PowerPoint Presentation

Document Sample
PowerPoint Presentation Powered By Docstoc
					 Sharing the Pain: Tools & Maps to
Measure & Rank Academic Programs


           Archie George
          Jane Baillargeon
           Jason Mayer*
         University of Idaho
       *now with Information Technology Services (ITS)
                 Background
• Fiscal problems
• External financial reviews
• Institutional accreditation self-study
• New president, interim provost
•University Vision & Resource Task Force
• Recommendations: selective program cuts
President’s Plan for Renewal
                Plan for Renewal

• Feb. 11 – Strategic Directions speech
   • Phase I – Budget Reductions (February)
   • Phase II – Prioritization Metrics (March & April)
   • Phase III – Reinvestment (Fall 2005)
    Phase I – Budget Reductions

• Base budget reduction, reallocation
• Positions eliminated or “zeroed out”
• No program cuts
• Deans & department heads submitted
     program definitions for Exhibit II
Exhibit 2: Academic Programs Defined
       Phase II – Prioritization Metrics
Seven Step Process for Transforming the U of Idaho
  1. Program Mapping and Assessment
  2. Compilation of Data for Prioritization Process
  3. Quantification of Prioritization Tool Metrics
  4. Relative Ranking of Programs
  5. College Program Analysis
  6. Faculty Governance Review and Advice
  7. Executive Decision and Implementation
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product I: Workshops with each college
• Program Name & Descriptions
• Roles of Graduates
  •Roles as Global Citizen
  • Roles in the Profession
• Global Statement: Program and it’s
Purposes
• Key Program Themes
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product II: Workshops with each college
• Program Outcome Guide
• Entry Requirements
• Program Knowledge Base
• Skills Learned and Demonstrated
• Key Assessment Tasks
• Intended Outcomes
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product III: Human Resources Assigned to
the Program
• Input on-line after workshop
  Name, Employee Classification,
  FTE: Teaching, Advising,
  Research/Scholarship, Service (internal
  & external), Administration
Product IV: Program Maps
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product V: Course Activity Matrix
• by Subject & Course
  • “In” the Program or “Out” ?
  • Introductory ?
  • Part of Sequence ?
  • Integrating Experience ?
  • Capstone ?
  • Part of a Theme ? (specify)
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product VI: Linkages with Other Student
Services
• Academic Assistance Program
• Library
• Counseling & Testing Center
• Writing Center
• University Residences
• etc….
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool I

Product VII: Future Positioning
• Step 1: Answer three questions:
  • How could we increase alignment with
       other programs?
  • Who within & without organization
       could assist in enhancing program
       reputation?
  • What organizations outside could we
       partner with to reposition program?
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool II

Program Metrics – Identifying Program
Strengths and Weaknesses
Two dimensions: Quality & Economic Value
• Quality
  • Publications per faculty FTE ( 50% )
  • Composite student quality ( 20% )
  • Two electives ( 15% each )
Composite student quality index
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool II

Program Metrics: Economic Value
  • External grant dollars per FTE ( 20% )
  • Degrees awarded per program ( 15% )
  • Degrees awarded / teaching FTE (20%)
  • Human resources costs ( 15% )
  • Percent of small classes ( 10% )
  • Two electives ( 10% each )
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool II

Identifying Opportunities for Program
  • Qualitative assessment related to
       president’s five strategic themes
  • Qualitative assessment related to
       centrality to university mission
Program Mapping and Assessment: Tool II

  Rank order programs on two dimensions
       Quality
       Economic Value
Undergraduate Programs Ranked
                        References

   Mapping:
       Stiehl, R. and Lewchuk, L. The Mapping Primer: Tools for
        Reconstructing the College Curriculum. The Learning
        Organization, Corvallis, OR, 2005.
       Stiehl, R. and Lewchuk, L. The Outcomes Primer:
        Reconstructing the College Curriculum, 2nd edition. The
        Learning Organization, Corvallis, OR, 2002.


   Prioritizating:
       Dickeson, Robert. Prioritizing Academic Programs and
        Services. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1999.
Comments/Questions?


     Archie George
   archie@uidaho.edu

    Jane Baillargeon
   jane@uidaho.edu

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:9/13/2012
language:English
pages:22