1 / 16

Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW)

Evaluating Academic Productivity and Making Data-driven Decisions in Colleges of Arts and Sciences. Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW). Regional Public Comprehensive > 14,000 students Six Colleges and Schools COAS 63% of Credit Hours Most Majors Most Graduates

janus
Download Presentation

Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluating Academic Productivityand Making Data-driven Decisionsin Colleges of Arts and Sciences

  2. Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW) Regional Public Comprehensive > 14,000 students Six Colleges and Schools COAS 63% of Credit Hours Most Majors Most Graduates ~ 66% of Scholarly Products

  3. IPFW AcademicAffairs Student Affairs Financial Affairs School of Education Arts & Sciences Health & Human Services Visual & Performing Arts Dormer School of Business Engineering, Technology & CS Sciences & Mathematics Social Sciences Humanities Anthropology CSD (Audiology) Political Science Psychology Sociology Biology Chemistry Geology Physics Mathematics Communication English History ILCS Philosophy

  4. COAS – 15 Departments, Humanities, Social Sciences, Science and Mathematics Environmental Conditions: July 1, 2009 Started as Dean System Mandated Salary Freeze 10% Enrollment Growth Five New Tenure Track Lines Added (12 Total) The Question: Where to place the lines?

  5. Requests from Departments: 13 Requests from 11 Departments (Geosciences, Physics, Poly Sci & History)

  6. Quantitative Analysis: The Criteria Enrollment (=) Credit Hours CrHrs/Section % Enrollment Capacity Filled % Upper Division Capacity Filled # of Majors BA/BS Degrees Conferred % Faculty FTE Instruction & Research BA/BS Degrees / FTE

  7. Departmental Rankings Based on Quantitative Analysis

  8. As with all Quantitative Data GIGO Major Flaw: Counting Double Majors

  9. Qualitative Analysis: (High, Moderate, Low) Tradition/Possibility of External Funding Graduate Enrollment Possibility for Regional Partnerships (Engagement) History of Degrees Granted Buy in to Assessment/Program Review Student Success & Retention

  10. Results of Qualitative Analysis of Departments

  11. One Other Factor… … Curricular Need

  12. Recommendations for New Lines Biology #3 Quant / #1 Qual Communication #2 Quant / #2 Qual Psychology #1 Quant / #3 Qual CSD* #4 Quant / T#5 Qual Anthropology #11 Quant* / T#5 Qual English #5 Quant / T#13 Qual Mathematics #6 Quant / T#10 Qual Philosophy #10 Quan / T#7 Qual

  13. VCAA TT Line Allocations Biology Communication Psychology (CSD) (Anthropology) English (Mathematics) Philosophy

  14. Lessons Learned Understand the Data Invest in your Winners Be Transparent Insist on a Face-to-face Meeting Have the Courage of your Convictions Q-TIP

  15. Shameless Plug: Drummond, C.N., 2006, Visualization of Academic Efficiency and Productivity, Planning in Higher Education, April-June, v. 34, n. 3, p. 18-26.

More Related