The Academic Master Plan Committee Update

April 13 & 14, 2016

Welcome

Objectives: • To give an update on the work of the Academic

Master Plan Committee (AMP)• To provide context on the development of the

AMP• To present criteria to be used for program

planning and prioritization

Committee Member Department School

Denise Copelton Sociology The Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences

Greg GarveyCo-Chair

English The Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences

Pam Haibach KSSPE Health and Human Performance

Cathy Houston-WilsonCo-Chair

KSSPE Health and Human Performance

Susan Sites-Doe Business Business Administration and Economics

Peter Veronesi Education and Human Development

Education and Human Services

Doug Wilcox Environmental Science Science and Mathematics

AMP ChargeThe Academic Master Plan Committee will identify the academic path for the College at Brockport for the next five years. The plan will also fold into the College’s new Strategic Plan which the College has been working on. Essentially we want to identify from an academic affairs perspective, where we are and where we want to go.

AMP Charge - ContinuedSpecifically the committee is tasked with the following:

1. Review and build on the materials and ideas related to Academic Master Plans that the Academic Affairs Leadership team reviewed and worked on in Spring/Summer 2015.

2. Identify ways to fulfill our values of excellence in our programs, innovation in existing programs and creation of new programs and engaged student learning within a liberal arts institution with professional programs.

3. Identify criteria for determining programs that need to be revitalized or that we should not invest in further.

4. Identify the processes and data to be used in looking at programs.

AMP Charge - Continued

5. Make recommendations about the following: a. assessment processes and data b. alternative modes of delivery c. responsiveness to prospective student interests d. responsiveness to the job market e. competition from other programs/colleges f. other factors the committee finds to be of

importance in this process

Steps in the Process

• Weekly meetings of the AMP Committee• Reviewed research on Academic Master Plans• Reviewed Master Plans from:

– SUNY Oneonta– University of Cincinnati– Gallaudet– Washington State

Steps in the process

• Reviewed the prioritization model developed by Dickeson– Chairs attended a conference in Denver

• Reviewed Institutional Research Data and Consultant Reports

• Conducted a survey on faculty and staff Values– Analyzed survey data

Survey Results

We Value:• Commitment students academic success• Student engagement• Collaboration and collegiality• Diversity and Inclusion• High quality liberal arts and professional

programs• High quality faculty research

Survey Results

Other Interest:• Identity: What is Brockport’s identity?• Enhancement of diversity of student body,

faculty, and staff• Market readiness of graduates

Survey Results

Concerns:• Liberal arts and the Professions (roles)• Instructional modalities (f2f, on-line, hybrid)• Preparedness of incoming student

Where we are now

• Development of the criteria for program prioritization

• Presentation of the criteria• Soliciting feedback on the criteria

Criteria: Culmination of AMP Committee Work 2015-2016

Centrality and Consistency to Brockport’s Mission

• What is the mission of the program and how does it align with the Mission of the College?

• What are your strategic directions for the next 5 years? Please include a rationale.

Demand – Internal and External

• What is the internal demand of the program as it relates to majors, minors, general education and service to other departments?

• What have been the enrollment trends in the program over the last five years (majors, minors, degree recipients, number of students applied/admitted)?

• What are the external demands for the program, and what factors will determine future needs?

• How will the program compete with peer institutions for future student enrollment?

Instructional/Curricular Efficiencies

• What is the cost effectiveness of the program? • How efficient are course offerings (e.g.,

number of seats available vs. seats filled, enrollment caps, etc…). Suggested improvements based on your data?

• What are the funding trends (e.g., external & internal) to support the program?

Quality of Inputs and Processes

• Describe the program staffing (e.g., number of FT faculty, adjuncts, rank, years of experience/years at Brockport etc…).

• Identify evidence of faculty recognition (awards) and quality of program (accreditation).

• Identify evidence of student quality (e.g., GPA, awards) both incoming and outgoing.

• How well do available facilities meet the needs of the program and what are the shortfalls?

Productivity

• What is the scholarly/creative productivity of the program (e.g., number and funding level of external grants, number of peer-reviewed publications, invited and contributed presentations and other scholarly/creative works)?

• What are the number of students retained and graduation rate of students in the program?

• How does the program meet the needs of the local and broader community?

Justification of Impact and Overall Essentiality

• Please provide any additional information regarding your program that may not have been covered in these questions.

Next Steps

• Share report with faculty• Compile and synthesize feedback• Finalize prioritization criteria• Submit report to the Provost

Participant Task

Questions