AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Systems Appraisal Feedback Report
in response to the Systems Portfolio of
1094 BENEDICTINE UNIVERSITY
February 19, 2015
for
The Higher Learning Commission
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Contents
Elements of the Feedback Report .............................................................................................. 3
Reflective Introduction and Executive Summary ........................................................................ 5
Strategic Challenges ................................................................................................................... 8
AQIP Category Feedback ........................................................................................................ 10
Helping Students Learn ...................................................................................................... 10
Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives ........................................................................ 17
Understanding Students' and Other Stakeholders’ Needs .................................................. 20
Valuing People ................................................................................................................... 23
Leading and Communicating .............................................................................................. 27
Supporting Institutional Operations ..................................................................................... 30
Measuring Effectiveness .................................................................................................... 32
Planning Continuous Improvement ..................................................................................... 35
Building Collaborative Relationships .................................................................................. 37
Accreditation Evidence ............................................................................................................. 40
Quality of Systems Portfolio ..................................................................................................... 55
Using the Feedback Report ...................................................................................................... 56
February 19, 2015
2
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Elements of Benedictine’s Feedback Report
Welcome to the Systems Appraisal Feedback Report. This report provides AQIP’s official
response to an institution’s Systems Portfolio by a team of peer reviewers (the Systems
Appraisal Team). After the team independently reviews the institution’s portfolio, it reaches
consensus on essential elements of the institutional profile, strengths and opportunities for
improvement by AQIP Category, and any significant issues related to accreditation. These
are then presented in three sections of the Systems Appraisal Feedback Report: “Strategic
Challenges Analysis,” “AQIP Category Feedback,” and “Accreditation Issues Analysis.”
These components are interrelated in defining context, evaluating institutional performance,
surfacing critical issues or accreditation concerns, and assessing institutional performance.
Ahead of these three areas, the team provides a “Reflective Introduction” followed closely by
an “Executive Summary.” The appraisal concludes with commentary on the overall quality of
the report and advice on using the report. Each of these areas is overviewed below.
It is important to remember that the Systems Appraisal Team has only the institution’s
Systems Portfolio to guide its analysis of the institution’s strengths and opportunities for
improvement. Consequently, the team’s report may omit important strengths, particularly if
discussion or documentation of these areas in the Systems Portfolio were presented
minimally. Similarly, the team may point out areas of potential improvement that are already
receiving widespread institutional attention. Indeed, it is possible that some areas
recommended for potential improvement have since become strengths rather than
opportunities through the institution’s ongoing efforts. Recall that the overarching goal of the
Systems Appraisal Team is to provide an institution with the best possible advice for
ongoing improvement.
The various sections of the Systems Appraisal Feedback Report can be described as
follows:
Reflective Introduction & Executive Summary: In this first section of the System’s
Appraisal Feedback Report, the team provides a summative statement that reflects its broad
February 19, 2015
3
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
understanding of the institution and the constituents served (Reflective Introduction), and
also the team’s overall judgment regarding the institution’s current performance in relation to
the nine AQIP Categories (Executive Summary). In the Executive Summary, the team
considers such factors as: robustness of process design; utilization or deployment of
processes; the existence of results, trends, and comparative data; the use of results data as
feedback; and systematic processes for improvement of the activities that each AQIP
Category covers. Since institutions are complex, maturity levels may vary from one Category
to another.
Strategic Challenges Analysis: Strategic challenges are those most closely related to an
institution’s ability to succeed in reaching its mission, planning, and quality improvement
goals. Teams formulate judgments related to strategic challenges and accreditation issues
(discussed below) through careful analysis of the Organizational Overview included in the
institution’s Systems Portfolio and through the team’s own feedback provided for each AQIP
Category. These collected findings offer a framework for future improvement of processes
and systems.
AQIP Category Feedback: The Systems Appraisal Feedback Report addresses each AQIP
Category by identifying and coding strengths and opportunities for improvement. An S or SS
identifies strengths, with the double letter signifying important achievements or capabilities
upon which to build. Opportunities are designated by O, with OO indicating areas where
attention may result in more significant improvement. Through comments, which are keyed
to the institution’s Systems Portfolio, the team offers brief analysis of each strength and
opportunity. Organized by AQIP Category, and presenting the team’s findings in detail, this
section is often considered the heart of the Feedback Report.
Accreditation Issues Analysis: Accreditation issues are areas where an institution may
have not yet provided sufficient evidence that it meets the Commission’s Criteria for
Accreditation. It is also possible that the evidence provided suggests to the team that the
institution may have difficulties, whether at present or in the future, in satisfying the Criteria.
As with strategic challenges, teams formulate judgments related to accreditation issues
through close analysis of the entire Systems Portfolio, with particular attention given to the
evidence that the institution provides for satisfying the various core components of the
February 19, 2015
4
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Criteria. For purposes of consistency, AQIP instructs appraisal teams to identify any
accreditation issue as a strategic challenge as well.
Quality of Report & Its Use: As with any institutional report, the Systems Portfolio should
work to enhance the integrity and credibility of the institution by celebrating successes while
also stating honestly those opportunities for improvement. The Systems Portfolio should
therefore be transformational, and it should provide external peer reviewers insight as to
how such transformation may occur through processes of continuous improvement. The
AQIP Categories and the Criteria for Accreditation serve as the overarching measures for
the institution’s current state, as well as its proposed future state. As such, it is imperative
that the Portfolio be fully developed, that it adhere to the prescribed format, and that it be
thoroughly vetted for clarity and correctness. Though decisions about specific actions rest
with each institution following this review, AQIP expects every institution to use its feedback
to stimulate cycles of continual improvement and to inform future AQIP processes.
Reflective Introduction and Executive Summary for Benedictine University
The following consensus statement is from the System Appraisal Team’s review of
the institution’s Systems Portfolio Overview and its introductions to the nine AQIP
Categories. The purpose of this reflective introduction is to highlight the team’s broad
understanding of the institution, its mission, and the constituents that it serves.
Reflective Introduction:
Benedictine University is a private, not-for-profit, faith-based institution with a global
footprint, committed to liberal arts and professional education, with a rich history in the
Benedictine and Roman Catholic traditions. Its mission is to educate undergraduate and
graduate students from diverse ethnic, racial, and religious backgrounds. 714 faculty and
447 staff serve over 9,000 students in bachelors, masters, and doctoral degree programs,
preparing them for a lifetime as active, informed and responsible citizens and leaders in a
global community.
Benedictine joined AQIP in 2003 and received reviews through systems appraisals in 2006
and 2011, and a Quality Checkup Visit in 2009. Benedictine was reaccredited in 2009-2010.
February 19, 2015
5
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Seventy-five percent of Benedictine University faculty are adjunct.
The following are summary comments on each of the AQIP Categories crafted by the
Appraisal Team to highlight Benedictine’s achievements and to identify challenges yet to be
met.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category One. Benedictine University has
experienced strong enrollment growth over the past decade, with concomitant growth in
both the variety of programs they offer and the locations and venues in which their
programming is delivered. The institution has attempted to implement a new undergraduate
general education curriculum and to create a culture that values and embraces assessment
to ensure quality in its programming during this period of rapid growth.
However, problems remain in how some programs are delivered to ensure students are not
only prepared for careers, but also perceive themselves as being prepared. Further,
although Benedictine has established a Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence in
order to ensure the professional development of faculty, it is not clear to what extent this
resource is made available to adjunct faculty, who constitute seventy-five percent of
Benedictine’s entire faculty.
Finally, Benedictine’s success in creating a culture of assessment and data-driven
improvement has been uneven. There are opportunities to further consolidate and
strengthen the new general education curriculum and to build processes of assessment and
quality control into programs offered across multiple venues and physical locations. The
university is working to develop such a culture and is encouraged to continue its efforts to
produce a data-driven, systematic and student-centered culture of assessment and
improvement across all academic programs.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category Two. Benedictine is very clear about
who they are as an institution of higher learning, and through this section work hard to show
how they fulfill their mission, with many demonstrable processes and accomplishments
among their non-instructional objectives. Benedictine is encouraged to continue working on
the development of their existing processes and on framing their impact statements.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category Three. Relationship building with key
stakeholders is a priority for Benedictine as demonstrated by the many outreach and
February 19, 2015
6
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
support programs it has in place. However, performance results for both stakeholder
satisfaction and building relationships with key stakeholders are critical pieces of evidence
which have been minimally reported. It is important for Benedictine to analyze the areas of
underperformance and identify the causes so that targets for improvement may be
established.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category Four. Throughout Category Four, it is
clear that Benedictine both values and supports employees who make up the faculty, staff
and administration. As Benedictine continues to professionally develop people within the
institution, it is important to create a systematic process for identifying training needs, such
as data from employee evaluations and student surveys, which would enable the institution
to contribute to employee career development in a more systematic manner. It is also
recommended that Benedictine continue to demonstrate, in the spirit of AQIP, a long-term
commitment to continuous improvement, rather than relying on past strengths as are ofttimes referenced in this section.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category Five. While Benedictine appears to
engage all constituencies and stakeholders in its leading and communicating processes, it
recognizes that it has opportunities for improvement in the areas of student, staff, and
faculty communication. Moreover, as noted in 5P3, the process of leading and
communicating in planning is often top-down and could be more inclusive. A particularly
important result for leading and communicating is the section describing the success of
opening two new branch campuses and developing five international partnerships.
Additional results might also include measurement of the university’s leading and
communicating to branch and international locations.
Team Category Summary Statement for Category Six. Benedictine is moving toward
more data driven decision-making. However, it does not provide sufficient evidence to
demonstrate how its culture and infrastructure contribute to selecting the processes and
setting the targets for continued improvements and support of institutional operations.
Team Summary Statement for Category Seven. While there is an emphasis on creating a
more data-driven and evidence-based culture, a process has not been established to align
selection of measures with strategic directions of the university. Although the strategic plan
February 19, 2015
7
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
has produced goals for the future, a comprehensive set of measures to permit an
understanding of progress against the strategy is lacking. Without measures aligned with
strategy, Benedictine will be inhibited from gaining an understanding whether its actions are
producing the desired results and if the university is moving toward realization of its vision.
Team Summary Statement for Category Eight. While financial resource needs appear to
be addressed during planning, it is not apparent that other resource needs are considered
before action plans are implemented. These include staffing, learning and development,
equipment, technology, and space requirements, etc. If all needs are not adequately
addressed, Benedictine’s ability to develop and nurture faculty, staff, and administrator
capabilities to address changing requirements uncovered through the planning process may
be limited.
Team Summary Statement for Category Nine. While Benedictine cites many internal and
external partnerships, there is no clear process for identifying opportunities, creating, or
fostering internal and external partnerships. Formalizing this process and centralizing its
administration would strengthen Benedictine’s ability to foster collaborative relationships
selectively and effectively.
Benedictine frequently cites strengths of previous portfolios; however, in the spirit of
continuous improvement, the strengths identified in building relationships with organizations
that supply materials and services to students might be leveraged to build relationships with
other stakeholders.
Note: Strategic challenges and accreditation issues are discussed in detail in
subsequent sections of the Systems Appraisal Feedback Report.
Strategic Challenges for Benedictine
In conducting the Systems Appraisal, the Systems Appraisal Team attempted to identify the
broader issues that would seem to present the greatest challenges and opportunities for the
institution in the coming years. These areas are ones that the institution should address as it
seeks to become the institution it wants to be. From these the institution may discover its
February 19, 2015
8
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
immediate priorities, as well as strategies for long-term performance improvement. These
items may also serve as the basis for future activities and projects that satisfy other AQIP
requirements. The team also considered whether any of these challenges put the institution
at risk of not meeting the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation. That portion of the team’s
work is presented later in this report.
Knowing that Benedictine will discuss these strategic challenges, give priority to those it
concludes are most critical, and take action promptly, the Systems Appraisal Team identified
the following:

The institution appears to lack an approach for selecting, collecting, and analyzing
performance measures and does not report many results that provide sufficient information
to make informed decisions. In addition, no meaningful trends are reported in the Portfolio.
Key performance measures that are trended and show performance over time should be
visible and widely shared to allow Benedictine to control and improve its processes. It is
important to measure the right things and look at inputs, processes, and outputs and how
they connect to overall objectives.

The institution provides anecdotal information for the majority of AQIP categories, and there
is limited comparative or competitive data available to demonstrate how Benedictine's
effectiveness compares with other higher education organizations or those outside of higher
education. The portfolio frequently uses examples and describes individual activities rather
than systematic processes. Setting targets and establishing baseline data would allow
Benedictine to better assess their objectives, and regularly comparing their performance
against similar institutions would allow for a more meaningful assessment of the institution’s
performance.

The National Moser Center for Adult Learning (NMCAL) with its Academic Development and
Education Partnership has a unique “mission” within the broader mission of Benedictine.
This NMCAL unit may need additional explanation, as it clearly accounts for some of the
enrollment success of the institution. Does it employ an integrated approach in partnering
across units to provide a multitude of services to external stakeholders? Does the NMCAL
exemplify a best practice for the rest of the campus? If so, Benedictine has an opportunity
to replicate the work of this Center in the relationship-building processes conducted by other
units.
February 19, 2015
9
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report

Benedictine University
A particularly important result for leading and communicating is the section describing the
success of opening two new branch campuses, a Sports Complex, developing five
international partnerships and 17 new academic programs. The result of this ten-year effort
has been a significant gain in enrollment (2969 students in fall 2003 to 6318 students in fall
2013 (See Chronicle of Higher Education). Results beyond enrollment growth might also
include measurement on how mission has been adapted in instruction and outreach in
branch and international locations, whether student satisfaction with instruction changes in
any way with new locations, the degree to which faculty provide leadership to new academic
endeavors, etc.

Benedictine established a Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence (CTLE) in 2008
which provides data and resources to faculty to assist in curricular design, pedagogical
improvement and to coordinate faculty and advisors with students and to communicate best
practices in the classroom, including academic honesty policies for students and
technological resources for administering this policy. Given the large percentage of adjunct
faculty, Benedictine should be deliberate in ensuring the CTLE and full-time faculty provide
support, professional development, and guidance to this critical group of faculty.
AQIP Category Feedback
In the following section, the Systems Appraisal Team delineates institutional strengths along
with opportunities for improvement within the nine AQIP Categories. As explained above,
the symbols used in this section are SS for outstanding strength, S for strength, O for
opportunity for improvement, and OO for outstanding opportunity for improvement. The
choice of symbol for each item represents the consensus evaluation of the team members
and deserves the institution’s thoughtful consideration. Comments marked SS or OO may
need immediate attention, either to ensure the institution preserves and maximizes the value
of its greatest strengths, or to devote immediate attention to its greatest opportunities for
improvement.
AQIP Category One: Helping Students Learn. This category identifies the shared purpose
of all higher education institutions and is accordingly the pivot of any institutional analysis. It
February 19, 2015
10
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
focuses on the teaching-learning process within a formal instructional context, yet it also
addresses how the entire institution contributes to helping students learn and overall student
development. It examines the institution's processes and systems related to learning
objectives, mission-driven student learning and development, intellectual climate, academic
programs and courses, student preparation, key issues such as technology and diversity,
program and course delivery, faculty and staff roles, teaching and learning effectiveness,
course sequencing and scheduling, learning and co-curricular support, student assessment,
measures, analysis of results, and efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems
Appraisal Team identified various strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category
1.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 1. Among the processes
Benedictine believes are at a high level of maturity are the infrastructure for designing new
programs, determining and communicating student preparation requirements, integrating cocurricular with curricular activities, and determining that students have met learning
expectations. Processes that they believe are at a more moderate level of maturation
include determining specific program learning objectives, working with underprepared
students, addressing different learning styles, addressing special needs of student subgroups, and addressing learning support needs. Those processes they believe are less
mature are determining common objectives for learning, determining programs to meet
stakeholders’ needs, defining and communicating teaching and learning expectations, and
building effective course delivery systems.
To address differences in learning styles, the institution encourages a wide variety of
delivery methods to present course content. The institution also has established a Center for
Teaching and Learning Excellence in order to provide workshops and assessment training
for all faculty and mentoring opportunities for new faculty.
The institution uses a variety of indirect measures to assess their success in Helping
Students Learn. Longitudinal analysis as well as comparative benchmarks are used to
measure success. The results of this analysis drive changes in programs and services.
Though the core curriculum began in 2005, there is no evidence that there has been
assessment of general education by 2014. In addition, reviewers expressed a concern in
February 19, 2015
11
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
the 2009 Checkup Visit that direct assessment had not been comprehensively addressed.
In 2014, direct assessment of student learning does not appear to have been implemented
across the university.
1P1, O. Benedictine is currently implementing a new general education curriculum,
designed by faculty and staff, which identifies eight essential learning goals aimed at
preparing students for living and working in an increasingly globalized and multi-cultural
society, accomplished through curricular and co-curricular requirements. Benedictine
reports that the process for identifying shared outcomes was identified as a strength in
its last Systems Portfolio. While the curriculum is discussed in detail, the process by
which the institution identified shared outcomes was not clearly set forth. Benedictine
has the opportunity to establish from the beginning, a strong process of faculty control of
and regular assessment of this general education curriculum to ensure that it is
accomplishing the eight essential goals.
1P2, S. Program learning objectives are developed as part of the newly revised Program
Review Process. A systematic process appears to be in place to conduct the reviews at
six-year intervals for each program and submit revised or new learning objectives that
include short- and long-term plans for future improvement and changes to the academic
programs.
1P3, S. New programs and courses may be initiated through various means, including
initiatives by deans, faculty, inquiries from current and prospective students, employers,
and by monitoring competing institutions. Proposed programs and courses are then
processed through a well-developed process using forms and groups, including the
Curriculum and Standards Committee, the provost, registrar, and faculty as a whole.
1P4, O. Benedictine evaluates employment market needs through the new degree and
certificate program development process. It remains unclear as to how the university
actually designs responsive academic programming that balances student needs and
learning goals with the realities of the employment market. Processes governing
engaged learning experiences prior to graduation appear well established; however, it is
not clear how those processes take into account the realities of the employment market.
February 19, 2015
12
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
1P5, S. The Benedictine catalog stipulates incoming undergraduate and graduate
student expectations across multiple criteria, including the ACT, GPA and TOEFL.
Admissions review also considers the applicant’s preparation and acceptance at the
individual level. With approval of the Curriculum and Standards Committee, academic
departments and faculty apply preparation requirements in the development of new
programs.
1P6, S. Benedictine communicates preparation requirements and learning objectives for
programs, courses and degrees through traditional means such as the website, catalog,
and in program brochures; additionally, a New Student Advising Center works with the
Admissions Office to help incoming freshmen and transfer students understand
requirements.
1P7, S. Benedictine helps students select programs that match their needs, interests,
and abilities through a combination of offices and programs, including the New Student
Advising Center, program advisors, basic skills placement testing, BenULive, the Career
Development Office, and Desire2Learn.
1P8, S. The innovative Emerging Scholars Learning Community provides support for atrisk students who demonstrate potential but do not meet admissions requirements; the
Community enables them to achieve admission and acculturate to a college learning
environment. The high retention rate (82%), indicates success in serving its target
population well.
1P9, O. While the listing of new and varied delivery methods of classroom instruction to
address differences in students’ learning styles is comprehensive, the process by which
student differences are identified is not explained. It is important to describe this
process and how these different modes of delivery might meet students’ varied learning
styles.
1P10, S. Benedictine has a clear understanding of special student group needs (e.g.,
adult learners, students with demonstrated learning disabilities, student veterans, etc.)
and addresses them appropriately, actively and systematically.
1P11, S. The university’s Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence (CTLE),
February 19, 2015
13
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
established in 2008, provides data and resources to assist faculty in curricular design,
pedagogical improvement and coordinates faculty and advisors with students; the
Center communicates best practices in the classroom, including academic honesty
policies for students and technological resources. Student evaluations of courses have a
clear place within the process of faculty evaluation.
1P12, S. Benedictine provides an effective and efficient course delivery system that
meets the needs of its students by offering courses in various formats: face-to-face,
online, and hybrid. The Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence and an
instructional designer assist in the process of course development and assure a level of
consistency among courses regardless of format.
1P13, S. A six-year program review process, which involves a three-year action plan and
a year-end report for each program, feeds into and supports the systematized program
review process. Multiple internal committees have the authority and responsibility to
oversee and review program changes resulting from the review process to ensure
academic standards and learning outcomes are being met in all academic programs.
1P14, S. If the review process results in the recommendation of major revisions or
discontinuation of a program, the program must undergo a hearing before its College
Curriculum Committee; additionally, if the program impacts other colleges, it must
undergo a hearing by the Undergraduate Curriculum and Standards Committee.
Committee reports are forwarded to the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs.
1P15, S. Benedictine addresses learning support needs of students beginning with
admission and continues to provide support services throughout students’ matriculation;
the Early Warning Notice system enables faculty to notify support personnel when
services may be indicated. A variety of learning support needs are available to faculty
through the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence, including a new faculty
mentoring program, adjunct faculty services, library services, the Jurica-Suchy Museum,
and specialized software.
1P16, O. The Career Development Office creates a four-year plan of co-curricular
activities for each student that involves co-curricular learning goals. The process by
February 19, 2015
14
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
which the co-curricular development goals are aligned with curricular learning objectives,
however, is unclear.
1P17, O. While the application for graduation and the subsequent degree audit process
assures that students have completed course requirements for a degree, these
processes do not assess whether students have mastered the learning outcomes for the
degrees they are awarded. It is critical that the university ensures that students have
met expectations for the degrees they are awarded and documents the process.
1P18, OO. While the creation of a university-wide Assessment Task Force is an
important step in systematizing assessment, Benedictine has uneven processes for
assessing student learning across its three campuses and multiple venues for course
delivery.
It is important that the university develop a process, which has full faculty
input and support, which is uniform across the geographical and technological extension
of Benedictine classrooms, and which is data-driven, objective and quantitative in its
measures. Benedictine is encouraged to devote the resources (both financial and
human) requisite for developing a system which can capture the widely dispersed data
across its campuses and course delivery systems.
1R1, O. Benedictine collects a wide and standard set of data to measure students’
learning and development, ranging from IDEA results to NSSE data. Although
Benedictine uses a Program Assessment Matrix (PAM) to connect program-specific
learning objectives to general education objectives, efforts to develop a university-wide
assessment plan seem to be limited.
1R2, O. Benedictine has excellent results in student retention for at-risk, first generation
college students, based in part on its high-impact practices, which occur in a very high
percentage of courses. While not pegged precisely to general education and programspecific learning outcomes, and limited to only one year of data, comparative results
from the NSSE suggest that Benedictine is doing a good job of imparting knowledge and
skills to its students.
In addition, instructors choose metrics to measure their students’ learning. The College
of Science uses a program assessment matrix to assess learning with IDEA objectives.
Comparative IDEA data would be useful to allow reviewers to determine whether
February 19, 2015
15
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
students are perceiving this success.
However, Benedictine has an opportunity to develop a systematic assessment process
which will provide baseline measures which will identify targets for improvement in
courses and programs by which Benedictine may measure course and program
performance.
1R3, O. While Benedictine appears to be accomplishing its program-specific objectives
based on the IDEA data they provide, there is no trend data beyond 2013. In none of
the overall survey areas do their courses rise above the third quintile in excellence,
which by definition makes their evaluations average against the national data. It is
unclear that Benedictine is able to demonstrate performance results for specific learning
objectives beyond individualized ones selected by instructors.
1R4, O. Benedictine’s departments and programs have data collection practices in
place, but the university has the opportunity to centralize the collection of data across
the university related to student success in acquiring knowledge and skills required by
employers and to address problems in their programs. The data provided are somewhat
contradictory: for instance, 97% of nursing graduates are satisfied or very satisfied, but
only 71% (assuming the 41% and 30% statistics are distinct) believe the program
prepared them more than adequately or exceptionally well. This 26% gap needs to be
explained and narrowed.
1R5, O. Benedictine tracks very closely to peer institutions, and in many cases is above
benchmark. However, minimal data are reported and are limited to 2013. Benedictine
has an opportunity to expand and systematize data collection on a regular basis.
1R6, O. Although limited comparative data are available, Benedictine appears to have
an opportunity here to improve the accomplishment of its general education and
program-specific outcomes measured by the NSSE and IDEA data and detailed in 1R2.
1R5, O. Some of Benedictine’s works (e.g., high impact practices) are good and seem
to have considerable impact on student success and retention, while more generally
IDEA and NSSE data do not suggest the same level of significant success across all
general education and program-specific learning objectives. A more systematic process
February 19, 2015
16
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
of gathering, analyzing and interpreting student success data and feeding it back into
program and course development needs to be developed, a process which seems to
have only just begun at Benedictine.
1I1, O. Although efforts are being made, as suggested in 1R6, the process of developing
a mature and effective system for measuring and improving student learning success
has only just begun at Benedictine. Making certain the human and financial resources
necessary to fully develop and disseminate such a process throughout the university (in
all its campuses and venues and modes of delivery) will be essential for continued
improvement and success in this category.
1I2, O. Although limited to 2013 and absent sufficient comparative information, both the
NSSE and the 3YAP provide examples of Benedictine’s initial stage of disseminating
survey results and building a culture of improving performance in helping students learn.
AQIP Category 2: Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives. This category addresses
the processes that contribute to the achievement of the institution’s major objectives that
complement student learning and fulfill other portions of its mission. Depending on the
institution’s character, it examines the institution's processes and systems related to
identification of other distinctive objectives, alignment of other distinctive objectives, faculty
and staff roles, assessment and review of objectives, measures, analysis of results, and
efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems Appraisal Team identified various
strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category 2.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 2. Benedictine seeks to fulfill its
mission and distinguish itself by promoting its Roman Catholic and Benedictine mission and
identity. To this end, it has created its Center for Mission and Identity (CMI), as well as a
Board of Trustees Mission Integration Committee. In Academic Affairs, the university seeks
to accomplish its distinct mission through a new inquiry curriculum, while campus-wide
initiatives and external community endeavors have been undertaken.
The unique mission of being a Catholic and Benedictine institution is integrated into the
elements of service and scholarship, evidenced by CMI, new curriculum, Global Village, and
February 19, 2015
17
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
the National Center for Online Adult Learning. Both elements of this unique mission appear
to be strengths and are integrated and communicated to the broader audience of
stakeholders through the Assistant to the President for Mission Integration.
Benedictine collected data from the Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC) survey of faculty and staff
and has used the data as a guide to address their service learning needs. Using the
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) survey, the institution has been able to
assess its efforts to engage students.
2P1, S. Benedictine has an exemplary integration of mission and identity into its noninstructional objectives. It has well enunciated its Catholic, Benedictine and broader
values, and has programming in place to further those values across the university not
only in curricular but also co-curricular activities (athletics, service learning,
sustainability, etc.) in conjunction with multiple and diverse external partners.
Benedictine continues to update and demonstrate how it has spread responsibility
across its colleges and campuses for non-instructional processes. This spreading of
responsibility for non-instructional processes is designed to align closely with
Benedictine’s strategic mission and vision
2P2, O. Benedictine notes that it listens to and seeks feedback from its external
stakeholders in determining and designing its non-instructional objectives for students,
with voices heard from across the institution at all levels, as well as from the broader
community. It is not clear, however, what processes Benedictine uses in gathering that
information and how the institution uses that information to determine its major noninstructional objectives for those groups. Benedictine has an opportunity to increase
service to stakeholders through a systematic process by which it monitors the internal
and external environments.
2P3, S. Benedictine appears to have a well-developed and diverse set of channels to
disseminate and communicate the mission and non-instructional objectives through
internal and external email, social media (Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, etc.), through
mailers, distribution lists, newspapers, alumni magazine, marketing brochures, and
through the university website. Additionally, university representatives attend and
February 19, 2015
18
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
participate in community activities and serve on boards and task forces to share the
university vision.
2P4, O. While Benedictine states many constituencies are involved in clarifying and
assessing distinctive objectives, primary responsibility for approving instruments lies with
the Board of Trustees and the vice presidents. It is not clear, however, that
assessments and reviews of the appropriateness and value of the objectives are
conducted systematically.
2P5, O. Benedictine does not indicate clearly that there is a formal process or body
responsible for handling faculty and staff needs in general. Benedictine has an
opportunity to establish a more systematic approach to align and integrate full-time and
adjunct faculty and staff needs into the distinctive objectives’ design and improvement
processes.
2P6, O. Benedictine clearly articulates how it incorporates information from regular
assessment and multi-layered advisory consultation into needs adjustment, and
recognizes the university has an opportunity to implement a systematic approach for
identifying needs.
2R1, O. Although a number of measures are identified for use in tracking
accomplishments of non-instructional objectives, it is not apparent that data are
analyzed to any significant degree other than the data obtained through the Office of
Alumni Development. Benedictine has an opportunity to clarify measures of institutional
effectiveness in distinctive objectives and design ways to measure that effectiveness.
2R2, O. Although multiple non-instructional objectives concerning retention, enrollment,
faith-related student groups, etc. are being met, the university has an opportunity to
clarify measures of institutional effectiveness in distinctive objectives and to design ways
to measure that effectiveness.
2R3, O. The institution compares favorably in the area of High Impact Practices as
reported in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2013 Survey.
Benedictine could benefit from identifying data beyond NSSE and benchmark institutions
(i.e., athletic league members or comparable institutions) against which to measure.
February 19, 2015
19
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
2R4, S. Benedictine’s non-instructional objectives are directly related to its mission and
strengthen both its educational programming and its relationships with the surrounding
communities which it serves. Furthermore, key objectives appear to align perfectly with
the Catholic heritage and the overall mission of the institution.
2I1, O. Benedictine lists multiple achievements which connect to the faith-based mission
of the institution, as well as incorporating new personnel into the role of mission
integration; it is not clear, however, that these improvements were made based upon
data.
2I2, O. Benedictine emphasizes stewardship is highly valued, but does not make
reference to any improvements made in this area. Benedictine has the opportunity to
speak more specifically about how its culture and infrastructure help promote noninstructional objectives and how its identity as a Catholic and Benedictine school are
formally filtered through these objectives.
AQIP Category 3: Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ Needs. This
category examines how your institution works actively to understand student and other
stakeholder needs. It examines your institution's processes and systems related to student
and stakeholder identification; student and stakeholder requirements; analysis of student
and stakeholder needs; relationship building with students and stakeholders; complaint
collection, analysis, and resolution; determining satisfaction of students and stakeholders;
measures; analysis of results; and efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems
Appraisal Team identified various strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category
3.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 3. Benedictine has implemented
numerous methods to build relationships with students to foster retention, loyalty, positive
word-of-mouth, and to attract prospective students. The institution uses national data
sources in the field of higher education, including the National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE) survey to monitor student satisfaction, as well as outreach to local
professionals to identify the needs of the community. Benedictine recently hired a Director
February 19, 2015
20
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
of Institutional Research to help with this process. The institution also created an Improving
Student Success and Retention Project and has sought consultant advice to support
retention initiatives beyond the AQIP Action Projects.
The institution is aware of the need to develop ways to assess the effectiveness of its efforts
to build relationships with students and stakeholders. It may be a challenge for the
institution to segment and address the distinct stakeholder needs from so many additional
and diverse locations.
3P1, O. Benedictine uses several methods to identify the changing needs of their
student groups. However, it is not apparent that there is a systematic process in place
that is used to aggregate, analyze, and identify patterns and trends that could provide
important input when developing and selecting appropriate courses of action.
3P2, O. Benedictine has identified a large number of initiatives designed to establish,
maintain and strengthen relationships with students (both face-to-face and online). An
important opportunity exists, however, to enhance relationships with Benedictine’s
growing enrollment of graduate and working professional students.
3P3, O. The university uses various means to collect and analyze information on the
needs of key stakeholder groups, but it is unclear how needs are prioritized or how
Benedictine selects courses of action based upon the data.
3P4, S. Relationship building with key stakeholders is a priority of Benedictine as
evidenced by the many outreach and support programs it has developed to build and
maintain these connections. Benedictine is encouraged to build on this strength by
expanding its stakeholder base to include such constituencies as feeder schools,
employers, grantors, and city and state government agencies.
3P5, O. The Enrollment Office collects and analyzes data on the changing needs of
incoming students. However, there is an opportunity to use market surveys, the
Occupational Outlook Handbook, analyses of state and regional job markets, and
prospective employer surveys to identify potential students and opportunities for new
educational programs.
February 19, 2015
21
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
3P6, O. Benedictine has a systematic process, managed by the Office of Student Life,
for receiving, documenting, and resolving student complaints. A similar process for
addressing concerns from its other stakeholders is not described.
3R1, O. Benedictine provides information on how it determines the satisfaction of its
students and parents, but measures of satisfaction of other major stakeholders are not
addressed. An opportunity exists to identify these constituencies, establish processes for
gathering data, and use the data to increase overall stakeholder satisfaction.
3R2, O. The data indicate that Benedictine’s student satisfaction ranks below national
averages among Catholic colleges and universities. The institution has an opportunity to
identify the sources of student dissatisfaction and address them.
3R3, OO. Benedictine recognizes several areas where it is underperforming on the
NSSE. These areas provide an outstanding opportunity to identify the causes of these
results and identify strategies to remedy them.
3R4, 3R5, OO. Performance results for building relationships with key stakeholders and
stakeholder satisfaction are critical pieces of evidence that the institution is
accomplishing its mission. Benedictine reports minimal data regarding performance and
results related to stakeholders. The institution has an opportunity to clarify key
stakeholders, identify measures of satisfaction, establish processes for gathering data
and use such data to increase stakeholder satisfaction.
3R6, OO. Benedictine identifies multiple areas of underperformance on the NSSE
without any discussion of how underperforming in such areas as advising, technology
support, internships, and field experiences might be addressed. It is critical to identify
the causes of these results and develop strategies to remedy them.
3I1, O. Benedictine reports several improvements in this category, but there is no
indication that the improvements were data-driven, nor how, if at all, the changes
improved student and stakeholder relations. The institution needs to clarify key
stakeholders, identify measures of satisfaction, establish processes for gathering data
and use the data to identify opportunities for improvement.
February 19, 2015
22
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
3I2, O. Benedictine reports many characteristics of a culture of improvement, but it has
not clearly identified systematic processes which evidence a culture that actively
identifies and addresses ways to enhance stakeholder and student needs.
AQIP Category 4: Valuing People. This category explores the institution’s commitment to
the development of its employees since the efforts of all faculty, staff, and administrators are
required for institutional success. It examines the institution's processes and systems related
to work and job environment; workforce needs; training initiatives; job competencies and
characteristics; recruitment, hiring, and retention practices; work processes and activities;
training and development; personnel evaluation; recognition, reward, compensation, and
benefits; motivation factors; satisfaction, health and safety, and well-being; measures;
analysis of results; and efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems Appraisal
Team identified various strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category 4.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 4. Benedictine reports that its
processes for valuing people exhibit a wide range of maturity levels. The area that needs
attention is that of regularly monitoring processes by systematic data. Benedictine reports
that it has several programs and events in place that focus on valuing all members of the
university community and notes that it has included in its strategic plan the goal of
identifying a formal process for assessing faculty and staff satisfaction and using the results
to plan improvements. Benedictine notes that it has received positive feedback from the
Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) survey of full-time undergraduate faculty
satisfaction, as well as identification of areas where improvement is needed.
Given the proliferation of locations and Benedictine’s special mission and identity, it is
important that Benedictine consider faculty development opportunities for adjunct faculty
and the role that full-time faculty play in instructional and curricular oversight.
The university has established a hiring process that is designed to attract potential
candidates that possess the credentials, skills, and values they require; newly hired
employees are oriented to the history, mission, and values of the Catholic and Benedictine
tradition. New tenure-track faculty participate in a year-long New Faculty Mentoring
Program designed to provide an appreciation for the university’s culture, history, mission,
February 19, 2015
23
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
values and Benedictine heritage. Additionally, a variety of programs and opportunities for
faculty and staff are designed to enhance their productivity, develop skills pedagogically,
and engage students in academic research.
The results of the HERI survey indicate several areas where the institution exceeds its peer
groups; the institution has addressed those areas where results are slightly lower through
the establishment of campus initiatives.
While Benedictine collects a range of data, the institution may benefit from a more focused
effort to use comparative and recent data to inform their decision-making.
4P1, OO. Benedictine does not discuss any process whereby the appropriate credentials
for a given position (apart from a terminal degree for faculty) are determined prior to
advertisement or hire. Given the large percentage of adjunct faculty at Benedictine
(75%), it is important to describe in detail how these credentials are identified. The
university has an opportunity to articulate the process through which they identify the
specific skills, credentials and values required for faculty.
4P2, O. The institution follows a standard process for screening applicants and hiring for
open positions, but it is not clear how organizational values are integrated into recruiting
and hiring processes.
4P3, O. The Portfolio does not include a description of Benedictine’s approach to
recruiting, hiring, and retaining employees. The opportunity lies in making clear what is
almost certainly already in place at Benedictine.
4P4, S. Benedictine has a good system of new employee orientation. The institution has
an annual retreat for employee orientation which includes an Abbey visit. Faculty and
employee orientations, monthly tours, and faculty mentoring programs are evidence of
ongoing commitment to employee orientation and integration of the history, mission and
values for all employees.
4P5, O. The Portfolio does not include a well-described and systematically evaluated
process to explain how Benedictine plans for changes in personnel.
February 19, 2015
24
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
4P6, O. Benedictine acknowledges the institution is in the process of reviewing the
PeopleSoft system to enhance processes. It is not evident that a formal work system
that contributes to organizational productivity, daily work flow, communication among
departments, and employee satisfaction has been created.
4P7, S. Benedictine seems to have a very well-developed and comprehensive set of
guidelines governing employee behavior, which demands ethical practices across all
aspects of the workplace, as well as for students. This set includes a long list of
programs, processes, policies, and offices that help to ensure the ethical practices of
faculty, staff, and students. Relevant examples include the Faculty, Employee, and
Student Handbooks, Conflict of Interest Disclosure information, a Compliance Office, a
confidential telephone helpline for reporting unethical behavior, and an Institutional
Review Board.
4P8, S. Benedictine seems to have a mature and data-driven strategy for determining
employee training needs as they develop and change and for developing effective
methods for delivering that training in a timely manner, especially for mission-critical
areas. It is clear from the Systems Portfolio how academic unit and IT leadership identify
training needs.
4P9, S. Benedictine relies on several different systematic processes for identifying the
training needs of internal stakeholders and for aligning individual performance and
development goals with the strategic directions of the university.
4P10, S. Benedictine’s performance management model demonstrates a systematic
approach to improving employee performance through ongoing feedback and goalsetting. This model includes setting goals for the coming year as well as evaluating
performance in the preceding year.
4P11, O. Although Benedictine lists various awards given to faculty and other
employees, it is not clear how it designs its employee recognition, rewards,
compensation, and benefit systems to align with its objectives for instructional and noninstructional programs and services.
February 19, 2015
25
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
4P12, O. Benedictine describes a well-developed system for allowing employees to
offer feedback on the workplace and for coordinating employees’ personal career goals
with the needs of the institution. It is unclear, however, how the university takes action
when information is gleaned from these general strategies.
4P13, S. Benedictine provides for faculty and staff satisfaction through its new Employee
Assistance Program, and it provides various training opportunities to assure that safety
and security are maintained on campus.
4R1, OO. The institution engages an outside consulting firm to evaluate salary, benefits,
and the quantitative awards given to recognize individuals for service to the college;
these data, however, do not measure efforts toward valuing people, nor are they a
measure of the impact these efforts have on institutional morale.
4R2, O. While there is clear historical evidence indicating that the majority of employees
were satisfied with their employment, Benedictine administered the HERI survey in
2004-05 and 2011; current results are not available to indicate overall job satisfaction.
4R3, OO. Measures to gauge productivity and effectiveness of faculty and staff in
helping to achieve Benedictine’s goals have not been established. The evidence
provided fails to link faculty, staff, and administrative productivity to Benedictine
achieving the institution’s goals.
4R4, O. Benedictine identifies areas of poor performance on the HERI Faculty Survey; it
has begun to examine the results and address the lower percentage of satisfaction in
some areas. Benedictine has an opportunity to further inculcate mission in the faculty,
whose dissatisfaction with the quality of students is at odds with the goals of Benedictine
to educate first-generation college students from at-risk backgrounds.
4I1, S. The institution clearly describes a number of improvements; these include adjunct
faculty benefits and acts of employee appreciation.
4I2, O. Benedictine demonstrates past successes; the institution does not explain how
those successes are connected to the culture and infrastructure at the university.
February 19, 2015
26
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
AQIP Category 5: Leading and Communicating. This category addresses how the
institution’s leadership and communication structures, networks, and processes guide
planning, decision-making, seeking future opportunities, and building and sustaining a
learning environment. It examines the institution's processes and systems related to leading
activities, communicating activities, alignment of leadership system practices, institutional
values and expectations, direction-setting, use of data, analysis of results, leadership
development and sharing, succession planning, and efforts to continuously improve these
areas. The Systems Appraisal Team identified various strengths and opportunities for
Benedictine for Category 5.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 5. In general, Benedictine has an
established, data-driven decision-making processes whereby various constituencies of the
university are involved, and major decisions are made by the president, provost, and
executive vice president with oversight by the Board of Trustees (BOT). The institution and
its leaders set direction consistent with the university’s mission, vision, and values through
the university’s strategic plan. A variety of leading and communicating processes are
described, and results are documented. The institution appears to have a succession plan at
both staff and administrative levels.
Collaborative decisions originate from the President’s office with BOT oversight. There is
clear evidence of ongoing leadership development using action plans.
5P1, S. Benedictine’s mission and identity are clearly rooted in the Catholic Benedictine
tradition of the founders at St. Procopius Abbey. Authority over review, interpretation
and implementation of mission and identity resides with the Board of Trustees through
its Mission Integration Committee, which reviews both every three years.
5P2, O. Benedictine’s Mission Integration Committee of the Board of Trustees is
primarily responsible for reviewing the university’s mission and core values, and with
setting targets and reviewing actions. A more inclusive process by which the Board
could gather information from internal and external stakeholders would assure alignment
of goals and priorities with the mission and vision.
February 19, 2015
27
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
5P3, O. Although Benedictine employs an inclusive review process in its planning, it
would appear that leading and communicating is largely a “top down” process. By way
of example, the provost sets priorities for Academic Affairs and then meets with students
and faculty to discuss his plans. Similarly, the Office of Institutional Research created an
Institutional Effectiveness Plan, which was then shared with faculty and staff. There is
an opportunity to better engage stakeholders earlier in this process.
5P4, S. Benedictine monitors trend analyses, conducts market research, and engages in
professional networking when developing new programs and initiatives to ensure that
these reinforce the emphasis on student learning.
5P5, S. Benedictine involves task forces comprised of a broad representation of the
institution to study and make recommendations regarding various issues and
opportunities confronting the university. Although inclusion of a flowchart would help to
clarify this process, this description of task forces suggests a collaborative and
consensus-driven model of leadership.
5P6, O. Benedictine has a wide range of data upon which it draws in order to make
decisions about the operations and possibilities confronting the university. It is not clear,
however, how Benedictine uses these data in decision-making processes.
5P7, S. Benedictine describes a thorough and well-developed system for communicating
information to employees throughout the university with multiple opportunities for
feedback and for obtaining and disseminating information to and from the university
community.
5P8, S. The Center for Mission and Identity (CMI) is primarily responsible for
communicating the mission and identity of the school to internal and external
constituencies. The CMI has multiple communication channels available to accomplish
this task, and houses all relevant documents on the CMI website.
5P9, SS. Benedictine invests significant resources into identifying and cultivating leaders
from among its employees, including training for new department chairs, cultivation of
women for leadership, and half-time “shadowing” assignments in the year preceding the
commencement of certain high-importance positions.
February 19, 2015
28
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
5P10, S. Benedictine has a clear set of organizational rules for identifying top leadership
who will understand and share the Catholic and Benedictine identity of the university.
Mid-level leadership also has a clearly identified process for replacing departing
employees in an orderly and predictable manner.
5R1, O. Benedictine appears to have a well-developed employee evaluation process
which includes all faculty, staff, and administrators. However, more clearly identifying
critical performance measures and targets would enable the university to establish
baseline measures and track performance results, which are an important part of the
performance evaluation process.
5R2, O. While Benedictine is able to report several accomplishments, including dramatic
growth, the results it has included for leading and communicating are limited to the
evaluation of email and social media communication. While these are important
measures, it is important to identify other systems and processes to measure leading
and communicating.
5R3, O. Benedictine recognizes that there are opportunities to improve its process of
communication with students, especially first-year students, whose satisfaction is below
that of competitor institutions.
5I1, O. While Benedictine has referenced several areas in which it has made impressive
improvements likely to lead to improved effectiveness and efficiency, few of these
improvements relate directly to leading and communicating. It is important for the
university to identify systems and processes for leading and communicating, establish
baseline measures, and to set targets for improvement in this category.
5I2, O. Benedictine shows efforts to effectively lead and communicate, but
communication structures, networks, and processes which guide planning, decisionmaking, seeking future opportunities, and building and sustaining a learning environment
are not clearly articulated and seem to be minimally measured.
February 19, 2015
29
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
AQIP Category 6: Supporting Institutional Operations. This category addresses the
variety of institutional support processes that help to provide an environment in which
learning can thrive. It examines the institution's processes and systems related to student
support, administrative support, identification of needs, contribution to student learning and
accomplishing other distinctive objectives, day-to-day operations, use of data, measures,
analysis of results, and efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems Appraisal
Team identified various strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category 6.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 6. Benedictine reports having
reached an aligned maturity level wherein administration and senior level executive staff are
involved in university planning and decision making, engaging with key stakeholders as
appropriate.
The area in which Benedictine believes it has made the greatest improvement is in
documenting support processes to encourage knowledge, innovation and empowerment.
The institution recognizes that it does a significantly better job of documenting the processes
to support institutional operations.
The recent introduction of learning communities indicates that elements of shared
governance are providing input into support processes. Advisory committee input regarding
technology and alumni services reinforces this point concerning shared governance.
Benedictine uses formal and informal methods to identify and respond to changing student
needs. Processes for a number of institutional operations are clearly described. It appears
that support needs for online and off-campus students are taken into consideration as part
of improvement efforts. Several safety and security processes are in place.
Nationally normed surveys as well as specific departmentally designed surveys are used to
evaluate and assess the services provided. Process owners gather information to help
determine process improvement requirements; administrators and key stakeholders use
cross-campus collaboration to create change on measurable action items often times
identified through three-year action plans.
6P1, S. Benedictine reports using multiple formal and informal methods to identify the
February 19, 2015
30
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
changing needs of students and stakeholders (e.g., NSSE, internal complaint process,
Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence, student and faculty governance).
6P2, O. Benedictine relies on informal processes of employee evaluations and program
division initiatives to identify administrative, faculty, and support service personnel
needs. This presents an opportunity to systematize, rationalize, and quantify analysis of
administrative, faculty, and support service needs to more efficiently use resources.
6P3, S. Benedictine has built upon its previous strength and continues to introduce new
processes, classes, training and emergency call boxes to enhance the personal safety
and security of all employees.
6P4, S. Several formal and informal policies are in place to hold everyone accountable
for student, administrative, and institutional support on a daily basis. This is monitored
through regular staff meetings designed to update information, build community, and
share goals.
6P5, S. Benedictine uses PeopleSoft software to share support processes, documents,
and problems. This provides communication channels through which Enrollment,
Athletics, Financial Aid, the new Student Advising Center, and Student Life can
communicate. Online chat opportunities to support patrons are also used to foster
communication among all constituencies both on and off the campus.
6R1, O. The Emerging Scholars Program was implemented with one group of students,
but the data-driven decision to do so was not explained, nor does there appear to be a
regular, ongoing process to collect measures from administrative, student, and
institutional support services.
6R2, S. The results given for student support services processes are impressive,
demonstrating a substantial increase in the services offered to and utilized by the
students in the areas of learning, safety and health over the past several years.
6R3, O. While positive performance results for eProcurement, Ben Alert communication
system, and library processes are provided, the institution has an opportunity to identify
and secure results for other administrative support services as well to clarify processes
for support services, identify measures, and collect relevant data points.
February 19, 2015
31
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
6R4, O. Benedictine collects data related to student, administrative, and support
services; while gathering data is essential, it is important to turn the data into actionable
information to advance the quality improvement of the institution.
6R5, O. Other than the 2013 NSSE survey, the institution provides little comparative
data for this category. Benchmarks are one of the important tools for evaluation. The
institution should identify peer institutions and data points with which it may be regularly
benchmarked such as members of the Independent Council of Colleges, IPEDS, or faithbased higher-education institutions.
6I1, S. It is evident that Benedictine has made advances in its use of data to drive
improvement in student support and retention over the past several years. While results
are not yet comprehensive, the institution is moving toward a more data-driven decisionmaking culture.
6I2, O. Benedictine describes its campus as an environment rich in communication and
information sharing; however it does not provide sufficient evidence to support this
statement. It also does not demonstrate how its culture and infrastructure contribute to
selecting processes and setting targets for continued improvement
AQIP Category 7: Measuring Effectiveness. This category examines how the institution
collects, analyzes, and uses information to manage itself and to drive performance
improvement. It examines the institution's processes and systems related to collection,
storage, management, and use of information and data both at the institutional and
departmental/unit levels. It considers institutional measures of effectiveness; information and
data alignment with institutional needs and directions; comparative information and data;
analysis of information and data; effectiveness of information system and processes;
measures; analysis of results; and efforts to continuously improve these areas. The Systems
Appraisal Team identified various strengths and opportunities for Benedictine for Category
7.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 7. Benedictine describes itself as
having a data-driven, decision-making culture, as evidenced by a variety of reports,
February 19, 2015
32
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
participation in multiple surveys and use of comparative data to drive planning and
improvement efforts. A flowchart illustrates how information is integrated through the
institution.
The recently created Office of Institutional Research oversees the selection, management
and integration of data collection across campus; there does not, however, appear to be a
method for evaluating the overall performance of the institution. Effectiveness of the data
collection and distribution process seems somewhat fragmented. A set of Key Performance
Indicators has been identified as critical components of the academic programs and is used
to monitor and track progress. The Fact Book, introduced in 2012, is used to communicate
internally.
7P1, O. While Benedictine clearly describes the capabilities of PeopleSoft, it is unclear
how data are selected, managed, and distributed. For example, a comprehensive set of
measures to permit an understanding of progress toward the strategic direction of the
University is lacking. Without measures aligned with strategy, Benedictine may be
inhibited from gaining an understanding of whether its actions are producing the desired
results and whether the institution is moving toward realization of its vision.
7P2, O. Although general information, such as enrollment and fundraising data are
collected, it is not clear how improvement opportunities are identified and action taken to
meet the changing needs of students and other key stakeholders.
7P3, O. While the university describes which data are collected, it is not clear how
Benedictine determines the needs of departments and units related to the collection,
storage, and accessibility of data. There is limited evidence that performance measures
are derived from the university’s needs nor whether they provide critical data and
information about key processes and results.
7P4, S. Benedictine has processes in place to collect and analyze a number of
measures of organizational performance. The University Planning Council uses data in
its planning; deans and the president widely distribute performance results.
7P5, O. Processes and methods for the collecting comparative data do not appear to be
February 19, 2015
33
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
developed. Although a few benchmarking initiatives are evident (IPEDS and IDEA),
underlying processes to support a systematic comparative data approach are lacking.
These processes could include an approach to identify 1) what comparative data needs
exist, 2) how to choose comparative data sources, 3) what data collection methods to
use, 4) how to analyze the data collected, and 5) how to use the data that are collected.
Without regular collection of comparative data, Benedictine may be limited in its ability to
understand competitor performance and direction, to improve its processes, to identify
action plans needed to achieve higher performance, and to set targets for improvement.
7P6, S. Benedictine provides several examples of how it ensures that departmental use
of data and information are aligned with institutional goals for instructional and noninstructional purposes, including the regular review of both the data and resulting
applications at the institutional level.
7P7, S. Benedictine uses BMC Footprints service desk software to monitor timeliness,
accuracy, and security of information systems processes. The PeopleSoft system
provides an additional level of security. Data owners adhere to established protocol
when entering data. Access control also contributes to security.
7R1, O. While various departments have systems in place to monitor performance, it is
not clear what measures are collected and analyzed to determine the effectiveness of
the system for information and knowledge management.
7R2, O. No evidence is cited for Measuring Effectiveness and how it meets the
university’s needs in accomplishing its mission and goals. The university may have an
opportunity to build a more comprehensive system to accomplish this and provide
accurate measures of its performance.
7R3, O. While participation in the NCAA pilot program for athletics is described, no
results are reported for the university’s performance in Measuring Effectiveness
compared with other higher education institutions or organizations outside of higher
education.
7I1, O. While the addition of the Office of Institutional Research is a significant
accomplishment and demonstrates the emphasis towards an expansion of the
February 19, 2015
34
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
measurement architecture and data-driven decision making, there are gaps that need to
be addressed. Specifically, gaps exist in the areas of engaging stakeholders in the
discussion of important measures and establishing benchmarks.
7I2, O. While the recent establishment of an Office for Institutional Research reinforces
Benedictine’s commitment to measuring its performance, there is little evidence that the
university has developed a culture where establishing measures and targets, collecting
and analyzing data, and identifying opportunities for improvement are the norm.
AQIP Category 8: Planning Continuous Improvement. This category examines the
institution’s planning processes and how strategies and action plans are helping to achieve
the institution’s mission and vision. It examines coordination and alignment of strategies and
action plans; measures and performance projections; resource needs; faculty, staff, and
administrator capabilities; analysis of performance projections and results; and efforts to
continuously improve these areas. The Systems Appraisal Team identified various strengths
and opportunities for Benedictine for Category 8.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 8. Benedictine reports that processes
in the area of planning continuous improvement exhibit a wide range of maturity levels. They point to
its Action Plan, Year-End Report, Program Review Process, University Planning Council and
Provost’s Council as systematic and aligned. Processes related to CIRP, NSSE, and HERI are
systematic and moving toward alignment. The AQIP process helps Benedictine continue to identify
both long- and short-term goals which are clearly identifiable (Fig. 8.1). It is not clear how the role of
the Operations Council (VPs) is integrated into the strategic planning process, if at all.
Processes needing improvement include sharing survey results among institutional units
and setting performance targets based on survey results. Budgeting and financial
management are aligned and integrated.
8P1, S. Strategic planning is an inclusive process led by the University Planning Council.
Several task forces carry out plans and implement improvements. A 3-Year Action Plan
(3YAP) project engages academic and operational units in planning; a newly revised
program review process is also key in the planning process.
February 19, 2015
35
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
8P2, S. Long- and short-term strategies were developed through a university-wide
planning process with input from department chairs, program directors, academic deans,
and vice presidents. Strategies are aligned with AQIP Categories.
8P3, S. Benedictine describes a clear, concise process for developing action plans from
its strategies. It organizes its strategic goals around the AQIP Categories.
8P4, S. University Planning, Operational and Provost’s Councils coordinate and drive
high-level strategic planning. Task forces are chartered as required to carry out action
plans.
8P5, S. The University Planning Council and Provost’s Council provide
recommendations to the President with respect to defining objectives and setting targets
for the University’s Strategic Plan. Targets are established by using information collected
from a variety of sources. These include, but are not limited to, CIRP, NSSE, and the
HERI.
8P6, S. The 3YAPs link resource allocation with unit goals and align action plans with
the University’s Strategic Plan. Additionally, the linkage aligns plans with budgets and
fiscal year operations.
8P7, O. It is not apparent that any risk analysis is accomplished during development of
the strategic plan so that a clear understanding could be established as to the
importance of certain aspects of the plan or the ability of Benedictine to actually execute
the plan. For example, it is not clear that a defined approach was used to prioritize goals
that are included in the 3YAPs.
8P8, O. The methods for developing and nurturing faculty, staff, and administrator
capabilities to handle changing institutional strategies and action plans appear to be
informal, reactive and less structured than may be necessary to address future
opportunities and challenges facing the institution.
8R1, O. Although the university tracks its progress with accomplishing short-term and
long-term goals, measures to demonstrate the effectiveness of the planning processes
and systems do not appear to have been established.
8R2, O. Although enrollment and retention results are in place, a great deal more is
February 19, 2015
36
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
needed to allow the leadership team to understand if the strategic planning process is
successful in producing better outcomes.
8R3, S. Benedictine has short-term targets and plans for improvement.
8R4, O. Benedictine provides minimal comparative data to demonstrate how
effectiveness in strategic planning processes compares with other higher education
organizations or those outside of higher education.
8R5, O. The university reports anecdotal evidence that systems for planning
improvement are effective. While its enrollment growth and financial stability are
commendable, more direct measures of an effective strategic planning process would
include levels of employee participation and satisfaction with the process.
8I1, S. The effort to develop and implement the 3-Year Action Plan was a significant step
in moving Benedictine toward higher performance and compliance with AQIP
requirements in this Category.
8I2, S. The university is in the early stages of developing a culture where establishing
measures and targets and taking action to improve are the norm with respect to the
Planning Continuous Improvement Category.
AQIP Category 9: Building Collaborative Relationships. This category examines the
institution’s relationships – current and potential – to analyze how they contribute to the
institution accomplishing its mission. It examines the institution's processes and systems
related to identification of key internal and external collaborative relationships; alignment of
key collaborative relationships; relationship creation, prioritization, and building; needs
identification; internal relationships; measures; analysis of results; and efforts to
continuously improve these areas. The Systems Appraisal Team identified various strengths
and opportunities for Benedictine for Category 9.
Team Reflection Consensus Statement for Category 9. Benedictine reports that it
provides specific criteria in the area of building collaborative relationships with clear goals
and processes to include traditional undergraduate and graduate enrollment, international
partnerships, and educational partnerships. They also report that the relationships the
February 19, 2015
37
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
university has established are designed to impact its ability to achieve its mission and
student success. The institution’s work with feeder schools aids in preparation of students
to succeed at Benedictine, and international partnerships positively impact enrollment.
The institution collaborates with area high schools to coordinate events and has
collaborative programs with several area community colleges.
Benedictine builds relationships with employers through direct outreach, internships and
externships. The university has worked to develop relationships with future employers of its
students in response to the last Systems Appraisal Feedback Report, using a local
consortium of private colleges.
9P1, S. Benedictine has created and built numerous relationships with multiple
institutions and organizations, all of which appear to be well thought out and consistent
with its mission and goals. Agreements include 3+1 academic programs with community
colleges, partnerships with Catholic high schools, and international partnerships in China
and Vietnam.
9P2, O. As with 9P1, the existence of multiple partnerships with educational
organizations and others who depend on the supply of Benedictine students seems to
have occurred without a systematic and formalized process to evaluate, manage and
cultivate such partnerships. Formalization and centralization in the administration of
such partnerships would help Benedictine going forward.
9P3, O. While Benedictine works to develop supplier relationships that meet student
needs through both internal processes and outside contractual services, it is not clear if
there is an evaluation process for each service or what mechanisms are used for
identifying target objectives and measures which could provide concrete information
upon which to base provider decisions. The work of the National Moser Center for Adult
Learning (NMCAL) is highlighted as a best practice within the institution.
9P4, O. Benedictine reports that this item was identified as a strength in its previous
Systems Appraisal, and that no substantial changes to its processes have occurred. It
provides no information as to what the previously reported processes were and/or are.
9P5, S. Benedictine reports that NMCAL works intentionally to create and prioritize
February 19, 2015
38
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
collaborative partnerships that result in community benefit, making special note of
NMCAL’s Center for Lifelong Learning. The university has developed a National
Corporate Partnership Services division, which integrates the works of its administration,
academic leadership, Alumni Services and Career Development to ensure the strategic
priorities of the institution are met. Some of the partnerships include degree program
offerings, internships, consulting, and professional development.
9P6, S. The NMCAL has developed a system of surveys, partnership agreements, and
regularly scheduled meetings to ensure that each entity’s expectations are being met
and/or that appropriate adjustments are being made.
9P7, S. Strong relationships appear to exist across academic disciplines of Benedictine.
Faculty members across disciplines collaborate to address academic and college-level
issues.
9R1, S. Benedictine lists several ways by which it measures its collaborative
relationships. Among those relationships for which it collects data regularly, and that it
references, are its high school programs, the National Moser Center for Adult Learning,
donors/fundraising, and its Office of Career Development. Within NMCAL, annual,
quarterly and weekly Group Projection Sheets are shared with internal stakeholders to
help measure and ensure that deliverables are met in ongoing academic outreach work
with the community.
9R2, S. Benedictine’s performance results for its collaborative relationships are
extensive and positive. A sampling of data is included.
9R3, O. While limited comparative data are provided, Benedictine results with the HERI
Faculty Survey do not compare favorably with other Catholic 4-Year Colleges.
Benedictine has an opportunity to examine the inconsistency between their perceived
strength in collaborative relationships and the data and to establish targets for
improvement.
9I1, S. The institution is monitoring the activity in this area and continually monitors and
looks for ways to expand collaborative relationships. Examples of this are joining the
Private Illinois Colleges and Universities to enhance community college interactions, and
February 19, 2015
39
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
the adoption of the project management and analysis tool by the NMCAL.
9I2, O. It is unclear what distinguishes Benedictine in terms of culture and infrastructure
that aids in the selection of process improvements and targeted results in Building
Collaborative Relationships. Beyond an approach to maximize the profit margin called
“Increasing Revenues,” it is unclear how the institution has evolved its culture to set
targets for continuous improvement.
Accreditation Evidence: Benedictine
The following section identifies any areas in the judgment of the Systems Appraisal Team
where the institution either has not provided sufficient evidence that it currently meets the
Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation and Core Components, or that it may face difficulty
in meeting the Criteria and Core Components in the future. Identification of any such
deficiencies as part of the Systems Appraisal process affords the institution the opportunity
to remedy the problem prior to Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
No evidence issues noted by the team.
Core Component
Criterion 1: Evidence found in the Systems Portfolio
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
1A
1B
1C
X
X
X
Adequate but could be improved.
1D
X
Unclear or incomplete.
Core Component
Criterion 2: Evidence found in the Systems Portfolio
2A
February 19, 2015
2B
2C
2D
2E
40
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
Benedictine University
X
X
X
X
X
3D
3E
Adequate but could be improved.
Unclear or incomplete.
Core Component
Criterion 3: Evidence found in the Systems Portfolio
3A
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
3B
3C
X
Adequate but could be improved.
X
X
X
X
Unclear or incomplete.
Core Component
Criterion 4: Evidence found in the Systems Portfolio
4A
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
4B
4C
X
X
X
Adequate but could be improved.
Unclear or incomplete.
Core Component
Criterion 5: Evidence found in the Systems Portfolio
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
February 19, 2015
5A
5B
X
X
5C
5D
41
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Adequate but could be improved.
Benedictine University
X
X
Unclear or incomplete.
1P1 & 1P2. HLC Core Component 3.B. The institution demonstrates that the exercise
of intellectual inquiry and the acquisition, application, and integration of broad
learning and skills are integral to its educational programs.
Benedictine’s general education curriculum recently underwent a major reform. The Task
Force on General Education (TFGE) was appointed by the provost in 2009 and completed
its work over a three-year period. In this period, it created a more modern general education
curriculum designed to help students meet the common learning goals. In December 2012,
the Faculty Assembly voted to adopt the new general education curriculum.
Program objectives are determined by the department faculty at the undergraduate and
graduate levels. The department reviews and researches the current literature, reports
published by professional societies and organizations, trends, and career needs in their
particular discipline. This work is done on an ongoing basis to maintain the currency of
academic programs and is published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs.
The new curriculum prepares students for living and working in an increasingly globalized,
interconnected and technologically sophisticated world, provides a solid background in a
variety of disciplines and modes of inquiry, and fosters the intellectual curiosity, personal
growth, social responsibility, and good stewardship that are central to the liberal arts
tradition as well as to Benedictine’s University’s Catholic and Benedictine heritage.
Adequate, but could be improved.
1P2 & 1P18. HLC Core Component 4.B. The institution demonstrates a commitment to
educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student
learning.
February 19, 2015
42
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
A newly revised Academic Program Review Process was adopted by Benedictine in the
academic year 2013- 2014. It is a systemic process with departments establishing 3-Year
Action Plans and Year-End Reports, which support the 6-year Program Review. Under this
process, departments collect, analyze, and develop short- and long-term plans for future
improvements and changes to the academic programs. One facet of the new Program
Review process is to evaluate the programmatic student learning objectives for currency
and modify them as appropriate.
The Lisle campus is currently in the process of forming a university-wide Assessment Task
Force. A four-member team attended an AAC&U (American Association of Colleges &
Universities) institute on assessment of general education in the summer of 2014. Upon
their return to campus, this team met with the provost to discuss their first draft of a
university-wide assessment plan and to determine action steps. The charge of the task force
is to develop a plan for continual assessment of the general education curriculum and
institutional level assessment for the campus as a whole. This task force will comprise
faculty representing each of the colleges at Benedictine.
The Springfield campus has the most mature Assessment Committee. This committee is
codified in their Faculty Handbook and is charged with aiding the Dean of Academic Affairs
in developing, maintaining, evaluating, and modifying the assessment program. To meet this
charge, the committee monitors the assessment plan; reviews assessment reports campuswide every year; works to educate faculty, staff, and administrators about the importance of
the assessment process; analyzes assessment information and distributes it campus-wide.
Adequate but could be improved.
1P4 & 1P10. HLC Core Component 1.C. The institution understands the relationship
between its mission and the diversity of society.
Benedictine has an Accommodations Team that reviews students’ requests for academic
accommodations and the accompanying documentation to determine appropriate academic
accommodations services. This team is coordinated through the Student Success Center by
the Special Programs Coordinator and consists of the Associate Dean of the Student
Success Center and faculty members representing the areas of special education,
psychology, and nursing. Organized by a full-time learning specialist working in the Student
February 19, 2015
43
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Success Center, academic accommodations available to students are related directly to the
student’s diagnosis, as supported by professional recommendations in the documentation
provided.
The recent general education reform (see 1P1) is the clearest example of the University's
efforts to align the curriculum with the demands of today's workplace and society as a
whole, especially when it comes to preparing students to live and work in increasingly
diverse and multicultural settings.
The new curriculum also requires students to complete at least one engaged-learning
experience prior to graduation, which may include an internship, field work, or study
abroad—all experiences that are valued by prospective employers.
Strong, clear and well-presented.
1P4 & 1P12. HLC Core Component 3.A. The institution’s degree programs are
appropriate to higher education.
With respect to courses being current and requiring levels of performance by students
appropriate to the degree or certificate awarded, Benedictine accomplishes this through a
process that all departments go through to launch a new program and by the Program
Review process.
Individual academic programs also work with their alumni and appropriate employers and
industry representatives to make sure that their curricula are aligned with current industry
practices and employer needs.
Courses offered at the National Moser Center for Adult Learning (NMCAL) are developed for
the fully online environment (using the Engage Learning Management System) in
collaboration with a partnership through Deltak. Deltak provides an instructional designer to
work with subject matter experts in each of the disciplines. There is a continual cycle of
improvement for courses established through this partnership.
Strong, clear and well-presented.
1P4 & 1P13. HLC Core Component 4.A. The institution demonstrates responsibility for
the quality of its educational programs.
February 19, 2015
44
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
The General Education Curriculum Committee (GECC) is currently working on ways to
assess whether actual student learning reflects the Essential Learning Goals. The Writing
Program is serving as a pilot for this project. During the May 2014 writing faculty workshop,
the faculty developed rubrics that can be used to evaluate whether students are meeting the
Benedictine University Essential Learning Goals associated with the WRIT 101 course. The
learning technology consultant is now working to integrate these rubrics into Desire2Learn,
the course management system, in a way that makes it easy for faculty to assess their
students' progress on the relevant learning goals. Eventually, similar rubrics will be
developed for other programs and courses that are part of the new general education
curriculum.
The newly created 3-Year Action Plan (3YAP) and the Year-End Report (YER) support the
Program Review process. The 3YAP is a strategic planning document and the YER is a
reporting document. All essential documents for Program Review are uploaded into a D2L
site. The nine AQIP categories are the basic framework used by the revised Program
Review process. After completing a Program Review Report, which includes
recommendations from external reviewers, a department chair or program director creates a
3-Year Action Plan in which goals for the next three years are identified. Individuals are
given responsibilities to accomplish each goal, and a timeline for completion is generated for
each goal. Year-End Reports are submitted to track on-going progress toward meeting the
goals of the 3YAP. At the end of Year 3, the 3YAP is significantly revised. The process is
continued for years 4 through 6.
As a member of the Illinois Articulation Initiative (IAI), Benedictine University follows the
agreement which stipulates that transfer of completed Illinois transferable General
Education Core Curriculum courses, and selected major courses will be accepted. Nontraditional learning experiences are evaluated using the recommendations from the
American Council on Education. Credit from international institutions must be evaluated by
either Educational Perspectives of Chicago or Educational Credential Evaluators of
Milwaukee, and this must be done prior to submitting credits to the University. In terms of
quality assurance, several guidelines and procedures are implemented. Transfer credit
evaluation personnel work with individual departments on all matters. Copies of transcripts
February 19, 2015
45
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
and correspondences are digitally stored. Additionally, only official transcripts from the
institution or transcripts hand-delivered by the student in a sealed envelope are evaluated.
Strong, clear and well-presented.
1P6. HLC Core Component 2.B. The institution presents itself clearly and completely to
its students and to the public with regard to its programs, requirements, faculty and
staff, costs to students, control, and accreditation relationships.
Prospective students can easily locate Benedictine’s common learning objectives as well as
major and program requirements on the institution’s website, where policies and information
regarding transfer students are also found. This information is available at
http://www.ben.edu/academic_programs. Electronic copies of the University’s
Undergraduate Catalog (which contain both program requirements and course descriptions)
are also found on the site and contain all academic requirements and policies.
Requirements and policies include freshman, transfer, and international student admissions;
course loads; class registration; course withdrawal and repetition; grades and academic
standing; academic recognition (i.e., Deans Recognition Lists); probation and dismissal from
the University; withdrawal and leave of absence from the University; required courses for
each program of study (with descriptions, prerequisites, and associated minors); and
graduation (including application for total hours and earned honors).
All admissions requirements and general academic expectations for entering new freshmen
are communicated in several ways: by Enrollment Center recruiters and counselors; through
a variety of recruitment publications (including brochures, program descriptions and fouryear course schedules, as well as major checklists); at multiple fall and spring universitywide open houses; during initial advising and registration periods; and at the Benedictine
Beginnings orientation programs for new students.
Expectations are communicated to undergraduate students on an ongoing basis through the
advising system, with freshman advisors meeting with their advisees on a regular basis
throughout the first year. From sophomore to senior years, meetings continue to take place
on an as-needed basis with assigned advisors in major disciplines with a minimum of one
meeting per term so that students become aware of all program and graduation
requirements before registering for their classes online each term.
February 19, 2015
46
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Strong, clear and well-presented.
1P7 & 1P15. HLC Core Component 3.D. The institution provides support for student
learning and effective teaching.
Testing and placement of freshmen into the proper basic skills (rhetoric and math) and
foreign language courses occur during the first-term advising-registration period so that
students are more prepared to handle a typical load of classes (i.e., four to five classes per
semester). To address students’ different learning styles, the New Student Advising Center
(NSAC) advisors, in conjunction with faculty, are able to refer students for additional help
with their academics throughout the year. Most recommendations involve scheduling oneon-one appointments with tutors at the departmental level or learning specialists within the
Student Success Center so that individual needs of students can be met.
NSAC advisors help their advisees transition into major programs of study by reviewing their
strengths and then sending their advising folders (with relevant notes on academic
progress) to the respective department chairs, who will choose the most compatible advisors
based on each student’s interests and abilities. These major advisors will meet on an asneeded basis with their students during their sophomore, junior and senior years.
The University provides many services to support faculty in their instruction of students. The
following is a partial list of the services provided to faculty to support them in the student
learning, development, and assessment processes:
• The Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence provides workshops, seminars,
colloquia, learning communities, and peer reviews to enhance the quality of instruction.
• New Faculty Mentoring Program orients new faculty members to Benedictine.
• Adjunct faculty orientation and training sessions are conducted each fall by college,
and Adjunct Faculty Manuals are distributed.
• Tailored library services, such as consultative research sessions, to find and refine
scholarly resources, full-service reserves program including traditional print and hosted
electronic materials, and up-to-date holdings of texts and journals in the Library.
February 19, 2015
47
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
1P11. HLC Core Component 2.D The institution is committed to freedom of expression
and the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning.
Benedictine has a strong Academic Honesty Policy (AHP) that applies to all students and
faculty. The AHP states, “The search for truth and the dissemination of knowledge are the
central missions of a university. Benedictine University pursues these missions in an
environment guided by our Roman Catholic tradition and our Benedictine heritage.” The full
policy can be found at http://www.ben.edu/degreeprograms/ahp.cfm. In addition, as noted
in section 2.16.5 of the most recent Faculty Handbook,
“Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further
the interests of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common
good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition. Academic freedom
is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in
research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching
aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the
student to freedom in learning.”
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
1P11. HLC Core Component 2.E. The institution ensures that faculty, students, and
staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.
The University has established a Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence (CTLE).
Since its inauguration in September 2008, the CTLE has sought to provide dialogue and
professional development opportunities in areas of curricular design, development, teaching
methods, and assessment for fostering reflective critiques, informed practice, scholarly
investigations into teaching practices, and accountability to students and the public.
Also under the umbrella of the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence (CTLE), the
director of the New Faculty Mentoring Program guides and directs the assimilation of new
faculty members into the Benedictine community and educates them regarding the
February 19, 2015
48
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
University’s expectations for effective teaching. All participants attend a series of workshops
over the course of their first academic year at Benedictine on topics such as teaching
strategies, academic advising, IDEA evaluations, and rank and tenure expectations. Each
new faculty member is also assigned a mentor who is generally a senior faculty member
from another department. One of the mentor’s responsibilities is to observe the new faculty
member in the classroom, answer questions, and provide feedback on teaching and
learning.
With respect to Core Component 2D, the University has a strong Academic Honesty Policy
(AHP) that applies to all students and faculty. The AHP states, “The search for truth and the
dissemination of knowledge are the central missions of a university. Benedictine University
pursues these missions in an environment guided by our Roman Catholic tradition and our
Benedictine heritage.” The full policy can be found at
http://www.ben.edu/degreeprograms/ahp.cfm.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
1P16. HLC Core Component 3.E. The institution fulfills the claims it makes for an
enriched educational environment.
Benedictine’s has co-curricular programs which contribute to the educational experience of
students. Several departments sponsor internship programs that correlate to the curriculum
offered by the department, especially in professionally-oriented programs such as
communication arts, graphic arts and design, and the business programs. In the Political
Science Department, students are encouraged to do at least one internship, typically
involving working for a law office, working on political campaigns, working for elected
officials such as state legislators, or for non-governmental organizations. Students in the
nursing program are required to complete 70 hours of clinical practicum experience, and the
masters in public health requires 240 hours of internship work.
There are many opportunities for Benedictine students to study or volunteer abroad. The
following list gives a few examples of study abroad or volunteer abroad opportunities:

Exchange Program: Students can register for courses in partnering colleges and
universities around the world.
February 19, 2015
49
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report

Benedictine University
Mission Trips: Students can participant in mission trips intended to help the less
fortunate around the world and to give students an inter-cultural experience.

Faculty-Led Study Abroad Programs: In the past three years, faculty members have led
groups of students on eight study abroad trips to five countries (China, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Brazil, and ‘Europe’).

Faculty-Led Research Programs: Twice in the past five years, faculty members have led
groups of students on trips to China to conduct research in their fields.
Most departments at the undergraduate level require some sort of capstone experience.
Depending upon the program, this might be a senior thesis, senior seminar, senior portfolio,
or passing a comprehensive exam with the minimum score prescribed by the department.
Some departments have performance or exhibition requirements such as those in Fine Arts
and Music. The graduate business programs require their students to simulate a company.
Adequate but could be improved.
3P1. HLC Core Component 4.C. The institution demonstrates a commitment to
educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and
completion rates in its degree and certificate programs.
The Improving Student Success and Retention Project is designed to bring various
departments together to develop strategies and programs to ensure student success.
The new Student Advising Center gathers information on the needs of incoming students
and the development of learning communities to improve student engagement and to
improvement retention and completion rates.
The four year career model – Explore, Experience, and Emerge – is designed to help
students progress through their academic experience and career preparation.
Adequate but could be improved.
3P3 & 3P5. HLC Core Component 1.D. The institution’s mission demonstrates
commitment to the public good.
February 19, 2015
50
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Community service and commitment to the public good are integral to the mission of
Benedictine University.
The University seeks to develop a concern for the well-being of people through hands-on
charitable activities such as conducting blood drives and raising funds for cancer research.
The institution allows community groups to use space on campus rent free and works with
the community to conduct an annual “Sustainable Saturday” recycling event.
Adequate but could be improved.
4P2 & 4P10 HLC Core Component 3.C. The institution has the faculty and staff needed
for effective, high-quality programs and student services.
Academic departments meet annually to discuss current and future staffing needs.
Benedictine provides training through the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence to
ensure all instructors are current in their disciplines.
The Faculty Handbook outlines tenure processes, and the third-year review allows the
university a chance to ensure adequate support of quality teaching is being achieved.
Adequate but could be improved.
4P7 HLC Core Component 2.A The institution operates with integrity in its financial,
academic, personnel, and auxiliary functions; it establishes and follows fair and
ethical policies and processes for its governing board, administration, faculty, and
staff.
Benedictine has established a Compliance Department to equip the institution to meet the
complex legal and ethical compliance requirements that arise in higher education.
There is an expectancy of integrity and honesty amongst all staff and students. This
behavior is reinforced through the Faculty Handbook – Statement of Professional Ethics as
well as the Employee and Student Handbooks.
All Benedictine employees are required to complete a Conflict of Interest Disclosure
annually which is housed in the Compliance Department.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
February 19, 2015
51
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
4P7 HLC Core Component 2.E. The institution ensures that faculty, students, and staff
acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.
The search for truth and the dissemination of knowledge are the central missions of a
university. Benedictine pursues these missions in an environment guided by their Roman
Catholic tradition and their Benedictine heritage. The institution has clear and complete
policies regarding ethics and the discovery and application of knowledge.
Students are obligated to apply knowledge ethically through the Academic Honesty Policy,
which is a binding document for all of the Benedictine community. Faculty are available to
give guidance on the ethical use of information.
Section 2.16.5 of the Faculty Handbook emphasizes the pursuit of knowledge. “Academic
freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom
in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching
aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the
student to freedom of learning.”
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
5P1 & 5P2. HLC Core Component 1.A The institution’s mission is broadly understood
within the institution and guides its operations.
Benedictine’s mission is clearly rooted in the Catholic Benedictine tradition of the founders
at St. Procopius Abbey, and the evidence confirms that it is broadly understood and guides
the university’s operations.
Authority over the review of the university’s mission, which takes place every three years,
resides with the Board of Trustees through its Mission Integration Committee.
Benedictine’s mission is clearly articulated on its Center for Mission Identity website and
elsewhere in various forms on the university’s website and in its literature.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
5P2 & 5P6. HLC Core Component 5.C. The institution engages in systematic and
integrated planning.
Benedictine’s planning processes are formalized; planning procedures are in place at the
February 19, 2015
52
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
unit level and at the campus level, involving several different offices, as appropriate.
Benedictine gathers considerable data upon which it relies for its decision-making and
planning. Much of the data are gathered and distributed by the Office of Institutional
Research from sources such as NSSE, FSSE, HERI, and CIRP.
Adequate but could be improved.
5P2. HLC Core Component 2.C. The governing board of the institution is sufficiently
autonomous to make decisions in the best interest of the institution and to assure its
integrity.
The Board of Trustees is sufficiently autonomous to make decisions in the best interest of
the university and to operate with integrity.
The Board of Trustees’ bylaws provide clear guidelines regarding the Board’s areas of
responsibility in preserving and enhancing the institution.
The Board has developed comprehensive and robust conflict of interest policies.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
5P3 & 5P8. HLC Core Component 1.B. The mission is articulated publicly.
Benedictine’s Board of Trustees and its Mission Integration Committee are responsible for
the university’s mission, as well as its vision and values, all of which are reviewed every
three years.
Benedictine’s Center for Mission and Identity is primarily responsible for articulating and
communicating the mission of the school to internal and external constituencies. It does this
though multiple communication channels, including the Center for Mission and Integrity
(CMI) website.
Benedictine’s book, Our Mission, Our Vision, Our Values, which is distributed to all new
faculty, staff, and students, outlines the university’s commitment to those areas.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
5P5 & 5P9. HLC Core Component 5.B. The institution’s governance and administrative
structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that
enable the institution to fulfill its mission.
February 19, 2015
53
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Although final decisions reside with the president, executive vice president, and provost,
Benedictine involves various task forces with broad representation from across the
university in studying and making recommendations regarding the issues and opportunities
that confront the university.
Over the past four years, Benedictine has utilized a variety of task forces in making several
major institutional changes, including policies and procedures, and the opening of its branch
campus in Mesa, Arizona.
Benedictine invests significant resources in identifying and cultivating leaders from among
its faculty and staff.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
7P2 & 7P4. HLC Core Component 5.D. The institution works systematically to improve
its performance.
Benedictine is working to refine measurement architecture across all nine of the AQIP
Categories and describes evidence to indicate effectiveness of programs and services
reported in the Portfolio.
The university created an Office of Institutional Research (OIR) to enhance its data analysis
capabilities throughout the university. The university continues to conduct data analysis
relative to institutional processes to identify improvement actions and how to link its actions
to positive outcomes.
The Office of Institutional Research is establishing data-driven decision-making processes
to proactively identify targets for improvement to meet the changing needs and expectations
of students and other key stakeholders.
Adequate but needs improvement.
8P6. HLC Core Components: 5.A. The institution’s resource base supports its current
educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in
the future.
Processes related to budgeting and financial management are aligned and integrated into
strategic planning wherein the University Planning Council is proactive in preventing
February 19, 2015
54
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
problems rather than solving problems. The budgeting process is one of the most stable
and closely managed processes at the university; it is an inclusive process, delineated into
four levels of responsibility wherein key strategic goals are measured and tracked.
The University’s 3-Year Action Plan (3YAP) requires each academic program and
operational unit to complete a 3YAP setting forth resources needed and timelines to
accomplish goals identified in the plan. The plan is aligned with the budget cycle, so that
funds needed to accomplish the goals, which are approved, are protected in the university
budget.
The credentials of employees are verified at the time of hiring by comparing them against
the job descriptions and the Faculty Handbook. The university ensures employees are
current in their disciplines and adept in their positions by providing training through the
Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence.
The Benedictine University Board of Trustees (BOT) defines mission and values and works
with the Center for Mission and Identity (CMI) to establish Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) and measure outcomes. Leaders set direction consistent with the mission, vision,
and values through the University Strategic Plan.
The provost works with deans and others to set goals and budget priorities for academic
affairs. The executive vice president works with staff and administrators to set goals and
budget priorities on the operational side of the university. Both sides of the university
measure effectiveness using metrics delineated in the Institutional Effectiveness Plan.
Strong, clear, and well-presented.
Quality of Systems Portfolio for Benedictine
Because it stands as a reflection of the institution, the Systems Portfolio should be complete
and coherent, and it should provide an open and honest self-analysis on the strengths and
challenges facing the organization. In this section, the Systems Appraisal Team provides
Benedictine with constructive feedback on the overall quality of the portfolio, along with
suggestions for improvement of future portfolio submissions.
Systems Appraisal Team Feedback on the Systems Portfolio
February 19, 2015
55
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Benedictine has submitted three AQIP Systems Portfolios, in 2006, 2010, and 2014. After
each Portfolio, the institution has received detailed feedback in the Systems Appraisal.
Benedictine has been directed to carefully consider this feedback especially Strategic Issues
that might help move the institution forward. Given that Benedictine has submitted two
iterations of a continuous improvement document and has received detailed peer review,
the team was disappointed in the overall quality of this third portfolio.
In multiple instances in this portfolio, process answers were not detailed nor answered at all,
with reference to a process being a strength in a previous portfolio. The team found it
difficult to ascertain evidence of Benedictine meeting the Higher Learning Commission
criteria, as criteria questions and focused responses were not embedded nor clearly
delineated in the Portfolio itself.
Perhaps of most concern to the review team was the fact that the measurement architecture
across all nine of the AQIP Categories does not appear to be well-developed. There is
limited evidence to indicate effectiveness of programs and services reported in the Portfolio.
Although Benedictine created an Office of Institutional Research (OIR) to enhance its data
analysis capabilities, data analysis skills and capabilities do not appear to be prevalent
throughout the university. Limited data analysis is occurring relative to institutional and
process-level performance outside OIR, thereby limiting Benedictine’s ability to identify
improvement actions and learn how to link its actions to positive outcomes.
Using the Feedback Report
The AQIP Systems Appraisal process is intended to initiate action for institutional
improvement. Though decisions about specific actions rest with each institution, the
Commission expects every institution to use its feedback to stimulate cycles of continual
improvement and to inform future AQIP processes.
Some key questions that may arise in careful examination of this report may include: How
do the team’s findings challenge our assumptions about ourselves? Given our mission and
goals, which issues should we focus on? How will we employ results to innovate, grow, and
encourage a positive culture of improvement? How will we incorporate lessons learned from
this review in our planning and operational processes? How will we revise the Systems
February 19, 2015
56
AQIP Systems Appraisal Report
Benedictine University
Portfolio to reflect what we have learned? How an organization interprets, communicates,
and uses its feedback for improvement ought to support AQIP’s core values, encouraging
involvement, learning, collaboration, and integrity.
The Commission’s goal is to help an institution clarify the strategic issues most vital to its
success, and then to support the institution as it addresses these priorities in ways that will
make a difference in institutional performance.
February 19, 2015
57