14
Planning
Organization
The current
planning process conforms to the College's administrative structure. The President is
responsible for developing the College's final plan. There are ten planning units at the
institution and they direct their goals and objectives through respective vice presidents
for approval to the President's Planning Group (PPG), which synthesizes their reports and
develops the final plan which is then presented to the President for final approval. The
PPG is comprised of the President, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Vice
President for Business and Finance, the Director of Development and College Relations,
Deans of the Schools of Business, Humanities and Social Sciences and Sciences and
Technology, the Assistant to the President, the Director of Planning and Institutional
Research, and the chairman of Developmental Studies.
Each planning
unit determines the planning process within that unit and is encouraged to have
broad-based involvement and to base unit plans on the College purpose and goals. For
example, academic planning takes place in the Academic Vice President's Council which
consists of all unit heads which report to the Vice President. Planning then, logically
proceeds from unit faculty and/or staff to unit level planning to planning unit heads to
the President's Planning Group to the President who submits the completed College Plan to
the Chancellor of the University System of Georgia.
The PPG is the
unit which advises the President on the assessment of institutional effectiveness. The
President chairs the meetings of the PPG. The PPG seeks to ascertain how the College can
become more effective in implementing its mission, and develops specific ways by which
effectiveness can be determined. The ultimate authority for institutional effectiveness is
clearly within the purview of the President. In the dispatch of this authority, the
President relies on the advice of the PPG. The Committee on Institutional Effectiveness
(CIE), with a chairman as its head, functions as staff to the PPG. All planning goals are
developed to be consistent with the goals of the College which are established to fulfill
the mission or purpose of the College. The purpose and goals of the College are set by the
President, after being advised by the members of the PPG and the college faculty, then
they are approved by the Chancellor, and finally by the Board of Regents of the University
System of Georgia.
Planning
Procedures
Each year, the
College prepares and updates the College Plan for the next three years. The planning
process is scheduled so that the yearly plan update process begins in the
fall. The President requests from the planning units proposed College-wide goals and
proposed unit goals. Each planning unit determines the planning procedure within that
unit. Some units have planning committees while others use administrative councils.
However, every planning unit head is encouraged to assure broad-based involvement of
faculty, staff, and students. The Planning Group reviews and adopts College-wide goals so
that these goals may be considered by the units in the development of unit goals. In the
winter of each year, the preparation of the budget is begun. The President holds budget
hearings with planning unit heads. In the spring of each year, the revised College Plan
is completed and distributed to all units, faculty and administrators.
According to a
survey (exhibit) for faculty (1989), a large majority was satisfied with the College
Plan for 1990-1992. According to the results of the Questionnaire for Administrators,
100 percent of administrators responding were found to be highly satisfied with the
College Plan for 1990-1992.
Evaluation of
Effectiveness
The Savannah
State College family affirms that an effective process should include broad-based
involvement of faculty and administration. The College must maintain a continuing process
of identifying expected educational goals and results and evaluating the extent to which
these goals have been achieved. Over the past two years, the President, Vice President for
Academic Affairs and officers of the ten planning units of the College have instituted a
broad-based review of the institution's Statement of Purpose and its expected educational
results. A summary of this review process follows:
1. All
academic and administrative units reviewed their objectives and then identified the
"expected results" for each objective. (Exhibit)
2. All
objectives and expected results were reviewed by the President, Vice Presidents, and
others in the planning process.
3. During
1989 attitudinal surveys (exhibits) of current students, graduates, faculty, staff, and
administrators were conducted.
4. All
faculty were asked for input in the development of a purpose statement and in defining
goals and objectives. (Exhibit)
5. Curricular changes based on the updated College purpose
and educational goals and objectives were made.
Procedures have
been developed for assessing whether educational goals are being achieved. The procedures
include the development of a list of goals and objectives and
assessment of these goals and objectives. All of the expected educational and support
services goals of the individual units are catalogued in separate documents (exhibit). It
is anticipated that the first full review of updated educational and support service goals
will be completed by Spring of 1991 and results will be used to improve institutional
effectiveness.
The President
will monitor the stated uses of the evaluations and will review the actual use of the
results in assessing the effectiveness of program goals. The results also will be used as
a basis for planning and budgeting decisions for the College.
Changes in the
Academic Achievement of Students
The College
monitors the changes in academic achievement of its students in several ways:
The Board of
Regents and the Office of Records and Admissions analyze the differences in SAT and ACT
scores as well as GPAs of entering freshmen from year to year.
2.
The Developmental Studies department analyzes exit rates of students by discipline
and by instructor as well as performance by developmental studies students in regular
college classes. The department
continues to analyze the differences in Collegiate Placement Examination (CPE) scores of
entering freshmen from year to year.
3.
The Department of Developmental Studies analyzes the differences between pre- and
post-CPE scores of students who exit developmental studies.
4. The School
of Business, the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, the School of Sciences and
Technology, and the Department of Developmental Studies have used exit measures, exit examinations or GRE scores for a number of years,
but have not always thoroughly analyzed the results. As a result of the institutional
effectiveness program, each department and school has reviewed and/or modified its exit
examination requirements. In the future each department and school will record and review
exit examination results as one element of measuring
student educational outcomes.
5. The
College analyzes differences in the percentage of students passing the Regents' Test from
year to year.
F. Each
academic course has a syllabus with clearly stated behavioral objectives. Course grades reflect the level of satisfactory
completion of those objectives.
G. Academic
standing is monitored, and students are required to maintain satisfactory academic
progress in order to avoid being placed on academic probation or academic dismissal.
H.. Exit evaluations are
used to monitor student performance as listed below:
1. A cumulative GPA
or 2.0 and a grade of C or better in each major course are required of all degree
candidates. Each of the three schools sets additional requirements.
2.
The School of
Business will require an exit exam of all students. The School of Business also uses a
senior level course, BAD 465, Business Policy, as an exit measure; this course attempts to
integrate all areas of the curriculum.
3.
In the School
of Humanities and Social Sciences, the following majors require the advanced test of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE):
English Language and Literature, History, Political Science, and Sociology.
Faculty-developed exit exams are used by the following majors: Mass Communications
(News-Editorial and Media Management concentration, Radio-Television and Performing Arts),
Social Work, Recreation and Parks Administration, and Criminal Justice. Some departments
in the School now use tests other than the GRE.
4. In the School
of Sciences and Technology, the departments of Biology and Life Sciences, Chemistry, and
Mathematics utilize the Graduate Record Examination as (MCAT and DAT) the basic exit
examination and pre-professional aptitude tests.
5.
The Department
of Engineering Technology has developed comprehensive exit examinations for its students.
These tests have been constructed by the faculty in the department to evaluate the
acquisition of skills gained from the program and the ability to think critically. In
addition to the exit examination, students are required to execute a senior project, the
department's "capstone" course, which is designated to integrate the knowledge
and skills learned in coursework as well as to gain the experience of practicing
technologists. After completing the project, a student must submit a report and make an
oral presentation to a jury of faculty members and peers.
6. The MBA,
MPA and MSW graduate programs require 3.0 GPAs and a 19 comprehensive
oral examination by a faculty committee.
I. An
annual student evaluation of faculty is done utilizing the Survey of Student Opinion of
Instruction developed by SUMMA Information Systems.
Results are used primarily to improve instruction.
J. In 1988-89
a survey of recent graduates was conducted. The survey is to be completed annually in the
future.
K. Systematic review of the productivity of
academic programs', is conducted annually. New programs are instituted only after careful
review. The plan approved for regular review of curricula is as follows:
The curriculum
will be systematically reviewed to ensure that all courses are taught regularly and that
the curriculum is directly related to the purposes and goals of the college. All courses
should be taught at least once in every four-year evaluation and planning cycle. Records
of courses taught within the four-year cycle will be maintained by the Registrar's Office.
At the beginning of the first year of the cycle, he will notify academic units about
courses which were not offered during the previous cycle. The academic units will review
the courses not offered and either recommend to the Vice President for Academic Affairs
deletion of courses or submit written justification for retaining the courses.
The content of
courses will support the objectives of the academic units, both in the major and minor
areas and in the core curriculum. A review of course content will enable academic units to
determine whether their expected educational results are being achieved. Academic units
will maintain records of the assessment results for their objectives and will, where
possible, use item analysis or sub-scores to determine the effectiveness of the
curriculum. Assessment results will also be provided to the Vice President for Academic
Affairs, who will review these with the Committee on Institutional Effectiveness.
At the
beginning of each academic year, academic units will review the assessment results from
the previous year. The Committee on Institutional Effectiveness will also review the
assessment results, particularly those for the core curriculum. If the assessment results
from the previous year suggest curriculum changes, the units will recommend such changes.
(Those changes may be course additions, course deletions, or additional requirements.) The
Committee on Institutional Effectiveness may make recommendations concerning the core
curriculum to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
L. Academic productivity reports are prepared showing credit
hours by departments and school.
M. The Social Work
program is accredited by the Council on Social Work Education, and the programs' in civil,
computer, electronics and mechanical engineering technology are accredited by the
Technology Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology. The School of Business has applied for accreditation of the undergraduate
business programs by the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business.
N. In 1988 the
Vice-President for Student Affairs initiated a study of residence hall life. An earlier
study, "The Task Force on the Quality of Residential Life," prepared by faculty,
staff, and students, was completed in 1987.
0. The
School of Business, the Department of Social Work and Applied Sociology, and the programs
in the Department of Engineering Technology all have advisory councils which provide
assessments of the programs.
Evaluation of
the Research and Public Service Missions
The College
responds to its mission to provide opportunity for life-long learning and public service
through the Coastal Georgia Center for Continuing Education. The Center offers non-credit
courses which are administered jointly by Savannah State College and Armstrong State
College. Each non-credit course or program offered by the Coastal Georgia Center is
evaluated by the participants at the conclusion of the program.
Faculty
developmental activities and research efforts are encouraged to enhance and support the
quality of undergraduate education at Savannah State College. A cross-section of the
faculty are engaged in research and also participate in professional organizations and
meetings.
Faculty members
work with the community, with businesses, and with area schools to help enhance their
programs. These activities are reported on annual self-evaluation forms by faculty.
Other public
service programs of the College include radio offerings on WHCJ, the campus station; the
National Youth Sports Program; Student Special Services; the Job Training Partnership Act;
and Upward Bound. All funded programs have required evaluations.
Faculty
developmental activities and research efforts are designed to enhance and support the
quality of undergraduate education at Savannah State College. Faculty are also encouraged
to participate in professional organizations and meetings. Annual Departmental and School
reports include individual faculty research and public service activities that have been
verified through the faculty evaluation process for that academic year.
The Office of
the President receives annual reports from the academic affairs unit and from all
non-academic units. Using information from these unit reports, the President prepares a
summary demonstrating the research projects, publications, and grants efforts by faculty
and staff. This "Annual Report of the College" is submitted to the Board of
Regents at the close of each Academic Year.
The
Institutional Effectiveness Plan
FIRST CYCLE
First Year:
1988-1989
The Committee
on Institutional Effectiveness, with a coordinator, was appointed and began functioning.
An Institutional Effectiveness Manual was prepared and distributed to the faculty.
The Statement
of Purpose was revised as part of the Self-Study process. The revised Purpose was
recommended by the faculty to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and to the President
in February 1989 and approved by the Board of Regents in May 1990.
All academic
units reviewed and clarified their objectives and then identified the "expected
result" for each objective. Evidence of these reviews is in the separate self-study
reports of each area of the College. Each area of the College completed an area
self-study. These are found in the SSC self-study exhibit room and are considered a part
of the College-wide self-study process. These were reviewed by the Committee on
Institutional Effectiveness and approved by the President in the spring of 1989. The
format suggested by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools was used for
objectives and expected results. Academic units completed the determination of all phases
of assessment. This procedure is based on The Resource Manual on Institutional
Effectiveness published by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.
Two attitudinal
surveys were conducted: one of recent graduates and the other of graduating seniors.
Second
Year: 1989-1990
The objectives
and results prepared by the academic units were returned to the academic units in the fall
of 1989 with suggested changes, After revisions andapproval by the
Deans and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, they were returned to the academic
units by the Vice President. The units determined the assessment procedures, the
administration of assessment, and use of results. These were then reviewed by the
Committee on Institutional Effectiveness and recommendation were made to the President.
During this
year, all administrative units clarified their objectives and identified the
"expected results" for each objective. These were reviewed by the Vice
Presidents and by the Committee on Institutional Effectiveness (CIE). The same format used
by the academic units was used by administrative units. After this, the CIE made
recommendations to the President. The President and Vice President for Academic Affairs,
as well as the faculty and other administrators, received copies of the final versions of
the self-studies.
Attitudinal
surveys of the faculty, students, staff and administrators were conducted. Results were
used by the Self-Study committee and others to further strengthen the programs of the
College. As they conducted their unit self-studies, many departments systematically
tracked their graduates in order to measure effectiveness. Unit reports included
information on graduates.
During this
year, the President of the College, after receiving recommendations from the CIE,
developed the annual College plan of the current goals and priorities, a summary of
significant assessment results, associated improvement activities, and action plans by
which institutional priorities, including improvements in effectiveness, would be
achieved. The President linked budget allocations to the planning and assessment process.
The President also formed the President's Planning Group (PPG). The Group functioned as
the official advisor to the President on plans and assessment. The Committee on
Institutional Effectiveness served in a staff capacity to the PPG.
Third
Year: 1990-1991
During this
year and in each subsequent year, schools, academic departments and administrative units
will review their objectives and expected results and develop plans for improvement before
the beginning of the next year's cycle.
Fourth
Year: 1991-1992
The assessment
cycle should be fully implemented and the entire plan reviewed. The annual assessment
cycle includes three activities: (1) review of the previous year's assessment activities
and refinement of the procedures, (2) refinement of assessment procedures, and (3) the
feedback through the administrative and academic channels from the President, this will
form the basis for establishing the next cycle. The
review of the previous year's assessment activities begin with the departmental level and
then upward through the channels.
SECOND AND
SUBSEQUENT CYCLES
Every Year:
The following
will be accomplished by a timetable approved by the President.
1. Assessment of the expected results
(academic and non-academic units)
2. Survey of graduating seniors
3. Development of an annual plan by the
President of the College, following the dictates of the Institutional Effectiveness flow
chart.
4. After a review of the
previous year's results, the President will react regarding strengths and weaknesses in
institutional effectiveness.
Every
two years
1. Survey of
recent graduates
2. General
survey of student opinions
3. General
survey of faculty and staff opinions
Assessment
Second Cycle First Year:
(1992-1993)
During the
first year of every cycle, the College's purpose will be reviewed by the President and all
areas of the College. Any proposed revisions will be submitted by the President to the
Board of Regents for approval.
During the fall
quarter, using the assessment results of the previous two years, all divisions will review
objectives and the expected results, assessment procedures, administration of assessment,
and use of results for each objective. Final revisions and approval of these will be
recommended to the Vice Presidents and to the resident
The Registrar
will maintain academic records of the College and make timely reports on all academic
activities to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The VPAA will make appropriate
recommendations about the continuation of certain academic activities to the President
after consultation with deans and faculties. The
President, also after consultation with the faculty and the PPG, will determine whether
certain activities are to continue and whether they contribute to effectiveness of the
institution. The same process applies with non-academic activities. Vice Presidents of
these areas will report to the President on certain activities.
Attitudinal
surveys:
Recent graduates
Graduating
seniors
Students
Second Year: (1993-1994)
During the fall
quarter, using the results of the previous two years, the faculty and all College
divisions will review their objectives and the expected results, assessment procedures,
administration of assessment, and use of results for each objective, final review and
approval by the President will take place as usual during the spring quarter.
Attitudinal
surveys:
Graduating seniors
Faculty and Staff
Third Year: (1994-1995)
During this
year and in every subsequent year, all College divisions will review their objectives and
expected results and develop goals (objectives) for improvement.
Attitudinal
surveys:
Recent graduates
Graduating
seniors
Fourth Year (1995-1996)
The second
assessment cycle should be fully implemented and the entire plan reviewed. The annual
assessment cycle includes three activities: (1) review of the previous year's assessment
activities and refinement of the procedures, (2) refinement of assessment procedures, and,
(3) the flow of feedback of assessment results to the President which will form the basis
for the next year's cycle. The review of the previous year's assessment activities will be
done by the faculty, and by the Vice Presidents and others who report to the President.
Attitudinal
surveys:
Graduating
seniors
Faculty
Staff
3.2 INSTITUTIONAL
RESEARCH
Savannah State College
views institutional research as an essential element within each unit of the College.
While most units engage in institutional research, several units have substantial roles
and provide significant information. Each academic unit undertakes research projects
related to faculty evaluation, student performance, accreditation/re accreditation,
preparation of annual reports, faculty performance, student satisfaction, etc. The Student
Affairs Office is particularly active, in conjunction with the Office of Records and
Admissions (which manages the student information system of the College) in the provision
of information on faculty workload, student characteristics, student performance, and
student enrollment.
The Vice
President for Business and Finance provides significant information on plant operations
and finance. The Vice President for Academic Affairs is responsible for the Faculty
Information System, the Faculty Assignment Report, the Regents' Consolidated Reporting
System, and the Space Utilization Report. Examples of recent institutional research are:
A. An information
source catalog list of over seventy-five reports and surveys from the University System,
the College Student Information Report, and the College Office of Planning and Institutional Research.
B. During 1989-90,
a survey of recent graduates was conducted. The survey is to be completed on an annual
basis in the future.
C. During
1989-90, attitudinal surveys of students, graduating seniors, and faculty and staff
members were conducted.
D. An annual
student evaluation of faculty utilizing the Survey of Student Opinion of Instruction
developed by SUMMA Information Systems is completed.
E. Research has
been conducted for the current self-study for the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools.
F.
A study of
student retention at the College is conducted each year.
G. Research has been conducted to support the specialized
accreditation achieved by the Social Work Program and the Engineering Technology program
and accreditation applied for by the School of Business.
H. Additional institutional research by the College is
contained in The Annual Report and Data Summary Reports.
The College
employs a full-time Director of Planning and Institutional Research. The Office of
Planning and Institutional Research is a staff unit reporting to the President. The
Director of this office is primarily responsible for performing the following at the
direction of the President:
1. Supporting
College planning activities;
2. Preparing
external reports for the College;
3. Developing, summarizing, and distributing data, reports,
and information on College operations focusing on recurring needs of the Office's primary
constituents;
4. Filling
requests for "ad hoc" data, information, and assistance.
The Director of
Planning and Institutional Research supports institutional level planning activities by
serving as staff to the President's Planning Group. Responsibilities include preparation
and distribution of planning materials, and summarization of proposed College-wide plans
and goals, as requested. This director also serves as staff to the Institutional
Effectiveness Committee, and gathers data to support planning decisions, and prepares and
distributes of the yearly College Plan at the direction of the Planning Group and the
President. At the request of the President, this director may coordinate and prepare many
external reports and requests for information from accrediting agencies, the University
System, educational organizations, and the federal government.
Additionally,
the director may also prepare information and conduct studies concerning the ongoing
operation of the College, as requested by the President, and prepare the annual College Fact
Book. This publication provides basic data and information to support the
decision-making and planning process. At the request of the President, this Director
recommends a draft of the survey of graduates and non-returning students.
As approved by
the President, this Office may respond to requests from individual faculty, staff, and
administrators.
In summary, the
Office of Planning and Institutional Research serves as staff to the President, and is
directed to respond to external requests for data, prepare information concerning the
ongoing operation of the College to support the decision making and planning process, and
respond to individual requests for information as approved by the President.
As approved by
the President, the Director may have access to all information on the institutional
research function necessary to support planning decisions and other projects. Evaluation
of the Director's position by the President is an ongoing process.
The President's
Planning Group and the President's Management Team frequently discuss institutional
research issues and review current institutional data. Specific data are prepared to
assist the President in administrative decision making.