goals and objectives of the institution is through the planning process itself. An update on the progress of strategic planning initiatives is required as part of this process. This approach focuses on specific planning initiatives rather than the overall efficacy of the planning process itself or the facility with which the process achieves the institution’s overall mission. Academic programs historically have been assessed through the program review process. This process was active from 1994 to 1996, but was subsequently suspended. The president recently reinstated the process, with a scheduled starting date of summer 2000. The original program review process was designed to rate programs for increased, level or decreased support. How program review and its criteria relate to planning and the university’s mission remains to be clarified. An adequate assessment mechanism should provide feedback to both the groups involved in the planning process and those that are affected by it. The faculty and staff survey responses reveal a general lack of awareness of the planning mechanism and lack of support for the process. This suggests that a feedback component is lacking. The respondents generally regarded the direction of the information flow in the planning process as one way–from the bottom up. Information about which initiatives are funded is particularly not readily available. Moreover, when strategic plans are prioritized, no information returns to departments and programs informing them of the reasons behind the particular prioritization. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
CHAPTER 2 Governance
Introduction The Governance self-study team addressed the following standards for accreditation:
The purpose of the self-study is to examine Kean University’s organizational, administrative, and governance processes. The role played in governance by the state higher education system, Kean’s governing board, senior administrative officers, the Faculty Senate, and the Kean Federation of Teachers and other local unions is described and reviewed. The State System of Higher Education The New Jersey Commission on Higher Education was created in 1994 by the Higher Education Restructuring Act. The commission provides coordination, planning, policy, development, and advocacy for the state’s higher education system in collaboration with the New Jersey Presidents’ Council. The higher education system comprises both public and independent institutions. The public institutions are: Rutgers University, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey Institute of Technology, five state universities, four state colleges, and 19 community colleges. There are 25 independent institutions in the state. The 1994 restructuring act gave public institutions greater autonomy, for the avowed purpose of stimulating creativity and innovation and allowing greater decision-making and accountability at the institutional level. Institutions would thus be better able to fulfill their respective missions and serve statewide goals. The Commission on Higher Education includes a 15-member advisory panel composed of representatives of higher education administration, the K-12 community, the state Legislature, the private sector, and organizations concerned with higher education in New Jersey. The 1994 act also created a tripartite structuring consisting of the Commission on Higher Education, the Presidents’ Council, and the individual university and college trustee boards. The commission provides for statewide coordination, research, advocacy, planning, and policy development, with advice from the Presidents’ Council. It recommends higher education initiatives and incentive programs to the governor and Legislature. It has authority for licensure, university status, institutional programmatic missions, and new degree programs. The Presidents’ Council is responsible for reviewing new programs, forming regional and cooperative programs among institutions, and making recommendations to the governor and Legislature on higher education policy issues. The trustee boards are ultimately responsible for the governance of their institutions. They have responsibility for institutional policy and planning, student tuition and fees, admissions, degree requirements, investment of institutional funds, legal affairs, and budget requests for state support. In addition, trustee boards have authority for academic programs, personnel decisions, and initiatives for improving institutional facilities. Evidence
Kean University Board of Trustees The Board of Trustees serves as the fiduciary authority of the university, overseeing its legal affairs and its fiscal, academic, and personnel policies and operations. The board approves, for instance, the institutional mission and the curricular requirements for academic programs and degrees. But the board is obligated "to avoid participation in the administration of policy," according to its bylaws, and with the exception of hiring and firing the president himself or herself, may take action on matters of individual personnel only upon the president’s recommendation. Beyond its oversight functions, the board directly participates in institutional fund-raising, its members having a responsibility both to "support institutional fund-raising efforts through personal giving" in proportion to their individual means and to be "willing to share in the solicitation of others," according to the board’s bylaws. In all of its functions, the board is to serve the interest of the public at large, "representing as it does the public interest and Kean University’s mission in behalf of that public interest, rather than any particular constituency of the University," according to the board’s bylaws. Some board members have recently undertaken personal liaisons with the governor, state legislators, and other government officials who represent the general public interest. The board’s communications with the public is accomplished primarily through the Office of University Relations. Board relations with internal constitutencies of the university are restricted by the board’s bylaws to the intermediary functions of the president, who serves as "the agent of the Board in the conduct of institutional affairs" and "as the formal channel of communication to the faculty, staff and student body." Elsewhere in the bylaws, it is directed that all communications to the board shall be transmitted through the president except as the board chairperson shall invite communications. Moreover, the bylaws impose upon the board an explicit obligation to "learn and consistently use designated institutional channels." Additional means of formal communication with the campus include the public business and published minutes of board meetings and the brief (five-minute) remarks the board entertains from the university community at those meetings. Informal communications also ocurs at occasional social events, such as the post-commencement luncheon and the rare party hosted by a campus constituency or board chairperson Trustees are appointed by the governor with the consent of the state Senate. The board may include anywhere from seven to 15 trustees. There are 11 trustees currently serving. Trustees are appointed for six-year terms, but they can continue serving beyond their term until a successor is appointed. In addition to the gubernatorial appointees, the board’s bylaws allow for two student trustees to be elected by the student body, with one serving as a voting member (except in matters prohibited by law) and the other as a non-voting alternate. Two such representatives are currently on the board. Among the 11 gubernatorial appointees are one African-American, two Hispanics, and three European immigrants. Two members are Jewish–one a Holocaust survivor and the other a past president of the National Conference of Christians and Jews–and one member is a Catholic nun and academic who is widely noted for her work advocating Israel and improving Christian-Jewish relations. In terms of professional backgrounds, the trustees are also relatively diverse: attorneys, entrepreneurs, businesspersons, academics or educators, a former state senator and an executive director from the nonprofit sector. Responses to Survey Although the total number of responses by the board to the 30-question survey for this self-study was not large enough to be statistically significant, we thought it prudent, nonetheless, to report on those board members who did respond. When asked if the board’s functions reflected the mission and goals of Kean, 67% of respondents agreed and 33% strongly agreed. Respondents believe that the mission statement provides overall guidance for Kean and that the mission is consistent with the needs of the student population. Also as part of the survey, five questions asked respondents to rank-order statements related to the institution’s mission. The responses were as follows: "Provide access to higher education for students with potential" Rank #1 - 40% Rank #2 - 60% "Provide learning support for students not fully prepared for college" Rank #3 - 20% Rank #4 - 60% Rank #5 - 20% "Offer programs of study that meet the needs of the region" Rank #1 - 20% Rank #2 - 40% Rank #3 - 20% Rank #4 - 20% "Prepare students for their social and professional lives" Rank #1 - 40% Rank #2 - 40% Rank #3 - 20% "Interact with the surrounding community and region" Rank #3 - 20% Rank #4 - 20% Rank #5 - 20% The survey asked if the board considered that it plays an appropriate role in governance at the institution. Responses were evenly distributed (33%) among the categories "strongly agree," "agree," and "neutral." An identical distribution was registered when respondents were asked whether participatory governance works well at Kean. Four of the five respondents (80%) strongly agreed that Kean makes an effort to make its long-range plans consistent with its mission, and 60% believe that the planning process guides major decisions. The same distribution is found on the question of whether the board is confident in the current planing process. The board was also asked to indicate its level of satisfaction with various administrative and governance units on campus during the past five years. The responses are given in Table 4. While the respondents indicate strong satisfaction with the senior administrative officers and the deans, many of the respondents marked "unable to respond" or left the response blank.
Table 4 Survey Reponses to Satisfaction with Administrative and Governance Units
The board was also asked to rank in order of priority, one to five, statements reflecting the core values of the institution. The results are given in Table 5. The responses suggest that "pursuit of academic excellence" is viewed as a high priority by the board. In addition, "prepare students for their social and professional lives" and "support of student learning and intellectual growth" were each given number one ranking by a board member, although the latter was ranked third by two board members. The board gave lower priority to "community connections and partnerships." The survey asked if the board considers that it plays an appropriate role in governance at the institution. Responses were evenly distributed among "strongly agree," "agree" and "neutral." Evidence
Table 5 Responses to Rank-Ordering of Statements Reflecting Core Values
Some rows may not add up to 100% because of rounding of percentages to nearest whole number
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Senior Administrative Officers Kean’s senior administrative officers are:
The senior administrators comprise 10 males and 5 females. African Americans are represented by 5 persons (33.3%), Caucasians by 7 persons (46.6%) and Hispanics by 3 persons (21.1%). There are no Asian/Pacific Islanders. By comparison, the 353-member faculty comprises 21 Asian/Pacific Islanders (6%), 34 African-Americans (9.6%), 272 Caucasians (77.1%), and 26 Spanish-surnamed professors (7.4%). Among students receiving bachelor’s degrees in 1998-99, 6% were Asian/Pacific Islander, 14.5% were African-American, 60% were Caucasian, and 12.7% were Spanish-surnamed. Almost 7% were classified as "Other." The 11 senior administrators who answered the Middle States Evaluation Survey were in general agreement concerning most areas of their activity. They unanimously agreed that senior administrative officers help provide a vision, and almost two-thirds (64%) agreed that senior administrative officers help develop the university’s mission, goal, and objectives. Sixty-three percent believe that the mission statement provides effective guidance for the university, 63% also believe the mission statement is easily translated into action, 81% believe the mission statement is consistent with the needs of Kean students, and 91% believe the mission statement is consistent with the university’s long-range plans. However, in interviews, some senior administrative officers appeared uncertain about their division’s goals in relation to the mission and were reluctant to discuss the topic. Among the senior administrators, 63% were confident that the planning process is effectively used and helps guide decisions at the university. In addition, 72% believe the planning process involves an appropriate level of participation from the university community, 73% believe the planning process is flexible enough to meet internal concerns and 63% believe the planning process is flexible enough to meet external concerns. The senior administrators unanimously feel that they effectively represent the institution before the public and 91% feel that they effectively attract financial and other support for the school. The senior administrators also believe that they have implemented effective working relationships with various constituencies of the university community. In both the survey and interviews, 81% of respondents said they work together as a team, 91% said they work together with the Faculty Senate, 82% said they work together with the local bargaining units, and 90% said they work together with students organizations. Ninety-one percent also said they enjoy sufficient contact with the faculty, 91% said they enjoy sufficient contact with staff, 82% said they enjoy sufficient contact with students, and 91% said they enjoy sufficient contact with other constituencies. To allocate resources, senior administrators have developed a management-by-objective process and university-wide planning mechanism. Almost two-thirds of the administrators (64%) believe that, throughout their activities, the university helps them foster a sense of community. The administrators strongly supported (90%) the idea that they possess the necessary background and skills to complete these tasks but less than half (45%) feel that they have sufficient time to complete their duties and just over half (55%) feel that they have the assistance needed to accomplish their work. The university’s mission includes the goal of "maintaining an environment where mutual respect characterizes relations among the members of a pluralistic campus community." Supporting this goal is the Affirmative Action Office, which has a commitment to equal educational and employment opportunities and to the principles of affirmative action. Almost two-thirds of the senior administrators (64%) believe that the Affirmative Action Office appropriately addresses the university’s mission. To ensure that this policy is met, the office delineates in the University Catalog and in its own policy booklet the school’s policies on sexual harassment, nondiscrimination, and harassment, along with the procedures for reporting and investigating discrimination complaints. The specific duties of each senior administrator include: President
Provost / Vice President for Academic Affairs
Vice President for Administration and Finance
Vice President for Institutional Advancement
Vice President for Student Affairs
Academic Deans
Graduate Dean
Director of Library Services
Evidence
Strengths
Weakness
Recommendations
Faculty Senate The Faculty Senate is an elected advisory body and the principal agent of the faculty in the governance of the university. The Senate participates in the formulation and approval of educational policy. The Board of Trustees has empowered the Senate to make decisions on academic and personnel matters that are subject to review and approval or rejection by the board. In addition, the Senate considers matters brought to its attention by the Board of Trustees, the university president, the faculty, the student body, and other appropriate groups and individuals. The Senate also provides a forum for members of the university community to bring issues of concern to the university administration. Various committees are each charged with specific duties (see the report Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on Committee Charges, Summary of Actions). The committees include:
The Senate is composed of 30 representatives selected from the full-time teaching faculty, full-time librarians, full-time professional staff represented by the Kean Federation of Teachers, and non-unit managers and administrators. Ten members are elected each year for three-year terms. The current members, elected in 1998, 1999, and 2000, largely reflect the diversity of the university community as a whole. There are 15 male senators and 15 female senators. The ethnic/racial composition is as follows: 6 African Americans (20%), 2 Asians (6.7%), 6 Hispanics (20%) and 16 Caucasians (53.3%). More than 8 of 10 survey respondents (84%) believe the Senate membership closely matches the diversity of the campus community as a whole. The ethnic/racial composition of the university’s full-time faculty is as follows: African Americans, 9.9%; Asian/Pacific Islander, 5.9%; Hispanic, 7.1%; and Caucasian, 77.1%. Senate representation is almost equally divided between the various schools and the professional staff: 5 members from Business, Government, and Technology (16.7%); 7 members from Education (23%); 6 members from Liberal Arts (20%); 6 members from Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics (20%); and 6 members from the professional staff (20%). However, no current members are librarians. More than three-quarters (79%) of the 19 Senate survey respondents believe that the Senate’s mission and activities are consistent with the university’s mission. The Senate’s activities help "provide a comprehensive range of educational opportunities" and, according to the Senate constitution, help "prepare [Kean] students to be equipped for lifelong learning and to be contributing citizens." The adoption of a strategic plan and the continuing efforts to link program review and budgeting with this plan have provided an opportunity to realize the potential of the university’s mission statement. The Senate’s work on the restructuring of the General Education and Learning Assistance programs is an example of the Senate’s continuing efforts to address the university’s educational mission. The survey reveals that 84% of the respondents believe the Senate maintains effective communication with its constituency and takes action on its interests, 85% believe the Senate is most effective in communicating on behalf of the faculty, and 90% feel the Senate is acting for the faculty. But only about half of the respondents believe that the Senate communicates effectively and acts on the needs of the professional staff and librarians. The Senate’s communication channels with the university administration are well established. In fact, 84% of the respondents believe the process is "effective" and that they play "an effective role in the governing process." Periodically, the Senate chair, the university president, the provost and senior administrative officers confer on future initiatives. Committees that directly engage the Senate constituency in university planning and budgeting have been established. The provost and other senior administrative officers regularly attend meetings and cooperate in reporting to the Senate on important issues. However, based on interviews with Senate members, the same level of communication and cooperation does not exist with the Board of Trustees. During the past academic year, the Senate has put a strong emphasis on improving its organization and operations. Five inactive committees were abolished and several others were combined for more effective operation. Senate election data for the last 10 years was compiled to help gain a more effective understanding of the Senate’s recent history and operations. (See Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on Committee Charges–Summary of Charges) Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Kean Federation of Teachers Nine state colleges and universities–that is, all but Rutgers University, the College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, and the New Jersey Institute of Technology–are represented by the Council of New Jersey State College Locals (AFT, AFL-CIO). At each of these nine institutions, a local unit represents the interests of faculty, professional staff, and librarians. At Kean University, the local bargaining agent is the Kean Federation of Teachers (KFT), which acts by contract with the state as the exclusive representative of faculty, professional staff, and librarians. It represents these constituencies in "matters related to terms and conditions of employment at the institution, according to the master agreement. The KFT represents the following personnel:
By contract, the KFT receives the agenda of the Board of Trustees one week before the board’s public meetings and can discuss agenda items with an administrative officer designated by the university. In addition, at the request of the KFT president or the university president, meetings can be established during the first week of April, October, and January to review the administration of the Master Agreement and to discuss problems that may arise, with the intent of "fostering good employer-employee relations" (Handbook of Professional Personnel, revised 1997). The KFT and the university can also sign letters of agreement on local issues as long as such letters do not violate provisions of the Master Agreement. Adjunct Faculty Adjunct faculty who teach credit courses for at least their second semester within the past two academic years are represented by the state colleges/universities adjunct unit of the Council of New Jersey State College Locals. A master agreement was signed October, 1999, and is effective from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2003. The state recognizes the adjunct unit "the exclusive representative for the purpose of collective negotiations for all terms and conditions of employment in a unit embracing" the nine state colleges and universities represented by the council. The master agreement stipulates the rights and responsibilities of adjunct faculty and those of the colleges and universities. A local unit represents adjunct faculty at each of the state colleges and universities. Operations, Maintenance, Service, Crafts, Inspection, and Security Employees Employees working under titles in operations, maintenance, service, crafts, inspection, and security are included in an agreement between the state and Local No. 195 of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, (AFL-CIO), and Local No. 518 of the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Employees Union (SEIU, AFL-CIO). The agreement stipulates both the rights and responsibilities of the employees covered under the contract and those of management. According to the university Office of Human Resources, 35 employees fall under the category of crafts, 7 under the category of security/guard, and 84 under the category of maintenance and service. Primary Level Supervisors Employees working under titles in the primary level supervisor category are included in the agreement between the state and the Communications Workers of America (AFL-CIO). Examples of employees covered by this agreement are crew supervisor painters, crew supervisor carpenters, principal clerk typists and head clerks. Higher Level Supervisors Employees working under the titles in the higher level supervisor category are included in the agreement between the state and the CWA. At Kean, only nine such employees are represented by the local unit. They include supervisors in facilities and maintenance, health services, purchasing and other areas. Administrative and Clerical Services Employees working under titles in the administrative and clerical services category are included in the agreement betweeen the state and the CWA. Evidence
Kean University Foundation The Kean University Foundation is charged with securing funds through private gifts and grants to support the university’s mission, goals, and objectives. Corporations, foundations, alumni, parents, and friends serve as the main sources of these funds. In recent years, the university has placed a strong emphasis on developing these sources. For example, the amount of funds raised in fiscal year 2000 climbed to a total of $1.87 million from $1.2 million in the previous fiscal year. The foundation’s goals for the next three to five years include: (1) preparing for a major campaign to help provide funds to support development and implementation of new programs, (2) increasing endowments and scholarships, and (3) providing for the university’s capital improvement needs. Evidence
Summary and Recommendations The Higher Education Restructuring Act of 1994 provided Kean University with greater autonomy from state oversight and gave the school’s Board of Trustees ultimate responsibility for the governance of the institution. The Middle States self-study allowed for a review of institutional procedures, practices, and policies pertaining to governance. The self-study found, in general, a functioning governance structure. Areas of strength and weakness are identified along with recommendations for improvement.
CHAPTER 3 Financial Resources and Allocations
Introduction The Financial Resources and Allocation self-study subcommittee addressed the following standards for accreditation:
B. Secondary Responsibility
Summary of Findings Kean University has attempted to meet the mission stated in the 1999-2001 Undergraduate Catalog. The university’s financial resources appear to be adequate to ensure the continuity of programs and services, but questions remain about continued funding for capital improvements. With the strategic planning process moving into its third stage, improved communication is needed to ensure that a systematic approach to planning and budget is understood and achieved. To be sure, limitations are imposed by spending and budgetary constraints, but there must be a continuing focus on the quality of instruction and curriculum change. Financial Resources and Allocation As a public institution, Kean University is primarily supported through a combination of state appropriations and tuition and fees. In the last 10 years, the percentage of state funding has declined relative to tuition and fees. In 1990, for example, state appropriations accounted for almost 70% of total revenues. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1999, however, the university received a regular state appropriation of $33.6 million, along with a total of $9.8 million in additional funds for FICA and fringe benefits. These sums amounted to 46% of the revenue required to support the university’s programs and mission. Tuition and fees provided an additional $38.9 million (41%), with tuition accounting for $33.5 million of that total and fees $5.4 million. Additional sources of income included investment income, auxiliary-activity revenue, and gifts and bequests. In the last five years, significant efforts have been made to increase outside sources of funding. The Kean University Foundation and the Office of Institutional Advancement have worked together in these efforts. One hopeful sign of the university’s fund-raising prospects is the $292,540 raised in 2000 by the annual Kean Gala for student scholarships and program support. The Kean University Foundation has permanently restricted net assets of almost $1 million, the income from which is earmarked for scholarships and special projects. The University itself is not able to accumulate assets from its sources of funding. Under President Ronald Applbaum, the university has been actively lobbying for an increase in its base state appropriation on grounds that Kean has historically been underfunded by the state in comparison with the other state colleges and universities. These lobbying efforts resulted in an increase of $1.6 million in the university’s base appropriation. The university’s balance sheet as of June 30, 1999, shows total current fund assets of $16.8 million and corresponding liabilities of $8.6 million. This 2-to-1 ratio of assets to liabilities seems fiscally appropriate but is not sufficient to generate additional revenue. The university’s assets include a physical plant, spread over 150 acres, whose current replacement value is estimated at $171 million. Funding for capital construction and for preservation and improvement of existing buildings and infrastructure comes from both general state appropriations for capital improvements and specially designated bond issues. For the five years or so before fiscal year 2000, state appropriations for capital improvements remained steady at $750,000 per year. In fiscal year 2000, the state approved the Higher Education Capital Improvement Bond Fund. Some $23 million of that fund is earmarked for Kean, with the provision that the university provides matching funds to cover one-third of the cost of servicing the bonds. This appears to be a one-time infusion of capital improvement funds that will not be repeated anytime soon in coming years. Indeed, in all probability, the capital improvement appropriation will revert back to the $750,000 level. In fiscal year 1999, the university received $1.7 million from the Higher Education Technology Bond Fund. Together with Kean’s matching funds, this allowed the university to implement a five-year technology plan. This year, a number of state-of-the-art computer labs opened on campus, and all faculty have received personal computers for their offices. These computers are connected to the Kean Communication Network. The university’s Facilities Master Plan outlines the major capital construction needs of the campus for the next 10 years. The budget request for fiscal year 2001, approved by the Board of Trustees in December 1999, contains 39 capital projects proposed for implementation through fiscal year 2006. The projects are listed in order of priority. In spring semester 2000, the Facilities Master Plan Prioritization Committee recommended priorities for both new projects and renewal and replacement projects. The timetable for implementing the committee’s recommendations must remain flexible, however, since any capital improvements are dependent on state funding. This situation highlights the need for Kean to seek independent sources of funding. The Grants Office continues to assist faculty and professional staff in obtaining federal and state funds for research projects and programs. Kean has enjoyed a steady increase in grant money. Grants for the past five years totaled $1,582,473 in 1995, $1,453,166 in 1996, $1,832,670 in 1997, $2,389,974 in 1998, and $3,004,090 in 1999. From January 1 to June 30, 2000, a total of $2,291,191 in grants has been received. The major operating expenditures for the university continue to be in the instructional area. In fiscal year 1999, the cost of instruction amounted to $43.2 million, representing 52% of the total expenses in the educational and general expenditures category. Institutional support is second at $14.7 million (17%), followed in order by operations and maintenance of plant at $11.4 million (14%), academic support at $3.6 million (4%), and scholarships and fellowships at $2 million (3%). Kean University qualified for additional funding under the governor’s performance evaluation criteria. All state colleges and universities received a 2.5% increase in their base appropriation for fiscal year 2000. Under the governor’s performance funding measures, however, Kean qualified for an additional 72.9% of a 1% merit funding. In the future, these performance funding measures may be used to determine annual higher education appropriations. Budget and Strategic Planning Process In 1996, President Applbaum called for the development of a five-year strategic plan for the university. The plan eventually drawn up provides broad themes grouped in four strategic directions: (1) organizational, (2) resource, (3) academic, and (4) interactive. The planning process was conceived to be an interactive one, operating both down from the University Planning Council to the individual departments and up from the individual departments and units to the planning council. The resource strategic direction calls for a long-range plan to provide adequate financial resources and facilities for all university programs and activities. This plan includes a comprehensive campaign to increase Kean’s share of state assistance so that state funding per full-time equivalent is commensurate with the needs of the university’s programs and services. The university has focused great effort on building relationships with the executive and legislative branches of the state government. President Applbaum has played a leading role in this campaign, along with members of the Kean Federation of Teachers who have traveled to Trenton with a student contingent to lobby for the university at the annual Lobby Day sponsored by the Council of New Jersey State College Locals. A second strategic direction calls for the allocation of resources for goals and programs that are consistent with the strategic plan. During the 1997-1998 academic year, 99 strategic initiative proposals were developed, 87 of them by departments in Academic Affairs, 9 by Student Affairs, and 3 by the administrative and finance divisions. The University Planning Council reviewed 65 of these proposals and divided them into three categories: "highly recommended," "recommended," and "deferred." At the request of President Applbaum, the Strategic Initiative/Budget Advisory Group prioritized the "highly recommended" proposals. Seventeen of the 19 proposals endorsed by the president received funding for fiscal year 1999 and again in fiscal year 2000. These strategic initiatives include: tutoring the young in reading and mathematics, introducing teen-age women to careers in science, and presenting lectures and informational exercises to senior citizens. Also receiving funding were the university’s Latino/Latin American Studies Program, Jewish Studies Program, Contemporary Writers Series, Concert Series, and Theater Arts Program. From their inception, the strategic initiatives have provided the means for departments across the campus to further the university’s mission to support "intellectual growth" and provide "service to the community." A third area of the resource strategic direction addresses the need for external funding for programs, research, student support, and other goals consistent with the strategic plan. The Kean University Foundation and the Office of Institutional Advancement are concentrating their efforts on achievement of this goal. Steps were also identified to implement the strategic directions. One step most desired by all is that of releasing final budgets to division directors by the end of July at the latest. But the timetable for releasing budget information is still dependent upon the enactment of the state budget in Trenton. Other recommendations have been implemented. Cost-center directors now have on-line access to their budgets, for example, and a new streamlined, on-line method has also been developed for the purchasing process. In developing the operating budget, departments and cost-center directors are asked to identify their needs and to account for the success of prior-year requests in meeting their objectives before they make additional requests. They must then prioritize their requests. These requests are submitted to the appropriate director, dean, or vice-president for incorporation into the final budget that the Office of Administration and Finance forwards to the president for his approval and submission to the Board of Trustees. The contract between the university and the Kean Federation of Teachers dictates that the largest segment of the operating budget is allocated to salaries and fringe benefits. The president makes the decisions on the remaining discretionary income, subject to approval by the Board of Trustees. Two university committees deal with budgetary planning, development and oversight. They are:
With participation by both committees, an institutional budget is developed within the constraints of anticipated revenues. The president then meets with the divisional vice presidents, who have prepared the budgetary needs of their divisions with input from deans, department chair, directors, and cost-center heads. The vice presidents communicate their needs, put in order of importance, to the president, who then allocates the funds. This allocation contains both very broad, discretionary authority and specific, targeted expenditures. Cost-center heads have the authority, subject to the limits noted above, to transfer funds from one line item to another at their discretion, with approval of the dean. Salary accounts, however, may not be transferred to non-salary accounts, except at the institutional level. The ability to transfer funds is at the heart of good management, as are appropriate limitations on such transfers. It would appear that first-line managers have sufficient flexibility, provided their budgets are adequate to meet their needs, to adapt to emerging, changing, or unanticipated needs. The institution also maintains sufficient controls upon such modifications through the established approval process. Strategic planning is inseparable from operational planning. It is vital that the budget-planning committees work in concert with each other. One strength of Kean’s budgetary process is the overlap of personnel on these two committees. This redundancy provides an appropriate connection in budget development between operations, strategic planning, and needs at the cost-center level. How well this overlap works is, to some degree, dependent on how thoroughly priorities and needs are identified and communicated from one level to the next. The extent to which the university community at large understands the budget process is questionable. According to questionnaires and discussions with the budget-planning committee members, many aspects of the budget process remain unclear unless one is directly involved in the process. What is more, there is no system for rewarding units that are efficient and come in under budget at the end of the fiscal year. Indeed, in some cases it appears that the more money you spend, the larger your budget will be the following year. Concerns continue to be raised regarding the timing of final budget allocations. Historically, they are made in the middle of fall semester, although spending is initiated at the start of the fiscal year on July 1. This lapse of three to four months sometimes creates difficulty in ordering big-ticket items such as equipment. In addition, funds are sometimes expended for line items that fail to be included in the final budget allocation. In spite of the work of the Strategic Planning Council, a need still appears to exist to clarify linkages between the planning and budgeting processes. Accounting and Auditing Processes The university prepares annual financial statements using the accrual basis of accounting. These statements are audited annually by an external-auditing firm of certified public accountants. In 1999, the latest report that is available, the university received an unqualified report from the accounting firm of KPMG, LLP. This is the highest level of assurance to which an auditor can attest. These annual audits are evidence to both the state and the public that the funds the university receives are being used appropriately. The audits are performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards of the accounting profession. The annual audit report is released to the public and is available from the Office of the Vice President for Administration and Finance. The administration and finance office is also currently searching for an internal auditor and anticipates that the person hired will be in position in fall semester 2000. During the course of an audit, an examination of internal controls is performed to ensure there are no major deficiencies in the policies and procedures used to safeguard assets and ensure the accuracy of financial information. Financial Trends and Concerns New Jersey is enjoying a period of economic prosperity that has led to record state budget surpluses. As a result, the state Legislature has been relatively generous in meeting Kean’s requests for regular and special funding. Historically, however, this institution has often seen its appropriation requests slashed and anticipated payments for state-negotiated salary increases only partially funded when the state faced budget deficits. The university’s ability to set equitable tuition rates and to raise external funds for its operating budget, capital budget, and the endowment fund and capital budgets and its Endowment Fund has created a modest unrestricted reserve fund of $7.2 million that can be tapped if the state’s economy should turn downward. Furthermore, the timetable for some capital construction projects could be extended if necessary. At this point in time, therefore, the university appears to have sufficient resources to meet its mission and goals. The faculty is aging. Over the next few years, a large number are expected to retire. The state has mandated a specific number of positions, including faculty, professional staff and librarians–875, to be precise–for which it will cover the cost of benefits. For any positions above that number, the university is responsible for paying the benefits. This translates into a 23% increase in the cost of benefits for each position not funded by the state. The state Office of Management and Budget is examining the process by which fringe benefits are charged. This could result in an increased fiscal burden for the university if the state determines that it will not cover these positions. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
CHAPTER 4 Human Resources
Introduction The Human Resources self-study team addressed the following standard for accreditation:
The purpose of the self-study is to analyze Kean University’s human resources. Specifically, the institution’s policies dealing with faculty, librarians, adjunct faculty, professional staff, clerical staff, public safety and police staff, and maintenance personnel are examined. Special focus is given to the faculty’s composition, qualifications, and intellectual professional development, based on the appropriateness to the university’s mission and programs. The institution’s organization, administration, and governance are also examined to determine how they facilitate faculty teaching, research, and learning.
Faculty Profile The 1999 Kean University Faculty Profile lists 353 full-time professors, 15 more than in 1990. Of this total, 147 are full professors (41.6%), 93 are associate professors (26.3%), 109 are assistant professors (30.9%), and 4 are instructors (1.1%). They are distributed among the four schools in the following numbers: Business, Government, and Technology, 57 (16.1%); Education, 81 (22.9%); Liberal Arts, 135 (38.2%); and Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Technology, 80 (22.7%). These numbers represent an increase of 3.6% for Business, Government, and Technology; 8% for Education; and 21.2% for Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Technology; but a decline of 4.9% for Liberal Arts. Overall, the growth in the professorate over the period from 1990 to 1999 is 4.4%. The ratio of females to males has increased in recent years. In 1995, the ratio was 146 females (42.8%) to 195 males (57.2%); in 1999, it was 158 females (44.8%) to 195 males (55.2%). From 1990 to 1999, the number of females with tenure grew, going to 114 from 78–a 46.2% rise. During that period, the percentage of faculty with doctorates or terminal degrees also increased, climbing to 88.1% in 1990 from 82% in 1990. The tenure rate, meanwhile, has remained relatively stable–79% in 1999 compared to 80.9% in 1995. The faculty is comprised of 35 African Americans (9.9%), 21 Asian/Pacific Islanders (5.9%), 272 Caucasians (77.1%), and 25 Hispanics (7.1%), according to the 1999 profile. These numbers represent an increase since 1990 of 25.9% for African Americans, 75% for Asian/Pacific Islanders, and 13.6% for Hispanics, but a 1.8% decrease for Caucasians. The total number of racial/ethnic minority faculty in 1999 was 81, distributed among the four schools as follows: 14 in Business, Government, and Technology; 16 in Education; 31 in Liberal Arts; and 20 in Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics. Respondents to the Middle States Evaluation Survey reflect the diversity of the faculty. Of the total 138 respondents (39% of the total 353 faculty), 17 are in Business, Government, and Technology (12.3%); 34 are in Education (24.6%); 47 are in Liberal Arts (34.1%); and 37 are in Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics (26.8%). The respondents are about equal in gender: 71 females (51.5%) and 66 males (47.8%). Racially or ethnically, 9 are African American (6.5%), 6 are Asian/Pacific Islanders (4.4%), 109 are Caucasians (80%), and 11 are Hispanics (8%). (Three respondents, 2.2% of the total, left this category blank.) More than 9 of 10 respondents (93.5%) hold a doctorate or terminal degree. Among the respondents, 68% believe the gender diversity of the faculty matches the university’s mission and 58% believe the ethnic origins of the faculty matches the university’s mission. Two-thirds of the respondents (66%) also say that the ethnic and cultural diversity of the student body strengthens their respective departments, and 89% believe this ethnic and cultural diversity is one of the university’s strengths. Workload The faculty workload is 24 teaching credit hours per year. According to the statewide teachers’ contract, no full-time faculty member may be assigned more than 15 teaching credit hours per semester within load. In addition, the teaching assignment may not include more than three different course preparations in any semester, except if it can be demonstrated that the course offerings and class sections in a department cannot reasonably be scheduled on this basis or if a faculty member’s schedule includes one or more two-credit-hour courses. If such conditions prevail, one additional course preparation may be assigned. Overload work is voluntary, and all overload rates are paid beyond the 24 teaching credits per year. Faculty assigned duties outside of teaching–those supervising student teachers, for example–receive teaching credits for such activities in accordance with the university’s policy. Survey responses to questions regarding workload were generally negative. Although 56% of the faculty consider Kean a "professionally satisfying place to work," only 25% consider faculty morale "high." Just 39% believe contractual agreements are appropriate to teaching loads, and a scant 19% agree with distance-learning work policies. In addition, slightly more than half (51%) support contractual policies on outside employment. These conclusions are based on 138 replies of the 353 surveys distributed, which represent a statistically significant response rate of 39%. Teaching Part of Kean’s mission is to provide a quality education based upon a solid liberal arts preparation leading to employment, research, graduate education, and personal growth. To accomplish this goal, the faculty is encouraged to use teaching and learning styles incorporating the latest technology. Teaching in small, manageable classes–each averaging about 20 students–is a major practice at the university. Faculty members thus have more time to dedicate to individual students and provide for their individual needs. The university encourages quality instruction in several ways. Student evaluations of faculty instruction, for example, play an important role in the retention, tenure, and promotion processes. The university also recognizes outstanding teaching through such annual honors as the Presidential Excellence in Teaching Award, Alumni Undergraduate Teacher of the Year Award, and Graduate Teacher of the Year Award. Survey respondents generally agree that teaching is important at Kean. Almost two-thirds (64%) believe faculty members "are academically prepared to teach in their assigned areas" and an almost identical proportion (63%) believe faculty members "uphold the values of sensitivity to student strengths and needs." Similarly, 64% feel faculty members are "encouraged to pursue innovative teaching techniques." In addition, 67% recognize the importance of experimenting and revising their course content, 63% their curriculum, 71% their instructional methods, and 62% their instructional tools. Nearly two-thirds (63%) also agree that effective use of equipment and facilities can enhance their teaching. Indeed, 57% said computers have been integrated into one or more of their courses and 63% plan to use computers in the future. Yet, just 37% believe that the laboratories, studios or equipment available in their programs are adequate. What is more, only 36% believe that assessment and evaluation–two important means of improving teaching–are being effectively used. Advisement According to the statewide teachers’ contract, advisement is considered a part of the responsibilities traditionally borne by faculty members and is "reasonable and consistent" with sound academic practice. Faculty involvement in the advisement process at Kean is typically performed at the departmental level. Department chairs ensure that faculty members keep office hours in support of their teaching assignments and during early registration periods. Large departmental programs are headed by a program coordinator who is responsible for providing both initial and ongoing advisement for students. In some cases, departments may have two or more program coordinators who are normally given reduced teaching loads or overload credit for their work. Faculty members seem satisfied with the advisement information they are provided; three-quarters of the survey respondents (75%) said they have "adequate information to advise students on their programs." Community Service Kean faculty and administrators are encouraged to help provide expertise and services to individuals and community-based organizations. One way faculty are helped to achieve this goal is through the recently created Gateway Institute, which was designed to raise the standards and quality of life for the communities within the region. Gateway’s goals include meeting the economic, social, cultural, and educational challenges of an emerging global community. The institute also provides programs in such areas as policy planning, strategy development for expanding international trade, economic impact analysis, and educational and economic development policy. In addition, the institute is involved in studies assessing community health needs and environmental quality, studies in technical areas, and policy forums and conferences. Almost two-thirds of the faculty (63%) support the value of service to the university, but only 48% believe service to the community is as important, even though 84% feel that strengthening community relations is vital to Kean’s mission and goals.
Recruitment Together with their respective department chairs and deans, faculty members play a key role in the recruitment, selection, and appointment of new faculty by recommending candidates to the university president. The statewide teachers’ contract and local agreements detail standard faculty recruitment and regulations for the university. Typically, after receiving the president’s approval to hire, a departmental search committee defines the nature of the position and, in cooperation with the dean and the affirmative action director, develops an advertising campaign. Every effort is made to attract a diverse field of applicants. The search committee then evaluates the credentials of all applicants, invites selected applicants for interviews, and recommends a final slate to the chair and department members for their approvals. In inviting applicants for interviews, the committee also consults with the affirmative action director. The chair and department members submit final candidates’ names to the dean. The dean in turn interviews the final candidates. The search committee, department chair, and dean then recommend a nominee to the provost/vice president for academic affairs. He or she, in turn, recommends the nominee to the president for appointment. After making its recommendations, the search committee must submit a detailed report on each applicant to the affirmative action office. The recruitment process requires persistent effort on the part of the faculty members who take part in it. In recent years, concerted efforts have been made by departments, deans, and the affirmative action office to attract applicants of the highest caliber for tenure-track positions. Applicants who have terminal degrees and strong teaching and professional experience are preferred in searches for full-time faculty. Survey responses underscore the success of these hiring strategies. Seventy percent of the respondents believe that the university’s recruitment, selection, and appointment process is appropriate and 58% believe the university has attracted stronger faculty over the past five years. Reappointment, Tenure, Promotion Overall procedures for promotion in rank, including specific minimum requirements, are detailed in the statewide teachers’ contract and the bylaws of the university’s Promotion Committee. The process occurs in two stages, first at the department and university levels through elected faculty committees, then at the presidential and trustees-board level. A similar process is followed in evaluating candidates for retention and tenure. The reappointment and tenure process takes place at the department, school, and university level. The president then recommends candidates to the Board of Trustees. The statewide teachers’ contract and local agreements define the protocols for this process. During the five-year probationary period preceding tenure, faculty are expected to pursue an agenda of teaching, research, and service excellence. Application for retention and tenure requires evidence of significant contributions in all three areas. The timetable for application for reappointment puts undue pressure on first-year appointees. They must compile a reappointment dossier well before their first semester is completed and then begin the process again for the following year before the end of their second semester. Almost two-thirds of faculty (64%) believes the tenure process is effective but only 47% believes "the retention process works well" and just 17% believe "the promotion process is equitable." Five-Year Review of Tenured Faculty The statewide teachers’ contract provides guidelines and procedures for the review of tenured faculty members. The criteria for evaluation include: (1) evidence of effective teaching and fulfillment of professional responsibilities, (2) continuing scholarly growth, and (3) service to the university and the community. The contract also requires student and peer evaluations for tenured faculty. Written performance assessments must be made for all faculty members undergoing review. For each tenured faculty members’ fifth-year evaluation, the department chair and two department members must each complete one classroom observation and write a performance review. The respective dean reviews these documents and then writes an assessment letter to the tenured faculty member undergoing evaluation. Scholarly and Professional Development Faculty Research and Presentation The university considers research leading to publications and presentations an important part of the retention, tenure, and promotion processes. Scholarly activities are announced in the administration’s weekly Administrative Reports and prominently displayed in the Administration Building. The annual Presidential Award for Scholarship also recognizes such activities. Survey responses to questions on research and scholarship are not inspiring. Only 43% of respondents believe that all faculty uphold and value a commitment to scholarship and just 47% believe all faculty uphold the value of continuing professional development. Slightly under one-third (32%) believe that faculty in their respective departments contribute sufficiently to research within their disciplines. The pursuit of professional development and research is a recognized and established element of faculty responsibility. To further this end, the university provides released time for research on a competitive basis. Career development grants are awarded to faculty who present papers, chair sessions at conferences, or serve as officers of a scholarly organization. New faculty are offered untenured faculty research initiatives to help them pursue scholarly activities. In addition, the university offers sabbatical leaves on a competitive basis. The university has significantly increased faculty travel funds to $650 per person. Computer training is offered by the campus Technology Institute for Professional Staff (TIPS). Center for Professional Development The Center for Professional Development supports the professional growth of both tenured and nontenured faculty. A mentoring program is provided for all new tenure-track faculty. Mentoring is performed by trained senior faculty, who receive a stipend for their involvement. Teaching loads for the newly hired faculty are reduced by three credit hours during their first semester. Survey respondents support the Center for Professional Development’s activities. More than three-quarters (77%) agreed that the center’s monthly workshops and annual In-service Day are useful. Support groups such as the Authors Group and Great Teaching Ideas Group meet monthly. Confidential teaching consultations are also provided. The center organizes the Academic Affairs Colloquium Series, featuring faculty research sponsored by the provost’s office. Grants and Foundation Offices The Grants Office, headed by the associate dean of the Nathan Weiss School of Graduate Studies, provides in-depth assistance to faculty seeking external funding for research initiatives. The office also funds university-supported research and grants released time for research and creative works. The Kean University Foundation assists faculty in preparing grant requests to private groups and foundations. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Librarians Profile The Nancy Thompson Library staff comprises nine full-time librarians at the rank of Librarian I, II, or III, three of whom are being added in summer 2000. Four of the librarians serve as administrators; the other five hold staff positions. The Librarian I and II ranks require two master’s degrees while the Librarian III rank requires one master’s degree. All full-time librarians must possess at least one master’s degree in library science as a prerequisite for their positions. The library staff is diverse. The director is a female African American and the three associate directors are, respectively, a female African American, a female Asian/Pacific Islander, and a male Caucasian. The four staff librarians are, respectively, a male African American, a male Asian/Pacific Islander, a female Asian/Pacific Islander, and two female Caucasians. The librarians believe that their diversity is a strength because the university’s diverse student population can see and interact with staff members of varied racial and ethnic backgrounds. The emphasis on diversity is also evident in the library-supported Ethnic Studies Center and in the separate Holocaust Resource Center, which is housed in the main library. Evaluation and Promotion Librarians use the same forms as faculty for evaluation and promotion. The rank of Librarian III equals the rank of Instructor; the ranks of both Librarian I and II equal the rank of Assistant Professor. The five staff librarians currently comprise three who hold the Assistant Professor rank and two who hold Instructor rank. Promotion for librarians is initiated by an announcement from the university president that promotion is available to the position of Librarian I or II. The promotion package is then sent, in order, to the Library Personnel Committee, the library director, the provost, and finally the president. The librarians cite several problems with this process. They strongly believe that the faculty promotion packet "does not express the essence of librarianship" and, thus, their evaluation and promotion process is more cumbersome and possibly slower. What is more, because the library is understaffed, outside librarians must be called upon to help complete the evaluation and promotion process. This results in persons making decisions on cases who are not familiar with the particular librarians involved. The reappointment process raises much the same concerns. Even though it was revised last year, the reappointment form is not designed with librarian concerns in mind. Professional Development The university supports professional development to an extent. The university reimburses up to six credit hours of tuition per semester for graduate study. The library director supports professional development and notifies librarians of programs, meetings, and conferences. To qualify for promotion to Librarian I or II, librarians must pursue a second master’s degree, usually in some field needed by the library, such as computer science or information management. Travel funds for professional development are made available through the Office of the Provost/VPAA. For the 2000-01 academic year, a total of $4,500 was allocated for travel by librarians to attend conferences. Library personnel typically keep abreast of current trends through the offerings of the New Jersey Librarians Association. Several staff members have published articles and made presentations at national and local conferences. Conclusions Despite the additional personnel hired this summer, the number of librarians is still inadequate to maintain the efficient operation of the university library. A detailed analysis of this situation can be found in the Library and Learning Resources Committee report. But this situation also impacts on librarians as university personnel. The consensus of a focus group of librarians is that a library the size of Kean’s requires 25-26 full-time librarians. A nearby state university about the same size as Kean has 20 full-time librarians and is evidently seeking to increase that number. Kean librarians have a feeling of being "burned out." They feel that they must cover too many areas at a time during the 89-hour library week and cannot adequately serve students and faculty. Other important work is either put off or left unfinished. Additional responsibilities of librarians include holding workshops for various classes, Freshman Seminar groups, and faculty research. Part-time personnel are hired to augment the library staff, but they are too few in number and cannot fulfill many of the functions of full-time staff members. The librarians also feel that their computers are old and outdated and that their requests for newer machines are ignored, even though the university has mandated that each professor receive a new computer. On-line research efforts are thus slowed. One librarian noted that he (or she) often conducts on-line research during weekends at the Rutgers University library. The bottom line of all this is that librarians do not believe that they are able to meet the university’s stated mission. What is more, the librarians do not feel as though they are part of the university community. The "culture of the school" does not stress the image of librarians as partners in research but instead relegates librarians to the status of "service people." The librarians feel that the Faculty Senate, for example, adopts policies such as the material circulation rules that fall under the normal management policies of the library but which librarians are never involved in formulating. The understaffing and lack of community acceptance have an adverse impact on librarians. The focus group believes that the four librarians who have left the campus in recent years did so out of a feeling of exhaustion and their status in the campus community. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Adjunct Faculty Profile Kean University continues to rely increasingly on adjunct faculty to fulfill its teaching, research, and service responsibilities as a metropolitan institution of higher education. For example, the number of adjunct faculty climbed to 533 in 1999 from 477 in 1990. The Strategic Plan for the Division of Academic Affairs 1999-2001 shows that some academic departments have recently experienced a decline of full-time faculty instruction to less than 50%. According to the New Jersey Commission on Higher Education Policy Brief of May 2000, Kean has the second highest number of adjuncts of all the state’s eight public residential universities. The School of Liberal Arts currently employs 212 adjuncts, a large proportion of whom teach composition, developmental writing, and English as a Second Language classes. The School of Liberal Arts is followed, in order, by the School of Education, with 146 adjuncts (59 of whom are in student teacher supervision); the School of Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Math, with 99 adjuncts (51 of whom teach mathematics and computer science courses, including developmental math courses); and the School of Business, Government, and Technology, with 76 adjuncts. The 1996 periodic review report noted that the number of adjunct faculty within the General Education Program was a major cause of concern. This situation is illustrated by data from the four General Education core courses in spring semester 2000. Those courses are GE 1100, Emergence of the Modern World; GE 1200, Intellectual and Cultural Traditions of the Modern World; GE 2020, Inquiry and Research; and GE 2400, Science and Technology of the Modern World. The four courses combined had a total of 84 sections, with 52 sections taught by 31 adjunct faculty, 6 sections taught by 5 administrators, and 26 sections taught by 19 full-time faculty. Although both the 1999 Period Review Report and the 1999-2001 strategic plan of the Academic Affairs division stress the importance of increasing full-time faculty lines, the university must continue its reliance on adjunct faculty until the additional faculty lines become a reality. In 1999, the adjunct faculty population was 55% male and 45 % female, a figure consistent with the 1990 and 1996 reports. In racial/ethnic composition, 27 adjuncts were African-American, 29 were Asian/Pacific Islander, 331 were Caucasian, and 29 were Hispanic. Race or ethnicity was not reported for 119 adjuncts. The 1999 figures show an increase in the number of Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic adjuncts and a slight decrease in the number of African-American adjuncts. Still, the total number of minority-group adjuncts was 83 in 1999, compared to 78 in 1996. In the 1999 academic year, adjunct faculty at public institutions of higher education across the state organized and formed a statewide adjuncts union. Statewide bargaining has resulted in increased pay for adjunct faculty, but other issues remain within the purview of local negotiations. Evaluation and Reclassification Hiring and supervision of adjunct faculty is conducted at the departmental and school level. The Handbook for Professional Personnel describes the detailed process for these procedures. For each adjunct, department chairs assemble a credentials folder that includes a resume, qualifications and background application, official transcripts, and two letters of recommendation. During an adjunct’s first semester of employment, department chairs are also required to assemble a folder that includes faculty and student evaluations from at least one of the courses the adjunct teaches. Adjuncts must be evaluated thereafter at least once in every six semesters they teach. The Middle States survey reveals that 71% of the respondents have been regularly evaluated by faculty and 65% regularly evaluated by students. Training and Development Adjunct faculty are normally provided informal training and development by their respective departments. About half of the respondents to the Middle States survey said that they were given an orientation to the university and almost three-quarters (72%) said information about university policies is shared with them. Almost three-quarters (74%) also said that they regularly interact with their respective department chairs for advice and help. The School of Education provides formal training for adjuncts who supervise student teachers. This training is provided in ongoing sessions by the Teaching Performance Center that focus on supervision and classroom instruction skills. The adjunct faculty do desire more opportunities for formal training. More than half of the survey respondents (56%) said they would like to participate in teaching effectiveness workshops. Survey Response The Middle States survey elicited only an 18% response from the adjunct faculty. Any analysis must be viewed in the light of this limited data. A large majority of the respondents (82%) believe that the university’s mission should include providing access to higher education for students with potential. A slightly larger percentage (88%) believe that the mission should include a component ensuring quality education to help prepare students for their professional and social lives. Slightly more than half the respondents (52%) believe that the mission should not emphasize providing learning support for students not fully prepared for college. More than three-quarters of the respondents (78%) believe that one of Kean’s strengths is the ethnic and cultural diversity of the student body. Adjunct faculty make a positive contribution to the university in numerous ways. They enable increased numbers of course sections to be offered. They provide support to programs, majors, and departments. They provide another link to students beyond the full-time faculty, and they bring additional expertise to academic programs, including student teaching and nursing field supervision, and thus allow full-time faculty to benefit from released-time activities. Adjunct faculty have several concerns, nevertheless. One of their concerns is their status in the university community. Some adjuncts feel isolated and disconnected. A majority of adjuncts also feel that they do not have adequate office space (a concern shared by resident faculty, it should be pointed out) and, depending on the department with which they are affiliated, some feel that access to copy machines, telephones, and secretarial and administrative services is inadequate. With all this, however, an overwhelming 96% say the prime reason they work at Kean is the enjoyment they get from their profession. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Professional Staff Profile The professional staff at Kean University is a diverse, talented, and generally well educated body of employees who perform in a wide range of positions– administrators, advisors, teachers, and mentors. Professional staff employees come from a variety of backgrounds and bring a wealth of expertise, knowledge, and skills to the campus. They interact not only with students, faculty, administrators and the community but also with academic and non-academic programming on a continuing basis, providing valuable support to the university. Kean has 140 professional staff employees, according to a report by the Office of Human Resources. Of this total, almost two-thirds (66%) are women and slightly more than a third (34%) are men. In the job title in the highest salary range–professional services specialist I–the ratio of women to men corresponds almost exactly to those overall female-male percentages: 8 of the total 13 professional service specialists I, or 62%, are women, and 5 of them, or 38%, are men. Similar correspondences can generally be found throughout the remainder of the job title structure. The racial/ethnic composition of the professional staff is as follows: Caucasian, 78 (60%); African American, 34 (26%); Hispanic, 14 (11%); and Asian/Pacific Islander, 4 (3%). Professional staff employees are spread out over a total of 44 administrative units, departments, offices, and programs in Academic Affairs, Administrative Services, Student Affairs, and Institutional Advancement. Only 12 of the 44 units employ four or more professional staff employees; the typical number in any division is one or two. In those 12 divisions employing four or more professional staff employees, there is a generally balanced racial/ethnic mix. The most notable exceptions are the Athletics and Recreation Department, which has 12 professional staff employees (the second highest number of any division), all of whom are Caucasian; and the Office of University Relations, which has six professional staff employees, all but one of whom are Caucasian. Interestingly enough, four of the five Caucasian professional staff employees in the Office of University Relations were hired within the past year, along with the only minority professional staff employee in the office, a female African American. Training Professional staff are eligible for career opportunities when a vacancy in a professional staff position of higher rank becomes available. They are also eligible for reclassification if there is a substantial increase in job responsibilities in an existing position. Professional staff are eligible for the Career Development Assistance program that includes tuition reiumbursement and leaves. Most recently, funds were allocated for travel related to professional development for members of the professional staff. Professional staff are eligible to apply for Released Time for Research and Creative Works grants. Evaluation In labor matters, the professional staff is represented by the Kean Federation of Teachers, an American Federation of Teachers local, which also represents librarians as well as professors. This year for the first time ever under the statewide labor contract, professional staff employees won the right to performance-based promotions. Such promotions consist of advancement to the next higher title in an employee’s title series. Criteria for performance-based promotions are established by the university president and are provided in writing to all affected employees. The president determines whether promotions shall be granted. Initial hires serve a five-year probationary period and are then eligible for multi-year contracts: 3, 4, and 5 years. Candidates for multiyear contracts prepare a written self-evaluation folder that is submitted to the immediate supervisor. Survey Responses A total of 68 professional staff employees responded to the Middle States survey. The respondents generally believe that professional staff employees have the academic qualifications, knowledge, and senstitivity to perform their jobs. Fifty-eight percent indicated a desire to have more informal interaction with faculty and 48% said they understand the formal governance structure. But only 25% said they understand the planning and budget process, and just 20% said they had been asked for feedback about the planning process. Responses were generally mixed to questions regarding opportunities for professional development, reclassification procedures, staffing levels, and the like. Almost half of the respondents (49%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that there were sufficient opportunities for professional development. An almost equal percentage (47%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that policies and procedures for reclassification are appropriate. More than half (56%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that the number of professional staff employees was appropriate to meet the needs of their respective units. Almost half (47%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that the reclassification process is equitable. More than half (52%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that adequate resources are available to support attendance at profesional meetings. Almost half (47%) disagreed or strongly disagreed that effective administrative skills are sufficiently rewarded, and an identical proportion said computer training workshops at Kean are helpful. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Clerical Staff Profile The clerical staff totals 230 employees and comprises such positions as secretarial assistants, head clerks, principal and senior clerk typists, transcribers, and bilingual transcribers. Senior and principal data-entry machine operators also perform clerical duties. Clerical staff are represented by the Communications Workers of America (CWA), except for confidential secretaries in the President’s Office, the offices of the provost and the other vice presidents, and the Office of Human Resources. Of the total 230 clerical staff employees, 92 are women (83.5%) and 38 are men (16.5%). The diversity of the clerical staff reflects that of the university community as a whole: 60 African Americans (26.1%), 5 Asians/Pacific Islanders (2.2%), 125 Caucasians (54.4%) and 40 Hispanics (17.4%). Clerical staff employees have clearly delineated job responsibilities and report to a supervisor (management, faculty, or professional staff) who may or may not be part of a bargaining unit. Clerical staff employees are the first line of communication in a department and, in some cases, supervise student aides and other clerical workers. A review of clerical staff diversity reveals that the general racial and ethnic distribution reflects that of the university as a whole but some notable variations exist. For example, African Americans make up 50% of the clerical staff in senior administrative offices (president, provost, and vice presidents), 57.1% in the General Accounting Office, 62.5% in the Financial Aid Office, and 83.3% in the EEO office. Caucasian clerical workers predominate in the offices of the Athletics and Recreation Department (80%), Campus Police (66.7%), Instructional Resource Center (75%), Library (80%), Registrar (78.6%), School of Business, Government and Technology (83.3%), and School of Education (70.6%). Hispanic clerical workers predominate in the Undergraduate Admissions Office (80%). Asians/Pacific Islanders do not predominate in any office. Evaluation Clerical employee evaluation is based on the Performance Assessment Review (PARS) process outlined in the three CWA agreements with the state of New Jersey. Following a probationary period of normally four months, the employee and his or her designated supervisor will mutually formulate performance and improvement goals and work standards appropriate to the job. The goals and standards become the basis for measuring the employee's performance during a rating period. Although the survey returns from the clerical staff were limited and the focus group was small, the responses revealed widespread concern about the evaluation and promotion process. The focus group was uniformly negative in its responses to the rules and regulations regarding evaluation and promotion. According to the CWA president, clerical staff employees are also concerned that supervisors do not complete Performance Assessment Reviews in a timely manner and that this, in turn, leads to unnecessary delays in employee salary increases. Well over half of the clerical staff (58%) believes that the job reclassification process is not effective in their own interests, and 50% believes the process is not effective in the university’s missions, goals, and objectives. The focus group also expressed concern about the practice of hiring temporary workers instead of current staff members to fill vacancies over a long period of time. If current staff members were hired, they could gain a higher position.
Training and Development Opportunities for training and development exist for all clerical staff. These include computer-training workshops, university courses for which tuition waivers are available, and reduced-cost cultural activities both on and off campus. In addition, on-site childcare is available to provide time for training. The majority of survey respondents (73%) believe that they are well trained to complete their assignments. More than half (56%) believe that professional development activities are useful to them and an almost identical proportion (55%) feel that their supervisors encourage professional growth. Survey Results Sixty-eight clerical staff employees, or 29.6% of the total employed by the university, responded to the Middle States survey. The respondents were primarily Caucasian and the overwhelming majority had been at the university for more than six years. More than two-thirds (69%) had some college experience, a college degree, or a master’s degree. The respondents had mixed reactions to their jobs. They generally agreed that they received adequate supplies to complete their jobs. But they felt that they lacked adequate office space and computer technology to complete their assignments and that supplies were not often received in a timely manner. Only 50% said that they gained personal satisfaction from their work at the university. Reaction was also mixed on the question of whether the appropriate number of personnel is available to complete assignments. (Interviews with academic deans and office managers, on the other hand, revealed that none of the deans felt there was any serious lack of personnel in their schools.) Only the library appears to be appreciably short of clerical employees. Clerical staff reaction to questions about the university community is somewhat mixed. Fewer than one-third (28%) believe that the university helps them foster a sense of community. Two-thirds (66%) felt that they are respected by students and other clerical staff employees, but less than half (49%) felt that they are respected by the administration and only slightly more than half (51%) felt that they are respected by the faculty. In regard to the university’s mission, almost three-quarters (72%) believe that the university should provide access to higher education and prepare students for their social and professional lives. Asked to rate what they consider part of the university’s mission, 78% said academic excellence, 55% said access and opportunity, and 54% said learning and intellectual growth. But they were much less certain about the university’s mission in regard to student population needs, broadness of mission, composition of the student body, learning support, and meeting regional needs. In addition, they did not support the university’s emphasis on diversity or interaction with surrounding communities. Evidence
-Administrative and Clerical Services Unit -Primary Level Supervisory Unit -Higher Level Supervisory Unit
-Complete List of Clerical Staff -Senior Administrators -General University - Wide Departments -School of Business, Government and Technology -School of Education -School of Liberal Arts -School of Natural Sciences, Nursing and Mathematics -Nathan Weiss School of Graduate Studies -General Education Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Department of Public Safety and Police Profile The Department of Public Safety and Police was established in 1971. The department’s goal is to provide a safe environment for members of the academic community to live, work, and learn. The department’s mission is to work with all members of the campus community to preserve life, maintain human rights, protect property, promote individual responsibility, and fulfill commitments to the community. The department’s specific responsibilities include: (1) protecting life and property, (2) detecting and preventing crime, (3) preserving peace, order, and safety, (4) enforcing university rules and laws, (5) maintaining a sense of security, and (6) providing other essential safety-related services. As stated in the mission statement, the department seeks to fulfill its responsibilities by "working cooperatively with the public and within the framework of the constitution to enforce the laws, preserve the peace, reduce fear, and provide for a safe environment." All campus police officers are members of the New Jersey State Police, are represented by the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, and are appointed by the Board of Trustees as campus policemen for the institution (NJ Statute 18A:6-4.2). The unit consists of police officers who have received training in a police academy and security officers/guards who have received no such training. Twenty-eight full-time positions are allocated for campus police officers, of which 26 are currently filled. There are seven security officers/guards. The number of campus police officers in each category is fixed, making it difficult for employees to move up in rank. In addition, salaries of police officers in local municipalities tend to be higher than the salaries at Kean. The distribution of campus police officers by gender and racial/ethnic designation is as follows: Campus Police Officers
Security Officers/Guards
The department is mandated by the Jean Cleary Act to notify the community of services and crime statistics. The services and crime statistics are published annually during fall semester in the Kean University publication "The Guide: A Look at Campus Life and Public Safety at Kean University." Statistics for the past three years show that the majority of crimes are burglary and motor vehicle thefts–crimes against property and not individuals. Basic information and crime prevention materials are distributed to incoming students and their families during orientation. The Office of Residence Life and Housing distributes crime prevention materials each semester for resident students. Police officers are invited to make presentations to some sections of Freshman Seminar as well as to resident students. In addition, the department participates in the annual "Security Awareness Week" sponsored by the student government. During this activity, the department distributes crime prevention literature, takes part in informational programs, serves on panels and arranges specialized law enforcement demonstrations. Evaluation Kean University is required to use Civil Service procedures to evaluate the unit. These guidelines govern recruitment, promotion, increment, discipline, and salaries in distinct ways. The Office of Human Resources coordinates most aspects of the Civil Service procedure. In addition, the unit participates in the Division of Administration and Finance’s strategic planning, which includes a protocol for the evaluation of the unit.
Training and Development The surveys and interviews identified training as one area of strength. Kean police officers are fully trained and armed, and, in accordance with the state laws under which they are appointed and commissioned, have "all powers of police and constables in criminal cases and offenses against the law." In addition, campus police officers have the authority to enforce New Jersey state motor vehicle laws. The department works closely with police departments in the surrounding communities. Incidents on campus are handled fully by the campus police, unless township police are needed for assistance. All new officers receive 19 weeks of basic training, usually at the Union County police academy. In addition, they receive seven weeks of field training on campus with a field training officer. The Police Manual, which is distributed to each member of the department, describes the rules and regulations governing all campus police officers. After they are hired, officers have the opportunity to attend seminars and workshops throughout the state. To be promoted from one rank to the next, officers must take a Civil Service examination. Survey Results Only six surveys, or 18% of those distributed to unit employees, were returned. Generalizations are thus difficult to make. The chief, deputy chief, and a lieutenant were also interviewed. The surveys and the interviews reveal several areas of strengths and weaknesses. The unit lacks a computer-aided dispatch and records management system. Records, monthly logs, and reports are handled manually. In some instances Kean’s non-competitive salaries may make it difficult to keep trained officers. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Maintenance and Facilities Staff Profile The Office of Facilities and Campus Planning is the largest single unit in the Division of Administration and Finance. The office is composed of three subdivisions: (1) heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning operations, (2) planning and construction, and (3) facilities operations. The office is responsible for maintaining all campus facilities. The university has 33 buildings, situated on two separate campuses comprising a total of 140 acres of ground and encompassing 1.2 million square feet. Facilities operations personnel perform daily maintenance, repair, cleaning and groundskeeping at all university properities. They also perform all in-house construction and renovation projects, along with preparations for conferences and special events. In addition, facilities operations drafts, issues, and manages all facilities-related service and maintenance contracts; manages work orders for day-to-day maintenance; conducts preventive maintenance and small projects on the Maintenance Authority work-order software program; and handles all maintenance-related purchasing. The unit comprises employees in operations, maintenance and service titles; crafts titles; and inspection and security titles represented by the Communications Wokers of America. The unit also includes primary level supervisors and three managers. The supervisors are represented by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. The unit has a total of 159 employees and an annual operation budget of $9 million, including payroll. Women and racial and ethnic groups are concentrated in the maintenance area. Almost one-fifth (18%) of maintenance empoyees are women and almost three-quarters (74%) are either African American or Hispanic. The crafts area employs no women, and 69% of crafts personnel are Caucasian. Among employees holding supervisory titles, 86% are men, of whom 12 are Caucasian, 6 are Hispanic and 4 are African American. Every supervisor, incidentally, started as a janitor. Training Facilities and maintenance employees receive mandatory training in OSHA safety procedures, right-to-know laws, asbestos handling, blood-borne pathogens, new equipment and chemicals, snowplow operations, and confined-space operations. But periodic training does not occur consistently in the unit, according to focus-group interviews. In addition, the manual on standard operating procedures–currently undergoing revision–is not widely distributed. In efforts to reduce the number of cleaning chemicals to 10 from now more than 70, the unit plans to phase out certain chemicals and use safer and less costly biodegradable chemicals instead. Workers are provided with protective equipment such as gloves, back braces, ear and eye guards, breathing devices, rain gear, and hard hats.
Evaluation The Performance Assessment Review System is used to assess all classified staff. The review consists of job achievement factors (quality, quantity or work, timeliness) and job-related factors (conscientiousness, effective communication, flexibility, job knowledge/skills, problem solving, safety, and teamwork). Specific essential criteria vary for each position according to the state job description for each title. Facilities operations has some 30 to 40 different job titles within the unit. The unit also has an "Employee of the Month" recognition program. Survey Responses Only 28 of the unit employees responded to the survey–or 18% of the total number. With such a low number of returns, generalizing is difficult. Among the respondents, 46% said that they had finished high school, 21% said they had some high school, 11% said they had some college, and 14% said they held a bachelor’s degree. Forty-six percent of respondents have been employed at Kean for more than six years. To supplement the surveys, two focus group interviews were conducted. One group comprised employees in the crafts area; the other was made up of representative building and grounds employees, with a faculty member fluent in Spanish present to translate as necessary. The associate director of facilities was also interviewed. Responses varied among these various groups and individuals on questions concerning availability of supplies, amount and kind of worker training, unit staffing, storage of materials, and quality of equipment. One area identified as in need of review was the prioritization of tasks and work requests. The consensus of the workers interviewed is that the unit has improved under the leadership of the new associate vice president for facilities and maintenance. The unit has a spirit of professionalism that has not been seen in years. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Relationship to University Mission and Goals The 1991 Mission Statement emphasizes the importance of Kean University’s role as an educational leader in New Jersey that provides its students with the skills and knowledge to become lifelong learners. In addition, Kean is committed to access and diversity, and strives to engender a sense of community in all campus participants, including university employees. There is a strong general agreement at the university on the importance of these goals and the core values in the mission statement. Responses to surveys by the clerical staff indicate that the core value of "pursuit of academic excellence" ranked high (56%). The core value of "diversity" received a wide distribution of responses, with almost one-third (32%) ranking it fourth in importance. Additionally, asked if the university’s mission and goals were broad enough to encompass the campus community, 44% of clerical respondents agreed or strongly agreed. Among adjunct faculty, "pursuit of academic excellence" was ranked first in importance (67%). "Diversity" received a wide distribution, with 24% ranking it first, 17% ranking it second and 41% ranking it third. More than half the adjunct respondents (55%) agreed or strongly agreed that the mission and goals provided overall guidance for the university. Among resident faculty respondents, almost half (48%) ranked "pursuit of academic excellence" highest of the core values. As with the clerical and adjunct respondents, "diversity" received a wide distribution. Almost half the resident faculty respondents (47%) felt that the university has made an effort to make its long-range plans consistent with its mission statement. Almost two-thirds of senior administrators (64%) believe that they implement the university’s mission, goals, and objectives. An almost identical percentage (63%) agreed or strongly agreed that the mission statement provided overall guidance for the university. Summary A summary statement on the Office of Human Resources is necessarily complex because of the varied groups involved. But one issue–diversity–is a common thread. The diversity of the groups is evolving. Although the faculty has become slightly more diverse, it does not reflect the changing student population. But the maintenance staff remains largely composed of male African Americans and Hispanics, with Caucasians predominanting in leadership positions. Each area of Human Resources reflects some unique concerns. The university faculty is of prime interest. Overall, based on the increased number of faculty holding doctorates or terminal degrees, the professionalism of the faculty is improving. There is also a widespread perception that recently hired faculty are of a high caliber. In addition, most faculty believe that their peers are adequately prepared to teach and that they take active steps to improve instruction, including integrating technology into classes. The university recognizes quality teaching and scholarship through various awards, released time, and grants. Yet, some concerns exist. While most faculty believe that the university is a satisfying environment in which to work, faculty morale is low, possibly because of the burden of having to teach 24 credits a year, serve on university committees, and engage in scholarly pursuits. Closely related to the faculty are the adjunct faculty. The university relies on a large number of adjunct faculty to provide instruction, especially general education courses. The university was recently identified as having the second highest number of part-time instructors of the state’s eight public residential unversities. While adjunct faculty are well prepared to teach and greatly enjoy their work, many feel isolated and underappreciated by the university community. Similar issues arise among librarians and professional staff. Both groups are well prepared to meet the demands of their respectives areas, yet they are understaffed and in need of additional personnel to effectively complete their tasks. Campus police, clerical staff, and maintenance staff also feel well prepared for their duties. Yet, these groups strongly believe that personnel staffing is inadequate, temporary workers are relied upon too heavily in the clerical ranks, professional growth opportunities are limited, and the university as a whole fails to appreciate their work.
CHAPTER 5 Educational Programs
Introduction The Educational Programs self-study team followed these accreditation standards:
Kean University’s mission stresses access by a pluralistic population to challenging academic programs with appropriate support to enable students to achieve career objectives and advanced academic endeavors. The quality and breadth of programs of studies at Kean reflect the emphasis on acquisition of skills, respect for diversity, and academic excellence. The General Education program, which is administered by the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, provides the academic foundation for all Kean students. In addition, Kean’s five schools offer undergraduate and graduate degree programs covering a wide range of disciplines and career options. Students can gain expertise and specialization through major, minor, and collateral programs, and through classroom and distance learning. At the same time, practical professional experience can be gained through service learning, internships, and externships. The School of Business, Government, and Technology offers bachelor of arts degrees in criminal justice administration, economics, public administration, and technology education/industrial arts; and bachelor of science degrees in accounting, finance, graphic communications, industrial technology, management science, and marketing. The School of Education offers bachelor of arts degrees in several educational fields, some with specialized options. For example the degree in elementary education offers a bilingual education option and the degree in recreation administration offers options in therapeutic recreation, commercial recreation, and community recreation. The School of Liberal Arts offers bachelor of fine arts degrees in studio art and visual communications, a bachelor of social work degree, and bachelor of arts degrees in various disciplines, with teacher certification options available in some of them. Some degree programs offer multiple options. Communication majors, for example, can concentrate in broadcast communications or public communications. English majors have a choice of standard literature, writing, and teacher certification options. The School of Natural Sciences, Nursing and Mathematics offers bachelor of science degrees in chemistry, computer science, and several health professions. Programs leading to a bachelor of arts degree in biology, chemistry, computer science, and Earth science offer several options, including teacher certification, pre-professional, and honors. Bachelor of science degrees in health information management, medical technology, nursing, and occupation therapy–along with their respective options–round out the school’s offerings. Kean offers 17 interdisciplinary collateral programs. These programs involve students in interaction with other departments and other institutions. There are seven of these programs in the School of Education, seven in the School of Liberal Arts, one in the School of Business, Government, and Technology, and two in the School of Natural Sciences, Nursing and Mathematics. The programs range in subject matter from pre-law to environmental studies to athletic coaching. Joint programs provide opportunities for students to earn: (1) combined bachelor of science and master of science degrees in accounting, (2) combined bachelor of science and master of public administration degrees in public administration, and (3) combined bachelor of science and master of science degrees in physical therapy degrees (the latter in conjunction with the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey). Kean also offers a joint master of science in nursing and master of public administration degree. The Nathan Weiss School of Graduate Studies offers a wide range of graduate opportunities, with more than 40 programs and options leading to master’s degrees, professional diplomas, and state certification. Among the offerings are: a master of science in management information systems, master of arts in educational administration, master of arts in speech-language pathology, master of arts in liberal studies, master of arts in behavioral sciences, master of science in biotechnology, and master of science in computing statistics and mathematics. Many Kean programs have internal and external advisory committees to add diverse perspectives to program development and to link the programs to business, professional, and community groups. Evidence
Advisement Advisement at Kean takes place at three distinct levels. The Center for New Students provides advisement for most incoming students, including new freshmen, transfer students, mature students, and evening students. The five schools also provide academic advisement. The third level resides within the academic departments and programs. Chapter 6 of this report contains more information about the services provided by the Center for New Students and other offices involved in advisement of incoming students and those students who have not declared majors. Once a student has declared a major, responsibility for advisement shifts to faculty advisors in the student’s major department. The primary goals of departmental advisors are to ensure that students move sequentially through the curriculum, to ensure that students meet all program and university requirements, and to provide students with mentoring in their major department. Advisement programs vary substantially across the university. Academic departments in the School of Business, Government, and Technology have guide sheets that indicate the number of courses required for graduation, but instructions relative to sequence do not appear on the guide sheets or in the Undergraduate Catalog. Academic departments in the schools of Liberal Arts and Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics have academic advisement guide sheets delineating the courses and the sequence in which they should be pursued. The most comprehensive approach among academic departments is in the School of Education. In addition to guide sheets outlining courses and sequence, a sheet called "Assessment and Monitoring of Teacher Candidates Plan" is also provided. Five levels are reviewed and monitored sequentially. Each level includes one or more monitoring checkpoints at which students must meet established requirements before moving on to the next level. In the Middle States self-study student survey, the majority of students indicated that faculty advisors are knowledgeable about courses and requirements in their majors. But less than half (48%) said that printed departmental advisement materials are helpful, and slightly more than one-third (37%) said the overall advisement system at the university works for them. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Undergraduate Programs The Developmental Studies, General Education, and Learning Assistance programs, which have provided the academic foundation for Kean students for more than a decade, have been studied and revised. A new comprehensive General Education/Learning Assistance Program is being phased in. Until it is fully implemented, the existing programs remain in effect. The Learning Assistance Program is discusssed in more detail in chapter 6. Developmental Studies Program The current Developmental Studies Program strives to help students develop the academic skills necessary for success in college-level courses. The program’s goals and objectives include:
Placement testing in reading, writing and mathematics is used to identify the academic needs of entering students and to provide a means for placing students in appropriate courses. The program offers six courses, with two levels of instruction in each discipline: reading courses CS 0410 and CS 0411, writing courses ENG 0109 and ENG 0109, and mathematics courses MATH 0143 and MATH 0150. The courses are graded as "P" (pass) and "U" (unsatisfactory), and do not carry college credit, although they carry institutional credit to validate students’ course-load status. While students complete their developmental requirements, they are not permitted to register for a total of more than 16 credits per semester. Students who have not completed their developmental reading and writing requirements are barred from beginning their General Education core requirements. The director of Developmental Studies administers the program with the assistance of coordinators from the departments of English, Communication Science and Mathematics. Each coordinator supervises and trains faculty, coordinators testing and placement activities, and works with the developmental studies director to ensure that program objectives are met. The Learning Assistance Program, together with other departments and programs, provides support for the Developmental Studies Program. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
General Education The General Education Program was adopted by the Faculty Senate in June 1984 and was designed to provide students with a broad liberal education and a solid foundation for advanced course work in their major programs. The curriculum was based on a series of goals that have served as guidelines for program development. The program’s goals and objectives include:
A General Education curriculum comprised of six core courses at the 1000 and 2000 levels is required of all students before they begin their major courses. The six core courses are: (1) English Composition (ENG 1020), (2) Emergence of the Modern World (GE1100), (3) Intellectual and Cultural Traditions (GE 1200), (4) Inquiry and Research (GE 2020), (5) Landmarks of World Literature (ENG 2203), and (6) Science and Technology in the Modern World (GE 2400). The core courses provide a common academic experience for all undergraduate students. In addition to course objectives, the core courses all have their program objectives, which include strengthening of communication, computation, and critical thinking skills. Students in the core courses are required to attend two cultural events, assigned by their individual course professor, to complement their course work. In addition to the core requirements, students are required to take General Education breadth requirements: 9 credits from the Humanities, 9 credits from the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 4 credits from the Biological and Physical Sciences, 3 credits of Mathematics, and a Health and Physical Education course. Such courses carry the designation "General Education Breadth" (GEB) for registration purposes. There is flexibility in satisfaction of GEB requirements for transfer students. Students are required to complete the General Education requirements by the end of their sophomore year. The General Education director administered the program. During the transitional period in which the existing program is still the required curriculum for students while the new program is developed and piloted, the assistant director of general education continues to attend to the program’s day-to-day operations. Co-directors are developing and implementing the new program. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
General Education Learning Assistance Program (GELAP) The new General Education Learning Assistance Program was approved by the Faculty Senate in April 1999. Approval followed campus-wide discussion of the recommendations and proposed plan set forth in the Report of the Presidential Task Force on General Education and Learning Assistance Programs, which collected data and deliberated for 14 months before presenting its findings on December 21, 1998. The goals of the new GELAP program are:
Two GELAP co-directors administer the program. To facilitate the transition from the old program, they are located in the office suite with the assistant director of general education, who is administering the current program. These three share support staff. The co-directors oversee testing and placement of incoming students, faculty training, student progress, student support, curriculum development and program integrity. The GELAP program is being developed by a GELAP implementation committee, which is chaired by the provost, and includes the program co-directors and representatives from the university’s four undergraduate schools as members. An assessment coordinator has been appointed to guide the development of outcomes assessment procedures for the new program. The GELAP curriculum provides for a 12-15 credit foundations skills core with academic support that includes composition, algebra, speech communication, research/technology and, if placement testing dictates, reading improvement paired with an appropriate course from an academic department. The foundations core is followed by disciplinary and interdisciplinary requirements totaling 27-32 credits that are designed to provide academic breadth. These disciplinary and interdisciplinary requirements are, in turn, followed by a 12-15 credit disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or thematic concentration, and then a capstone experience in which students can demonstrate their cumulative knowledge and skills in a multicultural context. Implementation of the program requires the development of new courses and the revision of some existing courses to meet program guidelines. Phase one of implementation is under way. Two new courses, College Composition and Algebra, have been developed and will be piloted in fall semester 2000. Both courses include a three-credit/three-contact hour format for students who test at the university level and a three-credit/six-contact hour format for students who need more intense and extensive instruction. Other departments involved in the core-foundation sequence are currently developing courses that will be piloted during the 2001-02 academic year. Courses appropriate for other GELAP requirements are also being developed. The program will pilot and phase in courses until full implementation occurs. Target date for full implementation is fall semester 2002. In an effort to unify the university’s curriculum, GELAP links the Developmental Studies Program and the academic departments. The outcomes and assessment of the GELAP program are tied to the university’s mission, goals, and objectives. GELAP outcomes are to be determined by integrated instruments for measuring expressed outcome categories: knowledge, skills, and dispositions (e.g. consideration of values, appreciation for diverse cultures, lifestyles and traditions). Twenty-eight specific outcomes to be measured have been determined, and the GELAP co-directors and departmental faculty, in conjunction with the assessment coordinator and outside consultants, are developing instruments to perform such measurements. Major Courses of Study Coordination between the GELAP program and major programs is being heightened as the GELAP program is being implemented. The university community seeks to enhance the linkages between the levels of academic programs in order to institute a vertical academic model rather than one with horizontal units. Currently, students must take between 51 and 66 general education credits, 18 credits of which are constituted by the six core courses. The number of credits required in major programs ranges from 30 to 72 credits. By state mandate, education majors must have a double major, one in education and the other in an academic discipline. Therefore, while the number of general education credits is fairly consistent across programs, the balance among those courses, major courses, and electives varies greatly. Students with the heaviest major requirements find it difficult to complete their program in four years. The new GELAP program attempts to address this issue by strengthening coordination with the academic disciplines as the program develops. Achievement of Major Program Goals Each academic major program defines its own goals in the university’s catalog. Many programs further refine their goals in student major handbooks. The School of Business, Government, and Technology has no such handbook. There is a wide variation in the specificity of program goals in these handbooks, but as a rule one finds more specificity in the handbooks for majors in fields leading to certification and specific employment (social work, nursing, education, and design, for example). The School of Education uses an overarching "Spectrum" model for all of its programs, which organizes objectives according to knowledge, skills, and values. The Middle States self-study surveys and student focus groups find that academic departments are satisfying the intellectual needs of students and providing students with the skills they feel they need for their careers. More than two-thirds of the survey respondents (69%) agreed with the statement: "The courses in my major are challenging." Students in focus groups similarly indicated that they were satisfied with their major courses as preparation for their career and with their non-major courses as enhancement of critical thinking and writing skills. The great majority of faculty respondents to the survey agreed that the academic programs emphasize intellectual skills and meet program and university goals. Alumni and graduate student surveys also indicated satisfaction with their preparedness for graduate study and professional careers. Achievement of Institutional Goals According to its Mission Statement, the university prepares students to adapt to change, be lifelong learners, and be contributing citizens. Moreover, the mission statement commits the university to providing access to excellent education for the state’s diverse population. Diversity is integrated into specific course content in such courses as bilingual education, transcultural nursing, ESL, and genetics. Kean is also implementing an institutional initiative to incorporate technological applications into methodology and course content. New computer labs are being installed, while others are being upgraded. Faculty and staff training in technology is ongoing. An institutional initiative to be an "interactive" university is accomplished through cooperative agreements, exchange programs, serving-learning opportunities, distance-learning courses, internships, and externships that are available in all four schools. All programs in all schools are accredited and approved by the appropriate external accrediting agencies. Other Programs in Fulfillment of University Mission Over the past decade, Kean has offered programs that provide academic expertise and resources to professionals in the region and provide undergraduate students with a variety of opportunities to access and enhance their education. Minors in various disciplines enable students to acquire a concentration in academic fields in which they have an interest and which complement their major field of study. Interdisciplinary collateral programs may also be taken to complement or augment a major program. There are also 17 collateral programs drawn from faculties of various departments and ranging in requirements from 18 to 53 credits of course work. Three collateral programs are currently inactive: athletic coaching, Classical studies, and urban studies. Collaterals in the School of Education have monitored field placements. Collateral programs are administered by faculty who receive released time for the added duties and responsibilities. Collateral coordinators are responsible for recruiting students, coordinating the scheduling of courses between departments, and monitoring the sequential progress of students enrolled in the program. Programs such as the Spanish Speaking Program respond to the institutional mission by providing access to students who must strengthen their verbal and written skills in English while taking freshman and sophomore level courses in Spanish. Another such program, the Passport Program, has as its primary goal the improvement of retention rates of students who do not meet traditional admission criteria. Passport students are closely monitored throughout their academic careers, beginning with a weeklong summer orientation program. The School of Education also has under its auspices 19 projects in eight municipalities in the state. One example of these projects is Project Adelante, which is aimed at reducing the dropout rate of Latino students and increasing the number of underrepresented groups in teacher education. Kean is also engaged in a global initiative. Each year, all students with the required minimum GPA of 3.0 are invited to apply for study abroad in one of 20 host countries. In addition, several departments offer Travel-Learn courses during the semester and summer breaks. Such courses involve study and travel in such locales as England, Russia, Egypt, and South Africa. The campus also enrolls some 300 international students who are not only acquiring a college education but, through their presence and interaction, are providing students from this country with global experiential learning. The number of exchange students is being increased. The expansion and development of exchange programs is an important administration initiative. The Center for Earth Science Education provides support for education of in-service and pre-service Earth science teachers in the region. The center, in conjunction with the Department of Earth Science, publishes a quarterly newsletter that serves the New Jersey Association of Earth Science Teachers. The Transcultural Nursing Institute provides programs and consultations both on campus and in the region that are relevant to cultural diversity in health care. All schools in the University provide practical experiences for students through field experience, internships, cooperative education, and externships. The Office of Experiential Education coordinates and administers all academic offerings in cooperative education/internships and service learning, with the exception of those in the School of Education. Field experiences and student teaching for education majors are coordinated and administered by the Teaching Performance Center. Service-learning is a relatively new campus initiative. The university piloted its first service-learning courses in fall semester 1999. It is anticipated that by the end of fall semester 2000, a serving-learning program will be implemented with course offerings in every school. Co-Curricular programs will be discussed in chapter 6. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Special mention must be made of three programs that exemplify the university’s mission to provide skills and excellent education to a diverse student population. They are: the Honors Program, the Exceptional Educational Opportunities Program (EEO), and the English as a Second Language Program (ESL). Honors Program The Honors Program is a consortium of courses and programs of study. It offers a personalized program to challenge and reward students who display exceptional ability and motivation. The program seeks to provide an opportunity for students to work closely with distinguished faculty and peers, and to conduct independent research. In addition, students have an opportunity for advanced scholarship in a supportive yet challenging academic environment. The program is being developed and supervised by a director. An Honors Advisory Committee composed of faculty and students assists the directors and provides resource persons in the departments. Grade-point average is the basis for admission to the program. The number of students in the program has been steadily growing in recent years, and the program is expanding and becoming more cohesive. Currently under consideration is development of a General Education Honors Program that would serve as a foundation for honors study. Such a program would provide a unified cadre of honors students. The following departments list honors programs in the university catalog: political science, public administration (School of Business, Government and Technology); English, music, philosophy and religion, psychology, sociology (School of Liberal Arts); and biological sciences, Earth sciences (School of Natural Sciences, Nursing and Mathematics). No honor programs are listed for any departments in the School of Education. Qualified students may register for individual honors courses or they may apply to honors programs in departments offering them. Some Kean honors graduates have gone on to some of the nation’s most prestigious master’s and doctoral programs; others have launched successful professional careers. The program exemplifies the university’s commitment to academic excellence. Evidence
Strength
displaying exceptional ability and motivation.
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Exceptional Educational Opportunities Program The Exceptional Educational Opportunities Program (EEO) is a department within the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The 1,200-student program is administered by a director, a 14-member professional staff, and 5-member secretarial staff. The program is open to students who do not meet the traditional indicia for success in college but who have demonstrated that they have the commitment, motivation, and potential for success. Fostering diversity is integral to the program’s philosophy and mission. The program has four facets: admission, instruction, advisement, and academic support. The instructional facet is discussed here; the others are discussed in chapter 6. EEO program instructional objectives include:
In 1998, the EEO program began using computerized placement tests like ACCUPLACER, which was developed by Educational Testing Service. Students are placed in reading, writing, and mathematics courses according to their scores on the reading comprehension, sentence skills, and elementary algebra sections of the computerized tests. For placement in English composition, students write a brief essay that is scored locally. Students whose first language is not English take a battery of tests, which includes a writing sample, an interview, and a written test. All students also take a locally designed biology review. Students are placed in the appropriate levels of reading, writing, mathematics, and science during the six-week EEO Pre-Freshman Summer Program. The summer program is designed to acquaint incoming freshmen with the academic, social, and personal demands of college life, and to give them intense instruction and support in a highly structured and nurturing environment. Class tutor/teacher teams and block scheduling provide additional reinforcement in order to assure student success. Academic departments participate in the summer-block scheduling, but EEO students register as part of the general student body thereafter. During the participants’ freshman year, the EEO staff monitors their progress formally by means of student feedback forms filled out by their professors. EEO counselors also seek information informally from professors on students who are having academic difficulties. Follow-up continues through the undergraduate years and beyond through the Career Exploration and Developmental Component. This component begins in the Pre-freshman Summer Program with students assessing their interests and possible career choices. It continues after graduation with the EEO office assisting alumni in finding employment or in entering graduate and professional schools. Each semester, EEO students enhance their learning by attending workshops, conferences, and seminars related to their majors. These include such annual events as the Seton Hall University law day conference, the New Jersey Educational Association conference, the Graduate Educational Opportunities conference, the Hispanic Association for Higher Education of New Jersey’s youth symposium, and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine’s open house. Internship programs in which EEO students participate include INROADS, Seton Hall’s paralegal studies institute; the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey’s biomedical careers summer program; and the mathematics immersion program at Stevens Institute of Technology. Consistent with the university’s mission, the EEO program provides access to an excellent education for a diverse segment of the student population and provides the support services necessary for academic success. One way the EEO program demonstrates its success is through the program’s honor society, Epsilon Epsilon Omega. Students who have earned at last 58 credits with a minimum 3.0 GPA are inducted into the society. Students whose semester GPA is 4.0 are also honored by having their names placed on a plaque in the EEO office’s reception area. The EEO program, like all New Jersey Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF) programs, is subject to annual outcomes assessments by the state. The outcomes assessed include indicators defined in the EOF state board program performance criteria. In addition, the EEO program is part of Kean’s program review process and is scheduled for internal review during the 2000-01 academic year. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
English as a Second Language Program The English as a Second Language Program (ESL) enrolls non-native speakers of English who have been admitted to the university but who need additional proficiency in English. The ESL program’s primary goal is to prepare these students for their academic studies, thus providing them with access to education that might otherwise be precluded because of language barriers. The program has four facets: placement, instruction, advisement, and academic support. A director and an assistant director administer the program. A bilingual academic advisor counsels and advises ESL students in conjunction with the Center for New Students and other campus student service providers. Specially trained ESL supplemental instruction leaders, who attend the core-level courses along with the students, provide tutorial assistance. In-depth placement testing, which includes an individual oral interview, a writing sample and a reading comprehension test, determines the level and sequence of English courses each student requires. The program offers 11 courses, which carry institutional credit and provide fundamental English instruction in listening, pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary and writing skills. Those courses, which carry ESL designations, are designed to provide skill development, but are not applied for graduation credits. Additionally, the ESL program offers three courses–ENG 1300, ENG 1400, and ENG 1403–that carry college credit and correlate with the general education courses Composition (ENG 1020) and Inquiry and Research (GE 2020). An ESL club publishes an annual student-run literary magazine, Accents, and offers an enrichment field trip each semester. The ESL club affords students the opportunity to make friends, practice English, and integrate themselves into the university community. The ESL program is beginning its program review as part of the university’s 2000-01 assessment initiative. Consequently, the program’s goals and objectives are being redefined and rewritten. In addition, the review of data that have been collected previously regarding student outcomes is being analyzed to assess various aspects of student and program effectiveness. The ESL program review report will include recommendations for new procedures and formats for data collection and assessment. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Graduate Programs The Nathan Weiss School of Graduate Studies supports the university’s mission through graduate education, research, and continuing education. Programs are responsive to the social and economic imperatives of the region. The development of service-learning courses is one of the most recent initiatives that combine practical experience with the theory and research learned in the classroom. Course content and instructional activities are geared to further the knowledge, skills, and values that are set forth in the professional accreditation guidelines for each graduate program. In addition, programs have incorporated relevant technology and workplace innovations. Partnerships and coalitions between Kean and local schools, businesses, industries, and community organizations help keep graduate coursework relevant to the careers for which the students are preparing. Graduate student focus groups described several positive outcomes of their study at Kean: intellectual growth, research expertise, mastery of knowledge base, increased skills in critical thinking and problem-solving, effective writing, and enhanced leadership skills. The Office of Graduate Studies (OGS) is the primary source of information for students regarding academic regulations governing graduate students. OGS monitors student progress, provides student advisement, and coordinates policies and procedures relative to transfer of credit. Each graduate program has a program coordinator who works in cooperation with faculty and the appropriate school dean to assure that the program is in compliance with standards of the university and of professional organizations. All matriculated students have a graduate advisor who assists them with their program of study. Student entry into the comprehensive examination and advanced seminar is approved through OGS’s student services director. Independent thinking is an important part of graduate study. All graduate students complete a culminating academic experience that promotes skills in problem-solving, synthesis, and reflective practice. It may consist of a comprehensive examination, an advanced seminar project, a thesis, or a portfolio. In support of graduate study, the university provides writing support, bilingual programs, a computer lab with tutorial assistance, a curriculum material center, a child study center, a child care center, and a comprehensive library with a variety of services to support research and professional development. Kean’s graduate programs are subject to a variety of program-review and accreditation processes. The university participates in reviews at the graduate and undergraduate levels by more than 19 additional accrediting bodies and by professional associations with specific membership criteria. Kean meets and surpasses the standards of all reviewing agencies for academic rigor and resources. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Continuing Education The Office of Continuing Education, under the administration of the Office of Graduate Studies, provides a wide range of non-credit bearing programs to meet the needs of the external community. The courses provide personal enrichment, professional development, and customized training for businesses and occupations. Course evaluation forms are distributed and collected after completion of each course offering. In addition, enrollment figures and cancellation rates are used to help determine future offerings. The Office of Continuing Education also offers selected credit-bearing courses and institutes. Courses that carry academic credit must undergo the same curriculum approval process as that required for other university courses, and the instructor’s credentials must meet the same standards as those of other university faculty. Continuing education at Kean is in transition. An internal task force conducted a rigorous program review and developed a report in 1997 that established goals and programs objectives. The report was updated and revised in 1999. Consistent with the recommendations of that report, a new assistant director is in place to enhance the administrative capabilities of the office. The program is enlarging its offerings and becoming more comprehensive. Guidelines have been established for granting graduate credit in conjunction with current graduate program offerings. The Office of Continuing Education is seeking cooperative projects with the community and is developing grants and institutes. There are aggressive outreach initiatives to local business, governmental, and non-profit sectors. The program is in the process of establishing partnerships to offer on-line courses and certificate programs. Thanks to recent fiscal reforms, the program no longer operates at a financial deficit. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Outcomes Assessment Kean has a long history in outcomes assessment in higher education. A university-wide schedule of program review through 1998 was in places. Changes in the administration of Academic Affairs created a transition period during which assessment processes were put on hold. In addition, such initiatives as integrating technology into the curriculum have taken the emphasis from assessment for the past two years. In spring semester 2000, the revised program review guidelines were approved for implementation beginning with the 2000-01 academic years. The stated objective is to foster excellence in education by providing an opportunity for programs and academic service units to identify areas of strength and address areas that need improvements. The program review is an ongoing process, and the document sets forth a five-year cycle of program review. Undergraduate The School of Education and the School of Natural Sciences, Nursing and Mathematics currently have the most consistent and comprehensive assessment processes. This is due in part to the prevalence of outside accreditation for programs in those schools. The School of Education has a "Comprehensive Assessment Plan for Initial Licensing" that summarizes the various forms of outside assessment activities for students in the education programs. Both schools use the outcomes of assessment activities to improve programs. For example, the School of Education has used its NCATE assessment to incorporate a new model (Spectrum) throughout all of its written documents, including course outlines, school mission statement, and student teaching handbooks. The School of Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics, in revising curriculum and designing new programs, has used such sources as external consultants, standards prescribed by professional associations, student surveys, and graduate performance. The School of Liberal Arts and the School of Business, Government, and Technology have fewer assessment activities. Some departments in those schools have measures such as portfolio review, proficiency examinations or senior seminars that are designed to integrate and apply cumulative knowledge and skills. But neither school has a comprehensive initiative or a process for interpreting data to improve program performance. Graduate Outcomes assessment includes performance instruments such as comprehensive examinations, thesis or advanced seminar projects, and portfolios. Each graduate program sets the specific performance instrument requirements, and each is responsible for setting the standards for successful completion. Results are shared with the Office of Graduate Studies, and satisfactory performance is required for graduation. Survey instruments are used in each program to gauge student needs and satisfaction. External impact surveys have been used by the Alumni Association, the university administration, and individual programs to determine community and employer needs. Institutional data systems include student demographic statistics and such documents as student academic progress. The Alumni Office also provides outcomes data on demographics and employment progress. Each program and school monitors course and program statistics for purposes of accreditation and program review. Evidence
Strengths
Weakness
Recommendations
Additional Findings Curriculum Development Kean University has procedures for developing and revising curriculum that are specific in the 1997 Kean College Curriculum Procedures. Among other things, this document has guidelines for the approval of new options in major courses, the revision of existing major programs or options, and the composition of curriculum committees at the department, school and university levels. Graduate programs and undergraduate programs undergo the same approval process. Certain programs require approval by an additional committee, such as the General Education Committee for general education courses and the Distance Learning Curriculum Committee for distance learning courses. The current university catalog lists 33 interdisciplinary courses. Nineteen are in the humanities. Kean has no specific mechanism for encouraging interdisciplinary or inter-institutional content and instruction; individual faculty and programs develop such content. The curriculum approval process has a procedure for interdisciplinary courses. Alternative modes of instruction, such as team teaching, have occurred on a limited basis in the School of Liberal Arts. In the School of Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics, clinical courses in the health professions have traditionally been team-taught. Course syllabi and requirements are uniform, with resident faculty in charge of lectures. Other alternative course formats have had success, such as the pairing of course sections in general education. Student outcome data showed that format to be quite successful, in fact, but the effort failed to become institutionalized because of a lack of support for the added faculty responsibilities. To expand on their commitment to the education of physically challenged students, the School of Education developed and introduced into the curriculum six exceptionalities "modules" in 1998. Each module was prepared by two to four faculty members from different departments and is taught as a set of interdisciplinary workshops for physically challenged students. A School of Education training retreat each year familiarizes education faculty with any two modules they select and prepares the professors to teach those modules. Subjects range from "Multiple Intelligence and Learning Style" to "Computer Adaptations and Rehabilitation Technology." Other modes of instruction recently introduced are service-learning courses and distance learning courses. Nine service-learning courses were offered in spring semester 2000, two of them in the School of Education, five in the School of Liberal Arts, one in the School of Business, Government, and Technology, and one in the School of Natural Sciences, Nursing, and Mathematics. Six distance learning courses were offered in spring semester 2000. One of them was in the School of Education and is designed to help prospective teachers develop educational materials for the Internet. The three other distance learning courses were developed in the School of Business, Government and Technology. Other distance learning courses have been developed but their implementation is delayed while questions of intellectual property rights are resolved. Faculty members are being solicited and trained to participate in distance learning in connection with the establishment of the New Jersey Virtual University. Articulation Agreements Kean University has articulation agreements with 35 New Jersey county colleges. The agreements provide that students graduating with an associate of arts or associate of science degree may be admitted as juniors, provided that all transfer admission requirements of the university have been met. These agreements cover numerous programs that feed students from county college programs into major programs at Kean. In addition, agreements have been signed with nine county colleges allowing joint admission to the university, although not to a major program. Kean has partnership agreements with the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Universidad Mayor (Chile), Wenzhou Teacher’s College (China), Zhejiang University of Technology (China), Universidad de Alicante (Spain), University of Cantabria (Spain) and New York College of Podiatric Medicine. Partnership agreements are aimed at establishing ties of friendship and cooperation to promote the exchange of students, personnel, scholarship, science, and culture. Such partnerships facilitate joint programs and accelerated programs. Academic Policy It is imperative that students be familiar with policies affecting their life at Kean–the policies on academic integrity and sexual harassment, for example. All student respondents indicated that they were familiar with the school’s academic integrity policies but very few said they were familiar with the sexual harassment policies or with other policies directly affecting them as campus community members. They had all received a booklet on the academic integrity policies. For most students, the catalog is the primary source of information. The majority of student respondents and student focus-group members said they were unaware of Kean’s Web site as a source of information. Student Satisfaction Kean students seem to be very satisfied with their education. On student and alumni surveys and in various focus-group sessions, respondents expressed their satisfaction on many aspects of their academic endeavors. More than three-fourths of alumni surveyed said that their Kean education had positively helped them prepare for a career and had improved the quality of their lives. Almost two-thirds of undergraduates (65%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "The overall quality of my major program is excellent." Only 5% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Few Kean programs survey their seniors and graduates as particular cohorts but those that do find similarly positive results. In the School of Education, for example, more than 90% of seniors reported that their coursework and field experiences met their expectations and prepared them for teaching "well" or "very well." In a separate survey of recent education graduates, the respondents were in unanimous agreement with positive statements pertaining to their Kean education and its impact on their ability to perform as teachers. Student focus groups in all four schools were satisfied with the curriculum in their majors. Students said that courses in their majors were clearly relevant to their personal and professional interests, and met their needs. They also commented on the positive classroom interactions with professors, with one student saying that his classroom experiences at Kean were more "collegial" than those at other schools. The weakness students most frequently reported was that courses were not offered in enough time slots to accommodate their work schedules. Kean students are particularly satisfied with the enhanced technology and the initiative to infuse more technology into the university curriculum. Most students felt that they were technologically competent, prepared for the routine requirements of their profession, and could readily adapt to specialized applications. While most students said that they knew some word-processing program before coming to Kean, they said that they learned software programs and applications in the upper-level courses of their majors that prepared them for their particular professional responsibilities. Some major programs still lack computer facilities specific to the major. Interior design students, for example, said the campus lacks a computer laboratory with software in their field and that this puts them at a disadvantage after graduating. Without exception, students were enthusiastic about the collaborative classroom methodologies that afford them the opportunity to work in groups. Among the focus groups, students commented that collaborative methods enhanced their skills in problem solving, reasoning, critical thinking, and writing. The students also indicated that collaborative learning gave them greater mastery of course content. Diversity Diversity at Kean is evident in its academic programs. Students may select from a number of collateral programs that reflect the multicultural student population and world community: Africana Studies, Bilingual Education, Global Studies, Jewish Studies, Latino/Latin American Studies and Women’s Studies. In addition, students may elect concentrations in Classical Studies, Family Studies, Gerontology, and Urban Studies. In student surveys and focus groups, respondents indicated that Kean’s academic programs enhanced their awareness of issues regarding ethnicity and gender. Liberal arts students said that working in cooperative groups in class increased their exposure to persons different from themselves. Education majors are encouraged to include both urban and suburban settings in their field experiences. Programs in the natural sciences, nursing and mathematics include diversity in numerous ways, including biodiversity, genetics, history of mathematics, and clinical placements in diverse settings. The Women in Science and Technology Program has activities that promote the recruitment of more women and minorities in fields in the natural sciences and mathematics. Students also indicated that the student composition of their classes was diverse. More than three-quarters of respondents (77%) said they had made friends with classmates of different backgrounds. Kean University is close to richly diverse communities and nationally recognized sites of cultural significance. Field trips are regularly conducted to such places as the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the Schomberg Center for Research in Black Culture. The U.S. Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., is also a regular field-trip destination. Guided trips to such sites give students a deeper appreciation of democracy and the experiences of various ethnic groups in the United States and the world. The Ethnic Studies Center at the Nancy Thompson Library was recently renamed in honor of the late New Jersey state senator Wynona Moore Lipman, the first woman elected to the state Senate. The Lipman center and the Holocaust Resource Center, also in the Thompson library, provide resources for in-depth study of the African-American experience, gender issues, and the Holocaust. Such study enhances student respect for the lives and history and others. Kean is a recognized leader in diversity training for students and members of the external community. The goal of the Diversity 2000 Council, which is housed in the School of Education, is to help school administrators, teachers, and students experience success in living and working together and creating a harmonious American society. Activities include courses on prejudice reduction, Holocaust education, and teaching for diversity. The council holds monthly meetings at workshops at Kean and at various sites in northern and central New Jersey. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Summary and Recommendation Kean University is located in a multicultural metropolitan region and has a student population that reflects the many complex factors of that environment. The university’s mission to provide access, demanding programs, academic rigor, and interaction with the surrounding community is a challenge. Yet, the challenge is increasingly being met with excellent programs and academic initiatives. Academic programs provide the quality of instruction and academic support essential for student success. The university curriculum and the campus extracurricular activities reflect the school’s exceedingly diverse student population. A meticulous self-study of academic programs leads to the conclusion that Kean must institutionalize a system in which outcomes assessment feeds into program development so that the university is assured of continuing to accomplish its mission with distinction.
CHAPTER 6 Students
Introduction The Students self-study team followed these accreditation standards:
The self-study subcommittee charged with researching and preparing chapter 6 held two organizational meetings in September 1999. Five teams were established at that time, with three subcommittee members assigned to each team. Each team was assigned one of the major topics identified in the self-study design. Team topics included admissions, advisement, student support services, student life, and academic support services. Each team determined its own schedule and arranged individual assignments. Discussions between the steering committee representative and the teams took place at various times throughout the process, in order to clarify issues and resolve problems. Final subcommittee reports with supporting documentation were submitted by each team in April 2000. Student Profile Slightly more than 11,000 students were enrolled at Kean University in spring semester 2000. This number included some 6,300 full-time and 2,900 part-time undergraduate students. The graduate student population was largely part-time. Of almost 2,000 graduate students, 80% attended less than full time. Enrollment levels have remained fairly stable over the past five years, with some moderate distributional changes resulting from modified admission policies and the addition of new graduate programs. More than 90% of Kean students are New Jersey residents. Most commute from communities within a 30-mile radius of the campus. About 1,200 students reside in campus housing. Kean’s student population reflects the diversity of the region the university serves. African Americans and Latinos, as groups, each account for about 20% of Kean’s undergraduate enrollment. African-American, Latino, and Asian students have collectively comprised a majority of each new freshman class for the past several years. Kean also attracts a significant number of international students. Students from more than 80 nations currently attend the university. About 60% of Kean’s undergraduates are women. Most graduate students are part-time. Their racial/ethnic composition tends to reflect their racial/ethnic composition in the jobs and professions that they hold during the day. African Americans comprise about 11% of all graduate students, Latinos about 9%, and Asians almost 4%. Women make up almost three-quarters of the graduate student population. Kean enrolls a substantial number of adult students, particularly as part-time students. One in every four undergraduates is more than 30 years old. Many Kean students are also the first in their family to attend college, and most students have limited financial resources. Most full-time undergraduates qualify for one or more financial aid programs, and a large proportion must work at least part-time while attending college. The academic backgrounds and preparation levels of Kean students cover a broad spectrum, but on the whole they are similar to those of students at other metropolitan universities. About one-third of Kean’s freshman class is admitted through special programs. Transfer students make up a significant proportion of the undergraduate population and constitute a majority of Kean’s graduating seniors. Admissions Undergraduate Kean’s Mission Statement commits the university to providing wide access to higher educational opportunity and to recruiting a diverse student population. The Office of Admissions has the primary responsibility for recruiting and admitting all undergraduate students, including new freshmen, transfer students, post-baccalaureate majors, and students applying for readmission. The admissions office coordinates its activities with special admissions programs and develops strategies for the attainment of the university’s quantitative and qualitative enrollment objectives. The office also maintains appropriate statistical data and records, and evaluates relevant documentation, including foreign transcripts. The Office of Admissions is a unit within the Division of Academic Affairs, Office of the Provost. Its reporting structure has recently been significantly modified as part of a re-engineering of selected student support services. This administrative restructuring will link admissions, registration, financial, and advisement. These operationally integrated units will report to the special assistant to the president for enrollment services for an initial two-year period beginning in September 2000. The admissions office processes more than 8,000 admission applications annually. The staff is composed of a director, two associate directors, four assistant directors, an administrative assistant, and eight clerical assistants. Recruitment Process Kean starts to recruit its freshman class about 18 months before the class is expected to enroll. The process begins by obtaining search lists from external sources. The lists contain the names of about 12,000 high-school juniors who appear to meet Kean’s admissions standards and.whose academic, geographic, and intended field of study characteristics match those specified by the university. Each of these 12,000 students is sent a general information document that contains brief information of interest to potential applicants, along with a response form requesting additional information. Recruitment is also accomplished through frequent campus tours and by the three open-house events scheduled during each academic year. The admissions office organizes the open houses, but participants from numerous university groups are involved in them. Opportunities are provided for prospective students and their famlies to visit the campus and to interact with members of the student body, the faculty, and departmental representatives. Admissions office staff also actively participate in high-school "College Nights" and in recruitment events at community colleges. Close relationships are maintained with high-school guidance counselors and transfer advisors at community colleges. The admissions office has expanded its market territory in recent years but such expansion is restricted by the limitations on campus housing. Some recruitment is also done through special programs, by academic departments, and by the athletics office. Deadlines and other relevant dates are clearly announced in the university’s admission application. Freshman admission policies are outlined in general in the admissions office literature and include descriptions of required high school courses and documentation. Specified requirements include SAT, ACT, or PAA scores and high school transcripts. Also included in the application is the process for admission through Kean’s special-admittance programs. Supplemental fact sheets included in the application package describe these special-admittance programs in more detail and also contain additional information regarding average SAT scores, high school grades, and related issues. The most detailed information document distributed to prospective students by the admissions office is the 35-page Kean Viewbook. This document contains general information about the university, admission requirements and procedures, and descriptions of academic majors and programs, facilities, orgaizations, and campus life. The admissions office’s evening hours have been expanded in recent years to provide improved services to a diverse population. Besides fulfilling in-person requests for applications and information, the office processes large numbers of requests received by telephone, mail, and e-mail. The admissions office says requests for applications are filled within 24 hours, except for situations in which a large number of requests are received simultaneously, such as at a recruitment event. In such instances, the response time is slightly longer. Survey Results Two questions in the Middle States Evaluation Survey of undergraduate students relate to student satisfaction with the application/admission process. The survey questions and results are as follows: "When I applied to KU, the information received was accurate/helpful" Strongly agree 8% (n=83); Agree 51% (n=510); Neutral 26% (n=264); Disagree 8% (n=79); Strongly disagree 6% (n=56); Unable to respond/not applicable 2% (n=16). "I was satisfied with the admissions process." Strongly agree 8% (n=80); Agree 52% (n=527); Neutral 21% (n=213); Disagree 10% (n=100); Strongly disagree 8% (n=77); Unable to respond/ not applicable 1% (n=12). Focus Group Results Three focus groups totaling more than 30 undergraduate students revealed that fall 1999 early decision and honors scholar freshmen had a higher degree of satisfaction with the admissions process than did other students. Although students in this category did have some complaints and concerns about their experiences as newly admitted students, the majority of their issues were with offices other than admissions. Other students in the focus groups had significantly more complaints, with both admissions and, especially, other offices serving incoming students. The majority of these students indicated that their initial impression of Kean worsened as a result of these experiences. The most frequently cited problems with admissions involved lack of a prompt response to requests for information and frustration at having to re-submit documentation. A very small number of students reported protracted delays in receiving their acceptance letters. In general, students who had been attracted by specific major program at Kean had a higher regard for the school at the time they applied than did other students. In addition to specific programs, convenience and cost were cited as the primary attractions of Kean Undergraduate Admissions Criteria and Programs Kean admitted 1,067 new freshman and 1,032 transfer students in fall semester 1999. These numbers are representative of recent enrollment trends. The incoming new freshman cohort included 622 regularly admitted students. The remainder were admitted through four special programs: the Educational Opportunities Program, Passport Program, Epic Program, and Spanish Speaking Program. The Epic Program, limited to mature students who are starting college-level work after having been away from formal education for at least five years, admitted 27 students. The Spanish Speaking Program, structured for speakers of that language who have a limited knowledge of English but who meet regular admission standards, admitted 47 students. The Passport and the Exceptional Opportunities programs account for the balance of the freshman class. Passport’s 1999 class totaled 124 new freshman, and 247 new students were admitted into the Exceptional Educational Opportunities Program (EEO). Regularly admitted students are selected through a process that considers a number of factors, including high school academic performance and SAT scores. Regularly admitted freshman entering Kean in September 1999 had an average combined SAT score of 1,009 and a high school grade point average of 2.84. EEO is a comprehensive department that encompasses recruitment, admission, advisement, and academic support services. Students who receive New Jersey Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF) grants are included in this program. Students admitted through EEO do not meet the university’s academic requirements for regular admission. In addition, most are from low- income backgrounds and from targeted geographical regions within New Jersey. About 50% of the EEO students at Kean are African American and 33% are Latino. The average combined SAT score of the 247 EEO freshman admitted in 1999 was 793. Their high-school grade point average was 2.54. The Passport Program provides advisement and support for students who do not fully meet the university’s regular admission standards, but who demonstrate the potential for academic success. In 1999, the 124 students admitted in the Passport Program had an average SAT score of 856, and a high-school grade point average of 2.58. Admission requirements for transfer students include a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.0 from an accredited post-secondary institution. In addition, admission to specific majors may require higher grade point averages, and prior completion of required courses. Kean has formal articulation agreements with more than 300 two- year colleges that greatly facilitate the transfer process. Evidence
Strengths
Weaknesses
Recommendations
Post-Admission Services Kean provides for basic skills testing, course placement, advisement, and registration of incoming students. The admissions office is not responsible for delivering any of these services. The admissions office plays a key role in the placement test notification and appointment scheduling, but the Developmental Studies Program is responsible for the academic testing and placement of incoming students. Registration and advisement of incoming freshmen and transfers is also handled by other offices, including the registrar’s office, the Center for New Students, and, particularly in the case of transfers, the school advisors and major departments. The admissions office serves as the primary conduit of information to newly admitted students. Each student is sent a copy of the Undergraduate Catalog and an enrollment packet containing pertinent information about housing and financial aid. Also in the packet is a guide for new students published by the Center for New Students. Because the admissions office plays such a central role in the lives of incoming students, these students often hold the office responsible for all aspects of their initial experience with the university–even those in which admissions plays no part. Feedback obtained in student focus groups indicate that problems with offices other than admissions sometimes had as much to do with student perception of the admissions process as did their interaction with the admissions office. Developmental Studies All incoming freshmen are tested in order to their determine preparedness for college-level work. Students are tested prior to registration in three basic-skills areas: mathematics, writing, and reading. These placement tests are administered by the Developmental Studies Program. Students whose test scores indicate a need for improvement in one or more areas are required to complete specified developmental courses in that discipline. If required, these developmental courses must be completed before enrollment is permitted in most of the university’s regular curriculum. A total of six developmental courses are offered by the academic departments appropriate to each skills area. These include the reading courses, CS 0410 and CS 0411; the writing courses, ENG 0108 and ENG 0109; and the mathematics courses, MATH 0143 and MATH 0150. The Developmental Studies Program is responsible for policy development, testing, placement, advisement, data collection, monitoring student progress, and intervention and academic support activity. The program staff includes a director, an assistant director, an administrative assistant, and a secretary. The Developmental Studies Program and the activities it administers are to be replaced by a broader and more comprehensive academic structure that will combine skills and content courses within the framework of reengineered support services and redefined course requirements. This replacement will take place in incremental stages beginning in fall semester 2000. A more complete description of the newly configured General Education and Learning Assistance Program (GELAP) can be found in chapter 5. Center for New Students As part of the continuum of undergraduate services provided after admission to the University, the Center for New Students conducts orientation activities for new students and their families, and provides information that facilitates adjustment to campus life. The center has a full-time professional staff consisting of a director, an assistant director, three full-time and one part-time professional staff members, one full-time and one half-time secretary, and five graduate assistants. Orientation activities also occur within the context of Freshman Seminar, a one-credit course coordinated by the Center for New Students required of all freshmen in their first semester. A peer liaison is assigned to work with the instructor in each Freshman Seminar section. The Freshman Seminar course provides information about key areas within the university, including university procedures, academic advisement, registration, tutoring, and career counseling services. The course also includes an introduction to the culture of higher education.Special sections of Freshman Seminar are designed for various populations or programs, including EEO, Passport, international, and adult students. Several sections are taught in Spanish. The faculty instructor of each section serves as the academic advisor and mentor for the students in that section during registration for the subsequent semester. The Center for New Students also provides support services to transfer students. Orientation and assistance is provided by the transfer coordinator and peer counselors during initial registration. Transfer students are also invited to participate in the various support programs and special events the center sponsors. The center provides comprehensive services to students aged 25 and over through the Entry Program into College (EPIC). The EPIC program coordinator and staff of peer advisers seek to meet the various requirements of its student constituency by providing pre-entry advisement, guidance, workshops, and support services. In 1999, the Center for New Students established an expanded evening student services operation in the lobby of the Student Services Building. This service is open four evenings each week and is staffed by persons from such key offices as the registrar, financial aid, and student accounting. A number of the services offered by the Center for New Students, including evening student services, will be moved to a one-stop facility, scheduled to become operational in September 2000. The Center for New Students evaluates its services through the use of a variety of assessment instruments, including the student satisfaction survey; the Entering Student Survey; Freshman Seminar pre-tests, post-tests, and end-of-semester evaluations; the transfer needs assessment; the Transfer Advance Program (TAP) needs assessment; and the student satisfaction survey. Responses to the Middle States Evaluation Survey for Undergraduate Students show that 53 % of students agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the student orientation process and 28% agreed or strongly agreed that their Freshman Seminar course was useful. More than half the students surveyed were transfer students who had not taken Freshman Seminar. During student focus-group discussions conducted as part of this self-study, peer liaisons connected with Freshman Seminar were frequently mentioned as a valuable source of information and assistance. Passport Program The Passport Program was established in 1992 in order to provide structured support for freshmen entering Kean as specially admitted students, but not receiving services from EEO, Epic, or the Spanish Speaking programs. Each year, 100-150 students are admitted in the Passport Program. They are a diverse group of students who demonstrate academic potential but do not meet regular admission standards. Before the Passport Program was created, such students were described as "specially admitted students," but had no programmatic connection. Most of them were either students whose admission credentials were close to regular admission standards or students with notable abilities in such areas as music or athletics. Under the state guidelines then applicable, between 10% and 15% of each freshman class was eligible for admission in this category. Passport services begin with a summer orientation program and continue through the first four semesters of enrollment. The progress of Passport students is closely monitored. Advisement and counseling are provided by the program staff, which consists of a director and two graduate assistants. The program also conducts a number of student development workshops and career-orientated activities for Passport students each semester. Spanish Speaking Program The Spanish Speaking Program assists prospective students with the application process and provides advisement and counseling services after admission. About 50 students are admitted through this program each year. All speak Spanish as their first language and have significantly limited English proficiency. The program coordinates the advisement and scheduling of its students in connection with developmental-level courses and a variety of freshman-level and sophomore-level courses taught in Spanish, including General Education, Freshman Seminar, biology, chemistry, mathematics, accounting, social sciences, and fine arts. The program also coordinates scheduling activity with the English Department’s ESL program. More than 30 course sections, including almost 20 specific courses, are taught in Spanish each semester. In addition to advising students enrolled in these courses, the Spanish Speaking Program coordinates the scheduling of courses taught in Spanish in order to maximize their availability to students. Students enrolled in the program are expected to develop English proficiency before graduation. Advanced courses in all majors except foreign languages are taught only in English. The program staff includes a director, two |