Follow-up Report
on progress made in the
College Student Services Administration (CSSA) Program
Since the 2004 Graduate Program Review
John Selker
April 16, 2007
This report summarizes the findings of the visit to the program made by John Selker on
March 27, 2007.
Summary
At the time of the original review on April 19, 2004, approximately three years ago, the
CSSA program was found to be “…highly effective and fit well with the mission of OSU.
OSU, the state, and region are very well served by this program.” The review team
prepared a 14-page report which detailed comprehensive consideration of the facilities,
faculty, program, and student experience. In this review, consisting of a 2-hour
conversation between Dr. Selker and the program director Dr. Shintaku, we focused on
the report recommendations. Dr. Shintaku had prepared a formal written response to all
of the report’s recommendations, which is attached to this report. The program has made
great strides, and is very healthy, having moved from strength to even greater strength.
The program should be very pleased with its status and accomplishments.
In this document we simply list the recommendations and a thumb-nail evaluation of the
status of each. The text from the original document is boxed, with the evaluation of
current status below each issue.
•
Critical Issue: Increase faculty FTE from the current level of one nontenured FTE to two tenure track to sustain the current program. No fewer
than three tenure track FTE will be needed if the PhD program is to be
reconstituted.
The program has added two new Tenure Track positions, including the key program
advisor. The PhD program is currently on indefinite hold, so the staffing level is
acceptable for the moment, though impending retirements will again touch off a staff
shortage unless new hires are pursued.
•
Enhance recruitment of minority and under represented students, as well as
broadening overall recruiting strategy.
The program has been successful at attracting increasing numbers of students from
underrepresented groups. There has been successful participation in the NASPA and
other minority outreach activities.
•
With decreasing cost-effectiveness of stipends for on-campus positions, CSSA
will need to pay more attention to finding new student funding opportunities and
work to maintain those currently in the program.
Despite the review team’s concerns, the program has managed to increase the number of
RA’s supported. This has involved some shifting from traditional supporters to new
areas, but the degree of support is adequate for the program, and appears secure.
•
The portfolio option needs to be more rigorously/completely described so students
are clear on expectations.
The portfolio experience has been attended to with great care, and is now a requirement
for all students in the program. The entire process and timeline are spelled out in detail
for the students, and the progress of each student is monitored on a regular basis through
formal meetings and progress-report requirements.
•
As the number of part time students increases, the need for a student space for
individual and group study increases. This space should include access to
computer/software required to successfully complete a portfolio.
The involvement of part-time students has not grown as had been anticipated at the time
of the initial review. Upon greater reflection and with the benefit of experience, the
department chair has concluded that the program is best suited to full-time participation,
and the program is fully subscribed, thus the interest in expanding this component of the
program is limited at this time. Part-time students are still allowed in the program, but
are not send to be a central aspect of the effort. A study space was provided, and is still
available, but is little used.
•
The interior spaces used for teaching need significant improvement to cosmetic
and furnishing aspects.
A complete renovation of the building is being sought as part of the OSU Capital
Campaign. The funds have been secured for the renovation of the exterior of the
building, and the process of finding funds to complete the interior project is well under
way.
•
As adjunct faculty are added, a dedicated space for them to meet with students
and carry out program related business would be appropriate.
Currently there is not space for this activity. It should be noted that adjunct faculty are
less central to the program now in comparison to the situation at the time of the original
review.
•
The budget process for the program must be made transparent. What is the
income, what is the cost to the College of Education, and what is the cost to the
university?
The budget is now entirely transparent to all. The program was found to be a moneymaker for the college, and appears to be slated to receive more resources as funds become
available due to this success.
•
Given the desperately unsustainable current allocation of faculty FTE to the
program, the hiring of a single graduate GTA is recommended immediately to
carry out repetitive and routine tasks.
A GTA was hired, and has been very useful.
•
Make course credit concomitant with the work required and the importance of the
subject matter. Many 1 credit classes seem to be more appropriate as 3 credit, and
visa versa.
A complete re-alignment of the academic program was undertaken. Many of the 1-credit
courses were eliminated, and the remaining courses were re-designed to fit into the new
national standards for such programs published in 2006.
•
The many 1 credit classes seem inefficient use of teaching resources. As possible
with the current heavy reliance on adjunct faculty, trim the overall number of
classes. Make those remaining more comprehensive and/or provide greater depth.
See above.
•
Include core coursework that addresses issue of the impact of technology;
competency assessment; and the process of public policy development to better
prepare the students for the contemporary issues they will face.
This has been largely achieved EXCEPT in the area of public policy. It is hoped that
with an additional FTE this could be done, though at present it is included in a piece-meal
fashion scattered throughout the curriculum.
•
Reduce practicum’s from 3 to 2, with one possibly being the assistantship.
This has been addressed through a more flexible program that allows for the possibility to
carry out one large and one small practicum, or the three equal credit experiences. The
students and staff believe that the rigorous practicum component of the program is
fundamental to why students come to OSU’s CSSA program, and should not be diluted.
•
Additional courses are needed to support competence in research methods for
thesis students, and in the future, PhD students.
Three courses that address these concerns were added (see attached formal program
response).
•
Additional courses or course content is needed to support competency in
assessment, impact of technology, and public policy.
Addressed above.
• Employ Competency Based measures to define class objectives and evaluate
performance.
The issue has been addressed well. This is organized using a matrix of course objectives.
•
Consider remote delivery very carefully: it is not clear that this modality is most
strategic for this program
Attempts thus far have not been successful, though they continue to try. The high per
unit cost of eCampus credits presents a large obstacle for this approach. In addition,
students generally need residence credits, so this option is not useful for many students.
•
A strategic plan matching resources to expectations is needed in the context of the
ambitions for undergraduate and PhD offerings. Expectations should be clearly
established by the Dean and program Chair to give clarity to the program staff on
these significant long-term possibilities.
In the process of the campus-wide re-prioritization this issue has been addressed. The
PhD program is on indefinite hold, awaiting new teaching FTE.
Graduate Council Program Review
College Student Services Administration Program
Follow-up Review:
Unit Summary of Reaction/Response to Report of Review Team and Specific Actions Taken to
Address Recommendations
March 2007
With the constant demand for quality and effective leadership in a variety of educational and workplace
settings, the Graduate Council program review of the college student services administration program could
not have come at a more opportune time. In 2004, the program faculty and staff welcomed the opportunity
to conduct a self-study and participate in an open and thorough review of the program. The
recommendations set forth from the review team clearly reinforced the desire to be recognized as one of the
premier and nationally-recognized graduate programs in higher education leadership with a specific
emphasis in college student services administration. Utilizing the report’s summary of recommendations,
the following provides a brief update of the original response/reaction and implementation plan.
1.
Increase faculty FTE from the current level of one non-tenured FTE to two tenure track to sustain
the current program. No fewer than three tenure track FTE will be needed if the PhD program is
to be reconstituted.
Since our initial graduate program review, the Department of Adult Education and Higher
Education Leadership has added two tenure track faculty positions. Still, with impending
retirements and the current statewide and campus budget issues, we will need to prepare for
these changes and anticipate additional fiscal challenges. In the meantime, we continue to
acknowledge that there remains a significant need for a doctoral program as there are very
few programs in the western region that emphasize student affairs administration and
higher education leadership.
2.
Enhance recruitment of minority and under represented students, as well as broadening overall
recruiting strategy.
Although we acknowledge that the department and the CSSA program enrolls a
significantly greater number of students of color, historically under represented students
and students from other marginalized populations (e.g. LGBTQQA) in relation to other
graduate programs, we remain committed to enhancing our recruitment efforts.
Specifically, we:
- attend and participate in the annual Careers in Student Affairs Day event in southern
California
- are now a NASPA Minority Undergraduate Fellows Program sponsored institution
- participated in the summer NASPA leadership institute for minority undergraduate and
graduate students (last year at Texas A&M University)
3.
With decreasing cost-effectiveness of stipends for on-campus positions, CSSA will need to pay
more attention to finding new student funding opportunities and work to maintain those currently
in the program.
Since the initial review, we have increased the number of Graduate Teaching Assistantships
by working with various campus units (in and outside student affairs) in developing new
positions. Examples of new assistantships (i.e. since initial review) include:
CSSA Follow Up Review/2
- Athletics (Academic Success)
- Academic Success Center
- College of Engineering
- SMILE (Science and Math Investigative Learning Experiences Program)
- Ecampus
- Natural Resources
- International Programs
4.
The portfolio option needs to be more rigorously/completely described so students are clear on
expectations.
The portfolio is no longer an option but a program requirement. As such, we have
developed a system so that students are better informed, advised and supported throughout
their program of study (see attachments). Specifically, we have developed a portfolio primer
and incorporated a required mid-program review process. In addition, all students must
include a public presentation including question and answer period prior to the closed
examination with committee members. We are very proud of the development of our
portfolio process; we have presented our model at regional and national conferences and
continue to consult with programs (including OSU) about the portfolio process.
5.
As the number of part time students increases, the need for a student space for individual and
group study increases. This space should include access to computer/software required to
successfully complete a portfolio.
Since the initial review, the number of part time students has not increased but rather
decreased in number. In addition, space has continued to be an issue for the program,
department and college. Since the initial review, the College of Education has secured
partial funding to completely renovate Education Hall. We have participated in a preconceptual design exercise facilitated by department faculty and have developed a series of
values and vision statements that include the need for students to feel welcomed, included
and engaged while in Education Hall (see attachment).
6.
The interior spaces used for teaching need significant improvement to cosmetic and furnishing
aspects.
See #5.
7.
As adjunct faculty are added, a dedicated space for them to meet with students and carry out
program related business would be appropriate.
Once again, there has been no change in this recommendation due to the current space
constraints and planning.
CSSA Follow Up Review/3
8.
The budget process for the program must be made transparent. What is the income, what is the
cost to the College of Education, and what is the cost to the university?
With the recent campus wide re-prioritization process, the College of Education has had to
be much more transparent with respect to income and cost. The CSSA program and other
graduate programs in the department currently operate in the black. In addition, two
department faculty members are actively involved in the College’s governance process that
specifically addresses financial matters (the current chair of the College’s Financial Affairs
Committee is a member of the department faculty).
9.
Given the desperately unsustainable current allocation of faculty FTE to the program, the hiring of
a single graduate GTA is recommended immediately to carry out repetitive and routine tasks.
The program has added one .3 GTA position (position description attached).
10.
Make course credit concomitant with the work required and the importance of the subject matter.
Many 1 credit classes seem to be more appropriate as 3 credit, and visa versa.
Since the initial review, a complete realignment of courses in the program has taken place.
Aside from one “remnant,” all one credit courses have been eliminated. In addition, a biannual special topics series has been developed and are consistent in course credits. Courses
include the following:
- Globalization of Higher Education
- Technology Issues in Higher Education
- Spirituality in Higher Education
- Student Leadership and Organizational Development
- Organizational Architecture
- Student Transitions
11.
The many 1 credit classes seem inefficient use of teaching resources. As possible with the current
heavy reliance on adjunct faculty, trim the overall number of classes. Make those remaining more
comprehensive and/or provide greater depth.
Done; see #10.
12.
Include core coursework that addresses issues of the impact of technology; competency
assessment; and the process of public policy development to better prepare the students for the
contemporary issues they will face.
Core courses now include technology, budget and finance and outcomes assessment but the
issue of public (and higher education) policy still remains absent. Hopefully, with the
addition of our new tenure track faculty member, we will be able to dedicate time to a new
course preparation in this much-needed area.
.
CSSA Follow Up Review/4
13.
Reduce practicum from 3 to 2, with one possibly being the assistantship.
Although we have taken this feedback to heart, there still remains a strong desire to
maintain the high level of practical application to complement our course work. Still, we
have changed the practicum requirements to some degree. The 270-hour requirement
remains but instead of three 3-credit practica, we have changed the requirement to a
minimum of two internships of varying length (i.e. variable credits; still must be 9 credits
total). We strongly believe that this is a distinctive element of our program and prospective
students seek out our program as a result of our internship commitment/requirement. To
add, assistantships are no longer a program requirement.
14.
Additional courses are needed to support competence in research methods for thesis students, and
in the future, PhD students.
Since the initial review, three new courses (and one existing course that is now available to
CSSA students) have been added to the department; they include:
- Research Methods in Higher Education
- Quantitative Analysis in Educational Research I
- Quantitative Analysis in Educational Research II
- Workplace Learning Needs Assessment
15.
Additional courses or course content is needed to support competency in assessment, impact of
technology, and public policy.
See #12.
16.
Employ Competency Based measures to define class objectives and evaluate performance.
Each and every course in the program (including new course proposals) must include
competency based measures to define class objectives and goals. Since the initial review, we
have revised the program competencies; among the changes include the addition of a new
competency (Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, Skills and Abilities). See attached
document. With the program implementation of the portfolio, all students are evaluated
against the program competencies.
17.
Consider remote delivery very carefully: it is not clear that this modality is most strategic for this
program.
With the help of our colleagues in Ecampus, we continue to explore remote delivery. In
addition, course release was given to one faculty member to explore the development of this
modality. Last summer we experimented with a remote delivery (off site rather than online)
in the Portland area but the tuition cost remains a challenge; in other words, the course was
not affordable enough for non-degree seeking students to take. We will need to continue to
explore this modality in the future although it has not been a priority.
CSSA Follow Up Review/5
18.
A strategic plan matching resources to expectations is needed in the context of the ambitions for
undergraduate and PhD offerings. Expectations should be clearly established by the Dean and
program Chair to give clarity to the program staff on these significant long-term possibilities.
Once again, as a result of the recent campus wide re-prioritization process, the CSSA
program (in particular) emerged as a program of high priority for the College of Education.
Hopefully, subsequent strategic planning will direct resources to the program.
Attachments:
- Program Competencies
- Portfolio Primer
- Portfolio Timeline
- Building Pre-Conceptual Planning for Renovation of Education Hall
- GTA position description
March 2007