Tennessee State University

1. Tennessee State University • Realigning Programs, Priorities, and Resources: • Academic Program Prioritization • Dr. Chandra Reddy, Chair, • Academic Program Prioritization Task Force

2. Academic Program Prioritization Task ForceAppointed by President Johnson on November 11th, 2009 Dr. Chandra Reddy, Chair Dean and Director of Research/Administrator of Extension • Dr. Charles Dickens, Professor, Teaching and Learning • Dr. Hinton Jones, Associate Professor, Architectural Engineering • Dr. Arthur Christon, AssociateDean, College of Education • Dr. Jane Asamani, Faculty Senate Chair • Ms. Cheryl Seay, Director, Center for Extended Education • Ms. S. Vaughn, Director, COE Learning Services • Ms. Ruth Gordon, Senior Office Assistant, Dean of Education • Ms. Lauren Hurely, Student Representative • Mr. Steve Adkerson, Student Representative • Attorney Terry Clayton, Alumni Representative • Dr. Millicent Lownes-Jackson, Associate Dean, College of Business • Dr. Dennis Gendron, Vice President, Technology & Administrative Services • Dr. Pamela Burch-Sims, Director/Professor, Speech Pathology

3. President’s Charge… • Identify academic programs deemed productive, essential and central to the University’s mission and strategic goals, programs to be retained and enhanced.

4. President’s Charge… • Identify academic programs that are deemed potentially productive and consistent with the University’s mission and strategic goals, programs that may be duplicative or would benefit from reorganization or consolidation.

5. President’s Charge… • Identify academic programs that are marginally productive or only tenuously related to the University’s core mission, programs that might be retains but on a reduced basis.

6. President’s Charge • Identify academic programs that are not productive or essential to the University’s mission and strategic goals, programs that should be eliminated so that resources might be allocated to more promising and productive programs.

7. Proposed Timeline • Committee Convenes November 15, 2009 • Complete Draft of Programs Reviews February 15, 2010 • Submit Final Report to President for Review March 31, 2010 • President’s Review of Report March 31 – April 20, 2010 • Review by Campus Community April 20 – May 31, 2010 • Final Decision by President June 30, 2010

8. Methodology • Review of other schools’ academic program prioritization plans

9. University of Wisconsin—Eau Claire

10. The Dickeson Model in Action • Bemidji State University, MN • University of Nebraska, Kearney • Middle Tennessee State University • Idaho State University • Wesley College, Delaware • University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire • Drake University • Many more….

11. TSU Environment • Strategic Plan calls for program prioritization • AMP mandates prioritization in order to become relevant • Funding realities, both current and future, require focused resource reallocation.

12. TSU Environment, Contd. • Relatively large number of schools and colleges for the size of the institution and uneven strength in the colleges (The Pappas Report, and AMP, p. 7). • Integrated Strategic Planning--Academic and Administrative Programs’ Prioritizations ( pp. 26, 27, 48). • President’s Retreat 2009 for Cabinet and Deans: Recommendations for APP Task Force

13. Development of Criteria for Program Prioritization Reviewed…models from • Dickeson, R.C. 1999 • Humboldt State University • Indiana State University • Morehead State University • Drake Univeristy • University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire

14. TSU Academic Program Evaluation Criteria… All academic programs are assessed against these ten criteria: • Mission Centrality that includes history, impact, and opportunity and • Productivity that includes demand, cost and quality among other things. Note: An academic program is defined as one that offers an academic at the University.

15. 1. History, Development, and Expectations of the Program (5 points) • What is the purpose of the program? • Describe ways in which the program advances the University’s mission? • What is the maturity level of the program (maturity as defined by greater than five years)? Is it a recently authorized program, a solid cornerstone, or a fully mature program?

16. 2. External Demand for the Program (6.25 points) • Review the national and local demand data. Is there a demand for graduates (job outlook)? • Do trend data and interests foretell a continuing need for the program?

17. 3. Internal Demand for the Program (6.25 points) • Proportion of course enrollments for major, minor, general studies, service purposes • Programs dependent on this program • Other claims on the program’s resources

18. 4. Quality of Program Inputs and Processes (12 points) • Credentials, skills, currency of faculty—quality • Number and mix of faculty sufficient to support program • Completion/retention rates of students • Currency of curriculum, student learning outcomes, assessment measures and data • Accreditations, reputation • Adequacy of resources, currency of resources

19. 5. Quality of Program Outcomes (12 points) • Student, employer, alumni satisfaction survey results • Student learning outcomes, national assessments, licensure scores, graduate admissions • Faculty teaching effectiveness • Faculty publication • Faculty and student public service • External assessments of program quality

20. 6. Size, Scope, and Productivity of the Program (18.75 points) • Number of majors, critical mass of students • Number of faculty and staff • SCH generated, degrees awarded, research • Opportunities of consolidation or restructuring

21. 7. Revenue and Other Resources Generated (6 points) • Grant revenue, indirect cost generated • Other revenues generated • Gifts, endowments • External relationships and associations with revenue production

22. 8. Cost and Other Expenses (18.75 points) • Costs versus revenues, special costs (labs, salaries) • Efficiencies in place or proposed • Resource investments needed for program optimization

23. 9. Impact, Justification and Overall Essentiality of the Program (5points) • Benefits of the program to the institution • Relationship to mission • Relationship of program to the success of other programs • Uniqueness of the program and its services • Responsiveness to societal needs • Program as a differentiator for the university • Relationship to the university strategic plan

24. 10. Opportunity Analysis (10 points) What recommendation within the context of the above criteria should be made on behalf of this program?

25. Weighting Two Track Evaluation • Productivity 80 point scale • Mission Centrality 20 point scale • Criteria Related to Mission • Questions1, 9 and 10 (20 points) • Criteria Related to Productivity • Quantitative –Questions 2, 3, 6 and 8 (50 points)Qualitative – Questions 4, 5 and 7 (30 points)

26. How did the committee interact …. • Website: Assessment Reports: http://www.tnstate.edu/ap/academic.asp   All documents: http://mytsu.tnstate.edu/cp/home/loginf • Presentations to the Chairs and Deans • Presentation to the Faculty Senate • Departmental Self-Assessment Reports • Presentations to the Deans Council • Briefings to VPAA and President • Deans participation in Scoring Rubric Development • University Communications regarding website

27. How to access prioritization information…. • Log onto MyTSU and click tab labeled Academic Review TF

28. Basis for Prioritization • Departmental Assessment Reports

29. Evaluation Process • Development of scoring rubrics with Deans • Multiple evaluators • Same evaluators for all questions • Rubrics were developed before reviewing reports

30. Example of a scoring rubric Question on External Demand for a program carries 6.25 points; It was scored for 5 points then adjusted for 6.25 Score Response 0 The program did not provide any documented evidence of external demand. 1 The program provided minimal information not pertinent to external demand. 2 The program provided minimal evidence of external demand. 3 The program provided adequate evidence of current external demand. 4 The program provided documented evidence of current (stable) external demand. 5 The program provided clear, accurate, descriptive, and well documented evidence of current and future external demand.

31. Calculating a Program Score Mission Centrality Rating for BA in Esoteric Studies

32. Program Rankings • Calculate the average score for each program • Calculate a mid-point for each evaluation track • Mid-point: (maximum score + minimum score)/2 • Rank each program as high or low • Programs were then grouped as: • Mission Centric and highly productive • Mission Centric and potentially productive • Marginally mission centric and marginally productive • Neither mission centric nor productive

33. Mission Centric and highly Productive Programs • AS Nursing • BBA Accounting and Business Law • BBA Business Administration • BBA Economics • BS Agriculture • BS AIT • BS Biology • BBA Business Information Systems • BS Cardio-Respiratory Care Science • BS Chemistry • BS Communication • BS Criminal Justice • BS and Assoc. Dental Hygiene • BS Electrical Engineering • BS Family and Consumer Science • BS History • BS Mechanical Engineering • BS Music • BS Nursing • BS Psychology • DPT Physical Therapy • MBA Business Administration • MEd Administration and Supervision • MS Agriculture • MS CISE • MS Psychology • MPA Public Administration • MS Speech Pathology • MSN Nursing • PhD Psychology

34. Mission Centric and Potentially Productive Programs • BS Architectural Engineering • BS Art • BS Civil Engineering • BS Computer Science • BS HPSS • EdD Curriculum and Instruction • MPH Public Health • MS Chemistry • MS HPSS

35. Marginally Mission Centric and Marginally Productive Programs • BS Architectural Engineering • BS Art • BS Civil Engineering • BS Computer Science • BS HPSS • EdD Curriculum and Instruction • MPH Public Health • MS Chemistry • MS HPSS • BA English • BS Health Information Mgt • BS Health Sciences • BS Political Science • BS Social Work • EdD Administration and Supervision • EdS Administration and Supervision • Med Curriculum and Instruction • MOT Occupational Therapy • PhD CISE • PhD Public Administration

36. Neither Mission Centric nor Productive Programs • BA Foreign Language • BS Africana Studies • BS Early Childhood Ed • BS Health Care Admin • BS Arts & Sciences • BS Mathematics • BS Physics • BS Sociology • BS Urban Studies • EDS School Psychology • MA English • MCJ Criminal Justice • Med Special education • MS Biology • MS Mathematics • MS Music Education • PhD Biology

37. Questions?