The Ripple Effect: From WASC Self-Study
to an
Institutional Commitment to a Culture of Evidence
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a more comprehensive report on the many
consequences of the University's initial foray into assessment, prompted initially by
WASC. It is illustrative of the University's commitment to use assessment in building a
culture of evidence. Of necessity, this description of the multiple ways in which the campus
is collecting evidence, and using it to make critical decisions, also documents how the
governance and process portion of the infrastructure work. We believe that the
infrastructure we are creating will ultimately sustain the changes set in motion by WASC.
The chapter begins by providing a description of the overall CSUS institutional
commitment to assessment followed by a thorough description of the critical link
connecting assessment, planning, and budget at CSUS. It concludes with a detailed
description of the many consequences and changes already underway as a result of our
commitment to using evidence to improve our effectiveness as an institution of higher
education.
§
The WASC Self-Study commitment to assessment has stimulated an institutional
commitment in using evidence to improve institutional quality and effectiveness. The
transition from WASC to an institutional commitment is represented by a three dimensional
cube (see Phase I University Assessment Model Figure I) that illustrates the University's
long term assessment plan. One dimension of the cube represents Initiatives, which are
the external and internal forces that call for assessment. [For a complete description of the
external and internal stimuli for our assessment efforts (University Assessment
Initiatives) see page 72-77 of Self-Study Phase I.] The second dimension represents
Assessment Resources, which are the ongoing activities used to gather evidence about
institutional and program outcomes. For a complete description of the Assessment
Activities and Instruments see pages 77-82 of the Self-Study Phase I. The third face of
the cube represents the goals of the institution as represented in the University's Strategic
Plan Themes. The Strategic Plan is comprised of eight goals, articulated in a series of
theme papers. The critical feature of this conceptual presentation of the long term
University Assessment Model is that it demonstrates the University's commitment to assess
its progress in achieving the goals of the Strategic Plan using a variety of assessment
activities and multiple methods at every level of the University.
The University Assessment Model grew directly out of the WASC Self-Study
model. The WASC Self-Study focuses on three themes: Teaching and Learning, Student
Outcomes, and The Learning Community. The University's long-term model, an extension
of the WASC model, quite naturally replaces the three WASC Self-Study themes with the
eight themes of the University Strategic Plan. Otherwise, the model is the same: a variety of
initiatives involve the University in assessment, and the instruments and activities provide
data to assess our progress in meeting the goals of the Strategic Plan. Not every assessment
initiative is expected to relate to all eight themes or to require data from all available
instruments. For example, professional accreditation assessment activities would likely
focus on just three Strategic Plan themes: teaching and learning, academic programs, and
scholarship. Instruments and institutional data designed to provide evidence related to the
themes of capital campus and public life might not be useful to a professional
accreditation review. Similarly, the NCAA accreditation activity would not be addressing
the scholarship theme, but would focus primarily on issues of teaching and learning and
enrollment planning.
The predominant assessment initiative that would, by definition, address the goals
of the Strategic Plan and its themes, and use all available data and instruments, is the
assessment of the Strategic Plan itself. The eight themes, collectively, describe the issues of
fundamental significance to the future of the University. A complete assessment of
progress in achieving the goals of the Strategic Plan is a major undertaking to which the
University is fully committed. We are in the second year of Strategic Plan assessment. This
commitment has redefined the role of the Council for University Planning (CUP) and has
forged a strong link among assessment, planning, and budget--certainly the goal of every
planning process. The next section describes the process used to assess progress toward
accomplishing Strategic Plan goals and the link we have established among assessment,
planning, and budget as part of that effort. Following that, we present substantial evidence
that the University has acted on the basis of the assessment findings as it strives to
implement its Strategic Plan.
§
A common pitfall of university planning is the failure to connect planning and
budgeting. When this happens, the budget becomes the de facto plan and the official
"Plan" becomes irrelevant. Since 1991 a document called "Resource Priorities" has served
as the primary linkage between planning and budget at CSUS. Each year in December, the
Council for University Planning (CUP) recommends a set of Resource Priorities to the
President for the following year's budget. Once approved by the President, the Resource
Priorities are used by the Vice President for Administration in drafting the University
budget. In CUP's annual review of the University budget, the Vice President for
Administration is asked to explain how the proposed budget responds to the University's
Resource Priorities.
For the past two years, the link between planning and budgeting provided by the
University's Resource Priorities has been strengthened appreciably, first, by the enactment
of the Strategic Plan and second, by the adoption of the Assessment Model described
above. The Strategic Plan provided a framework for the Resource Priorities that had been
lacking. Beginning with planning for the 1995-96 budget, the Resource Priorities were
developed with substantive references to the themes of the Strategic Plan. This process
ensures that there is a broad consensus behind the priorities and that the various priorities
are part of a coherent plan to address the University's mission and goals. A second, even
more critical change, the incorporation of assessment into the CUP planning process,
guarantees that we are directing resources toward those areas most in need of attention.
This came directly out of our participation in the innovative, evidence-based Self-Study for
WASC and the adoption of the University Assessment Model. The model has dramatically
changed, and improved, the role of CUP in planning and establishing Resource Priorities
for the 1996-97 budget.
This critical new link among assessment, planning, and budget is carried out
through the preparation of theme assessment papers for each of the Strategic Plan Themes.
These papers use all relevant institutional and assessment data to create a snapshot of where
the University is in relation to each theme. The goal and explanatory text in the Strategic
Plan are the source for identifying the "key concepts" which provide the structure for
assessment reports. A review of theme assessment reports now constitutes the primary
agenda for the Council for University Planning in the Fall semester, as it develops
Resource Priorities for the following year's budget.
During the 1995-96 academic year theme assessment reports on Teaching and
Learning, Academic Programs, Campus Life, and Enrollment Planning were reviewed by
CUP in the Fall semester in planning for the 1996-97 budget. These four were chosen in
part because they were perceived by CUP as priorities for the University and, in part,
because they were the themes with the most available outcomes data. Assessment reports
on the other four themes (Public Life, Capital Campus, Pluralism, and Scholarship) were
reviewed in Spring 1996. The first four assessment papers had a profound impact on the
Resource Priorities established by CUP. In fact, seven of the eight Resource Priorities for
1996-97 were derived from, or influenced by, the assessment papers. In this way, a critical
link among planning, assessment, and resource allocation was established.
As with any new planning process, ours is iterative, with changes made as we go
along to improve the linkages and the results. The second time around (during Fall 1996)
an important change was made in the way the Council considers the theme assessment
papers. Rather than have Council staff present the papers, members of the Council,
selected from the faculty, students, and staff on the Council, review the papers in advance
and report to the Council. This change fostered a much richer discussion of various
interpretations of the assessment data than could be generated by a staff presentation.
Members are asked to review the papers, answering the following four questions:
Responses to the questions, and subsequent discussions, have helped CUP integrate
assessment, planning, and budgeting at CSUS. A discussion of the process, and how it
actually worked, follows:
Resource Priorities. Five papers were reviewed during Fall 1996. The review
heavily influenced the Resource Priorities--all six of which stemmed from discussions of
the theme assessment papers. One Resource Priority in particular demonstrates the
commitment that the Council has to the assessment enterprise:
"Continue to build expertise in and support for outcomes assessment for academic and support programs for purposes of improving University programs and services."
Referrals to other groups. In addition to influencing the Resource Priorities, the
Council's Fall 1996 review of theme assessment papers resulted in written
recommendations to the Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning, and the Chairs
of the Academic Senate Curriculum, Faculty Policies, General Education, and Academic
Policies Committees. In each case, a memorandum was prepared referring to the data that
led the Council to identify the issue as one warranting the attention of the University's
various governance bodies with a request for a response. By referring planning issues to
appropriate governance bodies across the campus, CUP has strengthened the degree to
which assessment informs the decision-making processes of the University.
Recommended action steps. A separate list of recommendations were sent to the
President addressing issues where administrative action might be taken to implement
aspects of the Strategic Plan. This complements another new task for the Council that will
result in establishing "action steps" each year to implement the Strategic Plan. During
Spring semester the heads of the University's major operating units (called "program
centers") will be asked to propose 3-5 actions they will take to implement aspects of the
Strategic Plan. CUP will analyze the proposals in the context of the assessment information
it has reviewed and recommend to the President action steps based on University priorities.
The President and his staff will make the final decision on the action steps for next year.
Development of new measures. For some themes, extensive data are available that
allow the Council to come to an informed judgment about the University's progress and
condition. For other themes like Public Life the University has little assessment data
available. For still other themes like Scholarship there may be data but disagreement about
how to use or interpret the data. The Council's review of theme papers during Fall 1996
resulted in a list of areas where data collection needs to be improved. During Spring 1997
the Council will review a plan to expand available outcome measures for the Public Life
theme. In addition, staff from the Office of Institutional Studies will meet with an ad hoc
faculty group to develop assessment measures for the Scholarship theme. Resource
constraints, of course, limit the extent to which outcome measures can be developed, but a
process for identifying how measures can be improved using existing resources is in place.
While measures can lead to objective findings, evaluation of findings requires judgment,
and judgment requires standards. In many cases measures are available, but standards for
interpreting the measures are not. The Council is also involved in the evolution of standards
to improve its use of assessment information.
The Council's engagement with assessment data has begun to provide valuable
guidance regarding the future direction of the University's Strategic Plan. The relationship
between the themes and assessment is a dynamic interaction in which the themes shape the
University's assessment activities, and the assessment reports reshape the themes.
Specifically, based on CUP's work since Fall 1995, a planning committee of the Council is
drafting a new theme (titled "Institutional Effectiveness") and substantively revising three
others. One of the revisions to the Campus Life theme, for example, is the inclusion of a
strategy to build upon students' reported positive identification with their academic
disciplines by urging that disciplines find ways to serve as "homes" to make the University
experience more satisfying for students. The evolution of the Strategic Plan itself is perhaps
the most profound evidence of the University's commitment to reshape itself based on self-
assessment.
The linkage we have forged among assessment, planning, and budgeting extends
beyond the CUP process. For example, program centers are asked to provide information
on outcomes assessment as part of their annual budget submission. Specifically, they are
asked what directions they have taken in relation to the Strategic Plan, how they measure
their success, and to provide outcome measures for two years. As a sign of the full extent
to which outcomes assessment has been embraced, consider the following recent
recommendation of the Council to strengthen the degree to which program centers must
justify their budget requests with outcomes data:
The Council recommends that program centers requesting funds to address
any of the approved Resource Priorities be required to describe the intended
outcomes of the expenditure and, later, to provide an assessment of the
actual outcomes of the expenditure. The Council further recommends that
the Vice President for Administration present information to the Council on
(a) allocations made in relation to the resource priorities, (b) the intended
outcomes of the allocations, as proposed by the program center receiving
the allocation, and (c) any actual outcomes data that may be available. This
information should be presented in the Fall, when the Council begins
developing resource priorities each year, and in the Spring, when the Vice
President presents the recommended University budget. In this way,
subsequent resource priorities will be based both on evidence of progress
toward strategic plan goals (from theme assessment papers) and specific
evidence of the impact of various funding strategies.
The University plans to implement this recommendation in future budget cycles.
The process of applying for funds from the Lottery has been recently changed to
strengthen the link among assessment, planning, and budget. Applicants must submit
proposals that relate to a select number of categories derived from the Strategic Plan.
Moreover, they must identify projected outcomes for the proposed project and later must
submit a final report that includes outcomes data relating back to the projected outcomes
cited in the original proposal. Failure to submit the appropriate assessment report will make
applicants ineligible for future funding from the Lottery.
Another example of strengthened linkages among assessment, planning, and budget
is the new Pedagogy Enhancement Awards Program. Formerly the Faculty Mini-Grant
program, the goal of the grants program has been realigned with the Strategic Plan
emphasis on teaching, learning, and technology. The guidelines have been strengthened
with respect to the identification of project goals, the outcomes of the project, and the
requirements for a project final report as a condition of future eligibility. Similarly across
the campus, the link among project goal setting, outcomes reporting, and funding has
become well-established.
The goal of the planning process at CSUS is to integrate planning, assessment, and
resource allocation. Clearly we have made great strides in the last two years with the
introduction, first, of the Strategic Plan, and second, of assessment designed to create a
"culture of evidence". Our processes for making the best use of assessment data continue to
evolve and improve. However, assessment at CSUS is in its infancy, and strategic
planning is only slightly more advanced. Much work and discussion are needed to
determine how to improve planning and how best to use assessment data in the planning
process. The next section describes some of the actions the University has taken in its
concerted effort to respond to assessment findings.
§
During the last two and a half years, CSUS has systematically collected assessment
data for purposes of the WASC Self-Study and to support its new institutional assessment
efforts. Through the integration of assessment, planning, and budget described above, we
have been able to respond to much of the evidence with new or modified University
initiatives. This section lists (a) issues that have arisen from a review of various assessment
information and (b) initiatives taken to address the evidence. It is organized according to the
themes of the University's Strategic Plan. We believe the following pages illustrate the
University's commitment to build and respond to a "culture of evidence." Clearly more
attention has been given to the themes of Teaching and Learning and Campus Life in view
of their priority within the University.
§
Assessment information indicated significant student concerns about the scheduling
and availability of classes. We learned from a follow-up survey that the majority of the
respondents preferred to schedule their classes on two days a week. Issues have emerged
from responses to student surveys indicating that some of our students face a teaching and
learning environment that does not always accord with knowledge of best practices.
Students study alone, have little contact with faculty outside of the classroom and do not
participate widely in faculty research and scholarship. Others reported that faculty and staff
are not always willing to help when problems arise relating to their educational needs.
Particular dissatisfaction was reported with academic and career advising. Graduating
students and alumni reported that their coursework at CSUS did not prepare them as well
as they would have liked with the technological and communication skills they need.
Alumni reported that their education did not meet their expectations in areas of ethics,
problem solving, and a commitment to life-long learning. Faculty voiced the concern that
innovative teaching is not rewarded as it should be. In addition, only 36 percent of faculty
responding to a survey indicated that they were skilled in "using information technology to
enhance instruction."
Class Schedule. In response to concerns about the class schedule the Academic
Senate developed an alternative to the traditional MWF and TTh scheduling of classes that
had governed the offering of most lecture classes on the campus since time immemorial. By
Fall 1995, the Senate recommended, and the President approved, a new scheduling pattern,
which was implemented in Spring 1996. In addition, the President requested that Academic
Affairs investigate the feasibility of changing the academic calendar from a two-semester to
a trimester system. A group of faculty representing the Academic Senate and each of the
Schools, along with selected administrators, met to consider the issues involved in such a
change, and an outside consultant was hired to conduct an analysis of the fiscal impact.
After much discussion and analysis, a different alternative, the Extended Semester, was
recommended to the campus. In the Extended Semester alternative departments can offer
courses, funded by general fund dollars, during the months of January, June, July, and
August and include them as part of their fall and spring semester offerings. Numerous
administrative hurdles need to be overcome in order to implement this program. During
Summer 1996 a cohort of graduate students in Educational Administration began a program
of study that allows them to enroll in one three-unit course per month on a year-round basis
as part of the regular offerings of the department. Other uses of the extended semester are
under review.
Learning Communities. In Fall 1995, the Dean for General Education, in
consultation with the General Education Committee, initiated a Learning Communities
program on a pilot basis for first semester freshmen. In the program 25-30 students enroll
in two or three General Education classes as a group; the courses complement each other
and are linked by a common theme. Faculty are encouraged to integrate the courses,
promote group interaction and provide academic study sessions. In addition to providing
some structure to the General Education program, the Learning Communities provide
students with a "sense of belonging" to an academic community, a concern noted by
students in the survey data. The retention rate for Learning Community participants is 85
percent which compares favorably to the University's retention rate of 70 percent. The
program, in its second year of the pilot phase, has also grown from 100 students to 300 in
Fall 1996. Of the 100 students who participated in Fall 1995, 85 returned in Fall 1996.
While the program is open to all students, during the second year, some Learning
Communities were designed for Educational Opportunity Program students admitted under
special contract.
Technical, Communication and Research Skills. While a significant
majority of students who responded to the graduating student and the alumni surveys are
very satisfied with the academic programs of the University, the CASPER phone survey in
Fall 1995 revealed some dissatisfaction with the provision of technical, communication and
research skills. Since the survey, the number of computer workstations, lab hours, lab
assistance and computer training opportunities for students have increased. Academic
Affairs has given priority to establishing more discipline-specific computer labs so that
students can better relate technology to their educational goals. A newly-adopted plan for
ensuring 24-hour student access to computing resources emphasizes the need for a mix of
central and discipline-based lab facilities. Through a new $75,000 grant from the Lottery
Fund, the University Library expanded its library instruction program by constructing a
new 20 workstation lab for individual student and class use. The Library has also increased
its staff hours to help students with on-line and traditional research methods. Reference
librarians have designed a series of lectures entitled, "Demystifying Library Databases" to
meet student needs for information literacy.
Use of Technology in Teaching. The University's Center for Teaching and
Learning and the Computing, Communications and Media Services (CCMS) has sponsored
a two-day faculty workshop "Integrating Technology Into the Classroom" for the past two
years during the January intersession. To meet the demand for training in the use of
technology for instruction, CCMS has quadrupled its training programs for faculty. CCMS
also received a lottery fund grant from the University to establish a Multi-Media Fellows
Program during the 1996-97 academic year. The program is designed to provide training,
resource tools and personnel support to a cadre of faculty which will help them develop the
basic knowledge, skills, and experiences not only to create instructional multi-media
modules, but to become mentors for other faculty. Academic Affairs provided travel grants
($150 each) to faculty who participated in instructional computing workshops and a limited
number of grants for operating expense ($5,000) to departments for developing and
implementing a plan for integrating instructional technology into the curriculum. The
University has established a Teaching, Learning and Technology Roundtable to involve
faculty in campus planning for the use of information technology. An ad hoc committee
with representatives from Academic Affairs and CCMS is working to improve the degree to
which instructional technology resources are dedicated to meet the needs of the faculty.
Service Learning. A new Office of Community Collaboration was established,
within Academic Affairs, to provide expanded opportunities for students to engage in
service learning in the community and to identify opportunities for student/faculty
collaboration in community-oriented projects. A major goal of the new office is to promote
civic engagement and social responsibility among CSUS students.
§
Data from student and alumni surveys indicated two broad areas of concern. One
area was the low levels of participation by students in what might be called "traditional
campus life" activities. Students reported spending little out-of-class time on campus other
than to study. They study alone, and primarily at home. They do not attend formal campus
events with any frequency. They do not report a high level of identification with the
University as a whole. Some students cited safety concerns; 39% expressed an interest in
living on campus if apartment-style housing were available. Students report a much higher
sense of belonging at the level of the discipline; they indicate high levels of interest in
participating in department clubs; they report considerable interaction with students of
various backgrounds in their classes; they report very high levels of satisfaction with the
quality of their academic program and faculty. The second broad area of concern focused
on student services. Significant percentages of students reported dissatisfaction with some
service offices, with student financial aid at the top of the list. More than half indicated they
do not feel well-informed about campus events and 24% responded that they do not believe
the University welcomes student input in decision making.
Student/University Relationship. The Campus Life theme of the Strategic
Plan is being revised to align the University's goals more closely with student needs and
concerns. It calls for increased attention to establishing a stimulating set of campus life
activities, making the campus welcoming to all students, streamlining the provision of
student services, and providing more opportunities for students to participate in activities at
the level of the academic discipline. To address the concern that students did not have a
"sense of belonging" to the campus, a larger student life component was added to the
University's outreach, orientation and new student programs. Freshmen who participated
in our Summer Orientation Program were able to register for classes while on campus.
Continuing students were hired to counsel and advise new students; more faculty
participated in the summer program. Summer Bridge, a summer transition program
designed to assist underprepared students develop skills in writing and mathematics, was
expanded to include more students. A new Student Access Center was opened to provide
information and support to students about the full range of opportunities and services that
are available to them at CSUS. The Center trains and employs student assistants to help
fellow students obtain information and resolve problems. In a major initiative to change the
character of student life at CSUS, a housing plan is under consideration for one and two
bedroom apartment-style units with private baths.
Student Centeredness. A review of assessment data indicated a number of areas
where improvement was needed in the quality of services provided to students. In
response, Academic Affairs made "student centeredness" its highest priority during the
1995-96 academic year. The Academic Deans and other administrators developed new
activities or expanded existing ones that put the needs of students at the center of their plans
for the year. Deans, in turn, sought additional information and ideas from the students,
faculty, and staff in their schools. Already a number of new programs and activities have
been put in place, including:
Attention to "student centeredness" continues to be at the top of the University's
agenda and the term has been incorporated into the vernacular of the campus. In addition to
the above activities, the expansion of opportunities for student development outside of the
classroom, for department-based activities to improve student retention, and for
student/faculty interaction have been identified as priorities for the allocation of funds for
both the 1996-97 and 1997-98 budgets.
Information on Campus Events. A number of new initiatives, aimed at
improving information about campus events, have been implemented to address student
concerns. The University Union Programming Board worked with the State Hornet, the
student newspaper, to increase reporter awareness of the importance of timely and complete
coverage of campus events. A section of the State Hornet is now dedicated to campus-
wide programs and events. The Office of Student Activities increased the production of its
publication The Campus Calendar by 34 percent, in an attempt to increase the awareness of
scheduled events by all members of the campus community. In addition to providing
information on student life and campus programs to prospective students through the mail,
information is also made available electronically through the CSUS Home Page.
Information on campus clubs and organizations and opportunities to participate in student
and faculty governance are now regularly shared with students. Electronic kiosks, a 24-
hour computerized information line, which provide students with information on more than
250 campus topics, made their debut in Spring 1995.
Student Input to Decision-making. To address the student perception that the
University does not use student feedback, President Gerth invited students and other
members of the campus community to nominate any policy, procedure, or rule which might
be considered cumbersome or unfair. Since its inception the program has produced changes
in parking policies, improved the grade change policy, modified signs in the Library, and
increased student accessibility to campus computer labs. Student participation in the life of
the campus was also a major consideration in the decision to affiliate with a larger, more
comprehensive and prestigious athletic conference. In a general election students gave the
University a clear message that they value a viable athletic program.
Campus Environment. More than 50 percent of the respondents in the SNAPS
survey indicated that safety was an important factor influencing their choice of a university.
The topic of campus safety is an ever present concern of parents who attend the
University's Parent Orientation program each summer. The University has taken a
proactive approach to safety on the campus. With the support of the Division of Student
Affairs, the Department of Public Safety instituted police bicycle patrols in an effort to
increase officer visibility and approachability. In response to concerns about lighting on the
campus, Public Safety initiated a complete lighting assessment of the campus each month.
The Office of Housing and Residential Life provided funds to support a Public Safety
Officer to provide in-service training and consultation for residence hall staff members on a
part-time basis. A night shuttle service was re-instituted by University Traffic and Parking
Services. Each of these initiatives is designed to make CSUS a more responsive, safer
campus for students.
Student Support Services. Survey data indicated
a low level of student
satisfaction with the University's Financial Aid Office. A Voice Response System and three
electronic kiosks were installed in Spring 1995 which permit students to access their
Financial Aid documents, award status and disbursement information. A Satisfactory
Progress Computer Program was implemented in Spring 1996, which notifies students of
their status immediately after grades are posted. All-Calc, a software program designed to
provide timely eligibility estimates, was placed in service during the 1995-96 academic year
for prospective students. In addition to extending hours of service, the Financial Aid Office
hired peer counselors and additional professional and support staff to improve service to a
increasing number of financial aid applicants. A Financial Aid Management System, which
will link the University's Student Information System (SIS) with financial aid records, will
improve the ability of the Office to process financial aid applications in a more timely
manner. Finally, efforts are underway to upgrade the infrastructure in the Financial Aid
Office with an electronic document imaging system. For student services generally,
evening services, and hours of operation, for both undergraduate and graduate students
were expanded during the 1995-96 academic year. A system was also put in place whereby
evening students could request virtually any service on campus and be guaranteed a
response from that office within 24 hours of the request. In Fall 1995 the University
worked with the Associated Students, Inc. to establish a Student Access Center on the first
floor of the University Library where students can receive information on a broad range of
University programs and services.
§
The major concern arising from the Enrollment Planning theme assessment paper
was student retention. Although it is not clear what external standards would be most
appropriate for purposes of comparison, there is consensus across the University that our
retention rates are too low. Rates vary considerably across departments and sub-
populations, but data show that particular trouble areas are undeclared students and African
American students. For all students, the largest loss occurs in the first two years. It appears
from student survey responses that improvements in class scheduling and some support
services such as advising might improve retention rates. A related concern was student
preparedness. Data showed that 27% of Fall 1995 entering first time freshmen and 22% of
new transfers were placed on academic action by the end of the first term. In addition,
students are not taking the English Placement Test in a timely manner and those who do are
failing at higher rates. Increasing numbers of students are requiring remediation. Student
enrollment trends are also problematic, particularly for undergraduate transfers. (Graduate
applications, admissions, and enrollments are at all time highs.) There is some basis for
concluding that slow admissions and financial aid processing contribute to lower
enrollment rates. There are a number of academic programs that have been targeted for
growth that have not accomplished growth. Campus enrollment balance among class levels
is in line with University policy.
University enrollment management. The principal initiative taken in response
to concerns about enrollment and retention has been the hiring of a senior administrator into
a new position called Associate Vice President for Enrollment Management. This
administrator, located within Student Affairs, supervises the Office of Admissions and
Records and University Outreach. Major efforts are underway to better coordinate
University Outreach activities with school and department outreach and enrollment goals
and to improve the processing of undergraduate admissions.
School-based retention. Academic departments and schools have implemented
a variety of retention strategies appropriate to their own programs. Retention rate data, by
program, has been distributed to schools which will be, for the first time, setting retention
rate targets by program. This new responsibility for retention relates closely to the new
directions that deans are taking with respect to student-centeredness. A review of
assessment data indicates that discipline-based activities that focus on connecting students
to other students and faculty should have positive effects on student retention.
Entrance requirements. As part of a California State University systemwide
effort to better articulate with community colleges, CSUS will phase in enforcement of the
requirement that transfer students complete their English, math, and critical thinking
requirements before being admitted to CSUS. Senior administrators at CSUS have been
meeting with local community college administrators to ensure that this transition is smooth
and that students are given appropriate notice of the change.
Writing Proficiency Examination. CSUS is enforcing the requirement that
students pass the WPE before taking certain upper division courses. The intent is to ensure
that students be equipped as soon as possible for the rigors of a University education, thus
improving their chances of success.
Schedule Improvements. The changes to the class schedule described above
under the Teaching and Learning theme are also related to efforts to improve student
retention.
§
The major concern arising from the Pluralism Theme Assessment Paper was the
lower retention and graduation rates for African American, Hispanic, and American Indian
students. African American students had the lowest rates. A second concern relates to the
campus climate with regard to racial tolerance and respect. Two-thirds of graduating
students surveyed indicated that they had grown "very much" or "much" in the area of
interacting with people from other cultures and most attributed the growth to their college
experience. In addition, most students reported that faculty appear comfortable teaching
students of all racial and ethnic groups. However, enough students disputed this claim and
reported a climate of discrimination for the University to conclude that issues of race
continue to be salient. Students reported a high degree of interaction with students of
different race and ethnic groups in the classroom, indicating that efforts to improve
relations might be directed at the instructional program rather than only at support services
and special programs. Among staff surveyed, 44% indicated a concern about affirmative
action hiring policies, mirroring the debate that is occurring across the state and the nation
and indicating a need for continued campus dialog and staff development. Most faculty
surveyed reported having participated in conferences and workshops that increased their
respect for diversity.
Retention. Despite the changing climate around Affirmative Action in California,
the President and Provost have made it clear that the University will continue to pursue its
goals of diversity and pluralism as laid out in the Strategic Plan. School and department-
based retention efforts and enhanced student-centeredness are expected to partially address
low retention rates among these groups. Funding for School-based Educational Equity
programs has been secured through lottery dollars.
Campus climate. The President has vowed to continue a campus dialog on
issues of race and pluralism. To this end, a project called "Towards a Race Dialogue" was
funded as a collaborative effort among faculty and students in several departments to
educate the CSUS community about the issue of affirmative action in higher education.
This project was assigned to the Center for Teaching and Learning, which itself offers
workshops and materials to increase faculty competence in working with diverse student
populations. The Multicultural Center was given funds to sponsor a new lecture series
called "Politics of the Americas: Past, Present, and Future" to promote cultural diversity
within the University. Several departments across the campus were involved with
identifying guest speakers and with integrating speech topics into classroom discussions.
Staff development. The University has stepped up efforts to address staff
development through a focus on communication. New workshops have been developed
covering issues around staff interactions with students and other staff, customer service,
effective listening, mutual respect, and conflict resolution. At this time workshops are
voluntary. We are moving to target certain audiences for staff development of this nature
and are considering mandatory training.
§
Few major issues arose from the review of the Academic Programs Theme
Assessment paper. Students generally reported satisfaction with their academic course of
study at CSUS. Some of the issues from the Teaching and Learning theme relate here as
well, such as concern with the effectiveness of the current General Education program and
the education students receive in areas of technology and communication. The more
detailed assessment of academic program quality occurs through the academic program
review process, discussed elsewhere in this chapter. One issue discussed in the Council's
review of the assessment paper concerned the quality of departmental assessment plans and
the need to increase faculty expertise in student outcomes assessment. Other university-
level issues arising from the assessment data are the need to expand distance learning
offerings and to expand the regional emphases of our curriculum.
Distance education. Academic Affairs has appointed a faculty member, half-
time, to take the lead in Distance Education. This area had been one of numerous
responsibilities of an academic administrator and was not getting the attention it deserved.
Outcomes assessment. A group of faculty have been given release time
beginning Spring 1997 to work as a team on improving student outcomes assessment in
their departments. They are expected not only to develop departmental assessment plans for
their department's program review but to also serve as resources to other faculty across the
campus as they work on assessment plans.
Regional emphasis of programs. The new Office
of Community
Collaboration (OCC) is working with several academic departments to involve students and
faculty in joint activities with state and local agencies and community organizations. One
major initiative in which the OCC is involved--Sacramento Enriches--has been located on
campus. It is a regional effort to improve the health and welfare of children and youth in the
Sacramento region. Faculty and students from several University programs are involved. A
new Human Services Collaboration Group has been formed and supported with University
funds to promote interaction among different departments in the University that train human
services professionals so that students would be trained with the collaborative skills that are
needed in the professional world. Partnerships have been forged with school districts and
several community agencies to carry out the goals of this project.
§
Assessment papers for both these themes as well as for the Campus Life theme
make it readily apparent that the CSUS public life falls short of the traditional ideal. A
glaring shortcoming is the lack of community support for Intercollegiate Athletics. Also
apparent was the subordinate role that CSUS has typically played in regional economic
development issues. The contributions of the campus to the region's cultural life are more
impressive, through the Festival of New American Music, the Spring Arts Festival, two
public radio stations, high-profile public lectures, offerings of the Theatre Arts, Music, and
Art departments, and public events sponsored by the Multicultural Center. In addition, all
of our professional schools have a variety of activities involving regional constituencies,
virtually all departments offer internship opportunities, and there are numerous Centers and
Institutes serving a variety of regional needs. The primary issue raised by a review of this
plethora of activity was the minimal coordination across the University. Members of the
University community cannot easily know what each other is doing and members of the
external community cannot gain easy access to those at CSUS with whom they can build
constructive relationships. In addition, the survey of graduating students indicated that
learning is generally limited to the classroom, implying that too much of the above-
mentioned activity goes on without substantial student participation as part of their
academic programs. Finally, the sheer paucity of information available to assess progress
toward the goal of the Capital Campus theme indicated that more must be done to generate
activity in a broad base of departments that reflect the opportunities and responsibilities
associated with being a "capital campus".
Intercollegiate Athletics. In an attempt to increase the quality and visibility of
CSUS Intercollegiate Athletics in the region, we have joined the Big Sky and the Big West
conferences and funded more scholarships. In addition, the historic Memorial Auditorium
in downtown Sacramento has been obtained as the home site for men's and women's
basketball games.
Regional partnerships. CSUS has become a member of Campus Compact
established to assist universities in forming partnerships with local community service
agencies to expand opportunities for students and, at the same time, provide much needed
volunteer hours to the community. The Office of Student Activities created the Community
Service Volunteer Agency to collect information and coordinate volunteerism on behalf of
more than 250 registered student organizations. A faculty/student affairs partnership
fostered the development of a Service Learning Program at CSUS with the goal of
integrating community service into classroom activities. In Fall 1996, Academic Affairs
established the Office of Community Collaboration (OCC) to expand opportunities for
students and faculty in the community. A central task of the OCC will be to develop a data
base of faculty interests and community needs to facilitate identification of potential partners
both on and off campus. A faculty member was appointed to the newly-created position of
Executive Director of University Economic Development to represent the University in
regional economic development issues. These new initiatives will provide the opportunity
for students and faculty to use the community as a laboratory for learning and to contribute
to the economic and social development of the region.
State capital partnerships. The University recognizes the tremendous
advantages it has from its location in the state capital. In March 1995 an Institute for
Educational Reform was started at CSUS, headed by a well-respected, long-time member
of the California State Senate who had recently retired. In late 1996 an offshoot of that
effort--the Center for the Improvement of Reading Instruction--opened on campus as
well, to address one of the most salient issues on the state policy agenda. The Center for
California Studies continues to expand its scope of activity. Its legislator training programs
are becoming more central as term limits increases the number of new members of the
Legislature. A new seminar series has been started by the Graduate Program in Public
Policy and Administration within the School of Social Sciences and Interdisciplinary
Studies to spur increased awareness and interest across the disciplines in public policy
issues.
§
Assessment, at the level of the Council of University Planning, of the faculty
scholarship issue, has been more difficult than for other themes. All other themes were
assessed once, in the 1995-96 academic year, and again in the 1996-97 academic year. The
faculty scholarship theme assessment paper that was developed in 1995-96 suffered from
lack of consensus not only about the definition of scholarship but about how one assesses
scholarship at the University level. For example, is it enough to tally the numbers of faculty
submitting grant proposals and publishing research, or should we assess its impact on
teaching and learning? An ad hoc group of faculty will be assisting staff in the Office of
Institutional Studies to develop the outline for the faculty scholarship assessment paper to
be presented to the Council at a later date. Certainly much is occurring across the campus in
the domain of enhancing faculty scholarship, but it would be inaccurate to attribute these
efforts to the University assessment model.