Academic Programs Action Team Report

Objective 1.a. Regularly review and assess academic programs and General Education requirements to ensure consistency with and support of institutional mission and values

Strategy 1.a.1. Establish a mechanism for a series of discussions of academic standards and expected performance levels.

Participants should include faculty, alumni, and select students who have successfully completed the first year of college.
Develop a common core of faculty expectations regarding reading comprehension, writing and computation performance, research and critical skills, computer literacy, and the ability to understand a variety of perspectives.
Develop a procedure to document and to communicate these expectations to current and prospective students.

Measures: The following product-measures will result from the successful implementation of these strategies:

A common core of faculty expectations will be established.
These expectations will be documented and communicated in the form of a pamphlet, and will be distributed to current and prospective students.

Cost: $ Minimal additional costs are expected; cost-effectiveness has the potential to be high should long-term benefits include higher levels of retention.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Priority: Given minimal costs and potential benefits regarding standardization of university standards and possible enhancement of retention, immediate implementation is recommended.

Strategy 1.a.2. Academic units, with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

will develop measures for regular assessment of general education courses taught in their unit.
will report assessment results of general education courses in their annual program reviews submitted through Academic Council to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and will specify how the results were used to make improvements in course outcomes
will develop measures for regular assessment of the major and/or concentration
will report assessment results of the major and/or concentration in their annual program reviews submitted through Academic Council to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and will specify how the results were used to make improvements in the major or concentration

Designated person/unit: Each academic unit will develop assessment tools (with assistance as needed from Academic Assessment Committee and Office of Institutional Effectiveness) and will report results

Strategy 1.a.3. The university

will conduct regular assessment, through instruments such as CAAP and NSSE, of broad general education goals (such as critical thinking skills, appreciation for diversity, etc.).
will share results of this assessment with academic units
will develop strategies for using those results to make improvements in meeting General Education goals.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Strategy 1.a.4. The Office of Institutional Effectiveness will report results of the assessment of academic programs to the Faculty Assembly on a regular basis.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Measures: The following product-measures will result from the successful implementation of these strategies:

· Development of testing protocol for measurement of each academic unit’s general ed courses and major/concentration areas

· Completion of annual assessment of academic-unit’s designated students

· Completion of annual report of assessment results

· Development of testing protocol for measurement of broad general ed goals

· Completion of annual assessment of broad general ed goals

· Completion of annual report of broad general ed goals and presentation of results

Cost: $ Minimal additional costs, as units are already involved in ongoing assessment process; changes reflect more of a process change.

Priority: Given minimal additional costs, this is viewed simply as an expansion and clarification of the existing general ed./academic unit assessment process. Immediate implementation of all strategies is recommended.

Measures: The following measures will result from the successful implementation of this objective:

· The completion of the annual review and assessment of academic programs and general education requirements

· Development of a common core of faculty expectations regarding reading comprehension, writing and computation performance, research and critical skills, computer literacy, and the ability to understand a variety of perspectives.

Objective 1.d. Establish and implement campus standards for information literacy (the ability to locate, evaluate, and use information to become independent life-long learners) in support of USC Aiken’s curriculum.

Strategy 1.d.1 Establish a mechanism for a series of discussions of campus standards and expected performance levels for use of information literacy in the general education curriculum.

Participants should include library faculty and faculty who deliver the general education curriculum.
Develop a common core of faculty expectations for students in their general education curriculum: to locate, to evaluate, and to use information.

Strategy 1.d.2. Establish a mechanism for a series of discussions of campus standards and expected performance levels for use of information literacy in the major methods courses.

Participants should include library faculty and faculty who regularly teach research methods courses in their disciplines.
Develop discipline specific standards appropriate for the major research methods courses.

Cost: $

Designated person/units: Academic Council with assistance of the USCA Library Committee and the Institutional Research and Assessment Office

Measures:

· A pre / post assessment instrument should be developed and added to the freshman / senior assessment survey to measure entering and exiting students' knowledge of information literacy.

· A pre / post assessment instrument should be developed and used in the research methods courses and senior capstone courses.

Priority:

High--Given minimal costs, immediate implementation is recommended.

Objective 1.f. Study the feasibility and desirability of strengthening academic programs

Strategy 1.f.1. Establish an administrative structure for all acronyms and academic programs (including AHUM, ASUP, Honors Program, BIS)

Strategy 1.f.2. Develop a standardized protocol for assessing program demand and feasibility, incorporating campus-related data (e.g., enrollment patterns and trends, student demand, resource needs, consistency with mission) and community need. This assessment should have a minimum of a five-year extrapolation.

Strategy 1.f.3. Communicate the university’s mission, strategic plan, values and strengths to the university community as they affect curriculum development and faculty hiring.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Specific Program Strategies:

1.f.4. History: Provide more non-Western offerings by filling tenure-track slots, as they come open, with specialists in those areas.

1.f.5. Honors Program, ASUP, AHUM, BIS, First Year Program, and selected interdisciplinary minors; Religion, and Photography and other offerings dependent on adjunct faculty: Designated academic unit, with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, will develop measures for regular assessment of each program, including course evaluations and assessment of program goals. Make recommendations regarding expansion and/or maintenance.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs with assistance from appropriate academic units will develop assessment tools (with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness)

Strategy 1.f.6. Foreign Languages: assess the demand and feasibility of each language offering, incorporating campus-related data (e.g., enrollment patterns and trends, student demand, resource needs, consistency with mission), and community need. Make recommendations regarding expansion, maintenance, or elimination of select language offerings.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs with assistance from the Foreign Languages Department

Strategy 1.f.7. Physics and Astronomy: examine the academic structure of comparable universities and provide a recommendation for the academic/administrative placement of physics and astronomy, based upon a sound theoretical and pedagogical rationale.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs with assistance from the College of Sciences

Strategy 1.f.8. Music: continue with ongoing development of the degree in Music Education.

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs with assistance from the Department of Visual and Performing Arts

Measures: The following product-measures will result from the successful implementation of these strategies:

o Assignment of appropriate academic units for ASUP, AHUM, BIS, Honors Program, 1^st year program, and selected interdisciplinary minors

o Development of assessment protocols by academic units

o Development and implementation of program recommendations

Cost: $ Minimal additional costs are expected, as recommended strategies are a part of regular assessment procedures

Priority: Due to minimal costs, immediate implementation is recommended.

Objective 1.g. Evaluate the curriculum validity, market demand, cost effectiveness, student success rate, and impact of external accreditation requirements of the following programs in order to maintain academic quality and meet student demands

· Elementary Education Program, Salkehatchie

· Distance Education Programs, USC to USCA and TV based (See also Objective 9.l.)

· Engineering

· Bachelor of Interdisciplinary Studies

· Golf Course Services Concentration

· Evening Programs

Strategy 1.g.1. Re. Elementary Education Program, Salkehatchie, Engineering, and Golf Course Services Concentration: appropriate academic unit, with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

will collect data regarding market demand, cost effectiveness, student success rate, and impact of external accreditation requirements (as appropriate)
will report findings to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and make recommendations regarding continuation of programs

Designated person/units: Each academic unit will collect data and make recommendations

Strategy 1.g.2. Re. Evening Programs, Distance Education Programs, USC to USCA and TV based: the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

will collect data regarding market demand, cost effectiveness, student success rate
will report findings to the faculty assembly and make recommendations regarding continuation of programs

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Strategy 1.g.3. Establish an administrative structure for BIS program within a designated college and academic unit

Strategy 1.g.4. Designated academic unit, with assistance as needed from the Academic Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, will develop measures for regular assessment of BIS program, including course evaluations and assessment of program goals. Make recommendations regarding maintenance or elimination.

Designated person/unit: Assigned academic unit.

Measures: The following product-measures will result from the successful implementation of these strategies:

· Assignment of appropriate academic units BIS program.

· Development of assessment protocols by academic units

· Development and implementation of program recommendations

Cost: $ Minimal additional costs are expected, as recommended strategies are a part of regular assessment procedures

Priority: Due to minimal costs, immediate implementation is recommended.

Measures: The following measures will result from the successful implementation of this objective:

o Implementation of a standardized method of program evaluation

o Recommendations regarding specific program changes

Objective 1.i. Evaluate the suitability of offerings, the scheduling, and the pedagogical effectiveness of Maymester and Summer School programs, and the degree to which they support the institutional mission.

Strategy 1.i.1 Establish a mechanism for a series of discussions of offerings, scheduling, and pedagogical effectiveness of Maymester and Summer School Programs.

Academic units will establish written criteria for the suitability and pedagogical soundness of courses to be offered in Maymester and/or Summer Sessions.
Academic units will assess the impact of Maymester and Summer School offerings as to how they meet student needs, major requirements, scholarship requirements, and financial aid (and any other concerns to be determined).

The Academic Council should provide pedagogical rationales and justifications to the Academic Vice Chancellor for all Maymester and Summer School offerings.
The Courses and Curriculum Committee should be charged with further evaluation of all courses, especially when considering course additions, to address suitability of offering any new courses during Maymester and summer.

Cost: $

Designated person/units: The Academic Council, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, and C&C committee.

Measures: The successful implementation of these strategies will result in the following:

o Developed criteria to justify Maymester and Summer offerings, including relevance to degree progress, enrollment patterns, and other areas deemed significant by the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Academic Council.

o A systematic plan for offering Maymester and Summer coursework

Priority:

Medium--depending upon the budget situation and potential for further revenues from Maymester and Summer offerings

Objective 2.c. Assess USC Aiken’s learning environment (for example, optimal student-faculty ratio, class sizes and class configuration) and use results to guide policy and practice.

Strategy 2.c.1 Assign to Academic Council (or a designated faculty committee) the task of determining the following:

Current class sizes at USCA (taking into account method of delivery and program assessment numbers that are recommended by CHE and professional organizations);
Current class configurations at USCA (lecture halls, labs, classrooms with movable chairs and tables, computer classes, etc.);

§ Current data and professional recommendations for how students learn best, by academic unit and overall.

§ The findings and recommendations will then be reported to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Chancellor, Enrollment Planning, and IPC

Cost: $

Designated person/units: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Academic Council with assistance from the Chancellor, Enrollment Planning, and IPC

Measures:

The successful implementation of the above strategies will result in a regular assessment and reporting of student-faculty ratios, class sizes and class configurations.

Priority:

Extremely High--direct relevance to the institutional mission and institutional identity, at a time when a quick fix to budget constraints are already threatening our institutional devotion to instructional excellence and our traditional focus on a low faculty to student ratio

Objective 3.c. Encourage efforts to develop interdisciplinary courses, linked courses, and non-credit opportunities that build upon the expertise of the campus and broader communities.

Strategy 3.c.1 Establish an administrative structure to encourage efforts to increase and enhance interdisciplinary offerings, including:

§ Team taught classes;

§ Linked classes (learning communities);

§ B.I.S. offerings;

§ Other non-credit and credit bearing opportunities that extend and employ the expertise of the broader community, in conjunction with Continuing Education

§ Bringing in regular consultants to campus to initiate new projects, if needed

Strategy 3.c.2. Establish a means of supporting team taught and linked courses (faculty course load, minimum enrollment levels, etc.

Strategy 3.c.3. Establish a granting mechanism to reward faculty incentives to increase and enhance interdisciplinary offerings as well as offer travel to share interdisciplinary research.

Designated person/units: Chancellor and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, with the assistance of the B.I.S. Director, the USCA Development Office, and selected members of the USCA First Year Committee

Strategy 3.c.4. Departmental and other administrative and/or evaluative units should develop and communicate appropriate means and measures for valuing interdisciplinary course development and research on the pedagogy of interdisciplinary courses.

Cost: $$ to $$$

Designated person/unit: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Academic Council

Measures: The following measures will result from the successful implementation of the above strategies.

The creation of an Interdisciplinary Office with a director of interdisciplinary studies (not to be confused with the B.I.S. program director, although this position might be reconfigured to include advocacy) within three years of the implementation of this strategic plan

An internal grant program for faculty interested in exploring inter-disciplinary opportunities

Priority:

High—This objective builds on First Year initiatives already begun, recognizes the recommendations after three years of work by the USCA First Year Committee, and directly affects the university mission, specifically concerning interdisciplinary relationships. On the other hand, if, for any reason, the creation of an Interdisciplinary Office with a director of interdisciplinary studies cannot be implemented by the 2006-2007 academic year, the university priority of this objective as a whole will be assumed to be low.

Objective 3.d. Engage in ongoing efforts to define instructional excellence and to implement assessment measures including, but not limited to, student and peer evaluations of teaching.

Strategy 3.d.1. The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, with assistance from Academic Council and identified instructional leaders should establish mechanisms for defining instructional excellence both across the university and within academic unit.

Strategy 3.d.2. The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, in conjunction with the Academic Council, will explore methods of evaluating teaching, beyond the use of SET forms and peer reviews (teaching portfolios, for example)

Strategy 3.d.3. The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will research the feasibility of establishing a Center for Teaching Excellence.

Cost: $$

Designated person/units: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Academic Council, the Faculty Assessment Committee, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Measures: The successful implementation of the above strategies will result in the following measures:

· the development of a definition of “instructional excellence” applicable across the university and within academic units

· the development of an instrument to assess “instructional excellence” including, but not limited to, student and peer evaluations

· a report concerning the feasibility and desirability of a Center for Teaching Excellence

Priority:

High--This particular objective speaks to our institutional mission as a comprehensive teaching institution, and could be extremely important to the next SACS review process.

Objective 3.f. Examine the effectiveness and viability of web-based/hybrid* courses and use the results to guide the development of additional offerings as appropriate.

Strategy 3.f.1 The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs should appoint a committee to research the effectiveness and viability of these courses. The committee’s report should include

§ An examination of the literature on these courses, including internal documents such as the USCA’s Distance Education and Technology Planning Team Report, the Campus Technology Plan, etc.

§ Determining what is being offered effectively at similar institutions, and

§ determining the costs (and other logistical concerns) of these courses.

Cost: $

Designated person/units: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Academic Council with assistance from the Center for Educational Technology.

Measures:

The successful implementation of the above strategy will result in a report examining the effectiveness and viability of web-based courses beyond those currently in place to be shared with Academic Council.

Priority:

Medium--Given minimal costs, this measure could be viewed as an expansion and clarification of the existing web-based courses being offered, and should be implemented as soon as possible.

Objective 3.h: Enhance and support instructional efforts by providing a laboratory/equipment budget for purchases of specialized equipment and for routine maintenance and replacement of existing instructional tools and laboratories

Strategy 3.h.1 Academic units should establish specific recurring laboratory/equipment needs, specify a time frame for maintenance and replacement, and work with the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs to establish regular allocations to unit budgets, including a specific account line for such needs.

Designated person/units: Academic Council and the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Strategy 3.h.2 Because many of these equipment needs are provided through grants that assume institutional support at some point, the Associate Chancellor for Finance and the campus grants officer, in conjunction with faculty members who have received grants, should assess how many costs have been borne by the institution for the past several years. For future external grants, the Associate Chancellor for Finance, in conjunction with the campus grants officer and affected faculty/staff, should project future costs of grant-related funding and report their findings to IPC.

Cost: $$ (depending upon allocations as identified in Strategy 3.h.1)

Designated person/units: Associate Chancellor for Finance, campus grants officer, IPC

Measures: Successful implementation of the above strategies will result in the following measures:

· Regular equipment review by academic units and a separate section of program review specifically for specialized equipment and routine maintenance/replacement of that equipment

· Regular review of all external grants with a report to IPC that includes an estimate of the future institutional costs of each grant

Priority:

High—The processes outlined above may be considered as an articulation of the current program review and grants processes. In light of current and future budget cuts and their low cost, the above strategies and measures are of high priority.

Objective 2.a. Develop a comprehensive and centrally coordinated First Year program aimed at creating a supportive and stimulating introduction to the university that includes

Comprehensive orientation that will provide students with necessary information and will foster enthusiasm and determination for the college experience
A quality advisement process that provides opportunities for exploration and affirmation of student aspirations
An expanded First Year Experience that will help students to confirm their abilities, learn how to access campus services, participate in shaping their academic experience, and become active citizens of the USCA community
Broad support from all segments of the campus

Strategy 2.a.1. Review and implement as appropriate the missions and goals of the First Year Program established by the First Year Committee in 2000. ($) (2.a.2. in the Strategic Plan)

Strategy 2.a.2. Appoint full-time (or at least part-time) Director of the First Year Program with adequate staff and financial resources to effectively coordinate all components of the First Year Experience, including the July and August Orientations, advisement, ASUP 101, and linked classes. ($$) (2.a.1. in the Strategic Plan)

Strategy 2.a.3. Ensure the availability of a sufficient number of well-trained advisors for all academic programs, especially during the July and August Orientations. (2.a.4.a. in the Strategic Plan)

Strategy 2.a.4. Examine the feasibility of establishing an Advisement Center staffed with appropriate personnel to advise all freshmen through their first academic year. ($$$) ** (2.a.6. in the Strategic Plan)

Strategy 2.a.5. Expand ASUP 101 to an entire semester to cover topics that will help students in their transition to college and their overall development. ($) (2.a.3.d. in the Strategic Plan)

Strategy 2.a.6. Develop a more effective method of assessing academic advisement in the First Year Program. ($)

Designated person/units: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Measures:

A comprehensive First Year Program in place to coordinate all components of the First Year Experience.
Distribute National Survey of Student Engagement mid-way through the second semester of the freshman year.
Continue the use of current Orientation and academic advisement evaluation forms.
Retention numbers quantified by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness throughout academic career of students at USC Aiken.

*Hybrid courses” are those that meet at times via the web and at times in the classroom.

** Each year it is becoming increasingly more difficult to get full coverage from all disciplines during each of the orientations, especially the one scheduled in July. The creation of an Advisement Center would eliminate this problem and further enhance the first year experience for our students. Short of the creation of an Advisement Center, there needs to be some form of compensation for those advisors who are coming in during these orientations.