1

2020 SELF-STUDY

Institutional Self-Study prepared for the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

and the Wilkes University Community

1

List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 2

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... 2

Acronym List ...................................................................................................................... 3

Self-Study Team Membership ............................................................................................ 5

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 7

Institution Overview ........................................................................................................ 12

Chapter 1: Standard I - Mission and Goals ..................................................................... 14

Chapter 2: Standard II - Ethics and Integrity ................................................................. 23

Chapter 3: Standard III - Design and Delivery of Student Learning Experience ......... 37

Chapter 4: Standard IV - Support of the Student Experience ....................................... 49

Chapter 5: Standard V - Educational Effectiveness Assessment ...................................... 62

Chapter 6: Standard VI - Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement ............ 79

Chapter 7: Standard VII - Governance, Leadership, and Administration ........................ 90

Conclusions and Opportunities for Improvement .......................................................... 98

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Wilkes University does not discriminate on the basis race, color, national or ethnic origin, age, religion, disability, pregnancy, gender, gender identity and/or expression, sexual orientation, marital or family status, military or veteran status, or genetic information in its programs and activities. The following person has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the University’s non-discrimination policies: Samantha Hart, Title IX Coordinator, 10 East South St., Wilkes-Barre 570-408-3842.

2

Table i-1 Linkages Between the Self-Study Institutional Priorities and the Standards of Accreditation and Strategic Planning Themes .................... 8

Table 1-1 Growth in Academic Programs ........................................................................ 16

Table 1-2 Fall Enrollment by Location and Degree Level ............................................... 17

Table 2-1 Wilkes Tuition and Fees compared to those of competing schools .................... 34

Table 3-1 Trends in Student-to-Faculty FTE ................................................................... 39

Table 3-2 Average Class Size Fall 2011 through Fall 2016 ............................................... 39

Table 3-3 Average SRS Responses for Criteria Related to the Instructor ....................... 40

Table 3-4 Course Sections Utilizing LIVE (D2L) ........................................................... 43

Table 4-1 Graduate Enrollment by Program Area/Discipline ........................................... 51

Table 4-2 Recent Examples of Wilkes University’s Use of Survey Results To Improve Effectiveness ................................................................................. 60

Table 5-1 Academic Review Submissions 2015-2019 ...................................................... 64

Table 5-2 UAC Assessment Results of FR reports ........................................................... 64

Table 5-3 Senior Perception of Career Readiness (CSS Comparisons) ............................ 67

Table 5-4 General Education Skill Development (From Senior/P4 Exit Survey) .............. 69

Table 5-5 General Education Knowledge and Skill Development (From College Senior Survey) ......................................................................... 69

Table 5-6 Perceptions of Institutional Impact on Skill Development (Seniors Only) ......... 70

Table 5-7 PRP Enhancements - 2013-2019 ................................................................... 78

Table 6-1 Key Strategic Plan Updates as of June 2019 ..................................................... 81

Table 6-2 Trends in Student Enrollment .......................................................................... 85

Table 6-3 Trends in Endowment Balance and Withdrawals .............................................. 87

Table 6-4 Trends in Fiscal Resources .............................................................................. 87

Table 6-5 Trends in Human Resources ........................................................................... 88

Table 6-6 Change in Technical Infrastructure ................................................................... 89

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Change in Enrollment and Credit Hours 2010-2019 ....................................... 17

Figure 1-2 Alignment of ISLOs with MVV ...................................................................... 18

Figure 1-3 Alignment of GISLOs with MVV ................................................................... 19

Figure 1-4 Change in Percent of Population, 2010 to 2018 ............................................... 20

Figure 3-1 GE Mission and GESLO Alignment Chart ...................................................... 45

Figure 4-1 Undergraduate Admissions Funnel Trends ....................................................... 50

3

AAUP American Association of University Professors

ABET Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology

ACBSP Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs

ACPE American Council on Pharmaceutical Education

ACS American Chemical Society

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ADDB Academic Department Data Book

AI Academically Ineligible

APC Academic Planning Committee

ASC Academic Standards Committee

ASPS Adult Student Priorities Survey

AU Annual Update

AWS Amazon Web Services

AY Academic Year

BoT Board of Trustees

CA Conditional Admit

CC Curriculum Committee

CCNE Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education

CEA Commission on English Language Program Accreditation

CFA Committee on Faculty Appeals

CGED Center for Global Education and Diversity

CIRP Cooperative Institutional Research Program (HERI)

CODIE Council on Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity

CSC Cohen Science Center

CSS College Student Survey (HERI)

CT Critical Thinking

CV Curriculum Vitae

D2L Desire2Learn – Brightspace (online platform)

DA Diversity Awareness

DE Discovery Education

DNP Doctorate of Nursing Practice

DPC Department Personnel Committee

DSS Disability Support Services

EAS Early Alert System

EdD Doctorate in Education

EDGE Educational Gateway to Excellence

ELL English Language Learner

ESL English as a Second Language

ETS-PP Educational Testing Service Proficiency Profile

F2F Face to Face

FAC Faculty Affairs Council

FAO Financial Aid Office

FDC Faculty Development Committee

FR Full Review

FT Full-time

FTE Full-time Equivalent

FY Fiscal Year

FYF First-Year Foundations

GE General Education

GEC General Education Committee

GESLO General Education Student Learning Outcome

GISLO Graduate-level Institutional Student Learning Outcome

GPA Grade Point Average

GSC Graduate Studies Committee

GTTF Gateway to the Future

HERI Higher Education Research Institute

HR Human Resources

IEP Intensive English Program

IFARHU Institute for the Formation and Use of Human Resources

ACRONYM LIST

4

IR Office of Institutional Research

IRB Institutional Review Board

ISLO Institutional Student Learning Outcome

IT Information Technology

KMCC Karambelas Media and Communications Center

LGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender and Questioning

LMS Learning Management System

LSI Learning Sciences International

MA Master of Arts Degree

MFA Master of Fine Arts Degree

MPJE Multistate Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination

MS Master of Science Degree

MSC Multicultural Student Coalition

MVV Mission,Vision, and Values

NAPLEX North American Pharmacy Licensure Exam

NCLEX National Council Licensure Examination

NIPP National Institute for Professional Practice

NSICP National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity Survey

NSSE National Survey of Student Engagement

OC Oral Communication

OPO Oral Presentation Option

OSRP Office of Research and Sponsored Programs

OTTL Office of Technology for Teaching

PASBO Pennsylvania Association for School Business Officials

PDE Pennsylvania Department of Education

PharmD Doctorate of Pharmacy

PhD Doctorate in Philosophy

PHEAA Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency

PLS3L Performance Learning Systems 3rd Learning

PRP Program Review Process

PRR Periodic Review Report (Middle States)

PSLO Programmatic Student Learning Outcome

PT Part-time

QR Quantitative Reasoning

RNL Ruffalo Noel-Levitz

SER Self-Evaluation Report

SG Student Government

SHINE Schools and Homes in Education

SI Supplemental Instruction

SLO Student Learning Outcome

SOE School of Education

SPC Strategic Planning Committee

SRS Student Response Survey

SSI Student Satisfaction Inventory (Noel-Levitz)

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics

SW Scientific World

TAP Tenure and Promotion Committee

TCI Transition to College Inventory

UAC University Assessment Committee

UBC University Budget Committee

UC University College

UMC University Mentoring Committee

UPP University Preparatory Program

USAC University Staff Advisory Committee

VoC Verification of Compliance

VPEM Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing

VPFSO Vice President for Finance and Support Operations

WC Written Communication

WCLH Wilkes University Radio Station

WEBS Women Empowered by Science

WUPD Wilkes University Police Department

5

COORDINATING COMMITTEE

• Co-Chair - Paul Adams, Ph.D. - Vice President of Student Affairs (through July, 2019)

• Co-Chair - Deborah Tindell, Ph.D. - Professor, Psychology

• Co-Chair - V. Ming Lew, Ph.D. - Assoc. Prof., Math & Comp. Sci. (from August, 2019)

• Brian Bogert - Director of Institutional Research

STEERING COMMITTEE

The Steering Committee was comprised of the Self-Study Coordinating Committee and the chairs of each Working Group, noted in bold text for each Working Group below.

WORKING GROUPS

Standard I – Mission and Goals• Cynthia Charnetski, OD, Past Chair, Alumni Board;

Member, Board of Trustees

• Lori Cooper, EdD, Assistant Professor, Graduate Teacher Education

• Amanda Modrovski, Director, Office of Sponsored Programs

• Prahlad Murthy, PhD, Interim Dean College of Science & Engineering/Professor, Env. Engineering, Earth Sci. and Geology

• Chad Stanley, PhD, Associate Professor, English

• Michael Wozniak, Student representative

Standard II – Ethics and Integrity• Kim Bower-Spence, Executive Director, Marketing

• Tom Hamill, PhD, Associate Professor, English

• Samantha Hart, JD, Title IX Coordinator

• Curtis Jaques, Head Coach, Men's LaCrosse

• Kyle Kreider, PhD, Professor, Political Science

• Blake Mackesy, EdD, Assistant Professor, Doctorate in Education

• Brian Whitman, PhD, Professor, Environmental Engineering

Standard III – Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience

• Scott Bolesta, PharmD, Associate Professor, Pharmacy Practice

• Georgia Costalas, Executive Director, Center for Global Education and Diversity

• Ruth Hughes, JD, Assistant Professor, Sidhu School of

• Business & Leadership

• Vee Ming Lew, PhD, Associate Professor, Math & Computer Science

• MaryBeth Mullen, SciD, Advising Coordinator, University College

• Paul Reinert, PhD, Assistant Professor, Graduate Teacher Education

• Paul Riggs, PhD, Dean, College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences

• Mark Stine, PhD, Professor/Chair, Communication Studies

Standard IV – Support of the Student Learning Experience

• Katy Betnar, Director, Learning Center

• Mia Briceno, PhD, Assistant Professor, Communication Studies

• Maria Grandinetti, PhD, Associate Professor, Nursing

• John Harrison, PhD, Associate Professor, Math & Computer Science

• Melissa Howells, Director, Student Development

• Izzi Metz, Head Coach, Basketball

• Stephanie Wasmanski, EdD, Director, Graduate Admissions

• Gretchen Yeninas, Associate Dean, Student Affairs

• Arsen Cora, Student representative

SELF-STUDY TEAM MEMBERSHIP

6

Standard V – Educational Effectiveness Assessment• Kalen Churcher, PhD, Assistant Professor,

Communication Studies

• Holly Frederick, PhD, Associate Professor, Environmental Engineering

• Kathleen Hirthler, DNP, Associate Professor and Chair, Graduate Nursing

• Karim Letwinsky, EdD, Assistant Professor and Chair, Doctorate in Education

• Daniel Longyhore, PharmD, Assoc. Professor, Pharmacy Practice (through Spring 2019)

• Phil Ruthkosky, PhD, Associate Dean, Student Development

Standard VI – Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement

• Jennifer Edmonds, PhD, Associate Dean, Sidhu School of Business & Leadership (through May, 2019)

• Evene Estwick, PhD, Associate Professor, Communication Studies

• Suzanne Galella, EdD, Associate Professor and Chair, Education

• Shelli Holt Macey, Director, Experiential Program, Pharmacy Practice

• Courtney Lomax, Manager, Budget-Analysis, Finance Office

• Don Mencer, PhD, Associate Professor, Chemistry (WG Chair, from Summer, 2019)

• John Stachacz, Dean for Library and IT

Standard VII – Governance, Leadership, and Administration

• Mark Allen, PhD, Dean of Students

• Jon Ference, PharmD, Associate Provost for Academics

• Linda Gutierrez, MD, Associate Professor, Biology (beginning Spring, 2019)

• Joe Housenick, Assistant Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer (through Fall, 2018)

• Jacqueline Lukas-Eovitch, Alumni Events Manager

• Kristin Pitarra, Human Resources Director (beginning Spring, 2019)

• Eric Ruggiero, Associate Professor and Chair, Integrative Media (beginning Spring, 2019)

• Diane Wenger, PhD, Associate Professor and Chair, Global Cultures (through Fall 2018)

• Mike Wood, Special Assistant to the President

• Cody Morcom, current student, Student Government President (2017-18)

Verification of Compliance• Josh Bonner, Director of Digital Marketing (through

Fall, 2018)

• Susan Hritzak, Registrar

• Justin Kraynak, Chief, Operations and Compliance

• Kristine Pruett, Director, Technology for Teaching and Learning

• Pat Sweeney, PhD, Assistant Professor, Nursing

• Amy Terkowski, Director of First-Year Admissions

7

SELF-STUDY APPROACH

The Self-Study is organized using a Standards-Based Approach, with seven chapters, each representing a Standard of Accreditation. The institutional priorities (see below) are integrated within the standards and evaluated through the lenses of the standards. The Self-Study has the following intended outcomes:

• To demonstrate that Wilkes University meets Middle States Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation, and to provide the Middle States visiting team and the Middle States Commission on Higher Education sufficient evidence to recommend reaffirmation of accreditation.

• To highlight our strengths and accomplishments, identify problems and propose solutions, and identify opportunities for growth and development as we strive toward attainment of the institution’s mission and institutional priorities.

• Enhance our understanding of Wilkes University in the landscape of higher education and our communities

• Provide comprehensive and understandable recommendations for the next five to eight years. The recommendations must be carefully worded, affirmed, and assessed by the university community

• Create a process that demonstrates the University’s commitment to inclusion and shared governance.

In January of 2018, the University established an 11-person Self-Study Steering Committee consisting of the coordinating team and the chairs for each of the working groups. Each working group chair was specifically chosen for their expertise and ability to lead that specific group. Each chair then collaborated with the coordinating team to select members for their group, to include individuals offering diverse perspectives from across the Wilkes community (see the Team Membership section). In addition to those directly involved in the Self-Study process, the campus community, as a whole, has been engaged and invested in the Self-Study process. Initial presentations about the process were made to the President’s Cabinet, the Board of Trustees and the full faculty. To further engage the faculty, the annual Faculty Retreat in 2018 was devoted to discussion of the Self-Study and allowed for feedback and suggestions. This was followed by a survey of the campus community

to engage faculty and staff in the initial stages of the process. At the preliminary campus visit by Middle States VP, Dr. Kushnood Haq, wide representation from the campus attended an open forum. Feedback of the early findings of the working groups was collected through campus-wide charrette exercises (i.e., small-group planning sessions allowing for individual contributions). Regular updates were made to the Board of Trustees and Faculty groups. In addition, presentations were made to the University Staff Advisory Committee and Student Government. The initial full-draft of the Self-Study was sent out to the University community and all were invited to provide feedback and comments via a survey.

INSTITUTIONAL PRIORITIES

The University identified the following priorities for the Self-Study:1. Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development2. Financial Vibrancy3. Diverse and Global Community

These three priorities were selected for the Self-Study because they clearly resonate with the University’s mission, its values and the themes that are emphasized in Gateway to the Future: The Strategic Plan for Wilkes University, 2014-2020.

Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development: A Wilkes education is rooted in a commitment to academic programs that reflect the highest standards, challenging students to achieve beyond their self-perceived potential and creating in all graduates a dedication to lifelong learning. Sustaining these ideals requires a faculty that values excellence in teaching and scholarship and places an emphasis on ”individual attention” and academic excellence. This dedication to student success requires a commitment to evidence-based practices that take full advantage of innovative pedagogy, technology, and cross-disciplinary collaboration. Because teaching effectiveness is enhanced by faculty scholarship, the University must grow its support for faculty development and access to external sources of funding to ensure student access to faculty-supervised research and scholarship is enhanced.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

8

Financial Vibrancy: Wilkes is an enrollment-driven institution where cost-of-attendance will increasingly influence recruiting, retention and student success. Maintaining institutional financial strength will be dependent on the ability to generate new sources of income and to effectively manage resources. Strengthening the financial profile will be dependent on: 1) strategies to sustain and grow enrollment; 2) growth of the endowment; 3) the ability to generate external funding; 4) a disciplined budgeting process; and 5) operational practices that create a culture of productivity, efficiency and continuous improvement.

Diverse and Global Community: If Wilkes students are to engage locally, nationally and internationally, creating a more diverse and inclusive campus community and curriculum is an imperative. The strategic plan has set a goal of growing to 10% the number of international students in the first-year undergraduate class. Achieving this ambitious goal requires more than just a focus on international recruitment and requires an institutional commitment to create an educational environment that encourages faculty, student and scholar exchanges; creates opportunities for domestic students to travel abroad and

creates an understanding through programs—curricular and co-curricular—of what it means to be a global citizen.

Identification of Priorities: The identification of institutional priorities began in October of 2017, prior to the Self-Study Institute, when the Coordinating Committee worked with the provost to identify possible topics based on the University’s Mission and Values and the themes of Gateway To The Future: The Strategic Plan for Wilkes University, 2014-2020. The Coordinating Committee at the Self-Study Institute tested the priorities. Based on positive feedback from exercises at the Institute and the MSCHE VP, the priorities were shared with the campus community, the President’s Cabinet, the Steering Committee, and the Board of Trustees for feedback and discussion. A consensus was achieved that the three priorities indicated above should be emphasized in the Self-Study. Table i-1 shows the alignment between the institutional priorities and the MSCHE Standards of Accreditation, and Wilkes’ Strategic Plan Themes.

INSTITUTIONAL PRIORITIES PROGRAMMATIC EXCELLENCE AND FACULTY DEVELOPMENT

FINANCIAL VIBRANCY

DIVERSE AND GLOBAL COMMUNITY

MSCHE STANDARDS OF ACCREDITATION

I. Mission and Goals X X X

II. Ethics and Integrity X X

III. Design & Delivery of the Student Learning Experience X X

IV. Support of the Student Experience X X X

V. Educational Effectiveness Assessment X X X

VI. Planning, Resource Allocation, & Inst. Improvement X X X

VII. Governance, Leadership and Administration X X X

WILKES UNIVERSITY STRATEGIC PLANNING THEMES

Foster Excellence in Academic Programs X X X

Invest In Our People X X X

Recruit, Retain, Graduate and Place Undergraduate and Graduate Students

X X X

Improve Our Financial Strength X X X

Strengthen Our Campus Infrastructure X X

Support Efforts at Redeveloping Downtown Wilkes-Barre X X

Table i-1. Linkages Between the Self-Study Institutional Priorities and the Standards of Accreditation and Strategic Planning Themes

9

OVERALL FINDINGS

The following summaries provide an overview of key findings and opportunities for improvement that have emerged from completing the institutional self-study report.

Standard 1: Mission and Goals. The Wilkes University Mission Statement clearly articulates its purpose within the context of higher education, the diverse students it serves, and outcomes it hopes to achieve. The overarching goals outlined in the strategic plan, Gateway To The Future, are linked to the Mission Statement and clearly articulate a detailed set of measurable objectives. The regular assessment of progress towards achieving these objectives is evidence of an institutional commitment to fulfilling University goals. Under the leadership of a new President in 2020, Wilkes has an opportunity to engage the University community in preparing for the next round of strategic planning to address both immediate and future challenges.

Standard II: Ethics and Integrity. Ethics and integrity are reflected in the daily operations of the University, guided by institutional policies and procedures that are documented in appropriate University publications, and also incorporate federal and state policies and processes. Initiatives have been created to instill trust within and outside of the University to help the institution achieve its mission and goals. With an increasing emphasis on admitting and graduating a more diverse student population, the University invests in providing access to opportunities and developing a respectful and inclusive learning environment to mentor students as lifelong learners to reach their personal and professional goals.

Standard III: Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience. The University is committed to strengthening the student learning experience through a rigorous and comprehensive academic experience delivered by a qualified group of faculty members who develop and maintain the curriculum. The University has increased support of the Faculty by providing additional funding for professional development and student mentoring through research opportunities. In addition, the University has continued to support and improve existing learning opportunities, and develop and institute new initiatives to promote student success. A

robust review process ensures the regular assessment of all academic programs and allows for resource requests for improvement when needed. The General Education curriculum provides students with varied learning experiences that prepare them for the opportunities and challenges of a diverse and evolving world.

Standard IV: Support of the Student Experience. The University provides comprehensive and effective support systems to foster student success both in and out of the classroom. New initiatives and infrastructure improvements, which have enhanced the experiences of students, are consistent with the University's mission and are integrated into the objectives of the University’s strategic plan. Institutional support for student success occurs from the time of enrollment through commencement through a variety of programs and systems designed to meet the needs of students with varying levels of academic preparation, to improve retention, and help students reach degree completion.

Standard V: Educational Effectiveness Assessment. The University’s assessment of educational effectiveness occurs at both programmatic and institutional levels and continues to evolve. All academic programs complete a comprehensive full review every three years, with annual updates submitted between full reviews. Both full reviews and annual updates enable data-driven decision-making for continuous institutional improvement and future growth. While assessment data for general education outcomes is collected primarily through the academic program review process, the conclusions of the self-study indicate that the University should continue to strive to make the data collection process more effective in providing comprehensive assessment results.

Standard VI: Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement. The processes for institutional planning and resource allocation are aligned with the University's mission and goals and guide the implementation and achievement of the University’s strategic plan. Unit-level planning for academic programs and administrative units is supported by data obtained both internally and externally through reports and surveys. The current comprehensive campaign has raised more than $55M, and has allowed for major improvements to the physical plant, creating a more attractive and welcoming environment. In addition, the development of new academic and support programs has enhanced the student

10

learning experience. These investments demonstrate the University's commitment to scholarly, technical, intellectual, professional and cultural resources that benefit the University and the surrounding community.

Standard VII: Governance, Leadership, and Administration. The governance, leadership and administrative structures of Wilkes University support the fulfillment of its mission and the achievement of its goals, to benefit the institution and its constituencies. The University is governed by a 29-member Board of Trustees, entrusted with the fiduciary responsibility and accountability for the academic quality, planning and fiscal well-being of the institution. The Administration is led by the University President, who serves as the Chief Executive Officer. The Faculty is responsible for delivering the academic curriculum and monitoring and approving all curricular matters, while the work of the Faculty is overseen by the Faculty Affairs Council, which serves as the voice of the Faculty to the Administration. The roles and responsibilities of each University constituency are conveyed through various University handbooks and policy manuals. The inclusion of both faculty members on key Board committees (as non-voting members) and the inclusion of faculty, student, and staff observers at regularly scheduled Board meetings has enhanced the lines of communications and the value of shared governance.

Opportunities for Improvement The Self-Study Report identifies opportunities for improvement that can guide the University in developing the next strategic plan and can preserve a strong commitment to providing all students with an outstanding educational experience. The opportunities for improvement are presented within the narratives of the Standard, in the relevant chapters of the Self-Study. They are also presented below grouped by the three institutional priorities, Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Financial Vibrancy, and Diverse and Global Community, along with an additional category related to communication. They are also summarized in the conclusion at the end of the report.

Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development1. The primary mechanism for general education

assessment is directly tied to the program review process. Consequently, the collection and analysis of general education data has been difficult to fully implement. The University should consider revising the current system for assessing general education so it clearly articulates the ownership and responsibilities for assessing the various components of general education. (Std. V)

2. The University should investigate the viability of embedding the skills area assessment into the capstone course across disciplines. (Std. V)

3. Given that the post-tenure review policy, as written in the Faculty Handbook is not currently practiced, the University should complete the examination of post-tenure review to develop a feasible process and determine how it should be implemented. The Faculty Handbook should then be revised to reflect those changes. (Std. II)

4. The University should ensure that the newly-formed IP Task Force complete its review, and upon approval, the policy be shared with the University community and implemented. (Std. II)

5. The University should consider a process for evaluating part-time and adjunct faculty for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook that can be regularly and consistently applied and is adaptable to accommodate the needs of individual academic departments. (Std. III)

6. To improve the effectiveness of support for student learning success, the University should more fully leverage the Early Alert System to identify students in need of academic assistance, and for students requiring tutoring services, it will be important to ensure the amount and level of tutoring meets their needs. (Std. IV)

Financial Vibrancy1. The University should ensure that future budget

goals are realistic given the anticipated decline in prospective first-year students (Std. VI).

2. With the projected revenue shortfall, the University should closely monitor its financial position and determine how to best allocate financial resources that will continue to foster excellence in existing academic programs while also strategically allocating resources to new programs to strengthen the University’s academic portfolio. (Std. VI)

11

3. Given the likely increase in utilizing D2L for future course instruction, the University should consider a plan to increase resources and staffing of the OTTL to assist faculty and students in effectively utilizing online resources. (Std. III)

Diverse and Global Community1. The University should consider ways to further embed

and enhance diversity and inclusion across the areas of recruiting, enrollment, the curriculum (including the delivery of diversity-related General Education and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes), and the overall student experience. (Std. I)

2. The University should create and implement a process to verify that all students, including transfers, have satisfied the Diversity Awareness skill area. (Std. III)

Communication1. The University should explore ways of ensuring

that decisions and their rationale that impact the University community are communicated clearly across and within constituent groups. This will be

particularly important as the University addresses anticipated financial challenges. (Std. VII)

2. The University should ensure that all graduate programs have graduate handbooks for their respective areas, and make those handbooks available online. (Std. III)

3. The current language in the Faculty Handbook should be clarified to provide specific and clear guidelines for the implementation and reporting of the 360 administrative evaluation process to ensure that all constituencies understand and adhere to the process. (Std. II)

4. As Wilkes enters into a new strategic planning cycle, there is an opportunity to engage in shared University-wide review of the Mission and Goals. The University should approach and conduct this review in a manner that carefully considers the historical identity of Wilkes University, its aspirational identities, and relevant external forces, factors, and requirements, balancing change and innovation with historical institutional values and tradition. (Std. I)

12

INSTITUTION OVERVIEW

Wilkes University was founded in 1933 as Bucknell University Junior College and attracted eager, highly motivated, and able young persons, virtually all of whom were the first members of their families to benefit from higher education. Bucknell University Junior College received support and encouragement from leading members of the Wilkes-Barre community, as well as stately mansions (now used as residence halls and office buildings) through the generous donations of city residents. The support of the community was a testament to the tradition of community service and generosity that characterized the region.

In 1947, Wilkes College was instituted as an independent, non-denominational, four-year college, with programs in the arts, sciences, and selected professional areas. Designated as a University in 1990, Wilkes offers degrees and programs in six divisions: the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences; the College of Science and Engineering; the Jay S. Sidhu School of Business and Leadership; the School of Education, the Passan School of Nursing, and the Nesbitt School of Pharmacy.

For over a decade, mentoring has been a core institutional value and is reflected in the Mission and Vision. With the goal of creating extraordinary learning experiences through mentoring, the University strives to make available to students, staff, and faculty at all educational and organizational levels, the opportunity for short and long-term learning/support relationships. This mentoring culture is key to fulfilling Wilkes’ mission by providing a rigorous educational experience that develops students intellectually and personally, engenders a sense of values and civic responsibility, prepares them for careers and graduate study, and encourages them to welcome the opportunities of a constantly evolving and multicultural world. The University enhances its tradition of strong student-faculty interactions in all of its programs by seeking outstanding people in every segment of the University and encouraging a spirit of cooperation, community involvement, and individual respect within the entire insitution.

As of Fall 2019, the University enrolls 2,351 undergraduates with about 90% maintaining full-time status. The University also enrolls 2,054 graduate students, overwhelmingly part-time. Wilkes’ total

headcount enrollment in the fall was 4,680. At the undergraduate level, admission is “selective,” with an acceptance rate of 78.6%. The SAT 25/75 percentiles are 1030/1210. Approximately 42% of all undergraduates live in campus housing. There is no Greek system presently on campus, and, with the exception of honor societies, all student organizations are open to the entire student body. Over the past several years, the six-year graduation rate has increased from 56% to 63% with one-fifth of graduates enrolling in graduate or professional school after graduation.

In terms of programs, Wilkes offers 24 BA’s in liberal arts fields, six BBA’s in business, two BFA’s in the arts, and 22 BS degrees in fields including chemistry and biology, engineering, nursing, and neuroscience. Engineering majors account for 16% of the undergraduate enrollment, with another 18% majoring in business or business-related fields, 11% majoring in the behavioral and social sciences, and 18% majoring in the health sciences (pre-pharmacy and nursing). At the master’s level, degrees are offered in creative writing, business, mathematics, nursing, mechanical engineering and engineering management, electrical engineering, and education. Nearly 90% of graduate degrees awarded in 2018-19 were for programs offered online. About two-thirds of Wilkes’ graduate enrollments are in teacher education. Some 275 students, all full-time, are enrolled in the Pharm.D. program in the Nesbitt School of Pharmacy. In the Fall of 2017, the University admitted its first cohort of students for a PhD in Nursing degree.

The University employs 196 full-time faculty, augmented by 252 adjuncts. The student-faculty ratio for Fall 2019 was 12-to-1. Of the full-time faculty, 100 (51%) members hold tenured appointments, 68 (35%) members are in tenure-track appointments, and the remaining 28 faculty members hold non-tenure track appointments. The University also employs 569 full and part-time non-teaching personnel, which includes administrators, coaches, clerical, maintenance, information technology, and security staff.

By charter, Wilkes is nonsectarian and is governed by an active, 29-person Board of Trustees. Its current Carnegie classification is Doctoral/Professional, assigned to institutions awarding at least 20 research/scholarship doctoral degrees and spending less than $5 million on research, or awarding 30 or more professional practice

13

doctoral degrees across at least two academic programs, as of 2016-17.

Wilkes’ operating budget for FY2019 was $104 million. In addition, capital expenditures were $8.8 million. The total endowment stands at $52 million (5/31/19). For 2019-20, student charges are $37,622 for tuition and fees, and approximately $15,108 for room and board. Eighty-one percent of full-time degree-seeking undergraduates received need-based aid, with the Fall 2019 first-year student discount rate at 54%. Alumni annual giving is at 13%.

Over 480 Wilkes students participate in intercollegiate athletics. The University maintains 23 NCAA Division III varsity programs, competing in the Middle Atlantic Conference and the United Collegiate Hockey Conference.

Wilkes has been accredited with the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) since 1937. In addition, seven professional bodies accredit, certify, or approve various University programs: American Chemical Society (ACS), Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE), Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET, Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP), the American Council on Pharmaceutical Education (ACPE), the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE), and the Commission on English Language Program Accreditation.

MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES

The Mission of Wilkes University:

To continue the Wilkes tradition of liberally educating our students for lifelong learning and success in a constantly evolving and multicultural world through a commitment to individualized attention, exceptional teaching, scholarship and academic excellence, while continuing the university’s commitment to community engagement.

The Vision of Wilkes University: Wilkes University will provide exceptional educational experiences that transform students and develop innovations through scholarly activities that lead to national recognition and shape the world around us.

Wilkes University Values: • Mentorship: Nurturing individuals to understand

and act on their abilities while challenging them to achieve great things.

• Scholarship: Advancing knowledge through discovery and research to better educate our constituents.

• Diversity: Embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion and sensitivity.

• Innovation: Promoting creative scholarly activities, programs, ideas and sustainable practices.

• Community: Appreciating and collaborating with mutual respect to foster a sense of belonging.

14

CHAPTER 1: STANDARD I

Mission and Goals(RoA: 7, 10)

15

Wilkes University continues its commitment to providing a comprehensive learning environment for all students. Since the last decennial self-study, the University has made marked progress in advancing the institutional priority of creating and expanding a diverse and global community as articulated in the 2020 strategic plan, the Gateway to the Future (GTTF) [SP-GTTF]. Through its themes and emphases, GTTF also guides progress in fulfilling the Self-Study institutional priorities of programmatic excellence and faculty development (an integral component of the University’s mission and values), and financial vibrancy. Through the initiatives of the GTTF plan, the University has addressed numerous challenges and improvements related to the financial and physical infrastructure of the University that demonstrate the University’s commitment to its mission and goals.

MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES (Criterion 1)

Wilkes University’s Mission, Vision, and Values (MVV) statements, are stated below [WW-MVV].

MISSION: To continue the Wilkes tradition of liberally educating our students for lifelong learning and success in a constantly evolving and multicultural world through a commitment to individualized attention, exceptional teaching, scholarship and academic excellence, while continuing the University’s commitment to community engagement.

VISION: Wilkes University will provide exceptional educational experiences that transform students and develop innovations through scholarly activities that lead to national recognition and shape the world around us.

VALUES:• Mentorship: Nurturing individuals to understand

and act on their abilities while challenging them to achieve great things.

• Scholarship: Advancing knowledge through discovery and research to better educate our constituents.

• Diversity: Embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion and sensitivity.

• Innovation: Promoting creative scholarly activities, programs, ideas and sustainable practices.

• Community: Appreciating and collaborating with mutual respect to foster a sense of belonging.

The MVV informs and guides long-term institutional goals and the strategic planning process. The MVV are communicated through the University’s website and in other key publications, including the University’s Undergraduate and Graduate Bulletins. The core of the current mission and values was developed during the 2005-2006 AY by a Mission/Vision Task Force. Later, when Vision 2015 (a prior strategic plan) was developed, in 2009-10, the Strategic Planning Committee updated the mission and values, adding language to the mission to recognize the University’s commitment to the liberal arts and long-standing engagement with the community. Value statements regarding Scholarship, Diversity, and Innovation were added to the existing values of Mentorship and Community Engagement as part of the Vision 2015 Strategic Plan [SP-V15]. The GTTF strategic planning committee, convened in 2013, reviewed the existing mission, vision and values, and endorsed their on-going relevance [SP-GTTF].

The results of a Fall 2018 Survey of Faculty and Staff clearly indicate that the Wilkes community is aware of the MVV, and approves of their contents [SR-SS18]. Overall, faculty and staff strongly agreed that the MVV are “clearly defined,” (6.48, where 7 is strongly agree); goals are “realistic, appropriate to higher education and consistent with” the mission, (6.33 mean); and the “goals focus on student learning and related outcomes and on institutional improvement; are supported by administrative, educational, and student support programs and services; and are consistent with institutional mission” (6.17 mean).

Similarly, the results from the most recent 2018 Chronicle of Higher Education: Great Colleges to Work For survey provide confirmation on these points, indicating significant positive increases to Mission and Goals-related statements. The percent of faculty and staff who indicated that they “under[stood] how [their] job contributes to this institution’s mission” reached 90%, an increase of 11% since 2010 (Q#5). Respondents also felt that they were “meaningfully involved in the institutional planning” (Q#42). The percentage who agreed with this statement increased by 12% since 2010 [SR-GC18].

16

INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIC PLANNING (Criterion 2)

Strategic planning at Wilkes has developed with intentional and consistent adherence to the mission and values, and careful consideration and support for innovation, expansion of programs, and diversity. University academic planning is closely guided by the MVV, down to the level of proposal submissions that require articulation of how new programs relate to and promise to deliver upon the MVV [UC-APC-1]. Forming the primary goals since the last decennial Self-Study, the University’s GTTF Plan is an inclusive plan that builds upon the work of the University’s former Plan [SP-V15]. The GTTF plan is the product of the 20-member Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) that began its work in March 2013. The GTTF plan, finalized in 2014, was an aggressive, comprehensive, and highly-detailed plan, intricately tied to the MVV, and has allowed the University to advance and more fully realize its mission [SP-GTTF]. Available online and in printed form, GTTF establishes six themes: 1) Foster Excellence in Academic Programs; 2) Invest in Our People; 3) Recruit, Retain, and Graduate Undergraduate and Graduate Students; 4) Improve Our Financial Strength; 5) Strengthen Our

Campus Infrastructure; and 6) Support Efforts at Redeveloping Downtown Wilkes-Barre. Within these six themes, GTTF encompasses a total of 56 strategic objectives, or sub-initiatives.

The three institutional priorities of the Self-Study (Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Fiscal Viability, and Diverse and Global Community) tie directly to the main themes of the GTTF. With a focus on exceptional teaching and innovation, the University has expanded its academic offerings at both the undergraduate and graduate level (including an Honors Program in Fall 2015) to advance the University’s institutional priority of programmatic excellence. These expansions of academic programs 2009-to-present are illustrated in Table 1-1.

The addition of the DNP to the existing PharmD and EdD degrees increased the annual number of students earning doctoral/professional degrees and led to Wilkes being classified as a Doctoral/Professional University in the 2018 update to the Carnegie Classification System. At the time of this writing, the new PhD in Nursing has yet to produce graduates, but the additional doctoral degrees conferred will only strengthen the University’s impact on doctoral/professional education.

Since 2010, the University has remained committed to undergraduate excellence while expanding its graduate program offerings. As shown in Figure 1-1, the University has seen an increase in undergraduate full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment and credit hours. From 2010 to 2014, graduate enrollments, on the other hand, decreased, largely due to less demand for graduate education affected by state budget cuts. In response, Wilkes examined ways to diversify its graduate offerings, including the introduction of online graduate programs in nursing to access a previously untapped population of students from across the country.

AY 2009-2010 AY 2019-2020

Undergraduate Programs 40 54

Masters Programs 8 10

Doctoral Programs 2 4

Table 1-1. Growth in Academic Programs

17

The percentage of international and out-of-state students increased from 2010 to 2019. See Table 1-2 for more detail on this out-of-state and international growth by degree level sought. The increase in out-of-state and international students creates less dependence on the local region and state. This was an intentional shift due to the diminishing pre-college age population in the Northeast Pennsylvania region. In relation, the University grew the

proportion of full-time undergraduate students residing on campus by 7% between Fall 2010 and 2019. Indicative of a renewed focus on undergraduate education and the undergraduate experience, the University added seven intercollegiate athletic teams, 2010 to present, bringing the total up from 16 to 23. This increase in athletes supports the University’s GTTF efforts to enhance student retention and graduation rates [AD-FAR19].

Table 1-2. Fall Enrollment by Location and Degree Level Sought

FALL ENROLLMENT % IN-STATE % OUT OF STATE % INTERNATIONAL

2010 2019 2010 2019 2010 2019

Undergraduates 78.9% 73.5% 18.3% 20.9% 2.8% 5.6%

First-Professional 81.7% 86.5% 17.6% 13.1% 0.7% 0.4%

Graduate 92.3% 78.5% 6.6% 20.2% 1.2% 1.3%

Total 86.9% 76.5% 11.4% 20.1% 1.7% 3.4%

Figure 1-1. Change in Enrollment and Credit Hours 2010-2019

Full-

tim

e Eq

uiva

lent

Enr

ollm

ent

(in

Thou

sand

s)

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

Cre

dit

Hou

rs P

rodu

ced

(in

Thou

sand

s)

Note: For FTE, year references fall term enrollment; for credit hours, year references the full academic year; FP (pharmacy program) credit hours are split between Undergraduate (UG) and Graduate (GR).

UG FTE

GR FTE

FP FTE

UG Credit Hours

GR Credit Hours

Source: Fact Books

18

MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES AND STUDENT LEARNING: (Criterion 3)

The MVV informs both undergraduate Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLOs) and Graduate-level Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (GISLOs), and these connections have been mapped, facilitating assessment of delivery upon the Mission and Values. See Figures 1-2 and 1-3.

To more purposefully incorporate Wilkes’ core value of diversity into the general education curriculum, a revision of the General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs) [UP-UGBGE19], approved in the Spring of 2015 included a new Diversity Awareness skill area [UC-FFM 043015].

The GESLOs for Diversity Awareness are: • D1: demonstrate knowledge and understanding of

the diversity of the local and global communities, including cultural, social, political, and economic differences;

• D2: analyze, evaluate, and assess the impact of differences in race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, native language, sexual orientation, ableism, age, and religion; and

• D3: utilize perspectives of diverse groups when conducting analyses, drawing conclusions, and making decisions.

These Diversity Awareness learning outcomes provide for greater and more direct assessment of this vital area of the mission and values. See Chapter 5 for assessment results related to student learning outcomes.

WILKES UNIVERSITY ALIGNMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES WITH MISSION, VISION, & VALUES

Mission

Continue the Wilkes tradition of liberally educating our students

Academic Excellence

Scholarship

Exceptional teaching

Success in a constantly evolving and multicultural world

Committment to community engagement

Lifelong learning and success

Committment to individualized attention

VisionWilkes University will provide exceptional educational experiences that transform students and develop innovations through scholarly activities that lead to national recognition and shape the world around us.

Values

Scholarship: Advancing knowledge through discovery and research to better educate our constituents.

Innovation: Promoting creative scholarly activities, programs, ideas and sustainable practices.

Diversity: Embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion, and sensitivity.

Community: Appreciating and collaborating with mutual respect to foster a sense of belonging.

Mentorship: Nurturing individuals to understand and act on their abilities while challenging them to achieve great things.

Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLO): Students will develop and demonstrate through coursework, learning experiences, co-curricular and extracurricular activities.

ISLO 1: The knowledge, skills, and scholarship that are appropriate to their general and major field of study.

ISLO 2: Effective written and oral communication skills and information literacy using an array of media and modalities.

ISLO 3: Practical, critical, analytical, and quantitative reasoning skills.

ISLO 4: Actions reflecting ethical reasoning, civic responsibility, environmental stewardship, and respect for diversity.

ISLO 5: Interpersonal skills and knowledge of self as a learner that contribute to effective team work, mentoring, and lifelong learning.

Figure 1-2. Alignment of ISLOs with MVV

Approved 2007

19

ASSESSMENT (Criterion 4)

As of June 2019, the University has completed 25 of the 56 strategic objectives of the GTTF plan, with progress being made on all remaining objectives [SP-JUNE19]. The University has made significant progress in achieving Theme 1 (Foster Excellence in Academic Programs) and Theme 5 (Strengthen our Campus Infrastructure) in particular. More information about attainment of the goals of the GTTF plan are articulated in Chapter 6 and shown in Table 6-1.

The information gathered through the self-study process revealed a consensus on a range of institutional emphases. These priorities, embedded within the MVV, and essential to the GTTF Plan, are represented in the three institutional priorities of the Self-Study (Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Financial Vibrancy, and Diverse and Global Community). The most salient and widely agreed upon of these strengths are: the culture of mentoring; support for scholarship; and dedication

to fostering and supporting diversity and inclusion. The University’s focus on mentoring, scholarship and diversity provides ample opportunity for the University to demonstrate its further commitment to innovation and community. The following sections provide illustrations of the University’s commitment to its core values.

MentoringWilkes University has had mentoring and individualized attention as a lived core value since its inception as Bucknell University Junior College. Today, mentorship is central to how the University educates, and it permeates the culture. Among the many programmatic efforts in which this value is manifested are: the Mentoring Fund, Provost’s Research and Scholarship Fund, the Educational Gateway to Excellence (EDGE) Program, E-Mentoring, Internships, Alumni Mentoring, Alternative Spring Break, Women Empowered By Science (WEBS), and Staff and Faculty Mentoring programs. Graduate level pedagogy is imbued with opportunities for mentoring through relationships with graduate faculty and preceptors. Study Abroad programming has also received increased

WILKES UNIVERSITY ALIGNMENT OF GRADUATE INSTITUTIONAL STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES WITH MISSION, VISION, & VALUES

Mission

Continue the Wilkes tradition of liberally educating our students

Academic Excellence

Scholarship

Exceptional teaching

Success in a constantly evolving and multicultural world

Committment to community engagement

Lifelong learning and success

Committment to individualized attention

VisionWilkes University will provide exceptional educational experiences that transform students and develop innovations through scholarly activities that lead to national recognition and shape the world around us.

Values

Scholarship: Advancing knowledge through discovery and research to better educate our constituents.

Innovation: Promoting creative scholarly activities, programs, ideas and sustainable practices.

Diversity: Embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion, and sensitivity.

Community: Appreciating and collaborating with mutual respect to foster a sense of belonging.

Mentorship: Nurturing individuals to understand and act on their abilities while challenging them to achieve great things.

Graduate Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (GISLO): Students will develop and demonstrate:

GISLO 1: A comprehensive understanding of appropriate theories, methods, and standards specific to the field of study

GISLO 2: Appropriate application of the methods, skills and technique specific to the field of study

GISLO 3: Effective written communi-cation skills in the field of study

GISLO 4: Effective oral communi-cation skills in the field of study

GISLO 5: Understanding of integrity and ethical practice

GISLO 6: The ability to engage in the process of systematic inquiry appropriate to the field of study

Figure 1-3. Alignment of GISLOs with MVV

Approved 2015

20

attention and support in recent years, and is approached from an ethos of mentoring that emphasizes interpersonal as well as international engagement. See the section on Diversity below for more discussion on how the University is investing in Study Abroad.

Scholarship Central to the mission and to the institutional priorities of programmatic excellence and faculty (and student) development is the support for scholarship. As prioritized in the GTTF Plan, the University has been able to markedly enhance its fiscal support for scholarship and research over the past decade, particularly for projects that involve students, faculty collaboration, and cross-disciplinary research. The Provost’s Research and Scholarship Fund is an internal funding opportunity for research or scholarly projects and activities that support interdisciplinary collaboration and mentoring. The Mentoring Committee also supports faculty research involving students, providing funding for summer projects and student presentations at conferences. Mentoring and scholarship together enliven the campus each summer with mentored scholarly projects and activities. From 2016-2018, 249 students participated in funded summer research projects. See Chapter 3 for additional discussion about funding sources to support faculty research and scholarship.

The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs (ORSP) at Wilkes University is a key supporter of programmatic excellence and faculty development. The ORSP manages internal funding supported by the University, including Mentoring grants; Faculty Development Committee grants (Types I-III); and the Provost’s Research and Scholarship grants. The ORSP also manages external funding at the Federal, State, Local, and Private level. Funding activity has increased significantly year-over-year for the last several years. In fact, the ORSP met its five-year strategic planning goal in the first two years of the plan cycle [SP-JUNE19].

Wilkes furthered its focus on doctoral education with the opening of the PhD in Nursing in Fall 2017, and the University’s new 2018 Basic Carnegie Classification recognition of being a Doctoral/Professional institution, based on the number and type of doctoral degrees awarded. With the University’s development into a Doctoral/Professional institution, it will be increasingly important to leverage Wilkes’ financial resources to provide support for faculty and student scholarship.

Diversity Diversity at Wilkes University, as stated in the MVV, is a core value that includes “embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion and sensitivity,” and establishing a diverse and global community is an institutional priority. It is imperative that Wilkes recognize the importance of living this value in how the University operates, particularly in light of the changing demographics in the northeast region of the United States. There is still work to be done, but the University is committed to that goal. Since 2010, Wilkes University has become a more diverse environment, with new global partnerships, resulting in an increase in the number of countries represented from 21 to 29 reflecting Middle Eastern, Latin American and Caribbean partnerships. The diversity of the domestic student population has also increased, with the non-white population growing from 18% to 24% from 2010 to 2018. The University also increased the percentage of international undergraduate students from 2.7% to 7.6% during that same time period, with the total number of international students (both undergraduate and graduate) at Wilkes up 117%, from 103 to 223. Efforts have also been made to increase racial/ethnic diversity in the faculty and staff. See Chapter 2 for more information about these policies. Additional information related to the trends in diversity can be seen in Figure 1-4.

Figure 1-4. Change in Percent of Population, 2010 to 2018

Perc

enta

ge C

hang

e

Wilkes Wilkes Wilkes Northeast Luzerne Students Staff Faculty Pennsylvania County

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

White Black Hispanic Asian Intl Other Races/Ethnicities

21

The University has also made a commitment to increase the number of students who study abroad. In support of the GTTF, the Study Abroad program encourages and supports learning experiences abroad that are safe, immersive, and academically sound. The Study Abroad Office helps develop programs to increase the accessibility of study abroad for all students, helps develop exchange programs to increase the University’s international footprint, and works closely with academic programs to help match study abroad programs with discipline-specific goals. To more directly connect study abroad to the academic side of the institution, the position of the Study Abroad Coordinator was modified to be held by a full-time faculty member, who is given release time to focus on the goals of the program.

With these positive changes, comes increased urgency to enhance the focus on inclusion and equity. In a unifying, centralized effort to provide guidance for the University in handling issues related to diversity and inclusion as well as to identify areas for improvement, the Council on Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (CODIE) was formed in 2016. This group includes faculty representatives from all of the schools and colleges of the University, three student representatives, and staff and administrators from Athletics, Admissions, Alumni, Student Affairs, Financial

Aid, Residence Life, Institutional Research, Research and Sponsored Programs and the Title IX office. This group reports to and makes recommendations to the provost and is represented on a variety of faculty and university committees, such as Student Life and Media. The aim of CODIE is to recommend and inform best practices that further the institution’s awareness of issues related to diversity and to support and address those issues properly. See Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion of CODIE.

Wilkes recognizes that, consistent with national and regional norms, students of underrepresented racial/ethnic backgrounds are not retaining at the same rates as students of majority representation. CODIE’s efforts are intended to enhance the environment for individuals of all backgrounds, with the longer-term intended effects for students of improving interpersonal and intercultural understanding, engagement with the University, satisfaction, retention, graduation, and successful transition to the next phase of life. Wilkes also recognizes the need to create a welcoming environment for individuals in the LGBTQ community. Allies training is offered on a regular basis and Wilkes invites guest speakers and events to campus that promote awareness of issues for this community [WW-ALLIES].

Mentoring, Scholarship, and Diversity in the CommunityA component of the University’s mission is to continue the commitment to community engagement. This may be best illustrated through efforts to embed the values of mentoring, scholarship, and diversity into community-based programs to impact and improve the surrounding community. Illustrations of how these values and MVV strengths are put into combined practice in the community can be found in the Wilkes University’s Women Empowered by Science (WEBS) program, the SHINE (Schools and Homes in Education) program, and Zebra Communications.

WEBS is a program that combines the institutional emphasis on mentoring, scholarship, diversity and inclusivity, and local community engagement, foregrounding mentorship as a central and intentionally lifelong role in students’ lives beginning in middle school. Each year, female students from local fifth grade classes visit the Wilkes University College of Science and Engineering after school during the academic year to participate in science, technology, engineering and math

22

(STEM) activities, to learn more about these fields and build confidence in their abilities to succeed in them. WEBS summer camps are offered to sixth and seventh grade young women who are interested in the sciences. These seven-day intensive STEM project-based learning experiences immerse students in research that will help them envision themselves as future scientists, doctors, mathematicians, engineers, and STEM teachers [WW-WEBS].

SHINE of Luzerne County is a program, housed at Wilkes, that serves more than 500 students in after-school centers and home visitor programs. SHINE employs a STEAM-based curriculum, focusing on activities in science, technology, engineering, the arts and math, and provides support to families. During the 2018-2019 academic year, 501 students were served, 620 family members attended monthly Family Nights, 36,180 meals were served, and 940 home visits were conducted for pre-K and kindergarten students [UP-PR19].

Zebra Communications, is a student-run full-service public relations agency, housed in the Department of Communication Studies. Each semester, Zebra works with 12-15 client-partners from the local community to develop public relations campaigns of up to 3-month duration, as well as other small projects. Zebra students gain valuable hands-on experience, while studying in three advanced public relations classes [WW-Zebra].

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. As Wilkes enters a new strategic planning cycle, there is an opportunity to engage in shared University-wide review of the Mission and Goals. The University should approach and conduct this review in a manner that carefully considers the historical identity of Wilkes University, its aspirational identities, and relevant external forces, factors, and requirements, balancing change and innovation with historical institutional values and tradition.

2. The University should consider ways to further embed and enhance diversity and inclusion across the areas of recruiting, enrollment, the curriculum (including the delivery of diversity-related General Education and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes), and the overall student experience.

23

CHAPTER 2: STANDARD II

Ethics and Integrity

24

Wilkes University prides itself as an institution that remains faithful to its mission and aspires to its stated vision and values through policies and practices that maintain high standards of ethics and integrity. The University has an ongoing commitment to enhancing and maintaining a respectful and inclusive campus that enrolls and graduates an increasingly diverse student population. This is reflected in the institutional priority of creating a more diverse and inclusive campus community and curriculum that is designed to treat all individuals with integrity and fairness. The University also demonstrates a commitment to ethical decision-making in the focus on Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, in the hiring and evaluation process, as well as in the way resources are allocated.

ACADEMIC AND INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND RESPECT FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (Criterion 1)

From its beginnings, Wilkes University has taken pride in being an institution that preserves academic freedom and freedom of expression. Wilkes demonstrates and sustains a commitment to academic freedom, intellectual freedom, freedom of expression, and respect for intellectual rights across a range of policies and practices that support the academic life of the institution. The Faculty Handbook articulates the foundational role of academic and intellectual freedom—and freedom of expression—in shaping the guiding principles of the institution across multiple contexts. The Faculty Handbook notes that “[i]t is the policy of Wilkes University to maintain and encourage full freedom in inquiry, research, and teaching for faculty members within their subject area” [UP-FH 5.4]. The processes that faculty members must follow when they believe that their academic freedom has been violated or when they have been the victim of discrimination are also clearly outlined in the Faculty Handbook. The Faculty Handbook also states that tenure is the “primary method for the protection of academic freedom” [UP-FH 5.9]. The Undergraduate Student Handbook also includes a statement on freedom of expression and addresses the students’ right to protest and dissent [UP-UH p.47]. In addition, the Student Handbook also has language that explicitly protects

students’ freedom of speech and sexual expression/identity by noting that students are expected not to restrict other students’ speech and that actions or conduct discriminatory against another student’s sexual orientation or identity are not permitted [UP-UH p.3].

The University remains engaged and committed to encouraging and advancing faculty advocacy. Within the governance structure of the University, the Faculty Affairs Council and the Faculty Grievance Committee are resources for faculty who need to address concerns regarding academic and intellectual freedom [UP-FH 4.3.10; 4.3.11d]. While not officially part of the University’s governance structure, a chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is established on campus that provides additional advocacy for faculty for sharing and circulating information about issues related to academic and intellectual freedom and intellectual property rights [WW-AAUP]. The AAUP provides the potential for external support and guidance should institutional support fail, prove insufficient, or be in violation of best practices.

As noted on the University’s website, the University supports and respects the intellectual property rights of faculty, students, and staff. Primarily in response to the growth in online instruction and questions raised about ownership of online course content and other forms of intellectual innovation, a task force was created in AY 2011-2012 to address intellectual property issues. The task force was charged with proposing policies that would satisfy all constituencies, while ensuring that the University complies with all respective federal and state laws and guidelines on intellectual property issues. The task force recommended the formation of a standing Intellectual Property (IP) Committee (populated by members of the Provost’s Office and faculty representatives from each College/School) and an Intellectual Property Committee Review Process [PP-IP]. The recommendations were made by the task force in February 2012, and approved by the Faculty and the Board of Trustees in March 2012 [SD-BOR030912]. The self-study process revealed that the Intellectual Property Committee was never formally convened, however. In the meantime, the University has utilized the draft proposal as guidance when dealing with intellectual property issues, and faculty and staff seeking guidance on intellectual property issues have a resource on campus with the Kirby Center for Entrepreneurship [WW-

25

APKCS; WW-APKCIP]. As a result of the discovery that the IP policy was never fully implemented, a newly-formed IP Task Force was convened in Fall 2019 by the provost to review and evaluate the recommendations from the 2012 IP Task Force in light of the current needs, and to propose additional recommendations that reflect current best practices. The University should ensure that the newly-formed IP Task Force complete its review, and upon approval, new recommendations are implemented as suggested.

Faculty, staff and students have access to copyright and fair use resources through the Farley Library’s online Research Guides [WW-RGCB; WW-RGCFU; WW-RGCD2L]. Additional external resources (e.g., Tufts University’s Fair Use Decision Tree) are also available. In addition to online tools and resources, the Farley Library has a dedicated Research Librarian who provides support on matters related to Copyright and Fair Use [WW-RGC].

The policy on academic integrity appears in several publications, including the Undergraduate Bulletin [UP-UB], the Undergraduate Student Handbook [UP-UH], and the Graduate Student Handbook [UP-GH]. The Writing Center website contains a detailed Statement on Plagiarism that describes the types of violations and penalties for committing plagiarism [WW-PLGM]. In addition, the Nuts and Bolts of Writing guide [WW-NBW] and the Statement on Plagiarism provide guidelines for avoiding plagiarism.

Academic and research integrity is preserved and protected through the University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) [UP-FH 4.3.12.j]. The purpose of the IRB is to “review research that involves human subjects,” with the “primary responsibility” being the “protection of human subjects in such research” [WW-IRBPRR]. The IRB’s work is driven by a commitment to maintaining high, consistently-enforced ethical standards for all Wilkes University researchers. To that end, the IRB provides easy access to documents that IRB members and researchers can use to evaluate whether a proposal is consistent with ethical standards [WW-IRBDL]. With the growth of research-based doctoral programs, and the increased focus on research at Wilkes, the demand for IRB review has also increased, and the IRB has received an average of 165 applications per year over the past three years. Over the past decade, there have also been changes in

federal regulations and the Wilkes IRB has ensured that all research is conducted in line with all laws, regulations, and policies. As of April, 2019, the IRB is now following the revised Common Rule for submissions [UA-IRB]. In response to the increasing caseload, and to ensure compliance with new federal regulations, the IRB adopted an online management system (IRB Mentor) through which applicants submit IRB applications online rather than by paper [WW-IRBINFO]. This system became fully operational in May 2019.

CLIMATE OF RESPECT (Criterion 2)

Wilkes University is committed to fostering an inclusive and welcoming environment for all students, faculty, staff, and community members. Community and Diversity are two of the University’s five core values [WW-MVV]. Wilkes defines Community as “Appreciating and collaborating with mutual respect to foster a sense of belonging,” and Diversity as ”Embracing differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion and sensitivity." In the University’s current strategic plan, Gateway to the Future, one of the six themes is Invest in Our People, which ensures a commitment to recognizing faculty, staff, and alumni as assets in transforming the lives of Wilkes’ students [SP-GTTF]. A campus culture that is supportive, welcoming, purposeful, and celebrative provides a foundation for best supporting collective efforts in recruitment, retention, development of faculty and staff, and engagement of alumni.

Creating and maintaining a climate of respect is a priority of Wilkes University, as evidenced by the current Strategic Plan, and consistent with the University’s values. One key feature of fostering respect is creating an environment in which everyone feels welcome and valued. The Code of Ethics Policy at Wilkes directs all employees to engage in responsible and professional behavior including dignity, respect, and fairness in dealing with others [WW-COE]. Additionally, the official Non-Discrimination Statement notes that Wilkes is “committed to providing a welcoming environment for all members of our community” and “ensuring that all educational and employment decisions are based on individuals’ abilities and qualifications.” [WW-NDS].

26

Wilkes regularly surveys students, faculty and staff regarding the campus climate. Students, in particular, have been surveyed at regular intervals about their experience. Over the past several years, Wilkes has participated in the College Senior Survey (CSS) from the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI), which includes questions that address campus climate. Results from the survey between 2011 and 2017 suggest that the majority of students are satisfied with the overall sense of community among students [SR-CCD p.1-4]. Reports of discrimination, harassment, and racial tension on campus are also low relative to a comparison group used for benchmarking. It should be noted, however, that Wilkes students reported less frequent shared experiences (e.g. sharing a meal, studying for class, partying, etc.), “with students from a racial/ethnic group other than their own," relative to students in the comparison group. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) replaced the CSS as a survey of seniors and first-year students at Wilkes in Spring 2019 [UA-NSSE]. The NSSE contains various items that can be used to assess students' experience of the campus climate. The Spring 2019 results suggest that Wilkes students were just as likely as students in any of the groups used for benchmarking (Mid-East US Private, Doctoral/Professional Carnegie Classification, and a custom comparison group comprised

largely of competitor institutions) to report that they had discussions often or very often with people of different races/ethnicities, economic backgrounds, religious beliefs, and political views. Wilkes students were also just as likely as students in any of the benchmark groups to indicate that their institution “emphasize[d] attending events that address important social, economic, or political issues." Although there was no statistical difference between Wilkes students and the benchmark groups regarding their perceptions of the degree to which their experience contributed to their knowledge, skills, and personal development regarding their “Understanding people of other backgrounds (economic, racial/ethnic, political, religious, nationality, etc.).” Wilkes first-year and senior students were much less likely than students at any of the other institutions to have reported that they “included diverse perspectives in course discussions or assignments" [SR-NSSECODIE].

Wilkes participated in the HERI Faculty Survey in 2014 and again in 2017 [SR-CCD p.5-6]. Nearly 75% of Wilkes undergraduate faculty surveyed at both times indicated that “developing a sense of community between students and faculty” is a high priority for this institution. Nearly all full-time undergraduate faculty agreed in 2014 and 2017 (97% and 96% respectively) that the “racial/

27

ethnic diversity of the student body enhances the educational experience for all students." Fifty-two percent (52%) of undergraduate faculty indicated in 2017 that they believed that it was an institutional priority to “promote racial and ethnic diversity in the faculty and administration.” This was an increase from just 36% in 2014. Fifty-nine percent (59%) indicated in 2017 that “developing an appreciation for multiculturalism” was an institutional priority, compared to 52% in 2014, demonstrating the University’s increased focus on diversity awareness (see Chapter 3 for more on the Diversity Awareness skill area of the general education core). Seventeen percent (17%) indicated in 2017, however, that “there is a lot of racial tension” at Wilkes, compared to 10% reporting the same three years prior. It may be worth noting that between survey administrations, the undergraduate student and full-time faculty populations self-identifying as white, non-Hispanic declined, while most other racial/ethnic demographic groups saw modest increases [SD-ETHtrends13-16]. In 2017, Wilkes added a 'Campus Climate' module to the HERI Faculty Survey [SR-CCD p.7-13]. Wilkes instructors indicated higher satisfaction on several of these items (compared to faculty from other institutions using that module). For instance, Wilkes instructors indicated higher satisfaction with administrative responses to incidents of discrimination and sexual assault, as well as with the representation of racial/ethnic minority faculty. Respondents also indicated that “Wilkes University has a long-standing commitment to diversity.” As has been the case for students, higher satisfaction with Wilkes' commitment to diversity may be at least somewhat related to having a less diverse population than faculty and students at other institutions used for benchmarking, however. According to the Chronicle’s Great Colleges to Work For survey results, Wilkes employee agreement increased between 2010 and 2018, from 74% to 80% for the item, "This institution places sufficient emphasis on having diverse faculty, administration and staff." Also, 83% of Wilkes employees (at both survey administrations) agreed with the statement, "At this institution, people are supportive of their colleagues regardless of their heritage or background" [SR-GC18EXT].

To help ensure that the University provides an open, inclusive, and respectful environment for all students, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity, the Council on Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (CODIE) was created in the Fall of 2016 to inform how the University can best navigate diversity and

inclusion-related issues [SD-HHMI IVp.2]. Specifically, CODIE was given the responsibility to “critically analyze Wilkes University’s strengths and challenges in the areas of diversity, inclusion, and equity.” To that end, CODIE assesses campus climate, evaluates policies, procedures and programs, and promotes equity and authentic inclusion, and conducts training and educational programs in the areas of diversity, inclusion and equity, among other responsibilities.

In June 2018, the provost and three members of CODIE, including the Dean of Students and two faculty representatives, attended a Diversity, Civility, and Liberal Arts Institute offered by the Council of Independent Colleges [SD-CICI]. Plans were drafted by the team for moving ahead effectively with diversity and inclusion efforts at the University based on the best practices shared at the Institute [SD-CIDIP]. Both beforehand and in the months following the Institute, Wilkes has made headway in various areas to better understand, develop, and support diversity and inclusion efforts [SD-CICPR].

CODIE developed and administered a survey to Wilkes students in Fall 2017 as a way to develop a baseline for improvement, and to evaluate how students experience inclusion differently at Wilkes. A summary of results framed around undergraduate student retention revealed that certain demographic minority groups were more likely to strongly consider leaving prior to completing their degree. These findings were shared with University leadership [SD-CODIEPPT] and will serve as a baseline for assessing improvements in the Wilkes experience for these populations, and will continue to inform the focus of CODIE.

Another survey developed by CODIE, in consultation with General Education Committee leadership, was an assessment of where and how diversity is addressed in the curriculum. The survey was initially distributed to faculty at the end of Fall 2018, and a preliminary list of courses was developed [SR-CODIE18]. Members of CODIE are also finalizing the development of a faculty and staff survey intended to focus on the diversity and inclusion experience and concerns of employees. The survey should be administered during the 2019-20 academic year. The results will provide a baseline for assessing the climate for faculty and staff in the future and will further inform the focus of CODIE.

28

The University has undertaken a number of diversity and inclusion initiatives that seek to respect and value Wilkes’ diverse and global community. Wilkes University created the Center for Global Education and Diversity (CGED) in 2008 to help support students of underrepresented groups. To help support the international student population, the CGED provides cultural, social, immigration and academic support. The CGED created an Intensive English Program and other support services for non-native speakers [UP-IEP]. The CGED works with the Multicultural Student Coalition in hosting activities that promote a diverse, welcoming, and inclusive campus environment [SD-CGED]. For example, the CGED has created celebrations for various cultural and ethnic groups, has instituted a multicultural awards ceremony, and has created a Global Coffee Hour for students, faculty, and staff each week of the semester. The CGED has also developed an annual Diversity and Inclusion Conference, and held the third annual conference in October 2019 [SD-CGED19].

To support students of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender and Questioning (LGBTQ) community, the Safe Space program was developed, and helps those students to identify a supportive faculty/staff member or student group [WW-SS]. In the Safe Space Ally training session, faculty/staff are given the tools to take action against negative attitudes towards the LGBTQ community on and off campus. Other initiatives that provide support and respect for the LGBTQ community include the creation of “all gender” restrooms [WW-AGR], and a policy to allow students to request the use of a “preferred” name on official school documents to support students whose given name may not match their identity [PP-NCF]. In 2016, the Wilkes University President created the President’s Award for Excellence in Diversity [WW-PAE]. This award is given annually to recognize an employee who embraces differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion, and sensitivity. Additionally, the Multiculturalism Award is awarded annually by the Teacher Recognition and Effectiveness Committee to recognize an outstanding faculty member who demonstrates leadership in the advancement of multicultural ideals in the classroom [WW-TRECMA].

Wilkes University’s commitment to a welcoming environment is further evidenced in its Title IX policies

and procedures. Wilkes has paid special attention to ensuring that policies are in place to address concerns regarding discrimination based on sex or gender per Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. In November 2015, the University hired a full-time Title IX Coordinator to provide leadership on these important issues [WW-TIX]. Activities and awareness campaigns are held in support of Title IX issues [WW-TIXCC]. The University is also committed to ensuring its practices are in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Procedures are in place to provide support and accommodations for students with documented disabilities [WW-ADA]. In order to assist faculty in making their online course content accessible/ADA-compliant, the Office of Technology for Teaching and Learning has compiled a list of resources for faculty [WW-OTTLR], and the Disability Support Services Office provides students with documented disabilities the appropriate accommodations [WW-DSS].

29

GRIEVANCE POLICY (Criterion 3)

Wilkes University remains committed to ensuring the opportunity for students, faculty, staff, and third parties visiting the institution to file complaints or grievances in order to address problems or shortcomings experienced [WW-NDS]. The University has adopted and published a Grievance Policy in the Graduate Student Handbook [UP-GH Ch. 6] and Undergraduate Student Handbook [UP-UH p.41] that guides students on how to file a complaint regarding any aspect of the University’s operations or about the actions of any student, visitor, or employee of Wilkes. A review of the graduate and undergraduate handbooks for the 2018-2019 academic year revealed minor inconsistencies with the wording of the grievance policy. The language in both handbooks is now aligned to reflect the current adopted policy. The University is committed to following the procedures outlined in the student handbooks to ensure fairness and consistency.

There is a Faculty Grievance Committee, whose job it is to hear “all grievances brought by members of the faculty” [UP-FH 4.3.11d]. On a survey conducted by the Middle States Self-Study Steering Committee, 78% of faculty and staff indicated that they felt Wilkes had a well-documented and fairly implemented grievance policy [SR-SS18]. In open-ended comments, however, some noted that they are not comfortable reporting grievances. It was also noted, through open forums [SR-SS19] and the Middle States survey, that the University should pay special attention so that individuals who file grievances feel protected and heard. A suggestion was made to hire an ombudsperson to help navigate more difficult employment situations.

As Wilkes has evaluated the accessibility of policies, it has become apparent that finding University policies can be difficult. At the August, 2018 Middle States Faculty Retreat, it was noted that it can be difficult to find all the relevant policies in a timely fashion [SR-FR18]. While new faculty are given information about policy at the new faculty orientation, extra guidance may be needed for established faculty. To maintain compliance with laws and regulations, the number of policies has increased over the past decade. This growth in policies has created challenges, most notably in ensuring easy access for students, faculty, and staff to all relevant policies.

Currently, policies are accessible in several locations, including the Employee Policies Manual, Undergraduate Student Handbook, and Faculty Handbook, among others, with no one location providing a comprehensive listing. In recognizing the importance of student awareness of policies, at the first-year orientation, all students participate in a required activity to ensure their familiarity with the Student Handbook. Related to student policies and procedures, Wilkes students reported on the 2017 Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) that residence hall regulations are reasonable and disciplinary procedures are fair, and students agree that the Student Handbook provides helpful information [SR-SSI17-Table 2 p.11].

Policies, like those found in the Student Handbook or Faculty Handbook, are reviewed and modified as needed. A Student Affairs cabinet (comprised of Student Affairs administrators and campus student leaders) is responsible for the monitoring of student life policies and guidelines. The Faculty Handbook committee makes recommendations of changes that are then approved by the faculty and eventually the Board of Trustees. Wilkes needs to continue to provide education to all constituents to ensure that policies are understood and accessible.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICIES (Criterion 4)

Wilkes University remains committed to avoiding both actual and perceived conflicts of interests for all employees, Title IX investigations, and Board of Trustees matters. In the Employee Code of Ethics policy, employees are reminded to avoid engaging in activity that would cause a conflict with proper execution of their University responsibilities [WW-COE]. The University has also noted that “[t]he employment of relatives in the same area of an organization may cause serious conflicts and problems with favoritism and employee morale." To avoid nepotism, the University in 2004 implemented a policy that prohibits “relatives of current employees” from “occupy[ing] a position that will be working directly for or supervising their relative” and that if a relative relationship is established post-employment, the supervisor is required to disclose the potential conflict to a superior, who is then given the task of deciding the appropriate course of action [WW-HoR]. The Faculty

30

Handbook states that any conflicts of interest present in an issue that comes before the University’s standing committees “shall be resolved by the Provost” [UP-FH 4.3.15]. The Faculty Handbook defines a conflict of interest as “the existence of a relationship with another person, or participation (past or present) or anticipated participation in an event or process, that may create in the mind of a reasonable person some question about a person’s ability to perform responsibilities in an objective and impartial manner."

The Undergraduate Student Handbook also outlines the procedures that need to take place in the event that someone alleges the Title IX Coordinator had a conflict of interest during an investigation. While the Title IX Coordinator “acts with independence and authority free of conflicts of interest,” concerns regarding possible conflicts of interest are to be reported to the Special Assistant to the President, External Affairs [UP-UH p.105].

Finally, the Wilkes University Board of Trustees has instituted a policy to govern the circumstances in which members might need to recuse themselves from discussion and voting on Board matters in order to avoid conflicts of interest [PP-BoTCOI]. Board of Trustees members complete an annual questionnaire related to possible conflicts of interest and these forms are reviewed by the Vice President for Finance and Support Operations/General Counsel and the Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees. The policy explains that if a board member is unsure whether an improper affiliation exists that could potentially create a conflict of interest, he/she should “disclose the relevant facts to the President, or to the Board, and shall abide by the decision of the President or Board as to the existence or non-existence of an affiliation” [PP-BoTCOI p. 2]. During the 2018-19 AY, a university trustee purchased and developed property near the campus that included student housing. A short-term lease agreement, based on current market rates, was made between the trustee and the University. Following the procedure outlined in the conflict-of-interest policy, the issue was reviewed by the Board Audit Committee and approved in June 2019.

FAIR AND IMPARTIAL EMPLOYEE POLICIES (Criterion 5)

The general processes to hire faculty, staff, and administrators are outlined in the Faculty and Staff Search Manuals [PP-FSM; PP-SSM]. The hiring manager prepares a job description in cooperation with the Human Resources (HR) department when new and replacement positions are created. Each description includes general information about the position, a position summary, principal accountabilities and essential functions of the position, work conditions, physical requirements, and minimum qualifications. The position request is ultimately approved at the Vice President level. The hiring procedures for department chairs, deans, provost, and president are outlined in the Faculty Handbook, and include guidelines for representation on each search committee [UP-FH 4.5]. In order to become a more diverse and culturally rich community, Wilkes University strongly encourages applications from persons with diverse backgrounds. Every job announcement uses a template with the clause “Wilkes University is constantly seeking to become a more diverse community and to enhance its capacity to value and capitalize on the cultural richness that diversity brings. The University strongly encourages applications from persons with diverse backgrounds” [PP-PAT]. From Fall of 2010 to Fall of 2019, the percentage of full-time faculty who self-identify as “non-white” has increased by 8% [SD-ETHtrends10-19]. All job listings are open to all interested internal and external candidates with the exception of hiring wherein a direct reporting relationship would exist between family members [WW-HoR].

Evaluation of Staff, Faculty and AdministratorsPersonnel in staff positions are evaluated by their supervisor in ways outlined in the Employee Policies Manual [PP-EPM]. The University’s Staff Annual Performance Appraisal Process provides the framework and guidelines to formally document and evaluate the performance of each staff member [WW-PMgmt]. A written review by the supervisor and a meeting between the supervisor and employee are part of the evaluation process [PP-SAF]. The employee is rated (Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, Needs Improvement) based on the written evaluation and meeting. Goals that

31

are set by the employee and supervisor are reviewed on an annual basis. The performance review is signed by the employee, supervisor, and next-level manager before it is submitted to HR. Employees may comment and/or document any disagreements or disputes related to the evaluation. The employee is also given the opportunity to formally appeal the evaluation.

The evaluation procedures for faculty are outlined in the Faculty Handbook. There are several different types of faculty evaluation, including an annual evaluation for all faculty, and evaluations specifically linked to the process of promotion and tenure. All faculty complete an annual self-evaluation that is submitted to the department chairperson [UP-FH 5.7.1]. Five areas of performance (teaching effectiveness, advising and participation in student clubs and activities, scholarship, university service, and community service) are rated by the chairperson, then reviewed by the dean and provost, before the final evaluation is returned to the faculty member. This formative process allows for faculty members to engage in conversations with their chair and the respective dean about their work in the previous year and how to improve as they move to the next stage of their career.

The categories used in the faculty evaluation process were recently modified. Prior to the change, the evaluation only provided for three (3) rankings: Outstanding, Good, or Needs Improvement. As it worked in practice, an overwhelming majority of faculty received the “Good” rating, and it was difficult to distinguish among faculty who were falling below expectations, meeting basic expectations, and those who were exceeding basic expectations. To address this issue with the rating scale, a Faculty Evaluation Task Force was created and made a recommendation to the faculty to improve the evaluation process. In 2018, the faculty voted to approve the recommendations and the annual evaluation process now allows for five different ratings including Outstanding, Good, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement, and Unsatisfactory [UC-FFM051818].

In addition to the annual review, evaluation of faculty members up for third-year review, tenure, and promotion (Associate Professor to Professor) is also conducted by the Department Personnel Committee (DPC), which is a committee of tenured peers whose appointment is in the same department [UP-FH 5.8-5.10]. The DPC reviews a portfolio of the faculty member’s accomplishments in

the areas of teaching effectiveness, scholarship, advising and participation in student clubs and activities, and University and community service, including compiled student evaluations and classroom observations by peers. For the evaluations for those applying for promotion to a higher faculty rank, the Tenure and Promotion (TAP) Committee (a committee of seven elected tenured faculty members at large) also reviews the application for promotion [UP-FH 4.3.11a; 5.9.8]. An evaluation report from the DPC, TAP, chairperson, and dean is forwarded to the provost for review. A recommendation for promotion from the provost is sent to the president, who makes a recommendation to the Board of Trustees who make the final decision to approve the promotion [UP-FH 5.9.9].

The appeal process for faculty annual review and third-year review includes the Faculty Grievance Committee, a committee of elected tenured faculty members at large, to review the case and forward a recommendation to the faculty member, chairperson, dean and provost [UP-FH 5.8.6]. The appeal process for a faculty member who is not granted tenure or is denied promotion, is outlined in the Faculty Handbook [UP-FH 5.9.1]. This process includes the Faculty Appeals Committee, a committee of three elected tenured faculty members at large with a fourth alternative member who serves in case of recusal. [UP-FH 4.3.11]. The Faculty Appeals Committee will review the case and all documentation and complete a report of its findings to the President, who makes a recommendation to the Board. Ultimately, only the Board of Trustees can act to promote a faculty member.

During the Self-Study process, an inconsistency was discovered regarding implementation of the post-tenure review process. Although the Faculty Handbook describes a post-tenure review process [UP-FH 5.11], due to difficulty in execution, this process was suspended by the faculty and the Board of Trustees for further review, and was never re-implemented. Conversations between the provost and Faculty Affairs Council occurred during Fall 2016 to develop strategies to implement a consistent post-tenure review process, and a Task Force with representation from all colleges/schools will begin meeting in Spring 2020 to revise the process. Given that the post-tenure review policy, as written in the Faculty Handbook is not currently practiced, the University should complete the examination of post-tenure review to develop a feasible process and determine how it should be implemented. The Faculty Handbook should then be

32

revised to reflect those changes. It is worth noting that although the post-tenure review process has not been followed, this has not precluded tenured faculty from being evaluated on an annual basis.

The processes for the evaluation of department chairpersons, deans, and the provost are outlined in the Faculty Handbook. Chairpersons and deans are evaluated every three years, in the spring semester. The Faculty Handbook provides a detailed process of how evaluations of chairpersons and deans are to be conducted [UP-FH 4.4]. The language in the Faculty Handbook for the evaluation of the provost is limited, however. The Handbook states “In addition to the President’s annual review of the Provost, the President will conduct a periodic administrative performance evaluation of the Provost using a process similar to the one used for deans. Those under the purview of the Office of the Provost will complete the evaluation.” The latest evaluation of the provost, who has since left to become president of another institution, was conducted during the Spring 2018 semester and was met with some challenges and criticism. While the 360 evaluation obtained specific comments from respondents, that level of detail was not shared directly with the provost, who received summative comments only from the President. In an attempt to clarify what she could do to improve, the provost requested additional feedback. This request could have created a conflict of interest and potential breach of confidentiality, and some respondents indicated concerns. A similar issue occurred with evaluations of the deans during the 2017-2018 AY, who initially also only received summary comments. This error in procedure was later corrected, but it is clear that there is room for procedural

clarification in the evaluation process of administrative leaders. To avoid this issue in the future, Wilkes should review and apply industry best practices when conducting and reporting on 360 reviews of its administrative leaders. Current language in the Faculty Handbook should be clarified to provide specific or clear guidelines on how to complete and report the 360 evaluation process to ensure that all constituencies on campus respect the process that was used and the final product.

Discipline and Separation of Staff, Faculty and AdministratorsStaff are at-will employees with Wilkes University; therefore, both the employee and Wilkes University have the right to terminate employment at-will, with or without cause, at any time. In an effort to ensure that all employees are treated consistently and equitably, Wilkes has established a progressive discipline process to address and modify or correct problematic employee behavior. Progressive discipline is not a guarantee and may not always be utilized in situations involving misconduct. The Progressive Discipline Policy, that outlines the discipline and separation policy for staff, is outlined in the Employee Policies Manual [WW-PDP].

A faculty member, tenured or non-tenured, can be terminated after following the procedure outlined in the Faculty Handbook [UP-FH 5.13.8]. Reasons for termination of faculty members for cause include: academic dishonesty and misconduct, disregard of duties, violation of University policy, harassment, and criminal acts. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights under applicable law.

33

ETHICAL COMMUNICATIONS (Criterion 6)

Wilkes University ensures the institution is reflected accurately in internal and external communications. These include public relations announcements, advertisements, and recruiting materials. Public relations news releases are reviewed by the administrative office or academic department promoted in the announcement before distribution to media outlets. News releases are distributed via ReadMedia’s Merit system. In addition, the University promotes Wilkes via the News@Wilkes website (news.wilkes.edu), which acts as a clearinghouse for news releases, videos, events, and articles about research and scholarship. News@Wilkes provides links to University social media accounts, as well. The University also publishes an alumni magazine, the Wilkes magazine [UP-WMSpr19] and the annual President’s Report [UP-PR19].

Wilkes University promotes the University with a variety of tactics designed to both elevate the Wilkes brand and recruit students for various programs. Messaging is developed based on a discovery process, through which students, faculty and alumni are surveyed or interviewed to learn about their experiences and unique aspects of Wilkes programs. All new materials for advertising at Wilkes conform to the style guide consistent with the University’s new brand, “Imagine Wilkes,” which reflects goals set in the strategic plan [UP-SG]. The Office of Marketing Communications creates admissions materials in consultation with academic departments and the Admissions Office to ensure that they accurately reflect student experiences and outcomes, and the variety and distinctive qualities of Wilkes programs. These materials include print publications, email communications, and information presented on the Wilkes website. In 2017, the majority of students agreed that Admissions counselors accurately portrayed Wilkes (71.6%), and that the admissions process was consistent with their actual advising (65.4%) and academic experience (68.4%) [SR-SSIadm2017]. On the 2018 Fall Freshman Survey, most students (91%) felt that their experience at Wilkes met or exceeded their expectations [SR-FFS18].

The main vehicle for internal campus communications is Today@Wilkes. The Office of Marketing Communications disseminates two versions daily: one for faculty/staff and one for students [WW-T@WE]. The

campus community submits news items via email or an online form [WW-T@WG]. A summary of headlines is emailed to the respective audiences. Readers can click on individual items of interest to read the complete article online. Subjects include campus events, student activities, HR news, and faculty, staff and student achievements.

Official messages are disseminated via email, either from the President’s Office or on behalf of the provost or other vice presidents. The Office of Public Safety distributes safety-related messages, including Clery Act reporting and weather announcements. These are sent via email or text message, in addition to Today@Wilkes [WW-EMS]. The University Staff Advisory Committee (USAC) also distributes an e-newsletter to staff members [WW-USACnews]. The availability of minutes from USAC meetings is also announced via Today@Wilkes. Information specific to faculty is discussed at full faculty meetings, held the first Thursday of each month. Each month, the meeting’s agenda, along with the minutes from the previous meeting, are distributed to all faculty.

ETHICS IN FINANCIAL AID (Criterion 7)

Affordability and AccessibilityWilkes University strives to make a private college education affordable. To do this, Wilkes promotes affordability and accessibility through many services and programs [WW-FA]. The Wilkes website lists scholarships for first-year and transfer students, a net price calculator, and information on PHEAA, FAFSA, private loans, and an education planner [WW-FA-Types]. The website also provides information on the satisfactory academic progress policy, Stafford Loan information, and information on “return on education,” referred to as “Colonels Earn More.”

Wilkes’ goal is to help prospective students attend the University. Wilkes encourages all applicants to apply for financial aid. In Fall of 2019, 96% of first-time full-time students were awarded some form of financial aid [UP-FB]. The majority of undergraduate students receive merit-based scholarships ranging from $8,000-$19,000 annually. In addition, Wilkes’ need-based grants are available to students who demonstrate financial need within university designated ranges. Grants are supported by funds received from gifts from alumni

34

and friends of the University and the operating budget. To provide extra financial assistance to first-generation college students, the First Generation Scholarship Fund was established in 2014 to help cover costs not already supported by federal, state or institutional financial aid. To date, this fund has raised more than $3 million. [WW-N@WFGSF]. Overall, in the 2018-2019 academic year (FY19), the University contributed $41,470,000 toward student need and merit-based aid [SD-Audit19].

As Table 2-1 indicates, Wilkes’ tuition and required fees have remained competitive, compared to other private institutions with which Wilkes competes for students.

Student Education about Financial AidWilkes provides financial information of many forms to prospective students and their parents/guardians. The Wilkes website provides current information on cost of attendance, disbursement of additional financial aid

funds for books and supplies, and the net price calculator [WW-FA]. It also provides financial literacy training in the form of a Cash Course that students can elect to take during the orientation period or later in their college career.

Wilkes University has prided itself on being an institution that provides a college education to first-generation college students. Wilkes University defines a first generation college student as a student for whom neither parent graduated from a 4-year institution. As reported in the Fact Book, the percentages of first generation college students in the freshman classes from 2015 through 2019 were 51, 47, 52, 44, and 43, respectively [UP-FB]. Given the percentage of Wilkes students who are first-generation college students, the need for financial aid education is particularly important.

FULL-TIME UNDERGRADUATE TUITION + REQUIRED FEES 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

AVERAGE ANNUAL

INCREASE

York College Pennsylvania $16,890 $18,780 $19,430 $20,100 $20,886 5.5%

Moravian College $38,132 $40,287 $42,024 $43,636 $45,312 4.4%

Duquesne University $33,778 $35,062 $36,394 $38,178 $39,992 4.3%

Median for other 12 Institutions $33,778 $35,062 $36,394 $38,178 $39,992 4.3%

King's College $33,090 $34,720 $35,830 $37,226 $38,724 4.0%

Susquehanna University $42,040 $43,720 $45,470 $47,290 $49,180 4.0%

Wilkes University $32,356 $33,568 $34,896 $36,194 $37,622 3.8%

DeSales University $33,350 $34,850 $35,900 $37,400 $38,700 3.8%

Misericordia University $29,840 $30,740 $31,660 $33,240 $34,560 3.7%

Widener University $41,224 $42,870 $44,166 $45,948 $47,328 3.5%

Drexel University $48,791 $51,030 $52,002 $53,244 $54,516 2.8%

University of Scranton $41,044 $42,162 $43,310 $44,532 $45,790 2.8%

Marywood University $32,692 $33,000 $33,940 $34,910 $35,906 2.4%

University of the Sciences $37,466 $38,850 $39,994 $25,000 $25,000 -7.7%

Table 2-1. Wilkes Tuition and Fees Compared to Those of Competing Schools

Source: AICUP Tuition & Fees Reports

35

COMPLIANCE (Criterion 8)

Disclosure of InformationWith regard to institution-wide assessments, the Office of Institutional Research is responsible for creating and implementing a survey research schedule of relevant University constituencies, which it keeps on its website [SR-SSched]. The Wilkes University Fact Book is available on the University Website and discloses information about graduation rates, retention rates, placement of graduates, and professional accreditations [UP-FB]. Accreditation information is also available on the website directly through an Accreditation and Rankings page [WW-Accred], and the status of each disciplinary program accreditation is tracked and accessible through the University Assessment Committee’s website [SD-DAS]. Pass rates for licensure exams are available through the appropriate departmental websites. See the Verification of Compliance (VoC) Report for additional information.

Compliance with the Commission’s Requirements of AffiliationCompliance with the Requirements of Affiliation is demonstrated through the Self-Study and VoC documents [SD-ROA].

Substantive changes When the self-study process began, Wilkes had over 60 additional locations listed in its MSCHE Institutional Profile. Most of these locations provided support for the delivery of courses at off-site locations for the graduate education program. As many of these programs have transitioned to an online format, the need to maintain physical instructional sites has been substantially reduced. As a result, the University decided to close most of those sites. In October 2019, Wilkes submitted substantive change requests to close 58 additional locations. In addition, increased demand at one instructional site for program-specific course offerings led to a substantive change proposal to convert the instructional site to an additional location. One site was also converted from an additional location to an instructional site. These recent requests were approved in January 2020. Substantive change requests were also approved to close an additional location in Mesa, AZ in 2017, and Weir Minerals in 2018 [SD-MSCHEinstit].

Compliance with Federal, State, and Commission policiesThe University complies with federal, state, Commission, and University policies, processes, regulations, and requirements in order to promote sound ethical practices that are in accordance with institutional values. The University has a compliance officer who works through the Office of Risk & Compliance Management to coordinate university-wide efforts to ensure compliance with federal, state and local regulations. The Office is responsible for the preparation, prevention and response to emergency events at Wilkes. The focus is on the safety of every member is the campus community. To ensure a safe environment for minors, a “minors on campus” policy was adopted in 2014 [PP-minors]. This policy requires all school employees and volunteers who have direct contact with minors be screened every five years. The University also adheres to Clery Act notification requirements [WW-Clery].

36

A Title IV audit was completed in 2015. The audit is included in the VoC report, which also includes other additional details regarding compliance.

PERIODIC ASSESSMENT (Criterion 9)

Wilkes University remains committed to reviewing policies on a regular basis. Handbooks and policies are living documents, in essence, frequently updated to reflect laws/mandates, best practices, and change based on assessment and feedback from stakeholders. For example, in 2017, the HR department established a practice to review existing policies every two years. The most current review commenced in Fall 2018 and was completed in early 2019. In addition, policies may be developed, modified or revised as needed. On the academic side, each spring, chairs and coordinators are sent pages from the Undergraduate Bulletin that pertain to their programs, to ensure regular and informed updates. In the past, while the Undergraduate Bulletin was updated by separate units each year, these revisions were then sent to an “editor” who made the final changes, and faculty indicated that changes made at the departmental level were not always incorporated in a timely fashion, and the Bulletin was not always available at the start of each academic year [SR-SS19]. To address this issue, a new process was implemented in 2018-2019, to help manage Bulletin changes. This process allows departments to directly enter edits into the system. Hands-on training was provided to department chairs and support staff in the Spring of 2019. Preliminary feedback regarding the new process has been positive, and this system will be continued for the next academic year, with additional training as necessary. Improvements are currently being made related to the Graduate Student Handbook [UP-GH]. The most recent version of the handbook approved by the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) was for 2017-2018. As discussed in Chapter 3, due to the growth of graduate programs, and decentralized authority for those programs, the GSC determined that separate handbooks were needed for each area, and policies that apply to all programs can now be found in the Graduate Student Bulletin. See Chapter 3 for more information on these changes.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. Given that the post-tenure review policy, as written in the Faculty Handbook is not currently practiced, the University should complete the examination of post-tenure review to develop a feasible process and determine how it should be implemented. The Faculty Handbook should then be revised to reflect those changes.

2. The current language in the Faculty Handbook should be clarified to provide specific and clear guidelines for the implementation and reporting of the 360 administrative evaluation process to ensure that all constituencies understand and adhere to the process.

3. The University should ensure that the newly-formed IP Task Force complete its review, and upon approval, the policy be shared with the University community and implemented.

37

CHAPTER 3: STANDARD III

The Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience (RoA: 8, 9, 10, 15)

38

Chapter 3 addresses the University’s commitment to strengthening the student learning experience by delivering a rigorous and comprehensive set of academic programs that challenge students to achieve beyond their self-perceived potential and promote lifelong learning. Processes for program development, curriculum approval, and student learning assessment demonstrate the importance Wilkes places on academic rigor and coherence for all program levels.

The Wilkes Faculty is responsible for the development, maintenance, and delivery of the curriculum and works with the administration and staff in support of the student learning experience. As a core institutional priority, programmatic excellence and faculty development are supported through the University’s strategic plan Gateway to the Future (GTTF), by committing to increases in financial support for faculty development activities and student participation and mentoring opportunities in faculty-sponsored research and scholarly activity.Several themes from the University’s strategic plan are linked to the design and delivery of the student learning experience. For example, approval and assessment processes directly foster excellence in academic programs. This chapter also discusses how institutional resources are invested in our people to assure that university personnel have the skills and credentials required to support and deliver the curriculum in a rigorous and coherent manner. Academic programs are designed to recruit, retain, and graduate students by marketing programs that appeal to prospective students, to sustain their interest, and provide students with marketable skills and knowledge to assure their placement in jobs or graduate programs upon graduation from the University. In addition, an investment in improvements to the campus infrastructure and physical plant have helped strengthen the campus to enhance the student learning experience and remain competitive among peer institutions.

UNDERGRADUATE, GRADUATE, CERTIFICATE, AND PROFESSIONAL PROGRAMS (Criterion 1)

As of Fall 2019, the University Bulletin identifies 54 undergraduate degree programs and 14 graduate degree programs. These degree programs reside in 23

departments or divisions that are organized into six colleges/schools. In addition, there are 55 undergraduate minors and several certificate programs. Numerous programs within the University’s academic portfolio are approved, certified, or maintain accredited status among seven external agencies [SD-DAS]:

• The Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP) - Eight undergraduate programs and one MBA program in the Sidhu School of Business. The Sidhu School of Business is currently in candidacy status for accreditation by AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business).

• The Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) - Four undergraduate programs, ten masters degree/certificate programs, and one EdD program in the School of Education.

• The American Chemical Society (ACS) - Undergraduate programs in biochemistry and chemistry in the College of Science and Engineering meet the guidelines and requirements for approval by ACS.

• Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET - Undergraduate programs in electrical, environmental, and mechanical engineering in the College of Science and Engineering.

• The Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE) - One undergraduate program, one master’s program, a DNP and PhD in the Passan School of Nursing.

• The Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) - One PharmD program in the Nesbitt School of Pharmacy.

• The Commission on English Language Program Accreditation (CEA) accredits one non-degree/non-credit Intensive English Program (IEP).

Approval of new courses and programs follows the process outlined in the Faculty Handbook. Proposals for new programs are reviewed and approved by the Academic Planning Committee (APC) for financial feasibility and the program’s curriculum and requirements are approved by the Curriculum Committee (CC) [UP-FH 4.3.14a; 4.3.10e]. Upon approval by both committees, the new program proposal is presented to, and voted on by, the Faculty for approval. The approval process is designed to ensure that questions regarding the length, rigor, and coherence of program proposals are addressed prior to a full-faculty vote.

39

Curriculum proposals for course additions/deletions are submitted, reviewed, and approved by the CC prior to a vote by the Faculty. Upon approval by the Faculty, revisions are reflected in the next edition of the University Bulletin, as appropriate. In addition to the APC and CC, other committees are involved in the monitoring and assessment of efficacy and rigor of academic programs, including the University Assessment Committee (UAC), General Education Committee (GEC), and Graduate Studies Committee (GSC). Lastly, the Academic Standards Committee (ASC) reviews and recommends changes to the rules and standards among programs as they pertain to the academic standards of the University [UP-FH 4.3.14b; 4.3.10d; 4.3.10g; 4.3.10b].

THE FACULTY (Criterion 2)

As of Fall 2019, the University employs 448 faculty members consisting of 196 full-time (FT) and 252 part-time (PT) faculty members [SR-CDS19]. Among the PT faculty, 145 members provide instruction in stand-alone graduate and professional programs while the FT faculty primarily support the undergraduate academic programs. The 2019-20 Common Data Set indicates that 92.3% of the FT faculty possess a doctoral or terminal degree in their field, which demonstrates the University’s continued commitment to providing a qualified teaching faculty to deliver the academic curriculum. The University Bulletin presents a list of the faculty and their respective degrees [SD-FL]. The 2019-20 Common Data set also reports a student-to-faculty ratio of 12 to 1, and Table 3-1 shows a 3-year trend in FTE student-to faculty data.

Over the three-year period from Fall 2017 to Fall 2019, a decline in student FTE coupled with the increase in faculty FTE has reduced the student-to-faculty ratio, which appears consistent with comparable institutions with a similar program mix. In addition, the student-to-faculty ratios by discipline are comparable to peer institutions offering similar academic programs participating in the National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity survey (NSICP) [SR-NSICP-SFRBD]. The average class size per course section across both undergraduate and graduate programs is shown in Table 3-2.

The various ranks among FT faculty members is clearly delineated in the Faculty Handbook, and also specifies minimum qualifications within each rank [UP-FH 5.2-5.3]. The Faculty Handbook also provides guidelines for recruiting and hiring faculty [UP-FH 4.5], which are specified in detail in the Faculty Search Manual [PP-FSM]. Please see Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion of faculty search procedures. To ensure that new faculty are given the support and resources needed for success, all newly hired faculty participate in a New Faculty Orientation. As reflected in a Fall 2017 survey, new faculty felt that overall the Orientation was helpful [SR-NFOS17]. The periodic evaluation of teaching faculty members is important for maintaining the institutional priority of fostering excellence in academic programs. All FT faculty members undergo regular reviews at various stages during their time at Wilkes. Particular attention is given to the review of tenure-track faculty. Each tenure-track faculty member undergoes a comprehensive third-year review, which serves as an assessment of the faculty member’s progress towards tenure, and also serves to simulate the tenure application process during their sixth year of full-time service [UP-FH 5.8]. The third-

FALL 2017 FALL 2018 FALL 2019

FT Faculty 180 193 196

PT Faculty 236 271 252

FTE Faculty 259 283 280

FTE students 3668 3506 3113

FTE students to FTE faculty Ratio 14.2 12.4 11.7

% of undergraduate course sections taught by FT faculty

61% 70% 70%

Table 3-1. Trends in Student-to-Faculty FTE

Note: Table data from the 2019-2020 Common Data Set [SR-CDS19] and IR Office.

COURSE DIVISION FALL 2011

FALL 2012

FALL 2013

FALL 2014

FALL 2016

Undergraduate 100-200 Level 21 23 22 23 21

Undergraduate 300-400 Level 16 17 17 18 16

Graduate 9 9 9 8 9

Table 3-2. Average Class Size Fall 2011 through Fall 2016 [SR-NSICP-CS]

Note: The table above shows the years Wilkes participated in NSICP. Wilkes will participate again AY 20-21

40

year review process includes the submission of materials, including a statement of goals and accomplishments, annual evaluations, and student evaluations from all courses taught. Course observations are conducted by tenured members of the department as a part of the third-year review process. In addition, the faculty member is interviewed by the tenured members of the department as part of the process. The third-year review process culminates in a report from the department that provides feedback to the faculty member indicating strengths, areas for improvement, and recommendations to help the faculty member develop a stronger tenure application.

All FT faculty are subject to consistent and regular review through an annual evaluation process that encompasses teaching, scholarship, service, and advising. The annual evaluation of a FT faculty member is largely based on the self-evaluation report (SER), discussed below and in Chapter 2. Another important component of the annual evaluation process is the student course evaluations. Students are able to submit feedback on the quality of faculty instruction (both online and face-to-face courses) through the Student Response Survey (SRS) [SD-SRSOL; SD-SRSF2F]. The average scores for two criteria related directly to faculty performance are presented in Table 3-3.

Each faculty member submits a SER at the conclusion of the academic year [UP-FH 5.7]. Within the SER, faculty members are expected to reflect on their contributions to teaching, scholarship, service, and advising during the academic year, to report on goals set during the previous cycle, and to develop goals for the next academic year. The SER, the SRS forms, and additional data as delineated in the Faculty Handbook, provide the basis for department chairs to complete an annual evaluation of each faculty member. The department chair’s annual evaluation is shared and reviewed with each respective

faculty member, and subsequently signed and delivered to the appropriate college/school dean. Although the evaluation of PT and adjunct faculty occurs in several individual departments/programs, there does not appear to be a formal evaluation process for PT or adjunct faculty members stated in the Faculty Handbook. While there is an assessment of teaching effectiveness for PT and adjunct faculty through the SRS forms, as required for all instructional faculty, the University should consider a more formal evaluation process for PT and adjunct faculty.

The strategic plan theme of Investing in our People has resulted in a substantial investment of financial resources promoting professional growth, development, and innovation for instructional faculty members. Each FT faculty member receives $500 annually for faculty development purposes, which may be used to cover expenses for professional organization memberships, journal subscriptions, and other professional development activities. In addition, a Faculty Development Committee (FDC) evaluates proposals to allocate funding for research and scholarly projects [UP-FH 4.3.10.f]. The FDC also allocates funding to support travel and attendance at professional conferences so that faculty members may engage in scholarly dissemination, innovation, and collaboration with peers in their field. The combined amount of funding awarded by the FDC for FY17 through FY19 was $426,926 [UC-FDC17; UC-FDC18; UC-FDC19]. Faculty members can also submit funding requests for scholarly projects to the University’s Mentoring Committee (UMC), which is charged with “reviewing applications for mentoring funds and awarding funds for student travel grants and university-wide project fund grants” [WW-UMC]. For FY18-FY20, the UMC approved over $566,000 to support mentoring related projects [SD-UMCFY18; SD UMCFY19; SD-UMMCFY20]. The UMC also provided over $172,000

SUBJECT LEVEL

(19) Instructor was an effective teacher* (20) Overall quality of the course was high*

FALL 2017

SPRING 2018

FALL 2018

SPRING 2019

FALL 2017

SPRING 2018

FALL 2018

SPRING 2019

Undergraduate 4.40 4.46 4.44 4.50 4.33 4.40 4.39 4.43

Pharmacy 4.40 4.42 4.53 4.55 4.38 4.36 4.49 4.52

Graduate 4.45 4.49 4.51 4.50 4.40 4.42 4.44 4.43

Table 3-3. Average SRS Responses for Criteria Related to the Instructor [SR-SRSS]

*The scale used to calculate the mean: 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree.

41

in travel grants for 674 students to attend conferences during FY17-FY19. Since Fall 2015, additional funds for faculty development opportunities are available through the Provost’s Research and Scholarship Fund [WW-PRSF]. This funding opportunity provides financial support for faculty members to pursue scholarly and creative projects. For the initial four funding cycles, more than $840,000 was awarded with a project approval percentage of 65% [SD-PRSFunding]. The June 2019 update of the Strategic Plan initiatives reports that funding provided through the FDC, UMC, and Provost’s Research and Scholarship fund has increased since FY14 [SP-JUNE19]. In addition to these internal funding sources, faculty members are encouraged to apply for external funding sources if possible. Assistance for applying for external grants is provided by the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs [WW-OSRP].

Eligible faculty can apply for sabbatical leave to pursue interests that support their individual professional and intellectual development and provide value to the University and its students [UP-FH 6.2.2]. In AY16-17, five of six sabbatical proposals were approved. In AY17-18, three of four sabbatical proposals were approved. In AY 18-19, five of eight sabbatical proposals were approved [UC-FDC17; UC-FDC18; UC-FDC19].

OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS(Criterion 3)

Official publications providing information about academic programs, student life, and university-related regulations are accessible through the University’s web page and portal. The Undergraduate Bulletin provides detailed requirements for 54 academic programs distributed among five undergraduate degrees: Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Business Administration, Bachelor of Fine Arts, and Bachelor of Science in Nursing. The Graduate Bulletin provides detailed requirements for 11 academic programs distributed among five master’s-level degrees: Master of Arts, Master of Business Administration, Master of Science, Master of Science in Nursing, and Master of Fine Arts; and four doctoral programs: Doctor of Education, Doctor of Philosophy in Nursing, Doctor of Pharmacy, and Doctor of Nursing Practice. Undergraduate bulletins dating back to 2006-07 and the graduate bulletins dating back to 2009-10 are archived and available electronically

[WW-BA]. In addition to degree requirements, both bulletins contain additional information regarding academic departments, recommended course sequences by semester to fulfill degree requirements, course descriptions, and prerequisite information.

The University’s website includes a listing of offered majors and minors [WW-MJMN], descriptions of offered degrees and majors, concentrations, and minors. Each program has its own webpage containing information about the program, degree requirements, and additional information, such as ways in which mentoring and research opportunities strengthen student learning, program-specific facilities, how learning outcomes are used by graduates, and how the programs prepare students for advanced learning and professional work.

According to the 2017 Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), students find that official publications are clear and complement each other. For example, Wilkes scored 5.82 (out of 7) on the survey item: “Major requirements are clear and reasonable,” exceeding the national mean of 5.63. And a related item (“The Student Handbook provides helpful information about campus life”) yielded a score of 5.68/7 compared to the national average of 5.26 [SR-SSI17]. According to the 2018 Adult Student Priorities Survey (ASPS) results, Wilkes graduate students were similarly satisfied that “Major requirements are clear and reasonable," with a mean of 6.36 (out of 7), exceeding the national mean for graduate/professional students of 6.00/7 [SR-ASPS p.23].

The self-study process revealed that, in spite of positive survey feedback regarding program information available to students, not all updates to the Undergraduate Bulletin were made in time for the start of the 2018-2019 academic year. As discussed in Chapter 2, changes to the University Bulletin made at the departmental level were not always incorporated in a timely fashion. To address this issue, the process for revising the Undergraduate Bulletin was changed in 2018-2019 allowing for a more efficient way to keep the Bulletin up-to-date. While initial feedback is positive, the University should evaluate the current system to assess the efficiency in reviewing, updating, and publishing the University Bulletins in a timely manner.

In addition to the undergraduate and graduate bulletins, the University also publishes an Undergraduate Student

42

Handbook and a Graduate Student Handbook providing additional information concerning administrative and academic policies and available support services. With an increase in graduate program offerings and an administrative reorganization that decentralized authority for graduate programs, the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) determined that it was not feasible to maintain a single handbook that could include every policy for all graduate programs, and that the best solution was to transition a single Graduate Student Handbook to separate handbooks for each graduate program [UC-GSC19]. Policies applicable to all graduate programs will be added to the Graduate Bulletin. Several graduate programs already maintain fully-developed handbooks, that are reviewed and updated on a regular basis within each individual program [UP-GNH; UP-GHP; UP-GHEd]. The remaining programs are in the process of developing handbooks. As this transition unfolds, the information contained in the Graduate Student Handbook is still available through the University’s website [UP-GH]. Upon completion, each graduate program will have a specific handbook to address information specific to their program, and the Graduate Bulletin will contain information relevant to all programs. The University should ensure that all graduate programs complete the process of creating and disseminating graduate handbooks for their respective areas.

LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES AND RESOURCES (Criterion 4)

Since the last self-study, Wilkes has continued to support and improve existing learning opportunities for students while investing additional resources to develop and institute new initiatives to promote student success. Many of the academic support programs available to students during their time at Wilkes are discussed fully in Chapter 4. Additional services and facilities provided by the University that support student success are discussed below: Honors Program Since its inception in Fall 2015, the Wilkes Honors Program has sought to recruit and retain exceptionally talented and highly motivated students by providing an enhanced, interdisciplinary educational experience [SD-HP AF]. Qualified students from across Wilkes’

majors enroll in designated honors classes and participate in co-curricular and extracurricular activities designed to augment intellectual, professional, and personal development and achievement [SD-HP R&E]. In addition to an enhanced educational experience, additional benefits enjoyed by honors students include:

• Grant funding to support study abroad, research, or internship experiences

• Cohort housing for first-year residential Honors students

• Preferential course registration• No additional cost for course overload related to

Honors work• Events such as field trips, dinners, and access to

notable speakers visiting campus

Fall 2018 census data indicated that there were 194 students in the Honors program, with the highest number enrolled in Pre-Pharmacy, Mechanical Engineering, and Biology [SD-HP-stats]. Although the Honors Program admitted the first students in Fall 2015, it has not yet completed a comprehensive program review. With the hiring of a full-time director in Fall 2018, the Honors Program is scheduled for a comprehensive program review during the Spring 2020 semester.

Writing CenterThe Writing Center provides peer-based support for students, and in addition, provides discipline-specific consultation services and support to staff and faculty writers for any stage or aspect of the writing process. The Writing Center also provides ESL/ELL-specific academic support services to students for whom English is not their native language. During the academic year, the Writing Center is staffed by 12-16 peer consultants under the direction of a tenured faculty member from the English Department, and face-to-face and online services are available year-round [WW-WC]. Usage data compiled over the last eight years indicates an average of 739 face-to-face consultations per year, with a high of 1,491 consultations during the 2016-17 academic year [SD-WC18]. The number of consultations completed annually as a percentage of undergraduate enrollment varied between 40% and 70%. Online consultations averaged about 200 per year during the same period. A summary of consultant evaluations since 2010 indicates a high level of satisfaction, with 91% of the evaluations receiving the highest ratings across all categories.

43

OTTL (Office of Technology for Teaching and Learning) The Office of Technology for Teaching and Learning (OTTL) provides support to faculty members wanting to integrate technology into their face-to-face (F2F) courses and to develop hybrid or online courses [WW-OTTL]. In addition to offering workshops, OTTL organizes and hosts a “Teaching with Technology” week prior to the start of the academic year, providing workshops on a variety of topics for faculty [SD-OTTLA; SD-OTTLR]. The OTTL provides support for the following platforms and systems:

• LIVE (D2L), the University’s learning management system

• MediaSpace, the University’s video platform• Comprehensive instructional design of hybrid and

fully online courses• Additional tools such as Google apps, classroom

clickers, and Respondus quiz tool• Turnitin, a plagiarism detection software• Remote Proctor, an online test/quiz proctoring

system

As indicated in Table 3-4, data from the OTTL indicates that the number of course sections utilizing D2L for instructional purposes has increased dramatically over the last few years. Of particular note is that the use of D2L in courses across all programs and levels, regardless of delivery mode, has increased by 31.6%, while the number of course sections not utilizing D2L decreased by 10.1%.

Since the growth of online offerings is incorporated into the University’s strategic plan, it is important that the available resources for faculty and students utilizing the

D2L platform are available, and include adequate online support for graduate and post-baccalaureate programs (e.g., making writing/tutoring services more accessible to off-campus students). As the staff of the OTTL currently consists of one director, two instructional designers, and one courseware app developer, it is equally important for the University to ensure that the OTTL is sufficiently staffed to maintain support for faculty and students who use the online teaching environment.

DegreeWorks A new degree audit system, DegreeWorks, was implemented in Spring 2018 [SD-DWD; SD-DWP]. This system represents an overhaul of the previous degree auditing system, with the goal of providing “ease-of-use” to allow students and advisors to more easily view transcript information and track academic progress in both major and university requirements. Additional improvements, including updated GPA and major field average calculations are provided, as well as a GPA calculator for planning purposes. Advisors can enter notes about meetings which can be viewed by the student, and the system can present “what-if ” scenarios for students to explore possible future coursework. Reports are easily generated, printed, and saved as a pdf [SD-DWA].

Farley LibraryThe Eugene S. Farley Library is centrally located on the University campus and offers an array of services to the campus community. Staffed by five professional librarians and 11 library technicians, the Farley Library maintains approximately 180,000 print volumes and provides access to more than 300,000 ebooks, 80,000 electronic journals, and 131 licensed databases [UP-FB

Table 3-4. Course Sections Utilizing LIVE (D2L)

YEAR ONLINE HYBRIDF2F

(D2L-ENHANCED)D2L TOTAL

F2F (NO D2L)

2016 723 81 826 1630 1156

2017 1094 104 837 2035 1000

2018 1156 118 871 2145 1039

% change +59.8% +45.6% +5.4% +31.6% -10.1%

44

p.57]. The Wilkes community has on-campus and off-campus access to the library catalog, online databases, journal collections, and online research subject guides through the library’s website. Usage statistics from the Fall 2019 Fact Book report total circulation of over 10,000 volumes, a turnstile count of about 184,000 and approximately 2,400 interlibrary loans. In addition, it is reported that the library staff have held approximately 200 information literacy classes. The Farley Library provides both individual and group study spaces, with study spaces on the lower level having 24/7 access. In addition to providing approximately 80 desktop computers distributed throughout the building for student use, there are approximately 70 laptops and tablets available for loan and use within the library.

Karambelas Media and Communication Center/Sordoni Art GalleryThe $4 million, 14,000 square foot Karambelas Media and Communication Center (KMCC) was officially opened in August 2017, fulfilling a goal of the University’s strategic plan for strengthening the campus infrastructure [WW-KMCC]. The KMCC houses the Communication Studies program and consolidates academic and co-curricular activities so students and faculty can collaborate across media disciplines. In addition to housing the speech and debate teams, the KMCC is home to WCLH Radio, Wilkes Now Television, The Beacon student newspaper, and the student-run public relations agency Zebra Communications. The KMCC includes offices and work rooms for student media organizations, state-of-the-art television and radio studios, audio rooms, faculty offices, and classrooms. The KMCC is also home of the Sordoni Art Gallery, which has a 3,000 square foot modern, purpose-built exhibition space complemented by office, conference, hospitality, and back-of-house work space. The gallery was officially opened in October 2017 [WW-SAG].

Cohen Science Center Dedicated in October 2013, the $35 million, 72,500 square foot Cohen Science Center (CSC) is a state-of-the-art facility that promotes interdisciplinary research and study in the sciences and houses the departments of Biology and Health Sciences, Chemistry and Biochemistry, and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences [WW-CSC]. Built to LEED Silver standards for energy and environmental design, the CSC features

energy-saving windows, energy-efficient lighting controlled by motion detectors, and low-maintenance polished concrete floors. The rooftop includes an area covered with vegetation to reduce stormwater runoff, a greenhouse, wet lab, and kitchen. Building performance for energy and water use can be monitored from the lobby, making it a living laboratory for teaching sustainability. The CSC provides a unique experience to students, integrating an impressive, cutting-edge physical space one might expect to find at a major research university, with high-quality research work conducted by Wilkes students and faculty.

Mark Engineering Center Dedicated in September 2018, the Mark Engineering Center represents an $8 million renovation of the Stark Learning Center, which marked another goal achieved in the University’s strategic plan initiative of strengthening the campus infrastructure [WW-MEC]. The 15,000 square foot center features flex labs with moveable lab benches and partitions that are adaptable to the needs of various courses, a 3D printing lab, as well as multiple meeting rooms equipped with flat-screen monitors and audio/visual equipment suitable for small-group collaboration. Funded by donors and a state grant, the Mark Engineering Center will help engineering students develop skills relevant to the 21st century and engage them with leading-edge research.

GENERAL EDUCATION(Criterion 5)

Wilkes University offers a free-standing General Education (GE) curriculum as a central component of all undergraduate degree programs. The framework of the GE curriculum encompasses four areas: First-Year Foundations, Skill Requirements, Distribution Areas, and the Senior Capstone Experience [UP-UBGE]. The GE Mission and Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) Alignment chart articulates the relationship between each of these components and the associated learning outcomes, and demonstrates how the GE curriculum prepares students for the opportunities and challenges of a diverse and evolving world (see Figure 3-1). The most recent analysis across five semesters from Fall 2016 through Fall 2018 indicates that more than half (56%) of the broader GE curriculum is taught by FT faculty [SD-GECOVFA1618].

45

• First-Year Foundations (FYF) - Students entering the University with fewer than 24 credit hours are required to complete a three-credit FYF course during their first semester. The FYF course is designed to instill individual awareness and development, and to provide a foundation for lifelong learning. The most recent analysis across five semesters from Fall 2016 through Fall 2018 indicates that 42% of FYF sections were taught by FT faculty members, while an average of 39% of FYF sections were taught by FT staff members, including those from University College (UC), who specialize in teaching FYF 101: Intelligence Applied, a required course for students who are admitted to the University under “Conditional” status [SD-GECOVFA1618]. The remaining 19% of FYF sections were taught by PT faculty or staff. To enhance the effectiveness of the FYF program, its role within General Education, and to link more directly with the Faculty, the position of FYF staff coordinator has been converted to the position of FYF Director, to be held by a full-time faculty member with release time to move the FYF program forward. The new FYF Director was appointed in January of 2020, following an internal search [SD-FYFDP].

• Skill Requirements - The skill requirements of the general education curriculum are: Written Communication, Oral Communication, Quantitative Reasoning, Critical Thinking, Computer Literacy, and Diversity Awareness. Student learning outcomes for each of these areas are articulated in the Undergraduate Bulletin [UP-UBGE]. Written Communication, Oral Communication, Quantitative Reasoning, and Computer Literacy requirements are fulfilled by successful completion of specific courses as outlined in the Bulletin. Critical Thinking is a required component of the FYF experience, and as noted in the Bulletin, “is embedded throughout all components and academic learning experiences of the Wilkes University curriculum.” Diversity Awareness, which was added as a skill area in 2015, is currently addressed and assessed in both FYF 101 and ENG 120, required for all majors. During the Self-Study process, it was identified, however, that there is no specific procedure in place to ensure that transfer students will satisfy the Diversity Awareness requirement. In the Fall of 2018, the Council on Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (CODIE) administered an initial survey to faculty to identify courses that address diversity issues [SR-CODIEDACL]. It is anticipated that additional data will be collected in the 2019-2020 AY, and when complete, the results can be used to identify

Firs

t-Ye

ar U

nder

grad

uate

Stu

dent

/Pre

-Wilk

es Progression through Wilkes General Education Curriculum

Alu

mnu

s/Po

st-W

ilkes

“Prepares all students to meet the opportunities and challenges of a diverse and continually changing world.”

Introduction to: “…liberal arts foundation for life-long intellectual development and personal growth, …sense of values and civic responsibility”

“…fosters the development of communication, intellectual and technical skills,… and provides the opportunity to develop problem solving and critical thinking skills”

“…and introduces Wilkes students to a broad range of disciplinary perspectives…and an awareness of the world beyond the classroom”

Wilkes-developed: “…foundation for life-long intellectual development and personal growth, …sense of values and civic responsibility”

FYF (1st component) GE Skill and Distribution Areas (2nd component) Capstone Experience (3rd component)

FYF focus: Skill focus: Distribution focus: Capstone focus:

Individual Awareness Individual Development Foundation for lifelong learning

Written Communication Oral Communication Quantitative Reasoning Diversity Awareness Critical Thinking Computer Literacy

Humanities Scientific World Social Sciences Visual & Performing Arts

Demonstration of General Education and Program-Specific Competencies

Figure 3-1. GE Mission and GESLO Alignment Chart

Progression through Wilkes General Education Curriculum

46

additional courses that could satisfy the Diversity Awareness skill area. The DegreeWorks audit could then be used to verify fulfillment of this requirement for all students, including those who transfer in FYF 101 and ENG 120 equivalents. It is important that a process is implemented to verify that all students have satisfied the Diversity Awareness skill area.

• Distribution Areas - The GE curriculum includes 24 credit hours distributed among four areas: Humanities (9 cr), Scientific World (6 cr), Behavioral and Social Sciences (6 cr), and Visual and Performing Arts (3 cr). Student learning outcomes for each of these areas, along with course options taken to meet these criteria are identified in the Undergraduate Bulletin [UP-UBGE].

• Capstone Experience - All academic programs employ a senior capstone experience appropriate to the discipline, many with major final projects that allow faculty to assess the effectiveness and sufficiency of curriculum in achieving learning outcomes related to rigor, coherence, and synthesis of learning.

Oversight of the general education curriculum is the responsibility of the full faculty, and the General Education Committee (GEC) has the responsibility to “proactively monitor the General Education curriculum and propose changes to the Curriculum Committee, as required, based on internal and external sources” [UP-FH 4.3.10d]. A salient example of this is the addition of Diversity Awareness to the Core Curriculum Skill Requirement area in 2015 [UC-FFM 43015; SD-DA CCP]. This addition demonstrates a clear link between GE and the University’s stated value of “Diversity” through teaching students to embrace differences and uniqueness through sincerity, awareness, inclusion, and sensitivity (see Figure 1-2 in Chapter 1).

The GE curriculum is assessed through the full program reviews submitted by programs that provide courses for one or more areas of GE curriculum. The staggered schedule for program reviews means that only portions of the GE curriculum are assessed each academic year. The GEC works in concert with the UAC to “develop assessment processes for the General Education curriculum” [UP-FH 4.3.10d]. GE assessment methods are posted on the GEC website, and GEC reports are presented to the Faculty and posted on the website. See Chapter 5 for a discussion of the assessment of the general education curriculum.

GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (Criterion 6)

Wilkes University offers 14 graduate programs that include a mix of traditional academic (research-focused) programs and professional programs. The professional programs typically do not have a research focus, but several provide an option for research to interested students. Descriptions of graduate programs and program requirements are available in the University Graduate Bulletin [UP-GB]. Master’s degree programs include: Masters in Business Administration, MS in Bioengineering, MA in Creative Writing, MFA in Creative Writing, MS in Education, MS in Electrical Engineering, MS in Engineering Management, MS in Mathematics, MS in Mechanical Engineering, and MS in Nursing. Doctoral programs include: EdD, PharmD, DNP and PhD in Nursing. Wilkes graduate programs employ faculty members who are appropriately credentialed in their discipline. Graduate program faculty members have the same access to department-level and university-level funding for scholarship and research as the undergraduate program faculty.

Graduate programs follow the same review process as undergraduate programs (see PRP section of Chapter 5). This assures learning outcomes for graduate programs are aligned with GISLOs, and are assessed to ensure that students are attaining skills and competencies appropriate to their discipline. Several graduate programs maintain external accreditation, providing additional assurance of program quality. Wilkes also offers several Post-Baccalaureate certificate programs, focused in the School of Education, Passan School of Nursing, as well as one in Creative Writing and another in Sustainability Management.

Graduate certificate programs focus on advancing professional education and necessary certification in their respective disciplines, and the content and quality of instruction is supervised by the appropriate department chair and dean. All new graduate certificate programs and major changes to graduate certificate programs follow the same approval process as undergraduate programs and are subject to approval by the APC and the CC [UP-FH 4.3.14a; 4.3.10e].

47

THIRD-PARTY PROVIDERS(Criterion 7)

For four decades, Wilkes University has forged partnerships with third-party providers to provide support services for numerous graduate and certificate programs. Through these partnerships, Wilkes offers online programs in graduate education and nursing. Syllabi and curricula for all programs follow the same review and approval process used for all Wilkes programs, and every program adheres to the University’s program review schedule and process.

Performance Learning Systems - 3rd Learning(PLS3L)

• Wilkes has partnered with Performance Learning Systems - 3rd Learning (PLS3L) since 1978 to provide face-to-face and online graduate courses, professional development workshops, and educational products and resources. The following online or hybrid 30-credit programs are offered:

• MS Ed in Online Teaching• MS Ed in Educational Development and Strategies • MS Ed in Effective Teaching• MS Ed in International School Leadership

Courses offered by PLS3L are administered through the Canvas LMS and are approved by the APC (for new program proposals or significant program revisions) and the CC. Wilkes and PLS3L work collaboratively on assessment, identifying program outcomes and key assessments for each program. Under the direction of Wilkes, PLS3L collects and shares relevant course assessment data and student information for program assessments and reviews, and the actual review of assessment data is the sole responsibility of Wilkes [SD-PO].

Pennsylvania Association for School Business Officials (PASBO) For over a decade, Wilkes has partnered with the Pennsylvania Association for School Business Officials (PASBO) to offer the MS in School Business Leadership (SBL) consisting of ten courses (30 credits). These courses address specific topics crucial for succeeding in today’s school business environment and are available for graduate or continuing education credit. During course development or revision, a content expert, recommended

by PASBO, is hired by Wilkes to develop or revise a course. Wilkes and PASBO work collaboratively to review the curriculum and to identify program outcomes and assessments. The collection and review of assessment data is the sole responsibility of Wilkes, however.

The University also partners with the Association for School Business Officials affiliates in California, Maryland/DC, Connecticut, and Washington. Although these agreements are strictly for revenue sharing, Wilkes does maintain open communication with these affiliates regarding improvements or revisions needed for the program and the possibility of hiring instructors from these states [SD-PO].

National Institute for Professional Practice (NIPP) Wilkes has maintained a partnership with the National Institute for Professional Practice (NIPP), formerly called Learning Sciences International, to offer four online MS programs. With the arrival of a new Dean for the School of Education (SOE) in 2015, an audit of all MS programs (including partnership programs) was conducted to decide what programs would remain and what programs would be phased out. As a result of the audit, it was determined that the partnership with NIPP would be phased out. A mutually agreed upon teach-out plan concluded in Summer 2019.

Discovery Education (DE) Since 2005, Discovery Education and Wilkes have partnered to support teachers as they integrate educational technology into classroom instruction. Partnering with Discovery Education, Wilkes offers the MS in Education in Instructional Media and a STEM Endorsement (requires Pennsylvania Department of Education approval) [WW-DE]. During the process of course development or revision, a content expert is hired by Wilkes to develop or revise a course. The review of curriculum is a collaborative process, with annual meetings to review each program. While program assessment is also a collaborative effort, the collection, review, and analysis of assessment data is the sole responsibility of Wilkes.

HotChalk In Spring 2018, a mutual decision was made to end the partnership between the Department of Nursing and HotChalk. Although the partnership resulted in increased

48

enrollments, the revenue generated was insufficient to offset incurred marketing expenses. A teach-out plan has been implemented and will be completed in Summer 2020.

ASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAMS(Criterion 8)

Academic programs are subject to a full review (FR) triannually, along with an annual update (AU) completed in the two intervening years between FR. A multi-year schedule indicating the cycle of programs to complete either a FR or an AU is published on the Wilkes UAC webpage [SD-PRC]. Both FR and AU processes are conducted by the University Assessment Committee (UAC) [UP-FH 4.3.14b]. An academic program completes its review during the spring semester, during which department chairs are expected to share and discuss their findings with their respective dean. Completed FR or AU are forwarded by the deans to the Office of Institutional Research (IR) by the end of the spring semester, and in turn are shared with the UAC, who completes its review by the end of June. The UAC shares its feedback with the provost, deans, department chairs, and program coordinators during the subsequent fall semester. Program leadership and deans are encouraged to discuss UAC feedback during the fall semester prior to the start of the next round of program review.

Both the FR and AU processes are designed to capture and streamline assessment on a university level and show how the academic programs contribute to the University’s mission and goals. An academic program's FR includes a description of its assessment process and reports results on student performance in achieving each PSLO. In addition, the FR reports on necessary actions and needed resources to address any identified deficiencies. The FR also reports on strategies that have been successful for retaining and graduating students or possible strategies to improve retention or graduation success if a concern is identified. For undergraduate programs under review, the FR also reports:

• the percentage of recent graduates who are employed or pursuing relevant continuing education (as available),

• a listing of all courses for majors intended to develop

discipline-appropriate writing skills and strategies employed to assess them through the courses, and

• assessment of learning in courses offered within the academic program that fulfill Wilkes GE skills or distribution area requirements.

For graduate programs under review, the FR also includes the assessment plan, collected data and assessment results, reporting strategies that have been effective in supporting student progression through the program, and possible solutions to progression issues. All FRs include a description of strategies utilized to engage program faculty in the assessment process.

Each AU submitted by academic programs includes a report of student performance on PSLOs, a description of actions taken to improve or sustain student performance, an indication of whether resources needed to address assessment results were requested and received, a description of the status and impact of initiatives focused on enhancing student learning undertaken within the review period, and a description of the strategies utilized for engaging faculty in the assessment processes.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. The University should consider a formalized process for evaluating part-time and adjunct faculty for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook that can be regularly and consistently applied and is adaptable to accommodate the needs of individual academic departments.

2. The University should ensure that all graduate programs have graduate handbooks for their respective areas, and make those handbooks available online.

3. Given the likely increase in utilizing D2L for future course instruction, the University should consider a plan to increase resources and staffing of the OTTL to assist faculty and students in effectively utilizing online resources.

4. The University should create and implement a process to verify that all students, including transfers, have satisfied the Diversity Awareness skill area.

49

CHAPTER 4: STANDARD IV

Support of the Student Learning

Experience (RoA: 8, 10)

50

The University prides itself on supporting the student experience to assure that students grow as leaders and as members of the campus and global community. Consistent with the Mission, the University focuses on recruitment of students possessing the attributes and aptitude to be successful. With its educational offerings tied to the values of mentorship, scholarship, diversity, innovation, and community, and a focus on the Institutional Priorities of Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Financial Vibrancy, and Diverse and Global Community, the University supports its academic programs through a robust co-curriculum that affords students ample opportunities for personal and professional development.

ADMISSION AND ENROLLMENT

Undergraduate Enrollment Students applying for undergraduate study at Wilkes are expected to have completed a high school academic record that minimally includes: four years of English; three years of mathematics; two years of science; three years of social studies and, if available, an introduction to computing. In addition, applicants must provide test scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) or the Achievement College Test (ACT). The University has established expectations for high school grade point average and class rank, as well as test scores. Supplemental information, including personal accomplishments and achievements may also be considered. Depending on the academic program to which a student is applying, additional academic requirements may be in place. Information about requirements for admission is available in the University Admissions publications and on the University Admissions website [UP-UBADM]. Admissions policies at the undergraduate level are established in concert with the Admissions and Financial Aid Committee. Enrollment decisions are made on a rolling basis with specific deadlines in place for particular programs (e.g., Pharmacy and the Honors Program). Throughout the recruitment process, the University conducts open houses and encourages prospective students to visit campus. Social media campaigns have become an increasingly important aspect of the recruiting process. In 2015, the University adopted the Common App as a vehicle for prospective undergraduate students to apply for admission. The adoption of the Common App resulted in an increase in applications as seen in

Figure 4.1. Along with the adoption of SLATE in 2018 as the University’s constituent relationship management system, the application process has become more efficient by providing software platforms to aide all phases of the admissions process. It is anticipated that using SLATE will also help manage enrollment during the predicted decline of high school graduates for the Northeast region [SD-WICHE].

Theme 3 of the Gateway To The Future (GTTF) Strategic Plan includes the University’s goals for increasing undergraduate enrollment. In GTTF, the University set the goal of growing the undergraduate first-year class to 650 students by 2020 and recruiting over 30% of these students from outside the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. To offset the anticipated decreases in the traditional first-year student market in the Northeast and Middle Atlantic regions, the University aspires to increase the percentage of international students on campus to 10%. Additionally, as part of the GTTF strategic plan, the University has developed several initiatives to attract students at or beyond its market share. Since 2014, six new athletics teams, an Honors program, and a marching band were established.

Figure 4-1. Undergraduate Admissions Funnel Trends

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

FALL 2014 FALL 2015 FALL 2016 FALL 2017 FALL 2018 FALL 2019

First-Year Transfer

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

App

lican

ts

Adm

its

Enro

llees

51

In support of the University’s recruitment goals, an enrollment plan was completed in Fall 2017 in collaboration with Ruffalo Noel-Levitz (RNL) [SP-SEP]. RNL was engaged to provide a review of enrollment strategies and processes, and to help develop a strategic enrollment direction. In Spring 2019, an administrative reorganization resulted in the consolidation of undergraduate and graduate enrollment and marketing functions under the leadership of a Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing (VPEM). A successful search for a new VPEM was completed with a start date of July 2019. The VPEM is currently evaluating enrollment strategy and operational efficiency.

In support of the institutional priority of fostering a diverse and global community, the Office of International Engagement was created to identify international enrollment opportunities, expand the University’s presence abroad and facilitate multi-dimensional partnerships. Additionally, in the Admissions Office, there is a dedicated counselor for international recruitment. The focus on international recruitment and retention supports the GTTF goal of making a Wilkes education more accessible to students outside the continental United States.

Graduate EnrollmentThe Graduate Admissions Office is housed within the Enrollment division and supports the colleges and schools in attracting qualified graduate students to fulfill the enrollment goals established in the strategic plan. The Graduate Admissions Office assists graduate programs in recruitment activities and processing admission

applications. Because the nature of graduate education focuses on advanced scholarship within an academic discipline or on specific educational/training goals relevant to a specific profession, individual graduate programs determine admissions decisions for applicants to their respective program. Oversight of the graduate admission policies belongs to the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC), a standing committee of the Faculty. The GSC is responsible for recommending changes in rules and standards related to admissions and ensuring faculty participation in admission activities for all graduate and professional post-baccalaureate studies programs [UP-FH 4.3.10g]. The GSC also recommends changes to policy and procedures supporting administration of the student financial aid program for graduate students.

The GTTF Plan has set the goal of increasing graduate program enrollment by 25%. Currently, the graduate program offered at Wilkes that reflects the strongest student demand is the Nurse Practitioner degree (M.S.) in Psychiatric Mental Health, which is one of the highest areas of national demand in healthcare. Wilkes University’s PhD program in Nursing was launched in Fall 2017. This is the first PhD offered at Wilkes. In addition, two bridge programs – one from the DNP to the PhD, and one from the PhD to the DNP were both added to the Passan School of Nursing (PSON) offerings. These programs are designed to meet a significant national shortage in faculty with Nursing PhDs in higher education. The hybrid format is convenient for students, and enables PSON to extend its scope to students and faculty from across the nation. The Doctorate in Education (EdD) program offered by the School of

PROGRAM AREA/DISCIPLINE FALL 2014 FALL 2015 FALL 2016 FALL 2017 FALL 2018 FALL 2019Master's Education 1389 1437 1572 1593 1433 1176

Master's Nursing 89 444 583 619 512 478

PharmD Program 289 285 284 285 283 275

Doctoral Nursing (DNP, PhD) 59 112 191 209 151 96

EdD Program 50 57 78 122 140 144

MBA Program 184 172 151 129 85 85

Creative Writing (MA, MFA) 83 64 74 60 54 55

Graduate Engineering Programs 56 55 53 34 16 13

Graduate Mathematics 1 4 4 2 3 6

Sustainability Management 2 2 1 1 0 1

TOTAL ENROLLMENT 2202 2632 2991 3054 2677 2329

Table 4-1. Graduate Enrollment by Program Area/Discipline

52

Education allows for both domestic and international enrollment. There is currently a program offered to students in Dubai with the intention to expand to other markets. In addition, the Maslow Graduate Program in Creative Writing (MA and MFA degrees) was ranked fourth in the United States for online creative writing programs by CollegeChoice.net in 2018. With low-residency week-long and weekender formats, student demand should be further enhanced with the addition of two concentrations in publishing and documentary filmmaking. Recent graduate and professional level enrollment trends by general disciplinary area can be seen in Table 4-1.

With the addition of the PhD in Nursing in 2017, the number of doctoral programs at Wilkes has grown to four (PhD, EdD, DNP and PharmD). In the updated 2018 Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, Wilkes University has been categorized as a Doctoral/Professional University. In the 2018-19 academic year, 160 doctoral degrees were awarded. Given the large number of professional doctoral degrees, Wilkes is granting more than twice the doctoral degrees of any other institution in northeast Pennsylvania.

POLICIES TO ADMIT, RETAIN, AND FACILITATE THE SUCCESS OF STUDENTS (Criterion 1)

Financial AidThe Financial Aid Office (FAO) works to remove financial barriers to student enrollment and retention. With the goal of assuring that a Wilkes education is affordable, the FAO works with students and families to secure adequate resources to progress to graduation. The FAO oversees all aspects of the University’s student financial aid programs and is responsible for ensuring institutional compliance with relevant mandates under the Higher Education Opportunity Act. A full range of financial information for prospective and current students and their families, including a net price calculator, is available online and in print. On the University’s website, students can find information about loan application processes, cost, debt and repayment [WW-FA]. Wilkes completed a full Title IV review in 2015, and addressed all requirements for full compliance. Documents related to that review can be

found in the Verification of Compliance Report.For the 2019 Fall Semester, 94% of Wilkes full-time undergraduates received some form of financial aid. Among the 2019 bachelor’s degree recipients, 80% borrowed in support of their education. According to the CIRP data from Fall 2018 [SR-CIRPTFS], Wilkes students were less likely than the comparison group to receive financial assistance from their families, making them more likely to contribute their own funds or borrow money to cover costs. The high dependence Wilkes students have on financial aid, and the high percentage of first-generation students, requires that Wilkes have an effective financial aid operation.

Since the last decennial review in 2010, Financial Aid has experienced leadership and organizational challenges. A one-stop shop approach had been used to handle financial aid, registrar and financial management functions using a team of generalists able to work across functions. That strategy was abandoned in 2014 when the University decided to return to a specialist approach in handling each of those functions; the FAO became its own department once again. The past two years have found the FAO on a more consistent and effective footing. The size of the office has incrementally increased from as low as four staff members to the 12 individuals who now oversee the financial aid process at Wilkes. The department has also undergone a shift in its reporting line. At the last decennial review, the department reported through the Vice President for Enrollment. Since then, it has reported to Student Affairs and Finance and Support Operations. With an experienced Executive Director of Financial Aid now in place, the FAO is reporting to the new Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing. Satisfaction survey results from undergraduate and Pharmacy students over the past several years illustrate general satisfaction regarding financial aid, compared to previous years [SR-SSIFATrends].

Academic Support Programs

(Criteria 1b and 1c)

Wilkes University provides a variety of academic support programs that complement the academic programs of study and promote student success. Many of these services are provided through University College; however, a variety of support programs have been established across the University that are available to students.

53

To promote academic success for all students, Wilkes offers support in the form of tutoring, supplemental instruction, and disability support services. Information about tutoring and other special services is advertised to all FYF classes, at new student orientation and by email notifications, flyers on campus, and through the University’s website. The University employs a Learning Specialist, who provides academic coaching and counseling, and assists with strengthening learning skills, including: study strategies, note taking, task and time management, and basic organizational skills. Instructors can make referrals directly, and some departments have created a reporting system to directly refer students. The Counseling Center also makes referrals when appropriate. Every semester, the Learning Specialist averages approximately 200 appointments, and offers six different academic workshop topics on a regular basis. In addition, 10-12 workshops are offered each semester to support the unique needs of athletes and other special populations [SD-UCServices].

In courses that students have historically had academic difficulty, additional help is provided in the form of Supplemental Instruction (SI). The SI instructor is typically a trained student who has successfully completed the course and meets regularly with the professor to become more familiar with the material and the areas that cause difficulty. In some cases, the SI instructor may be an adjunct faculty member rather than a student. The SI instructor offers a different perspective of the material, helps with study strategies, provides additional practice materials, and offers review sessions prior to exams. Student attendance at SI sessions is typically voluntary, although some faculty require that students attend a specific number of sessions. During the 2018-2019 academic year, SI was offered in six courses for the fall and eight for the spring, and approximately 60% (338/567) of the students enrolled attended at least

one SI session. SI sessions are added to courses at the request of instructors or groups of students. Although SI is administered through UC, there are additional SI courses supported through individual departments; the Mathematics Department offers SI courses as a credit-bearing section facilitated by an adjunct faculty member or a graduate student.

The University also offers individual and small-group tutoring for courses identified as “high-risk.” Small-group tutoring sessions are scheduled at a fixed time, and students can attend without an appointment. This environment fosters a cooperative atmosphere that is less intimidating for students and promotes peer-to-peer discussion. Individual tutoring appointments are scheduled through the Tutortrac system. Students meet with tutors in dedicated spaces. During the past three years, an average of 92 students per year requested an average of 277 individual tutoring sessions. Attendance data for small-group tutoring sessions are not maintained since students can come and go as time permits.

The Office of Disability Support Services, operated out of UC, coordinates services and accommodations to ensure the accessibility and usability of all Wilkes programs, services, and activities by those with documented physical and learning disabilities [WW-DSS]. Accommodations comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA). Disability Support Services (DSS) approves academic accommodations for 70 students on average per year. Upon receipt and approval of documentation, students meet with the Director of the Learning Center to develop an accommodation plan, which is implemented by the DSS coordinator. Accommodation services include physical accommodations such as specialized desks or classroom accessibility and specific

54

academic services. Academic accommodations include the services of the Learning Specialist (discussed earlier), additional tutoring and/or SI, and counseling services. Course accommodations may include materials provided in an alternative format, note-taking services, or video/audio-recorded lectures [WW-DSSAcc]. In addition, testing accommodations may include a word processor or scribe, extended time for testing, and a distraction-reduced testing environment.

An Early Alert System (EAS) enables instructors to identify students in academic difficulty beginning in the third week of the semester. Through the EAS, instructors provide information about attendance, academic difficulty, and other concerns, and can offer recommendations for improvement and resources for assistance. EAS notifications are sent by email to both student and academic advisor, and are monitored by UC staff who reach out to students, offer assistance and remind students of the available academic support services. Students receiving several early alert notifications are monitored closely by University College. Although the EAS is a robust system, instructors are not required to submit early alerts. At the Fall 2018 faculty retreat, there was a commonly expressed sentiment that the EAS would be more effective if more instructors took advantage of it [SR-FR18, p.5]. The University should investigate additional ways to implement EAS to make it more appealing for faculty and to ensure that it is utilized to the fullest extent possible. Athletic coaches also expressed a desire to be included in the “loop” when one of their student-athletes receives a notification through the EAS for either attendance or academic performance issues [SR-SS19].

Students not meeting all of the acceptance guidelines for a “regular” admit may be assigned a status as conditional admit. Students who are conditionally admitted are considered underprepared based on high school performance and rank, and SAT/ACT scores. Conditional Admit (CA) students receive extra guidance and support from University College (UC). The advising coordinators and learning support staff in UC provide academic support and monitoring for students who will benefit from a mediated transition to college-level studies. An Early Alert System (discussed earlier) allows UC to work with instructors of CA students in monitoring attendance and performance beginning the first week of classes. CA students also enroll in a

specifically-designated First-Year Foundations course, FYF 101: Intelligence Applied [WW-FYF], designed to assist students with the transition to college by overtly teaching the tacit knowledge necessary for success in the college environment and non-cognitive factors that impact student performance. Additionally, students can be admitted to the University, but may not be admitted to restricted majors. Students in this situation will be “undeclared” and work with professional advisors in University College to determine alternative pathways to their career goals.

The University implemented several additional programs to support the success of students not adequately prepared for college study. Conditional admits may be eligible for ACT 101 or EDGE (both discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs). These students are admitted through these individualized programs with an acknowledgment that they may not have yet reached their full academic potential because of educational, economic or personal backgrounds. These students are chosen for these special programs based on a holistic review of their application and academic credentials.

The ACT 101 program is funded by the Pennsylvania Department of Education and administered through the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Authority (PHEAA). ACT 101 supports academically high-risk students who are high financial need PA residents. Wilkes University is one of 37 universities and colleges across PA with an ACT 101 program. Students in this elective program are conditional admit status and receive intensive, individualized advising and educational planning through academic coaching, personal and financial counseling, and leadership opportunities [SD-ACT101]. Students participating in the ACT 101 program enroll in FYF 101: Intelligence Applied and a career and life planning (CAR 101) course irrespective of their major. These two courses focus on strategic learning, goal setting, and decision-making processes. The ACT 101 program annually supports approximately 80 students. The success of the ACT 101 program is seen by comparing the 3-year average first year retention rates and first-year GPA of ACT 101 students vs. non-ACT 101, conditional admit students (77% vs. 57% and 2.6 vs. 2.3) [AD-ACT101R&GPA].

Wilkes’ Educational Gateway to Excellence (EDGE) is a program offered to select students to help support the

55

transition from high school to college [SD-EDGE]. A WilkesEDGE program mentor and academic advisor work with students on an appropriate class schedule, dedicated study time and specific support services. Support services continue into the second semester, when a flexible, personalized learning plan is designed to accommodate each student’s academic progress as credits increase. This “ramp up” means students can ease into their college experience while remaining focused on graduation plans. To accommodate a lighter schedule during the first semester, two courses are required during winter or summer sessions. These courses are at no additional cost and can be taken at the student’s discretion (with guidance from a selected academic advisor). In addition, students are required to attend a study lab and maintain a work-study job on campus to assure they are spending a sufficient amount of time engaged in academic activities and learning important time-management skills. There were 21 students enrolled in the EDGE Program in the Fall of 2017, 15 in Fall 2018, and 13 enrolled for Fall 2019.

In Fall 2018, the University Preparatory Program (UPP) Bridge program was first piloted to aid the transition of non-native English speakers belonging to a cohort from Panama into regular university classes [SD-UPP-AR]. The UPP Bridge program provides 9 credits of undergraduate-level ESL courses to prepare English language learners (ELL) for both the required ENG 101 course and other courses with high didactic content in addition to FYF 101: Intelligence Applied. Initial full analysis of the success of the UPP program will be conducted during the 2019-2020 academic year, once the

students have completed their first year as a matriculated student, taking a regular course load. The goal is to expand this program and make it available to all aspiring Wilkes students who do not meet the English proficiency requirement of the University.

Even with the existing supports, first-year students sometimes fail to make satisfactory academic progress, and are placed on academic probation. A new program was piloted in the Fall of 2018, Colonels’ Pathway to Success, to help first-year students on academic probation by providing additional education and support [SD-CPTSProp]. This 15-week online course, utilizing readings, videos, and discussions, was designed to help students strengthen skills for academic success. In addition, the program provides a connection with students that allows for additional outreach to discuss plans for improvement, and to address inquiries about tutoring, counseling, and advising issues. Preliminary assessment showed that approximately 37% of those students who were AI or on probation at the end of the Fall 2018 semester, and enrolled in the Spring with additional supports, earned GPAs over 2.0 for the spring semester [SD-CPTSOverview].

Academic Advising

(Criterion 1c)

Wilkes undergraduates have consistently selected academic advising as the most important factor in their overall educational experience through the RNL Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) [SR-SSI-AATrends].

Wilkes University recognizes academic advising as an essential element of the learning process and development of the student as a whole person. Advising affirms the quality and integrity of Wilkes and its degree programs by providing informed guidance at the beginning of each student’s learning journey, through the growth and intellectual maturation process and continuing into their professional careers through lifelong learning.

Upon acceptance, students complete various placement tests (depending on program of study) and surveys that guide the creation of preliminary course schedules prior to orientation. From the moment students arrive on campus for orientation, they have academic advisors in place to assist with the transition to college-level studies. During these initial discussions, academic advisors get to

56

know their advisees and discuss the expectations of their selected program of study.

In the latest 2017 SSI, 80% of the items within the academic advising scale were identified by RNL as strengths because of the high ratings of importance and satisfaction [SR-SSI17]. Academic advisors are invited to attend an annual in-service sponsored by University College. This is open to new and existing advisors and covers topics related to diversity, advising theory, and best practices [SD-UC-AA19]. Prior to summer orientation sessions, advisors also attend a meeting to keep up-to-date on the latest academic policies and procedures.

Students are assigned to a faculty advisor in their chosen program of study. An office of Advising Services in University College provides academic advising for exploratory (undeclared) students and services for new transfer students. The Dean of University College manages the advising coordinators, each working with one or more of the colleges or schools. Prior to Fall 2016 there were two advising coordinators, however as increased needs became apparent to support student success and retention, the University added two additional coordinators. Advising coordinators serve as a first contact for new transfer students, facilitate advisor assignments, and oversee a special orientation session for new transfer students [SD-TSO19]. Advising coordinators serve in additional capacities, including:

• serving as primary advisors for undeclared students and undeclared science students;

• serving as a resource for faculty advisors and as secondary advisors to the students in the respective colleges or schools to which they are assigned;

• providing academic planning support during orientation sessions and maintaining the Orientation web page and advising mailbox;

• overseeing preliminary course scheduling of incoming first-year students including advising pre-admission and pre-orientation students when necessary; and

• providing advising and tracking services for probationary and reinstated students.

University College (UC) is the academic home for students who arrive at Wilkes as exploratory students. The UC advisors are familiar with the Wilkes academic portfolio of programs and guide exploratory students towards a choice of academic program. Each advisor

teaches a life and career planning course (CAR 101), designed to help students identify their interests, abilities, and life goals so they can effectively develop a roadmap to guide achievement of their career goals. Each advisor’s course consists of that advisor’s own undeclared advisees; thereby promoting regular contact between student and advisor. As a part of the course, undeclared students are required to attend a Majors/Minors Fair that allows students to meet with faculty from programs across the University. All students considering a change in career paths are invited to take CAR 101 or attend the Majors/Minors Fair.

Career Services and Internships

(Criterion 1d)

In November of 2018, the Cooperative Education and Internship Office was merged with Career Services to form the Center for Career Development and Internships. Located in the newly renovated office space adjacent to the entrance of the south campus gateway, the Center has infused energy into the overall Career Education operation and become a considerably more visible enterprise. This new Center emphasizes three salient priorities, which include enhancing students’ career readiness, broadening relationships with key stakeholders, and leveraging technology.

The staff at the Center enhances students’ career readiness by way of a Career Gateway Program, which is a multi-faceted, holistic approach to students’ college-to-career transition. From the moment students arrive on campus, the Career Gateway Program provides a wide array of experiential learning, career counseling, and networking opportunities designed to promote self-discovery and offer advanced preparation for life after graduation. Approximately, 250 students complete internships per year. The addition of the Handshake app, in Fall 2019 has allowed the Center to begin coaching students from the moment they walk on campus as first-year students. This app helps students build their resumes and search for internships and jobs across the country. The most recent data available indicates that 96% of students report working or continuing their education in their chosen field within one year of graduation [SR-FDS18].

57

Orientation

(Criterion 1c)

The Office of Student Development coordinates the summer orientation program for new undergraduate students and their families. Students choose from one of two, two-day mandatory orientation sessions, held every summer for first-year students [SD-SO18]. These sessions are designed to facilitate transition to the University and build a sense of community. Students learn about campus resources, meet with their academic advisor to finalize their fall semester class schedule, and participate in a community service project. A corresponding orientation for parents/families occurs during the same two-day period [SD-PO18]. Each first-year student is assigned an E-Mentor — an upperclassman enrolled in a similar/same major to lead the student through Orientation. This mentor/mentee relationship is expected to continue into the fall semester so that the E-Mentor can act as a resource to ease the transition to college life. Wilkes’ first-year E-Mentor program was recognized with an Excellence Award in 2013 by Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education [WW-EMAWD]. According to the 2018 Orientation Student Assessment Report, students felt confident to make a successful transition to Wilkes University after attending Orientation (4.15 mean on a 1-5 Likert scale) [SR-OSAR18]. Welcome Weekend (beginning the Friday before fall semester classes begin) serves as an extension of Orientation and includes First-Year Student Convocation, educational sessions on University policies/procedures and a further introduction to academic support services [SD-SOWW18].

In addition to the traditional first-year student orientation, Advising Coordinators from UC plan and support three transfer orientation sessions each year. Two orientations are held in the summer months and one in January. These orientations include an overview of advising services and a panel presentation (University College, Student Development, Career Services, Registrar’s Office, and Financial Aid), as well as information technology sessions, introduction to the library, and a tour of the campus [SD-TSO19]. Most recently, the transfer orientation has expanded to include a transfer student E-Mentor component to connect new transfer students with the University. Academic advisement meetings are scheduled with students to review schedules and major requirements. There is also a special orientation for international students, that focuses on issues specific to students from outside the

United States, including information about student visas, how U.S culture can impact the classroom, and resources available to the students [SD-ISO18]. While international students are welcome to attend the traditional orientation session as well, the timing during the summer does not always allow for their participation, so the special sessions are designed to provide all the information the students may need.

Health and WellnessHealth and Wellness Services offers a comprehensive array of health services to students, faculty and staff, including treatment of acute illness and injury, monitoring of chronic illness and referrals to off-campus specialists when needed [SD-HWS]. Specialty services targeted toward women’s and men’s health concerns, as well as programming on wellness and alcohol and drug issues are provided throughout the year. Campus Counseling is an integral part of the Wilkes Health and Wellness center and provides students an opportunity to discuss and explore personal concerns or issues with a counselor and ways of working through them. The focus of the office continues to be on individual therapy, for which the demand continues to increase, consistent with national trends. Group counseling experiences, consultation and referral services, crisis intervention, and personal development workshops are also offered. An after-hours counseling service—Protocall—was added in 2017 and is available to all students [WW-CCS]. This phone line is staffed with Master’s and Doctoral level counselors, specifically trained in college student mental health. Support is available to students who may be experiencing any mental health issue as well as students experiencing an emergency situation. Referrals to Wilkes’ counseling staff are made by the Protocall staff when appropriate.

Student SafetyThe necessity for expanding and formalizing campus security has surfaced in recent years as serious safety concerns, resulting from national events on other campuses, signaled to universities across the nation that improving campus safety and security was a priority. In response to a recommendation, included in a comprehensive campus safety study conducted by Margolis Healy, Wilkes University armed its officers in 2015 [SD-MHPSR]. In addition, the Department of Public Safety implemented over 50 additional recommendations outlined in the study, all designed to enhance campus safety and security at Wilkes University.

58

These steps included a redesigned public safety facility with secure space for a state-of-the-art communications and CCTV monitoring center, administrative offices, patrol rooms, interview room, property/evidence room and holding cells.

In February 2019, 19 officers of the newly created Wilkes University Police Department (WUPD) were sworn in. They are supported by five non-sworn officers who assist in parking enforcement and building security services, in addition to six full-time communications dispatchers. Now operating on the county 911 radio network, the Wilkes University Police Department has radio interoperability with local police, fire, and emergency services county-wide. WUPD is responsible for maintaining data that must be reported in annual safety and security reports. This data is available publicly on the website, as well as in print in various campus locations.

TRANSFER CREDITS (Criterion 2)

Wilkes University welcomes transfer students from other accredited universities and colleges. Specific policies are in place to ensure students are in good academic standing and meet admission criteria. All courses with a grade of 2.00 (C) or better that are comparable to those in the curriculum at Wilkes, and from recognized, accredited institutions, will be accepted for transfer. There are program-specific policies and procedures for students interested in transferring into the undergraduate nursing and pharmacy programs. The transfer section of the Admissions page of the Wilkes website includes important information for prospective transfer students, including how to apply, transfer scholarship opportunities, course transferability, and transfer admissions counseling services [WW-AdmTP]. The University has special transfer agreements with Luzerne County Community College, Lackawanna College, Northampton County Community College, Harrisburg Area Community College, Maricopa County Community College, Salus University, and Neumann University [SD-AdmAA]. Courses that do not have pre-existing equivalency status are considered on an individual basis. Students can find information about transferability of specific courses on the “Transfer of Courses” Admissions webpage [WW-AdmCRE]. Wilkes University policies regarding transfer credit are included in the Verification of Compliance report.

Additionally, a maximum of 12 credits may be granted for demonstrated and documented college-level learning acquired and developed experientially, not for the experiences themselves. Credit will be awarded for existing courses in the general education, major, and elective (including "general electives") components of the Wilkes curriculum and only on the basis of critical evaluation by appropriate faculty of the demonstrated learning presented in the petition and upon approval of the appropriate dean. The Academic Standards Committee (ASC) of the Faculty maintains the guidelines and procedures of the Policy on Experiential Learning and makes the final decision on the awarding of credit [UP-UBEL].

A number of opportunities to demonstrate competencies beyond those normally associated with graduation from high school are open to qualified high school juniors and seniors, as well as to adults returning to school after an interval of work or military experience. Academic credit may be granted for such demonstrated competencies through a variety of channels including Advanced Placement (AP) tests, military education and training programs, challenge examinations, the College-Level Examination Program (CLEP), Excelsior Exams, DANTES Subject Standardized Tests (DSST), and experiential learning portfolios [WW-AdmACDC].

SECURITY OF STUDENT RECORDS (Criterion 3)

The security of student records and information is an important priority for Wilkes. Wilkes University complies with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). FERPA guidelines are published in the Student Handbook and on-line through the University’s website [WW-FERPA]. The University has developed a Records Retention and Disposal Policy [PP-RRD]. The purpose of this policy is to ensure that necessary records and documents are adequately protected and maintained and to ensure that records that are no longer needed or of no value are destroyed at the appropriate time. This policy is designed for: 1) effective record retention to preserve the University’s history through archival records; 2) to enhance compliance with federal and state laws and regulations; 3) to minimize the cost of record retention; and 4) to optimize the use of electronic and physical

59

storage space. This policy applies to all records generated in the course of the University’s operations, including both original documents and reproductions. It also applies to records stored on computer and microfilm as well as paper records. All University personnel, including student workers and temporary workers, who have access to or use records are responsible for ensuring that records are generated, used, maintained, stored, retained and destroyed in accordance with this policy. The Office of Risk and Compliance maintains a database, organized by University office, that details the records in the custody of each office and the timelines related to retention and disposal of those records [SD-ORCRRS].

Information Technology (IT) hosts the Banner system on campus, where data is stored. Specific policies related to maintenance of data, emergency protocols related to technical difficulties (i.e. damage to the server) and security protocols for transferring and backing up data can be found in the IT Security Policy [PP-ITSP].

CO-CURRICULAR/EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES (Criterion 4)

The Student Affairs division is responsible for the majority of extracurricular activities, including Student Development, Intercollegiate Athletics and Intramurals, Residence Life, Career Services and Internships, Adventure Education, Civic Engagement, Interfaith Services and the Center for Global Education and Diversity.

Co-curricular activities present themselves in various forms. Student Government (SG) recognizes over 80

clubs and organizations that are available to all full-time undergraduates [WW-SGC]. These clubs and organizations are eligible to receive funding from the Student Activity Fee Fund if club leaders have completed training designed to inform them on University policy and procedure. The training includes information on purchasing and accounting procedures set forth by the University’s Business Operations office, hosting fundraising efforts according to the University Fundraising policy, receiving approval from the Office of Risk and Compliance when hosting events open to students and the general public, and following proper protocol when operating University vehicles (all drivers must be approved/cleared with a yearly motor-vehicle check and online training). All clubs are required to maintain a governing document (e.g., a constitution) and have a staff/faculty advisor. All other student-run organizations (non-SG recognized) are held to the same standard of procedural operation. The offices of Residence Life, Student Development, Global Education and Diversity, and International Engagement also plan and execute programming for undergraduate students according to their departmental mission and goals [SD-CGED16-17].

Wilkes offers a comprehensive intercollegiate athletics program that adheres to NCAA Division III and Middle Athletic Conference guidelines. The intercollegiate athletics program operates within the same academic eligibility guidelines and framework as the University. The operating budget for intercollegiate athletics provides the resources necessary to support the 23 varsity athletics programs at Wilkes University. During the 2018-19 academic year, 485 students participated on university athletic teams. Over 500 athletes are participating in the 2019-20 academic year. The budget for each athletic program is managed by the respective head coach and

60

monitored by the Director and the Associate Director of Athletics and the Finance Office. Supporting information about the University’s athletic programs can be found in the 2018 NCAA Self-Study [SD-NCAASS18].

THIRD-PARTY PROVIDERS(Criterion 5)

Wilkes uses several third-party providers for student support services.

• Protocall, a call-in counseling service used to provide off-hours counseling for students, was implemented several years ago. It is staffed by Master’s and Doctoral level counselors trained specifically to address college-level mental health issues.

• Adirondack, used by the Residence Life and Student Affairs office, supports “The Housing Director,” used for making housing assignments.

• For case management of student issues “Campus Kaizen” and the “Guardian” system replaced a prior system in Fall 2019.

• Dining services on campus are contracted with ARAMARK. ARAMARK operates a full-service dining hall, in addition to three grab and go options—Starbucks, P.O.D. (Provisions on Demand), and Rifkin Café (GrilleWorks and WhichWich). ARAMARK is also the primary caterer for

campus events. Dining services are evaluated on an annual basis through a residence life survey [SR-RLARAMARK].

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT SUPPORT PROGRAMS(Criterion 6)

Institutional effectiveness in support of student success is assessed through a variety of surveys and tools administered to students [SD-SRT]. Beginning as early as new student orientation and extending beyond graduation, student surveys have included: HERI’s CIRP Freshman Survey, the Transition to College Inventory (TCI), the Fall Freshman Survey, HERI’s Your First College Year (YFCY) Survey, RNL’s Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), HERI’s College Senior Survey (CSS), the First-Year Student Orientation Survey, the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), the Annual Residence Life Survey, the Intercollegiate Athletics End-of Season Survey, and the Career Placement Survey (six months after graduation) [WW-IRSRR]. Several examples of improvement-oriented changes driven by the survey results are summarized in Table 4-2.

In addition to these student surveys, the administrative offices that support the academic and non-academic

SURVEY DATA DRIVERS INITIATIVE IMPACT

Student safety concerns (SSI) Changes to Public Safety over the past several years

Significantly improved student feedback (SSI) about security on and around campus [SR-SSIS&S]

Student dissatisfaction with their financial aid experience (SSI) while serving a population with high need (CIRP)

Transformation from a One Stop and increase in Financial Aid Staffing

Although continued improvement is needed, satisfaction with the financial aid experience has improved. [SR-SSIFATrends]

Athletic Survey feedback from various teams regarding the need for updated facilities

Bruggeworth field project (2019)

Locker Room updates (2013)

Swimming facility changed from YMCA to CYC (2016)

New fields/facilities, allows for night games and increased seating capacity and extended the season for outdoor practice (impacted: Field Hockey, Soccer, Lacrosse, Baseball)

Impacted: Football, Lacrosse

Decreased concerns/Improved satisfaction (impacted: Swimming)

Transition to College Inventory (TCI) Results

TCI results provide first indicator for placing students on a “Watch List” used by University College staff. (part of annual process rather than a specific initiative)

As a result of the TCI data, the in-service training for academic advisors was also expanded to include more information regarding at-risk students.

Ensures that students who may be at risk of experiencing difficulty in their first college year get attention early.

Table 4-2. Recent Examples of Wilkes University’s Use of Survey Results to Improve Effectiveness

61

program of the University participate in the Program Review Process (PRP) to assure that students are being effectively supported, consistent with the mission of Wilkes. The program reviews are prepared by the individual units, shared with the direct supervisor and the unit Vice-President, and are then reviewed by the University Assessment Committee (UAC). The UAC provides feedback to the unit on its documented assessment processes with the goal of supporting efforts so they yield useful results that facilitate ongoing improvement. Examples are provided below to demonstrate improvements documented through the PRP to support students:

• Health & Wellness Services: Students' perceptions related to the quality of services offered within the unit are very strong [SR-DPHWS17]. In the Fall of 2017, however, 15 students were hospitalized due to serious mental health concerns. The spate of student crises highlighted a need for additional professional staff to serve and support students' complex needs. In February 2018, authorization was received for a new full-time psychologist [AD-HWSFR18]. A full-time psychologist was hired to address the growing demand for student counseling services and general behavioral and mental health concerns prevalent in higher education. The psychologist initiated data and trend analysis for the Counseling Center with a review of current protocols relative to best practices [AD-HWSAU19]. In the Fall of 2019, the psychologist resigned from the position, and while a licensed clinical social worker has been hired part-time to help bridge this gap, there is an on-going search for a new full-time psychologist.

• Enrollment Services: Enrollment Services increased cross-training of employees for processing applications, resulting in the elimination of periodic delays previously experienced when only two (as opposed to the current four) employees handled this [AD-ESAU18].

• University College Learning Center: Staff from the UC Learning Center developed a formal program, the Colonel’s Pathway to Success, aimed to improve the graduation rate of first-year students on academic probation. They also developed a program of support for the Panamanian scholarship students in the UPP program entering their college studies [AD-UCLCAU19].

• Student Development - E-Mentoring Program: Surveys used to assess the first-year student experience with their E-Mentor yielded mixed results. To ensure the most appropriate questions are asked of students regarding their E-Mentor experience, it was determined that a new survey tool was needed to gauge students' perceptions of specific aspects of the E-Mentoring program, and its value beyond Orientation [AD-SDFR18]. The new survey was administered in November 2018 and enabled more meaningful assessment of the objective measured (Cultivate meaningful peer-to-peer mentoring relationships to support incoming students from Orientation through their first semester). For instance, 96% of respondents indicated that their E-Mentor was “a helpful source of information about the University,” and 95% indicated that they felt their “E-Mentor was someone they could talk to about an academic issue.” Ninety-three percent (93%) shared that their “E-Mentor provided them with advice and support during the fall semester that had helped them in their transition to Wilkes” [AD-SDEMENTOR18].

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. To improve the effectiveness of support for student learning success, the University should more fully leverage the Early Alert System to identify students in need of academic assistance, and for students requiring tutoring services, it will be important to ensure the amount and level of tutoring meets their needs.

62

CHAPTER 5: STANDARD V

Educational Effectiveness Assessment

(RoA: 8, 9, 10)

63

Chapter 5 provides meaningful evidence that demonstrates both the impact and the strength of assessment practices at Wilkes University. This section will offer strengths and opportunities for improvement in assessment practice at Wilkes. The evidence provided within this standard addresses the ways in which the Institutional Priorities of Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Financial Vibrancy, and Diverse and Global Community are embedded within the assessment structure and practice at Wilkes.

CULTURE OF EVIDENCE

Since the 2010 Self-Study, the assessment of educational effectiveness at Wilkes University has evolved with intention and purpose. The culture on campus is one that seeks to more deeply understand how to generate meaningful evidence in a systematic way to make sound data-driven decisions. This allows for decision-making based on purposeful assessment. At the August 2018 faculty retreat, two themes emerged around assessment discussions [SR-FR18]. First, “There is a significant amount of assessment happening at the University.” Second, “There exists a shared University-wide focus on assessment.” This mindset has allowed Wilkes to engage in continuous improvement of educational experiences and progress towards achieving the institutional Mission and Vision.

Suggestions related to the assessment of student learning emerged in the 2010 Self-Study and remained a focus in the 2015 Periodic Review Report (PRR). Since then, consistent efforts have been made with noteworthy progress towards the integration and enhancement of the Program Review Process (PRP) for all major programs at Wilkes. The University Assessment Committee (UAC) leadership in collaboration with the Office of Institutional Research (IR) has engaged in regular discussions across campus to elevate assessment practice [SD-SAD1718]. With a continued commitment to assessing performance towards fulfilling the mission and strategic goals of the University, the process of institutional assessment has been refined and improved since the previous self-study. A program review process flowchart provided by the UAC provides an overview of the activity flow in the University’s PRP [SD-AcadPRPF18-19]. The evidence gathered through assessment and used to implement improvements for educational effectiveness at Wilkes will

be highlighted throughout this chapter to demonstrate how the University meets the goals of Standard V.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES(Criterion 1)

Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLOs) are clearly stated for both undergraduate and graduate programming. Figures 1-1 and 1-2 in Chapter 1 demonstrate the direct alignment of the Undergraduate and Graduate Institutional Student Learning Outcomes [WW-ISLO] with the University Mission, Vision, and Values. The ISLOs were approved and adopted by the Faculty in 2007, and the GISLOs were approved and adopted by the Faculty in 2015. The ISLOs and GISLOs are publicly accessible through the University’s website, the Undergraduate and Graduate Bulletins, and are incorporated within the Academic Program Full Review (FR) form [PP-AcadFR].

During the 2014-15 academic year, the General Education Committee (GEC) reviewed, revised, and proposed updates to the General Education Student Learning Outcomes (GESLOs) [UP-GBGESLO]. The revised GESLOs, which now include a Diversity Awareness skill area, were officially adopted by the Faculty in Spring 2015. The inclusion of a Diversity Awareness skill area is consistent with the University’s mission to prepare students for “success in a constantly evolving and multicultural world." As discussed in Chapter 3, the Wilkes General Education experience can be broken down into four areas: First-Year Foundations, Skill Areas, Distribution Areas, and the Senior Capstone Experience. Figure 3-1 in Chapter 3 illustrates how these four areas are mapped onto the Wilkes general education mission/vision statement.

ORGANIZED AND SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENTS

Program Review Process

(Criterion 2a and 2c)

The current system of program review was updated by the UAC during the 2015-16 academic year. At that time, a multi-year schedule for program reviews [SD-AcadPRPS15-22] was revised, based on consultation

64

with the leadership of programs that engage in discipline-specific external accreditation review cycles [SD-DAS]. The PRP serves as the primary mechanism for assembling, aligning, reporting, reviewing, and analyzing evidence of learning in all major programs. All major programs at the University engage in a Full Review (FR) every three years and conduct annual updates (AU) in the years a FR is not required. See Chapter 3 for a detailed discussion of the PRP.

Participation in the academic FR process provides faculty members the opportunity to ensure and communicate the alignment between programmatic student learning outcomes (PSLOs) and the relevant graduate or undergraduate ISLOs and University strategic plan themes. A summary of the alignment of undergraduate and graduate programs’ outcome statements with the appropriate set of ISLOs demonstrates interconnectivity of learning, a breadth of educational experiences, and alignment to the University Mission [SD-SLOA].

The AU form requires programs to update progress on assessment of PSLOs [PP-AcadAU]. Progress made in addressing issues noted in previous reviews as well as “next step” plans are documented as part of the AU. Table 5-1 shows that during the 2018-2019 review cycle, 100% of the academic programs scheduled for FR and AU submitted their program review reports. The full compliance shown in the 2018-2019 academic year demonstrates how assessment is becoming a part of the institutional culture. Although the programs completing a FR differ by year over the three-year cycle, it is believed that these positive gains are at least partly due to more frequent assessment-related discussions and meetings occurring in recent

years as a result of the ongoing process, which involve department chairs and academic deans. These meetings also help to ensure that UAC feedback on the assessment process is discussed and considered, and needs identified through the PRP are addressed appropriately. The PRP and the existence of clearly articulated learning goals throughout the University were noted as strengths by many faculty who attended the University faculty retreat in August 2018 [SR-FR18 p.7-8].

At the program level, the PRP and the ongoing work of the UAC provide resources and structure for the Faculty to report and analyze evidence for achievement of student learning outcomes (SLOs). The FR form gathers not only evidence of the alignment of SLOs with ISLOs and GTTF strategic goals, but also the tools used to gather evidence of learning, the frequency of assessment, and the achievement levels for each benchmark indicated. In the FR, programs indicate multiple forms of assessment including, but not limited to, performance assessments, scholarly projects, external exams, field experiences, and clinical case studies. This shows a commitment to providing opportunities for students to demonstrate learning success in different ways within and across programs.

As part of their annual process, the UAC examines the program reviews to provide feedback for each program on items such as reporting clear and measurable learning outcomes and the use of direct evidence to support decision making. Table 5-2 provides an overview of the results for the programs that completed a review between 2017 and 2019 [AD-AUTrnds p.1-2]. Follow-up conversations are scheduled with programs to provide additional guidance, as needed, to address any issues identified through the review process.

AY 2015-16 AY 2016-17 AY 2017-18 AY 2018-19

N % of Total N % of

Total N % of Total N % of

Total

Academic Program Review

48 76% 57 90% 55 96% 58 100%

Full Review 25 71% 16 100% 9 100% 34 100%

Annual Update 23 82% 41 87% 46 96% 24 100%

Note: N = The number of reviews submitted.

Table 5-1. Academic Review Submissions 2015-2019

ITEM REVIEWED2016-17(n = 16)

2017-18(n = 9)

2018-19(n = 34)

Learning outcomes are clearly written 60% 100% 94%

Learning outcomes are measurable 80% 100% 91%

Use of direct evidence to support student learning

80% 78% 88%

Use of indirect evidence to support student learning

27% 44% 29%

Table 5-2. UAC Assessment Results of FR Reports

65

Program Review Results

(Criterion 3b)

Evaluation of past FR reports for graduate programs shows that 88.5% of reported graduate assessments demonstrated the intended outcomes were achieved by students as per the benchmarks set [AD-GRFROA]. At the undergraduate level, 83.2% of the outcomes were achieved [AD-UGFROA]. Following up on the FR, in 2018-2019, 92% of programs submitting AUs indicated that they had taken steps to improve or maintain performance toward meeting benchmarks [AD-AUTrnds p.1-2].

As reported in program reviews, assessment methods and instruments vary according to individual programs and the nature of their learning outcomes, and results gathered from these tools are used by programs to help inform and guide curricular decisions, as discussed later in this chapter. Direct forms of evidence for student assessment include standardized tests (e.g., NCLEX, MFT, LSAT, NAPLEX, PRAXIS, MPJE), major portfolios, rubrics, and embedded questions. Additional sources of SLO assessment occur through labs, simulations, and case studies.

For several programs, evidence of student achievement is provided by nationally administered standardized tests. Some of these tests include the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) [AD-MCAT1517] and the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) [AD-PLR1819], for students entering medical or law programs following graduation from an undergraduate program. For those in chemistry and biochemistry programs, the American Chemical Society (ACS) exit exam serves as evidence of students achieving the established programmatic goals. The ETS Major Field Test (MFT) is used by multiple programs, including mathematics and psychology. Some students, such as those in the nursing, pharmacy, and education programs, take exams to demonstrate their successful preparation towards licensure or certification expectations. This evidence of success is provided through the National Council Licensure Examination (NCLEX), North American Pharmacy Licensure Exam (NAPLEX) /Multistate Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination (MPJE) and teacher certification exams upon graduation as a means for establishing minimum competency through practice certifying boards.

The English, Philosophy, and Digital Design & Media Art undergraduate programs use portfolios as part of their assessment strategy [SD-IMPRR]. At the graduate level, the MA and MFA in Creative Writing also use portfolios to assess the development of student writing. Many programs use rubrics as part of their overall assessment strategy. For example, Spanish [SD-SPR] computer science [SD-CSR], and the MS in Education Instructional Media program [SD-EDIMFPR] use rubrics to facilitate greater consistency of instructor interpretation and to demonstrate how student performance relates to the components of key assignments and/or course or program outcomes. Key embedded questions are also often used by programs to collect performance information from students useful for assessing student learning. Both the political science [AD-PSAU1819] and environmental engineering [AD-EEFR1718] programs do this, as well as other programs. For example, the environmental engineering program integrates questions related to the ethics section of the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) and Professional Engineering (PE) Exams into Quiz 2 in the EGR 201 course.

Nursing and pharmacy programs use labs, simulations, and case studies. For example, the Nesbitt School of Pharmacy engages students in integrated lab experiences (CareLabs). The required skills in CareLab, such as patient communication, follow-up and documentation, are assessed through an Objective Structured Clinical Examination, a simulation final exam graded on a rubric [AD-PHARMFR1617]. These results are analyzed and used annually to inform the CareLab curriculum and case studies. The BSN in Nursing [AD-BSNFR1819] is supported by the Clinical Nursing Simulation Center [WW-CNSC] to facilitate learning using simulated experiences.

66

The senior capstone is a culminating course or experience that integrates demonstration of outcomes from the Skill Areas of the General Education (GE) curriculum, the major field courses, and any relevant co-curricular programs. All undergraduate programs incorporate a capstone experience appropriate to the discipline. As such, on the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) administered in Spring 2019 [UA-NSSE], students with senior standing were more likely than students in the comparison groups to indicate that they had already or were currently completing a “culminating senior experience (capstone course, senior project or thesis, comprehensive exam, portfolio, etc.)” [SR-NSSEGES19]. As an example, capstone projects for the criminology major engage students in a culminating research project, requiring the use of information learned through research and statistics courses, as well as a synthesis of content from breadth courses taken throughout the program [SD-CRCE].

Within graduate programs, reported forms of assessment include internships, scholarly projects, field exams, and culminating synthesis assignments. In the Educational Leadership doctoral program, a doctoral qualifying exam and research oral defense were also noted as measures of student achievement of curricular goals. The qualifying exam [SD-ELQE] is scored blindly by three faculty members using a common writing rubric [SD-ELCWR] and the doctoral research teams also use a common rubric for oral defense [SD-ELODCR]. This comprehensive and consistent process offers reliable results, allowing for reflection and discussion around continuous curricular improvements.

Assessment Planning for New Programs

(Criteria 2c and 3e)

There are intentional connections between academic planning and assessment to ensure both are being addressed during the development of new programs. The Academic Planning Committee (APC) requires that new program proposals include a general description of an assessment plan. These proposals must also describe the program’s relationship to the University’s Mission, Vision and Values, a discussion of the impact that the proposed program will have on the University as a whole, a description of how rigor and quality in course offerings will be maintained, and a description of how program success will be measured [PP-APCBPT]. The Curriculum Committee (CC)

review/approval process requires that new major programs provide further detail about the program’s assessment plan, including a listing of SLOs, and where (which courses), when, and how learning will be assessed. The CC Proposal Form [PP-CCPF] includes instructions created by the UAC for developing an assessment plan [WW-UACAP]. After three years of operation, newly approved programs undergo a third-year review through the APC to assess how the new program is performing in terms of various operational factors that were in the approved program proposal, including enrollment, net revenue resourcing, assessment, contributions to the University’s mission, and the degree to which the program has been successful in reaching its goals [PP-APCPE].

Career Preparation

(Criterion 2b)

At both the institutional and program levels, and in direct and indirect ways, systematic assessment processes produce results that demonstrate student readiness for successful careers, meaningful lives, and further education. At the program level, this is embedded in curricular and co-curricular activities, such as student teaching and internships. In 2018, 26 students participated in student teaching and 247 completed internships. At the institutional level, the Center for Career Development and Internships conducts an annual first destination survey of recent graduates. For the class of 2018, 96% of recent graduates reported working in a field of employment closely or somewhat related to their undergraduate academic major [SR-FDS18]. This is consistent with the percentage reported by the class of 2017. For seniors participating in the NSSE in Spring 2019, 76% indicated that they either completed or planned to complete “an internship, co-op, field experience, student teaching or clinical placement” [SR-NSSESR19 p.8]. Ninety-six percent of Wilkes seniors indicated that they had spoken with faculty regarding their career plans [SR-NSSESR19 p.3]. Seventy-nine percent of seniors indicated that their experience at their institution contributed to their knowledge, skills, and personal development regarding “Acquiring job- or work-related knowledge and skills" [SR-NSSESR19 p.17]. For all three of these NSSE survey items, the responses of Wilkes seniors were comparable to those for two comparison groups used for benchmarking, and higher than a third. See Table 5-3 for College Senior Survey (CSS) data relevant to seniors’ perception of career readiness.

67

GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT (Criteria 2 and 3)

The GE curriculum is designed to stimulate the intellectual, personal, and social development of students and contribute to student preparedness for successful careers and meaningful lives [UP-UGBGE19]. Beginning in AY 2015-2016, the GE curriculum is assessed through the FR forms submitted by programs providing courses in one or more areas of the GE curriculum. The staggered schedule for program reviews means that only select components of the GE curriculum are assessed each academic year. A culmination of the information collected through this process is shared with the GEC for review.

First-Year FoundationsThe First-Year Foundations (FYF) course is the first component of the GE curriculum. The FYF course provides first-year students with learning experiences to help develop the strategies essential for a successful transition into the undergraduate experience. The SLOs for the FYF course focus on the development of self-knowledge, intellectual curiosity, openness to diversity, and a capacity for lifelong learning and civic responsibility. The FYF program review for the 2014-2015 academic year indicated that the learning outcomes and corresponding assessment strategies needed refinement to allow for more direct assessment [AD-

FYFFR14]. As a result, the Faculty approved the creation of the FYF Committee beginning in Fall 2016. In Spring 2017, the FYF Committee proposed a new plan for assessing a subset of the Skill Area outcomes, which was subsequently approved by the CC and the Faculty [SD-FYFCP17].

A subcommittee of the FYF Committee was formed in Fall 2017, and created rubrics [SD-FYFSR] to assess students’ achievement in each skill area of the GE curriculum. Consultation with content area experts was sought where relevant. The rubrics were uploaded into D2L for use by FYF instructors. The initial assessment using the skill area rubrics occurred in Fall 2018, but produced limited results, due to the low number of faculty who reported on their use [SD-FYFMemo]. As a result, the FYF Committee developed and administered a survey of Fall 2018 FYF instructors in Spring 2019 as a result, to learn what could be done differently to gain greater use of the rubrics. Results suggested that many instructors felt sufficient guidance had not been provided for how to access and use the rubrics [AD-FYFIS18]. To address concerns and better prepare FYF instructors, the Interim FYF Coordinator, supported by members of the FYF Committee, held two workshops [SD-FYFemail19-1] for Fall 2019 FYF instructors at the end of the Spring 2019 semester. Additional/refresher workshops occurred in August 2019, prior to the start of the fall semester [SD-FYFemail19-2]. The next FR of FYF will be submitted in Spring 2020.

Table 5-3. Senior Perception of Career Readiness (CSS Comparisons)

WILKES PRIVATE NON-SECTARIAN 4-YEAR

Please indicate your agreement with the following statements. This institution has contributed to my:

2015 2017 2015 2017

Preparedness for employment after college 87.4% 88.1% 85.5% 84.8%

Preparedness for advanced or graduate education 86.4% 87.0% 88.0% 86.7%

Interpersonal skills 90.8% 92.2% 91.6% 89.7%

Note: The numbers reflect the % Indicating “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”. Data from CSS [SR-CSSSkill].

68

Another development that occurred in Spring 2019 with relevance for FYF assessment was the creation of guidelines for a final project [SD-FYFFPE]. Students first completed this conference-style group presentation in Fall 2019. The final project will serve as a common reference point for FYF assessment of general education skills and will occur towards the end of the semester. The evolution of FYF assessment practices is summarized in a table [SD-FYFAD14-20].

Skill AreasAs discussed in Chapter 3, the skill areas of the GE Curriculum include Written Communication (WC), Oral Communication (OC), Quantitative Reasoning (QR), Critical Thinking (CT), Computer Literacy (CL), and Diversity Awareness (DA). Four of these Skill Areas—CL, WC, OC, and QR—are addressed within the context of specific academic experiences. Students take skill-focused course requirements in these areas, and must meet minimum competency in those courses to graduate. Assessment of CT is embedded throughout all components and academic learning experiences of the Wilkes University curriculum. DA is assessed through the FYF course and in additional general education courses, such as ENG 120. A recent survey administered by CODIE was designed to determine additional courses that specifically meet the diversity awareness skill area [SR-CODIEDACL].

To assess WC, the English program reported on student performance in English 101/Composition [AD-GEENG101]. Based on faculty review of end-of-semester portfolios, student performance met or exceeded the 80% benchmark for all three course outcomes. In 2018-19 the Communication Studies program reported on their COM 101/Fundamentals of Public Speaking assessment process and findings. COM 101 is taken by most students to fulfill the OC skill area course requirement. A sample of student speeches were evaluated by all full-time faculty for the program as well as one adjunct, using a common rubric. Four of five benchmarks associated with each of the five course outcomes were met. The review indicated that Communication Studies faculty would discuss COM 101 coverage of the SLO for which student performance missed the benchmark (73% vs. benchmark of 75%), in order to strengthen it to improve student performance on the outcome [AD-GECOM101].

As described in the Undergraduate Bulletin, the development and assessment of CT is embedded throughout all components and academic learning experiences of the Wilkes University curriculum. For example, it was noted in the GE assessment report provided by the Biology program in 2018-19 that introductory biology courses also address CT [AD-GEBIO105]. The expectation that students have developed their critical thinking skills is also apparent in various program outcomes, such as “Apply abstract theories to concrete problems and political issues” (assessed through PS 226) for Political Science program majors, or “Apply architectural and system theory to effectively solve systems engineering problems” (assessed through the capstone) for Computer Science majors.

The skill areas are also assessed through the FYF course. The assessment plan approved for FYF (referred to as the 2+2 curricular design), calls for every FYF instructor to include at least one General Education outcome from both the DA and CT skill areas into the course curriculum, along with a minimum of two additional GE skill area outcomes. This integration strengthens alignment of FYF learning outcomes with the GE curriculum, and allows for a common framework for direct assessment. The more formalized incorporation of the general education skill areas into the FYF curriculum also helps to ensure additional opportunities for students to focus on and develop their general education skills.

As further evidence of direct assessment of the skill areas, an abbreviated form of the ETS Proficiency Profile (ETS-PP) was administered in Spring 2014 [SR-ETSPPR14] to a sample of seniors and 2nd year Pharmacy (P2) students to assess their acquired reading/critical thinking, writing, and math skills. The assessment was coordinated by the UAC to follow-up on previous use of the ETS-PP by the GEC. Students known to have transferred credits into the institution were not invited to participate. The sample for the 2014 assessment was considered to be more representative of the population than the previous ETS-PP assessment involving seniors and P2s from 2010 based on various statistics, including SAT scores. Results for the Spring 2014 assessment, when viewed with previous ETS-PP results from first-year students in 2009 and 2011 illustrate the development of skills over the Wilkes experience - most notably for mathematics (relating most closely to Wilkes’ QR GESLOs) and reading/critical thinking.

69

Student feedback collected through surveys provides indirect evidence for assessing the GE skill areas. A data profile composed of results from various student surveys administered by IR was compiled in Summer 2019, and going forward will be provided to the GEC annually to support the committee’s oversight of the assessment of the GE curriculum [SR-GEIA]. Among the information included in this profile are the results from a senior exit survey, which revealed the results shown in

Table 5-4 regarding the specific outcomes of the GE. This internally-developed survey has historically been administered every other spring, but beginning in Spring 2018, has been administered annually.

Another source of information included in the 2019 version of the GE curriculum data profile is the College Senior Survey (CSS) [SR-CSSSkill]. The CSS has been administered at Wilkes periodically over the past several years, but most recently in Spring 2017. Table 5-5 highlights several items from the CSS related to educational outcomes, several of which relate to general education skills and abilities. The proportion of seniors indicating that their Wilkes education has contributed to the development of their critical thinking and problem solving skills is notable at 96-97%, and is comparable to students responding from the comparison group of non-sectarian 4-year institutions. Although nearly 75% of graduating seniors indicated in 2017 that Wilkes contributed to the development of their understanding of global issues, and this was up from 66% two years earlier, 83% of students attending the comparison group institutions indicated that their institution did the same. Wilkes is making progress in this area, but it is clear that more can be done.

Wilkes’ participation in both the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey and the CSS has allowed for an analysis of the development of Wilkes students over their time at Wilkes. Analysis of this data comparing students’ self-perception across various skills and abilities prior to the start of their first semester and just prior to graduation skills reveals notable improvements in public speaking and writing abilities, and computer skills [SR-TFSCSS-SC]. Although the decision was made in 2018 to discontinue the use of the CSS in favor of the NSSE [UA-NSSE], Wilkes can use student feedback related to their general education experience and skill development collected through the NSSE. A comparison of the responses of first-year and senior students collected through the Spring 2019 NSSE revealed statistically higher responses from seniors regarding their self-reported knowledge, skills and personal development for speaking clearly and effectively and thinking critically and analytically [SR-NSSEPG19]. Wilkes seniors indicated a higher facility with “Analyzing numerical and statistical information” and “Reach[ing] conclusions based on [their] own analysis of

Table 5-4 General Education Skill Development (From Senior/P4 Exit Survey)

Note: Percentages represent at least moderate improvement.

How much has Wilkes improved your skill development in:

2014 2016 2018 2019

Written Communication (WC) 90.7% 90.7% 92.2% 93.7%

Oral Communication (OC) 94.7% 92.1% 95.1% 93.2%

Quantitative Reasoning (QR) 93.6% 91.8% 95.6% 91.3%

Critical Thinking (CT) 97.1% 94.4% 96.9% 93.9%

Computer Literacy (CL) 82.5% 83.4% 88.0% 81.0%

Diversity Awareness (DA) N/A N/A 85.7% 82.6%

Note: The numbers reflect the % Indicating “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”

WILKESPRIVATE 4-YEAR NON-SECTARIAN

Please indicate your agreement with the following statements. This institution has contributed to my:

2015 2017 2015 2017

Knowledge of a particular field or discipline 98.4% 97.0% 98.6% 98.1%

Knowledge of people from different races/cultures 79.2% 85.2% 87.5% 87.1%

Understanding of global issues 65.9% 74.1% 77.0% 83.1%

Critical thinking skills 96.6% 96.2% 97.4% 97.5%

Problem solving skills 97.2% 97.0% 97.0% 96.8%

Table 5-5. General Education Knowledge and Skill Development (from CSS)

70

numerical information (numbers, graphs, statistics, etc.).” In fact, QR was noted by NSSE as an area of distinction for Wilkes - indicating that Wilkes is high-performing compared NSSE respondents nationally. Despite 71% of Wilkes seniors indicating that their institution contributed at least “quite a bit” to the development of their ability to write clearly and effectively, the perceived institutional contribution to writing ability was higher for the comparison groups used for benchmarking. Table 5-6 provides an overview of the perceptions of seniors regarding the degree to which they attribute their current knowledge, skills and personal development in various areas to their experience at their home institution [SD-NSSEReport19].

Distribution AreasAssessment of the GESLOs for the distribution areas of GE occurs at the course level, primarily through the PRP. Programs that deliver courses that fulfill distribution areas of the GE curriculum provide assessment information for those courses as part of the FR.

Area I — The Humanities. Students must successfully complete courses in English Literature (ENG 120), History of the Modern World (HST 101), and Introduction to Philosophy (PHL 101), Ethics (PHL 110), or foreign language, to fulfill Area I. An assessment of student performance aligned with the

Area I/Humanities course outcomes was most recently collected through the full PRP in 2018-19 [AD-AreaI]. Student performance on course outcomes was mixed, with all course outcome benchmarks met in ENG 120 and Spanish (SP 101), and not met in PHL 101/110 and HST 101. Philosophy faculty members found that student performance in PHL 110, was weaker than PHL 101. Follow-up based on assessment results involved redevelopment of PHL 110 to improve efficacy. In response to student performance below benchmarks in HST 101, a review of the nature and scope of course assignments across sections was conducted to ensure appropriate alignment with lectures, readings, and discussions. The importance of revitalizing HST 101 pedagogy was also noted as imperative to sufficiently engage students in learning through the course. Although student performance met all benchmarks, Spanish faculty members implemented a mandatory placement test, beginning Fall 2019, which should provide a better gauge for assessing student learning in SP 101 for students who place at a beginner level.

Area II — Scientific World Students must successfully complete two science courses, each from a different discipline to fulfill Area II. A general education assessment strategy that has occurred biennially since 2012, but outside of the PRP, addresses Area II/Scientific World (SW) GESLOs as well as the CT and WC skill areas. Students in the “105” science courses (BIO 105, CHM 105, EES 105, PHY 105), which are taken by non-science majors to fulfill their general education Area II requirement, are asked to read a science-related article and respond to open-ended prompts. A team of five faculty members from the College of Science and Engineering evaluate 50 randomly-selected artifacts for the assessment, resulting in two reviewers per artifact. The faculty reviewers are blind to the identity of the students, and hold norming sessions to ensure consistent interpretation of student work. Student responses to the prompts are assessed using rubrics aligned with the outcomes in each of three general education areas - the SW, CT, and WC. The IR Office has also routinely supported this assessment, allowing for deeper analysis of the results [AD-AreaII]. The 2018 report found that performance improved on 10 of the 13 assessed outcomes since 2016. This included three of the five SW outcomes, three of the four WC outcomes, and all four of the CT outcomes.

Table 5-6. Perceptions of Institutional Impact on Skill Development (Seniors Only)

Notes: The numbers reflect the % Indicating “Quite a bit” or “Very much”

How much has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in….

WIL

KES

MID

-EA

ST

PR

IVA

TE

CA

RN

EGIE

D/P

CO

MP

ETIT

OR

S

Writing Clearly and Effectively [WC] 71% 73% 77% 78%

Speaking Clearly and Effectively [OC] 75% 72% 70% 76%

Thinking Critically and Analytically [CT] 87% 85% 86% 88%

Analyzing numerical and statistical information [QR] 74% 61% 63% 64%

Understanding people of other backgrounds [DA] 58% 65% 67% 69%

71

A recent assessment of student performance across Biology courses that fulfill Area II/Scientific World requirements suggests that student performance is generally strong, with some variability by course (e.g., 105, 121, 122) [AD-GEBIO105]. It was noted in the report submitted that results would be discussed with the faculty responsible for the courses, engaging them to consider strategies to improve student performance related to the Area II outcomes where needed.

Area III — Behavioral and Social Sciences Students must successfully complete two courses in the behavioral and social sciences including political science, anthropology, economics, sociology, and psychology to fulfill Area III. The most recent assessment of course-level SLOs for Area III was reported in the 2016-17 FR submitted by the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences [AD-AreaIII]. All courses from Area III were assessed, including courses not associated with a major program (Anthropology 101, Economics 102). Student performance was assessed across course offerings using strategies such as embedded test questions, essay-form or multiple choice exams, and short papers. Outcome benchmarks were met for all reported course outcomes except two for Economics 102. Follow-up on the results in Economics 102 involved review of the relationship of test questions to Area III GESLOs. Since the last FR, programs within the Division have reflected on past results and have worked to identify consistent assessment methods across all course sections of a given course. These improvements to the process will be reflected in the next FRs for programs within the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences to be submitted in Spring 2020.

Area IV — Visual and Performing Arts Students must successfully complete one course in the visual and performing arts to satisfy Area IV. Given the reliance on the PRP process for evaluation of the GE, assessment in Area IV has faced challenges. Only one of the courses in this area is associated with a major program that would normally submit a PRP, and prior to AY 2019-2020, programs had not been directly instructed to provide assessment for all courses taught within their area that satisfy the GE. Consequently, no program had taken ownership of assessment for courses in Area IV. Recognizing the issue, the Associate Dean of the College of Arts, Humanities, & Social Sciences, as well as the Chairs of the Departments of Performing Arts and

Digital Design & Media Art held several meetings with the GEC co-chairs and one of the UAC co-chairs during the 2018-19 academic year to discuss assessment-related challenges and to propose workable strategies. The next scheduled round for assessment evidence collection from courses contributing to Area IV will occur in Spring 2020 [AD-AreaIV].

Senior CapstoneThis component of the GE curriculum is evaluated at the program level and assessment data is reported through the PRP. See previous PRP section. An example of GE skills assessed through major-specific capstones include those for Chemistry and Biochemistry majors. These students are expected to demonstrate their proficiency, integrating major-related knowledge and general education skills through the achievement of program outcomes such as, “Demonstrate proficiency in analysis, organization, interpretation, and presentation of chemical data” (QR), “express chemical concepts with quantitative relationships and to interpret the results obtained from the use of these quantitative relationships” (QR), “use written communication in a cogent and coherent form that demonstrates understanding of chemical concepts” (WC), and “develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills in synthesizing information” (CT) [AD-CHMBIOCFR1718].

The Communication Studies program provides another example, with intended outcomes for program majors assessed through the capstone such as, “Students should be able to write with precision for both media and non-media applications“ (WC) and “Students should be competent leaders and innovators; they should demonstrate rhetorical sensitivity, civic responsibility, ethical judgment, respect for diversity, and teamwork” (DA), with OC more directly assessed through their Senior Research Methods capstone presentation to faculty. Students should be able to “speak effectively in public and interpersonal settings; they should be effective oral negotiators, and be able to make effective public presentations using visual aids” [AD-COMFR819]. Although these examples demonstrate the integration of skill areas into the senior capstone, the University has not officially made it a requirement that capstone courses must assess all six GE skill areas. To more fully leverage the capstones’ utility as the culmination of the GE curriculum, the University should investigate the viability of embedding the skill area assessments into the capstone across disciplines.

72

GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND OVERSIGHT (Criterion 5)

A recommendation included in the 2010 Wilkes University Self-Study was:

The University Assessment Committee must clarify the assessment methodology and reporting process for courses within the distribution and skill areas of the General Education core.

As previously discussed, the FR component of the PRP, developed by the UAC, provides a methodology and framework for reporting on the assessment of learning across courses taken to fulfill GE skill or distribution area requirements. The GE section of the FR form provides a framework to guide the reporting and mapping of course outcomes to the skill or distribution areas. The UAC also provides periodic workshops and instructional videos that guide and inform the reporting expectations for the documentation of assessment methods used, interpretation of results, and follow-up actions for improvement. The systematic and annual nature of the PRP has created clearer communication of course-based GE assessment reporting expectations and has enhanced the ability for programs to focus on the continuous review and improvement of their GE offerings based on assessment data.

In spite of the gains made in the methodology and reporting process for the assessment of GE courses, a limitation of the current strategy has been that certain courses taken to fulfill GE requirements are offered by disciplines not associated with a corresponding major program. As a result, assessment data for particular courses used to fulfill a GE requirement has not been reliably collected. For example, data was not obtained for all courses taken to fulfill the Area IV GE requirement. Additionally, the most recent assessment of the QR skill area was not completed by the mathematics department as scheduled in AY 2017-2018. This occurred because the mathematics department did not believe they had clear guidance for which course(s) were to be used for assessment reporting, given that the QR skill area can be fulfilled by any mathematics course numbered 101 or higher. To provide additional guidance addressing

these concerns, the UAC has integrated enhanced communication into the 2019-2020 PRP, detailing which GE courses are most important to assess and report through the FR for each skill and distribution area and by which program or department.

The current GE assessment plan provides a strategy and framework for incorporating GE assessment within the scope of respective program reviews [SD-GEAP]. The plan provides an overview of the existing assessment strategy, but the plan has not been evenly implemented across all GE offerings. Additional oversight and guidance is needed to ensure that GE assessment strategies are sustained and meaningful. Integral to achieving improved coordination of GE assessment is a closer, clearer working relationship between the GEC and the UAC.

To clarify the working relationship between the GEC and the UAC, the GEC is planning to take primary responsibility for the oversight of GE assessment from the UAC. This change has been discussed with the previous Provost, the current Interim Provost, and the Associate Provost for Student Success, as well as in both committees. Discussions within the GEC over the past year have largely focused on empowerment to increase their role in the oversight of GE assessment.

As a first step towards establishing a greater role for the GEC in the assessment process, the GEC has created a template to facilitate its oversight of the distribution areas for (1) demonstrating the alignment of general education course outcomes with the appropriate set of distribution area outcomes, (2) summarizing assessment evidence by area across courses, and (3) providing takeaways and feedback based on the alignment and assessment evidence [SD-GECDAT]. In addition, an electronic form has been developed, based largely on the GE component of the UAC’s PRP Full Review form, to collect assessment data from all instructors of distribution area courses. By the end of the Spring 2020 semester, the GEC should have data for distribution area course assessment from a pilot test of the new electronic collection form. Following the assessment of the pilot, the GEC will determine when the form will be implemented, with a goal of AY 2020-2021.

It is anticipated that a similar form may be used to collect assessment evidence from courses taken to fulfill GE skill area requirements. The GEC is considering the development of templates to facilitate oversight of the skill

73

areas, similar to the ones developed for the distribution areas. Discussions are ongoing regarding how to best leverage the common undergraduate capstone experience to demonstrate student proficiency in each skill area.

THE USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS FOR IMPROVEMENT (Criterion 3)

Student Learning and Curricular ChangesUniversity assessment practices and the PRP provide meaningful data that are used to improve the achievement of student learning goals. A summary on the status of program assessment generated by the UAC, based on the Annual Updates (AU) submitted in 2018-2019 indicates that all academic programs that submitted an AU have re-assessed the programmatic learning outcome(s) where performance had not met the benchmark or goal in the previous FR [AD-AUTrnds p.1]. In the same year, 75% of the academic programs identified specific curricular changes or adjustments that were implemented as a result of the previous FR.

Consistent with the University’s strategic plan theme to foster excellence in academic programs, the PRP is designed to ensure the review and assessment of purposeful data and supports the follow-through of data directed action. Ongoing curriculum and pedagogical improvement occur regularly in the programs and so the PRP elicits information regarding specific curricular changes that have occurred as a result of student performance on assessments [AD-AUSummQ1]. Some examples of these curricular changes based on assessment include:

Program: Instructional Media, Master of Science• Assessment Data Referenced: PR revealed

student achievement of course outcomes were at 87% which was below the benchmark of 95% in EDIM 504. The data indicated a 94% mastery in EDIM 502.

• Actions Taken: EDIM 504 was retired and necessary outcomes were incorporated into EDIM 502, which underwent a revision in Fall 2018.

Program: Criminology/Sociology, Bachelor of Arts• Assessment Data Referenced: Student

performance on SLO related to statistical and quantitative reasoning was below desired benchmark in the course progression from SOC 371 to SOC 390.

• Actions Taken: The quantitative and statistical

reasoning course sequence was reversed to have students engage in statistical reasoning before quantitative methodology to allow for improved understanding in context.

Program: Pharmacy• Assessment Data Referenced: Spring 2017

NAPLEX results, MPJE results, and Pharmacy Curriculum Outcomes Assessment (PCOA) for P3 students. PCOA results were below benchmark of 50% (national average).

• Actions Taken: The School adopted an online law course for students so they can revisit material before the MPJE exam. PCOA is a required annual exam delivered in Spring of the P3 year. Lower performing content areas underwent curriculum review and revision (biochemistry, pathophysiology, biopharmaceutics).

Program: Communication Studies. Bachelor of Arts• Assessment Data Referenced: 2018-2019 FR

showed two program outcomes for the Senior Research Methods course below benchmarks.

• Actions Taken: Three COM Faculty met to discuss the development of related skills across the curriculum. As a result, APA format training was integrated into COM 102 (a foundational course for the Senior Research Methods capstone course sequence (324/325)).

Programs: Chemistry and Biochemistry• Assessment Data Referenced: The 2018-19 AU

indicated a need to increase chemistry preparation to ensure the benchmark for student performance on SLO1 (Students will be able to demonstrate proficiency in analysis, organization and presentation of chemical data) continues to be met

• Actions Taken: Changes made to curriculum to support achievement of a program learning outcome included re-introducing a second semester of inorganic chemistry, adding a biochemistry lab, and phasing out the integrated lab.

Improving PedagogyFaculty assess and reflect on their teaching on an annual basis. Nontenured faculty are provided with extra guidance through a peer evaluation process by which experienced faculty complete classroom observations and make suggestions to improve teaching effectiveness. All full-time faculty are required to submit an annual Self-Evaluation Report (SER) as outlined in the Faculty Handbook [UP-FH 5.6]. A more detailed discussion

74

is given in Chapters 2 and 3. The SER allows each teaching faculty member to assess teaching pedagogy and practice through self-reflection and student feedback obtained through the Student Response Surveys (SRS) [SD-SRSF2F; SD-SRSOL]. Unless exempted, all courses are subject to SRS evaluation in either paper or electronic form. The feedback collected through the SRS provides discursive comments in addition to quantitative ratings. While SRS does not provide a complete picture of teaching quality, it does offer faculty and evaluators insight into the student experience. Faculty members and the respective department chairs are provided a summary report of SRS data after grades have been submitted for the semester.

Feedback from student learning experiences can also inform department-level assessment and improvement. One example of how this data was used for purposeful decision making is evident in the School of Education (SOE) doctoral program in Educational Leadership. The online platform used for synchronous online course delivery has changed twice since 2016 based on feedback from students related to the online learning experience and ongoing collaboration between the department chair and the Office of Technology for Teaching and Learning (OTTL). In the Spring and Summer of 2017, OTTL worked closely with the doctoral program chair to understand student feedback and ultimately provide a more reliable platform for synchronous online video sessions. The YouSeeU Video platform was piloted by the doctoral faculty in summer 2017 and has since been fully implemented into the program, as well as fully integrated into the Desire to Learn (D2L) learning management system for the full university to access and use [SD-OVCchange].

Assessment and Professional DevelopmentProfessional development occurs in a variety of ways across the University to support educational effectiveness in response to assessed and identified needs. The investment of resources needed for professional development demonstrates data driven planning and budgeting decisions that align with the strategic plan theme of “investing in our people.” One such opportunity for faculty to learn together as a community occurs at the start of each academic year during the Faculty Retreat. In response to the 2010 Self-Study suggestions from the evaluation team, the 2014 Faculty

Retreat focused on writing clear and measurable student learning objectives [SD-FRAgenda14]. More specifically, the expert presenter guided the faculty through exercises related specifically to the General Education Student Learning Outcomes, which laid the foundation for the faculty review and update of the GESLOs in AY 2014-15. In addition, faculty can apply for funding to attend conferences for professional development through the Faculty Developmental Committee (FDC). See Chapter 3 for more information related to funding for faculty development.

Evidence provided through the PRP also contributes to ongoing planning and professional development in support of educational effectiveness. A summary of AU results submitted in AY 2017-2018 indicated that 54% of reporting programs requested resources to support educational effectiveness while 40% of programs that requested resources reported that those resources were received [AD-AUTrnds]. Further review of submitted AUs indicated several of these requests were for professional development that was implemented or is planned to occur in support of continuous improvement of educational effectiveness. For instance, in response to the growth in online delivery of graduate programming in the SOE [AD-S0EGRCrHrs], faculty in the SOE engaged in professional development related to the design and delivery of quality online education through Quality Matters, with the goal to develop courses that meet the Quality Matters standards. Quality Matters is a program and an institutional membership designed to “help educators deliver the promise of quality online learning opportunities to every level of learner.“

Similar action has occurred in a broader sense across the University in response to the growth in flexible course delivery methods, including online, hybrid, and D2L-enhanced courses. As seen in Table 3-4 in Chapter 3, the number of course sections utilizing D2L has increased by approximately 31% from 2016 to 2018, and D2L is now included in approximately 67% of the courses offered. To enhance the learning experience for students, consistent with the University Mission to “provide excellence in academic programs” and “invest in our people," the former E-Learning office was renamed the Office of Technology for Teaching and Learning (OTTL) in February 2017 to better represent the office’s operation and function within the University [WW-OTTL; SD-OTTLMemo]. This change was also prompted by a

75

newly developed mission and vision in response to the rapid growth in online learning and the appointment of a new director. From 2017-2019, strategic purchases through OTTL were approved with the goal of supporting teaching effectiveness across all academic programs. These investments were based on collected data and best practice research to support online learning growth and include:

• Conference system embedded into D2L [SD-OVCchange]

• Panopto Video Content Creation and Sharing System [SD-VCCChange]

• Lockdown Browser application for online testing fidelity [SD-OTTLLB]

• Additional Turnitin licenses to promote writing originality and a reduction in plagiarism

Assessment, Planning and BudgetingThe Academic Program Full Review form prompts department chairs or program coordinators to describe the resources needed to address student performance on program-level SLOs that fall below established benchmarks [PP-AcadFR]. Beginning in 2017-2018, a supplementary section was added to the AU form, which enabled those completing the forms to describe previous funding requests and re-evaluate resource needs based on the most recent assessment findings [PP-AcadAU]. The inquiries embedded into the PRP regarding resource needs provide important information for supporting the budgetary priorities of academic leadership, which is consistent with the University’s strategic priority of fostering excellence in academic programs by way of high-impact and evidence-based practices.

To allow for the meaningful use of this data, UAC compiles a summary of resource requests collected from the program reviews, and organized by college/school [AD-UACRRS]. Resource requests with potential budget implications are summarized and shared with the deans in time to be considered for budget planning each year [SD-PRRRDeans].

Several resource requests from the FR for AY 2017-18 received funding to address identified gaps or pursue opportunities to improve student learning. For example, the School of Pharmacy received financial support to develop a new system to monitor students’ competence in the domains of personal and professional development. The College of Science and Engineering’s Masters

in Bioengineering Program obtained funding for additional graduate teacher assistants to support program growth. The Masters in Creative Writing program received additional funding for course development. The School of Education was allocated resources to hire faculty required to implement a new Alternative Pathway Program within the Elementary and Early Childhood Education program and improve alignment of the MS in Educational Leadership curriculum to the new International Society for Technology in Education Standards. The BSN in Nursing received additional funding to support course development related to a review and restructuring of the curriculum.

Improving Support Services University College’s Academic Support Program provides education services that are designed to promote academic excellence and success among undergraduate students. Staff members from University College work together with academic departments across the University to assess students’ academic support needs and augment services. For example, the Learning Center staff collaborated with faculty in the Passan School of Nursing to create a new referral process that was designed to enhance support for students in need of test preparation, note-taking, tutoring, and academic coaching [SD-PSoNarticle]. The need for this support was identified by a declining NCLEX-RN pass rate, which has since improved [AD-NCLEXtrends]. In Fall 2018, after consultations with faculty in the Chemistry and Biology Departments prompted by student learning needs, the Coordinator of the Learning Center increased the number of supplemental instructors in several courses to better accommodate students’ needs. Responding to an increase in need for writing assistance, the number of work-study students employed by the Writing Center was increased, resulting in an increase in available tutoring hours. See Chapter 4 for more information about the support services offered.

Improving Key Indicators of Student Success Each first-year cohort is provided the opportunity to participate in the Transition to College Inventory (TCI), a survey developed at Old Dominion University to predict first-year students’ risk of experiencing academic difficulty in their first year based on non-cognitive factors. Each participating student is assigned a score to indicate their level of risk. Students are designated as low, moderate, or high risk based on their survey

76

responses. If a student has authorized the release of their TCI results to their academic advisor, that information is shared appropriately. University College (UC) uses this information to identify students considered to exhibit at least moderate risk. UC then monitors and updates their records with additional information based on student performance to best focus efforts on students who have demonstrated some indicator(s) of a need for additional support. Entering first-year students who had not completed the TCI are also included in the early watch list due to the higher likelihood of early attrition identified for this population in an analysis compiled by the IR Office for the provost in 2014 [SR-IoAR14]. Wilkes University has participated in the TCI annually since 2004 [SR-TCIRSTrends].

A Fall Freshman Survey is administered to collect feedback from first-year students on their orientation and academic advising experience, as well as their sources of support, and overall satisfaction with their experiences. This information is tabulated in a summary report, and results are disaggregated by student major and shared with department chairs to provide them with feedback on how first-year students in their major programs are feeling about their experience. This is done to promote first-year student success and retention. Changes made to the survey in recent years include the incorporation of two additional items that provide an opportunity for students with concerns to be contacted so they may discuss them with an appropriate Wilkes employee. This includes a member of the Student Affairs team for particular concerns or the Associate Provost for Student Success, if the student has indicated that he or she is unlikely to return for the spring semester, or is at least unsure about spring enrollment plans. [SR-FFSForm19]. These changes demonstrate clear alignment with Theme 3 of the University’s GTTF strategic plan, which includes two direct objectives to support student success as demonstrated by retention and graduation rates [AD-R&GRTrends].

An examination of retention data at a summer 2018 President’s Cabinet Retreat [SD-PCRRetention18] contributed to the decision to create a position of Associate Provost for Student Success in Fall 2018 [SD-ReorgRetention]. As a member of the Senior Leadership Team, the Associate Provost for Student Success serves as a point of coordination and provides oversight for several critical areas for supporting student success, retention, and graduation. This position oversees the FYF program,

University College Advising Services, the Honors Program, and the Intensive English Program (IEP). Moving University College from Student Affairs to the Associate Provost was to ensure a closer relationship of the division to the academic programs.

Communicating Assessment Results and Information about Academic Programs

(Critera 3f and 2c)

Improved internal reporting structures and PR processes noted in this section facilitate the sharing of assessment information and data with internal constituencies and educational stakeholders. Additional data on academic programs is shared internally through the Academic Department Data Book produced by the IR Office [WW-ADDB]. This resource, made available to the University Community through the portal and the staff shares drive, details University statistics by college or school, department, and major or subject across the following categories of information: Entering Student Statistics, Enrollment, Credit Hours, Student Satisfaction

77

Trends, Average Grades by Department and Subject, Retention and Graduation Rates [WW-IRDC]. Wilkes shares appropriate information with external audiences, as well, on the University website. This includes NCLEX-RN pass rates [WW-PSoN], pass rates for the NAPLEX, and MPJE licensure exams [WW-PharmA&O]. Annually since 2000-2001, the IR Office also publishes a University Fact Book, which is available to the public through the University’s website [UP-FB].

ASSESSMENT OF THIRD-PARTY PROVIDERS (Criterion 4)

As referenced in Chapter 3, academic programs offered through third-party providers participate in the same rigorous program review and assessment process as other academic programs [SD-PO]. This assessment process is present from program inception to course delivery and includes the APC pre-assessment process, the University CC for curriculum development and formative review, and SRS administration for delivery review. Currently, the School of Education maintains three long-standing partnerships that include collaborative curriculum development as well as shared curriculum delivery.

The PRP has revealed the need for changes to these programs, based upon the assessments. As an example, the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials (PASBO) partnership in the School Business Leadership Master of Science degree was reviewed during in the 2017-2018 program review cycle. The review revealed a need to better prepare students as writers. As a consequence, it was decided that all adjuncts would be specifically trained to hold students accountable to the writing rubrics. This evidence provides insight into the shared responsibility, authentic collaboration, and use of data to make intentional program decisions. A discontinuation of the Learning Sciences International (LSI) partnership occurred upon review of relevant data during the PRP. As reported in the 2017-18 AU [AD-AUSummQ1], students continued to perform below the desired benchmark for two research projects (84% and 88%), key assessments in the Reading Specialist Program. Influenced by the School of Education’s desire to strengthen student learning for those students, the Dean, Department Chair, and Program Coordinator agreed to terminate the partnership with LSI, which allowed the

University to oversee curriculum development for new, but related degree programs. The original programs that were part of the LSI partnership completed the teach-out plan in Summer 2019.

PERIODIC ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSESSMENT PROCESSES (Criterion 5)

In an effort to ensure that the PRP is serving as a catalyst for continuous institutional improvement, the UAC conducts ongoing evaluations of the processes that have resulted in significant enhancements to how the University collects, summarizes, and uses assessment results to enhance student achievement of educational outcomes. Periodic refinements to the PRP have kindled a steady dialogue on institutional improvement, increased the overall rigor of the University’s assessment efforts, and fostered high-impact and evidence-based curricular changes and practices.

During the 2015-2016 academic year, for example, the addition of AUs provided a means for programs to report on progress between the three-year FR cycles. By supplementing the FR with AUs, the University further nurtured the culture of assessment by making program evaluation a continuous, predictable, and ongoing process as opposed to one that was revisited every three years [SD-PRPChanges].

To strengthen faculty involvement in the assessment process, the UAC also added a section to the FR and AU forms that prompted those completing the report to identify specific strategies that were employed to engage faculty and staff in the assessment activities. Since this adjustment to the form was made, there has been more clarity with respect to the breadth and depth of faculty and staff involvement in the process [AD-AUTrnds].

Following consultation with the Provost’s Office, the UAC made significant modifications to the AU Form for the 2017-2018 review cycle. These changes were made to ensure an opportunity for annual check-ins on the status of assessed outcomes (academic programs) or objectives (administrative units), regardless of performance at the time of the last FR. New questions were also

78

added to the AU form that prompted program leaders to detail specific actions and changes that resulted from the assessment findings. In support of the GTTF Strategic Plan goal of recruiting and retaining students, the Academic Program FR form was revised in 2017-2018 to include a section that enabled programs to elaborate on effective practices utilized to address retention and graduation [PP-AcadFR]. An overview of changes made to the PRP over the past several years is included in Table 5-7.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. The University should investigate the viability of embedding the skills area assessment into the capstone course across disciplines.

2. The primary mechanism for general education assessment is directly tied to the program review process. Consequently, the collection and analysis of general education data has been difficult to fully implement. The University should consider revising the current system for assessing general education so it clearly articulates the ownership and responsibilities for assessing the various components of general education.

ACADEMIC YEAR ENHANCEMENTS TO THE PRP RATIONALE

2013-2014UAC launched a new website that featured an assessment glossary along with a wealth of print and web resources.

Augment campus community’s overall acumen related to the University’s assessment processes.

2014-2015

UAC initiated in-person workshops on the program review process. UAC began to distribute assessment process review summaries to Unit Heads and Academic Deans.

Provided faculty/staff forums for guidance and to ask questions about the PRP. Offer end-users more specific feedback related to the substance of each aspect of their PR.

2015-2016

UAC created instructional videos on the PRP.

First year for AUs Section added to the PR forms prompting author(s) to identify specific strategies employed to engage faculty/staff in the assessment process.

Enhance end-user support. Promoted the use of ongoing, systematic assessment processes. Encourage information sharing and an inclusive assessment process.

2016-2017

Extended the PR submission date to later in the spring semester. A detailed PRP flowchart was disseminated to end-users.

Address faculty concerns related to the PRP schedule. Clarify roles and timelines for each specific phase in the PRP.

2017-2018

AU and FR separated into two distinct forms. AU form modified to include a question about the receipt status of resources requested in the preceding FR. Google Drive introduced to facilitate access to current review materials and previously-completed reviews. Created a priority list for PRP follow-up conversations and increased push for follow-up meetings to close the loop prior to the next review cycle.

Address confusion related to having one form. Provide Provost’s Office, deans and vice presidents with information on budget requests. Improved efficiency, archival resources, and coordination for the PRP. To ensure assessment-related conversations were occurring where most critical for informing next steps and improvement.

2018-19

Offered workshops and recorded new instructional videos to support the PRP for the first time since Spring 2016 First time was able to create a summary of resource requests related to SLO or objective achievement needs - provided to appropriate VP or Academic Dean.

Provided faculty/staff forums for guidance and to ask questions about the PRP. Enhance end-user support. Deliberate reference to program or unit assessment outcomes to inform budget development.

Table 5-7. PRP Enhancements — 2013-2019

79

CHAPTER 6: STANDARD VI

Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement

(RoA: 10, 11)

80

Chapter 6 addresses the alignment of University planning processes, resources, and structures with each other and their sufficiency in fulfilling the University’s mission and goals. This chapter will demonstrate how the University’s strategic plan guides planning and budget decisions to achieve the institutional priorities of Programmatic Excellence and Faculty Development, Financial Vibrancy, and Diverse and Global Community. The chapter illustrates that decisions regarding resource allocation and improvement of institutional operations and services are determined through the use of internal and external data.

INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING (Criteria 1, 2, 5, 8, 9)

University Strategic Planning The University’s Gateway to the Future (GTTF) Strategic Plan [SP-GTTF] was created as an update to VISION 2015 [SP-V15] to reflect internal and external influences and a new analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges, while continuing to be driven by the University’s Mission, Vision and Values. The development of the current strategic plan began in the Spring of 2013 and was adopted by the Board of Trustees (BoT) in 2014. Through every stage of development, the Mission, Vision and Values served as a guiding document, resulting in six themes: 1. Foster Excellence in Academic Programs. At

the center of a Wilkes education is a commitment to academic programs that reflect the highest standards, and challenge students to achieve beyond their perceived potential. Central to this commitment is a faculty who, first and foremost, value excellence in teaching and learning. With an emphasis on “individualized attention” and “academic excellence," the University’s values of mentorship, scholarship, diversity, innovation and community will guide the student experience in and out of the classroom.

2. Invest in Our People. Our faculty, staff, and alumni are our single most important asset in transforming the lives of our students. Therefore, Wilkes must recruit, retain, and develop its faculty and staff members, as well as engage alumni in support of our students and programs. Supporting and creating new models for faculty development will foster faculty excellence and enhance student learning at the undergraduate and graduate levels.

3. Recruit, Retain, Place and Graduate, Undergraduate and Graduate Students. In a market characterized by intense competition and unrelenting challenges, Wilkes must recruit, retain, graduate, and place students to maximize our transformative impact, while growing in a way that supports Wilkes’ mission and values.

4. Improve Our Financial Strength. As an enrollment-dependent university where cost of attendance will increasingly influence enrollment decisions, Wilkes must strengthen and diversify our ability to generate and manage resources.

5. Strengthen Our Campus Infrastructure. As the competition for students intensifies, Wilkes must enhance our campus to ensure that students, faculty, and staff have the facilities and resources they need to excel.

6. Support Efforts at Redeveloping Downtown Wilkes-Barre. Driven by a sense of its community responsibility and a business imperative, Wilkes must be a force for positive economic development, making Wilkes-Barre an increasingly attractive option for current and prospective students, faculty, staff, and alumni.

The GTTF Plan guides the University in the development of annual goals and strategic initiatives of academic and administrative units. In addition, the President’s annual goals are specifically structured around each theme [SD-GTTFPG18; SD-GTTFPG19]. GTTF is firmly rooted in the University’s Mission, Vision and Values as discussed in Chapter 1. The responsibility and accountability for the initiatives specified in GTTF are under the purview of members of the President’s Cabinet. Updates of key measures are shared annually with the BoT and the Strategic Planning Committee (SPC). The SPC is a broadly-represented committee initially chaired by the President, and subsequently chaired by the Vice President of Student Affairs, responsible for reviewing and assessing progress in achieving the initiatives of the strategic plan and advising the President on additions, deletions and modifications to the strategic plan [UP-FH 4.3.14c]. An annual early summer meeting of the SPC is held so that those responsible for initiatives/goals can report on the progress and status and so that any changes in environment or priority can be discussed and considered. Table 6-1 highlights examples of key updates for each theme, taken from various strategic objectives, which illustrate GTTF progress. In addition, each

81

August the SPC convenes again specifically to discuss and recommend resourcing needs to meet initiatives. These recommendations are submitted to the Budget Committee at the start of the annual budget planning process.

In addition to the Strategic Plan Update, the President’s Report is made available to the public on an annual basis and highlights many achievements that are associated with GTTF strategic initiatives, such as fundraising successes, accomplishments of faculty through research and scholarship, and campus enhancements. This report is distributed in print and electronically [UP-PR19].

Campus Master PlanThe University also developed a Campus Master Plan that guides the campus’ future development and identifies priorities for the capital budget and fundraising [SP-MP11]. It is clear in its vision statements that although it was developed prior to GTTF, it is still in alignment:

• Vision 1 - Maximizes and improves existing University facilities and resources

• Vision 2 - Creates a strategic direction for housing• Vision 3 - Enhances the University’s relationship

with the community• Vision 4 - Provides a flexible framework

THEME 1: Foster Excellence in Academic Programs

• Competitive awards, through the Provost’s Research and Scholarship grant, were budgeted at $200,000 per year for 5 years. For the initial four funding cycles, more than $840,000 was awarded with a project approval percentage of 65% [SD-PRSFunding]

• Financial support for the Faculty Development Committee was incrementally increased by $100,000 over 5 years

• Mentoring funds for students participating in faculty-associated research was incrementally increased by a total of $100,000 over 5 years.

• Wilkes University Honors Program was created and used to recruit students with higher than average academic profiles

THEME 2: Invest in Our People

• In line with the goal of developing a compensation philosophy that is competitive, employees have received compensation increases each of the past 7 years [UA-CL19].

• Launched several employee recognition programs to celebrate the achievements of faculty and staff.

THEME 3: Recruit, retain, place and graduate, undergraduate and graduate students

• Full time campus psychologist was budgeted and hired in 2018

• Wilkes University added new athletic teams and a marching band to help recruit students

• The Wilkes Educational Gateway to Excellence (WilkesEDGE™) program was budgeted, piloted and implemented to help support and retain marginally prepared students

• Retention Task-Force created to help with retention efforts

• Associate Provost for Student Success position created and staffed

• Completed a successful search for a Vice President for Enrollment Management & Marketing

THEME 4: Improve Our Financial Strength

• The Founder’s Gala has been held annually since 2014, and has exceeded the revenue goal with more than $4M raised, overall

• While Wilkes has not met the goal of having a surplus of 5% of gross revenue, the University had operating surpluses for five of the past six years exceeding $1M per year from FY14 through FY18. FY19, however, resulted in deficit.

• Met the raised target of the comprehensive campaign of $55M (as of June 2019)

THEME 5: Strengthen our campus infrastructure

• Developed Campus Enhancement Plan [SP-CEP]

• Made significant strides in campus improvements, including acquisition of new buildings, major renovations, and deferred maintenance projects. See list of completed capital projects in the Strategic Plan Update (Theme 5).

THEME 6: Support efforts at redeveloping downtown Wilkes-Barre

• $4.1 million in grants awarded to improve streetscapes and pedestrian safety on S. Franklin, W. South, and S. Main Streets

• Formal agreement with Riverfront Parks Committee, Luzerne County and Kings College to improve conditions and expand programming on the River Commons

Table 6-1. Key Strategic Plan Updates as of June 2019

Note: Information in Table 6-1 taken from the Strategic Plan update, June 2019 [SP-JUNE19].

82

In Summer 2014 the University completed work on a Campus Enhancement Plan [SP-CEP] that addresses specific master planning issues, some of which appear in the 2011 Master Plan. Consideration of cost, complexity, urgency, and impact helped guide the analysis of projects.

Unit-level Assessment and Planning Consistent with and complementing the GTTF goals, academic and administrative units engage in regular reflection and assessment. The University uses academic and administrative program review, a performance management system, and surveys of engagement and satisfaction to determine effectiveness and future direction.

Administrative unit objectives are aligned through the Full Review (FR) with the University Strategic Plan Themes [SD-AdminFR-OASP]. Administrative units undergo FR every three years [SD-AdminPRPS]. During the years in between FRs, Annual Update (AU) reviews are completed, which provide updates on progress made in meeting goals associated with each objective, while also summarizing the extent to which associated resourcing needs have been addressed to support progress. FRs focus more closely on the unit objectives, assessment process, and the contributions of the unit to the achievement of the Strategic Plan. FRs and AUs are submitted by unit heads to their respective Vice Presidents (VPs) [PP-AdminPRPFlow]. The Institutional Research (IR) Office receives the completed reviews and shares them with the University Assessment Committee (UAC). UAC tracks participation and provides feedback on the documented assessment process to the VPs and unit heads. UAC uses a set of agreed-upon guidelines to review various components of the assessment process documented by each participating unit [PP-AdminAU; PP-AdminFR]. Resource requests by unit leaders are considered in the annual budgeting process [AD-UACADRS]. Collectively this process provides a framework for appropriate and timely unit-level planning and assessment.

Like administrative units, academic programs undergo a full program review every three years with annual updates completed the years in between [PP-AcadPRPS]. Academic programs align each programmatic Student Learning Outcome (SLO) with the appropriate set of Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLOs) - undergraduate or graduate, as well as the GTTF theme

to which it contributes, in the Academic Program FR [PP-AcadFR]. UAC feedback is provided in response to guidelines for good assessment process, to the individuals completing the review forms along with a copy to each associated Dean [SD-AcadFRG; SD-AcadAUG]. Primary goals of this process are to encourage dialog based on UAC feedback, and to refine assessment processes where needed to make them more useful for supporting each program’s continuous improvement efforts. For additional information on the Program Review Process (PRP) for academic programs, please see Chapter 5.

These processes collectively help assure that administrative unit objectives and academic program outcomes are clearly stated, linked to the University’s strategic plan and/or ISLOs (both of which are linked to Mission/Vision/Values), are regularly evaluated, and are informed by assessment activities (see Figures 1-2 and 1-3 in Chapter 1). Furthermore, budget needs related to the achievement of unit objectives and academic program SLOs are articulated in the PRP for consideration in the budgeting process for the University. Although this resourcing consideration has been a part of the FR process since AY 14-15, it was added as a component of the AU in AY 17-18 (see Table 5-7 in Chapter 5).

The policy for new program assessment was created to assure that new academic programs have measurable goals for student learning and that regular, systematic, and useful assessments are in place from the beginning [PP-AcadNPAP]. Likewise, new administrative units must develop measurable objectives and an initial assessment plan. New administrative units enter the regular administrative program review cycle after two full years of operation. New administrative units are encouraged to submit the initial assessment plan to the UAC for guidance in developing or refining the assessment plan.

Academic Planning The Academic Planning Committee (APC) is a University Standing Committee with broad representation across the University. The composition of the APC brings an institutional perspective to deliberations and consideration as to how proposals link to the Strategic Plan, and provides assurances of fiscal feasibility prior to curricular approval and implementation [UP-FH 4.3.14a].

83

The APC has a communicated process for new program proposals, and modification or deletion of an existing program [PP-APCFlow]. New program proposals must include a business plan which includes consideration of factors relevant to ongoing planning and operation, including budget impact and assessment methods [PP-APCBPT]. Proposals must also indicate how the program fits within the context of the Wilkes Mission, Vision, and Values. In addition to APC approval, new program proposals must gain approval from the budget managers of any affected programs, the appropriate dean of the college/school, the Provost, the VP for Finance and Support Operations, the Chair of the UAC, and the Middle States Accreditation Liaison Officer. Upon approval by the APC and all relevant parties, the proposal must receive curricular approval from the Curriculum Committee (CC), and then from the Faculty, and in special circumstances, the BoT.

Business plans for new academic programs completing the entire approval process are forwarded to the Finance Office for inclusion in future operating and capital budget cycles. After three years of operation, new programs are reviewed by the APC to ensure resourcing, assessment, and contributions are appropriate [PP-APCPE]. This review compares the projected enrollment/revenue to the actual amounts and allows for an opportunity to review progress, identify opportunities for improvement, and/or identify barriers to the success of the program.

Analysis & Support (Institutional Research) The Office of Institutional Research (IR) is the primary institutional repository for the collection and analysis of university data to support the continuous review, evaluation, and improvement of the institution. As a point of contact for institutional reporting, IR provides data and statistics that fulfill mandatory requirements to external entities, such as the federal government, while also providing information within the institution to support internal planning processes. In addition to routinely generated reports, IR regularly completes ad-hoc data requests that support decision-making and improvement. Over the past several years, there has been an increase in ad-hoc data requests that support assessment and decision-making [SD-AdHocIR].

Two compendiums of institutional information that are provided by IR annually are the Fact Book and Academic Department Data Book. The Fact Book is produced for a wide audience, including external constituencies, and is posted prominently on the Wilkes University website [UP-FB]. The Fact Book provides a broad overview of various enrollment, financial, and outcome statistics, as well as information on University services and organizational charts. The Academic Department Data Book (ADDB) is produced for an internal audience, and provides more detailed data by college/school, department, and individual discipline [WW-ADDB]. Various data in the ADDB are compiled into individual academic program data profiles [SD-AcadDPEX] that are provided annually to program leadership to support the PRP.

An example of how data has been used to drive decision-making is the Wilkes EDGE program, designed to provide extra support and opportunity for at-risk students. A group of Wilkes administrators and staff in key areas (Financial Aid, Admissions, University College) that support student recruitment and success reviewed retention and graduation rate trends for students based on indicators of academic preparation and financial need to determine how best to support the academic success of students at a particularly high risk of attrition [SD-EDGEP]. See Chapter 4 for more information about the EDGE program.

The University participates in the National Study of Instructional Costs & Productivity (NSICP) which provides benchmarking statistics useful for tracking the adequacy of fiscal and human resources to support

84

academic operations [SR-NSICP-DEBD17]. The participation in the NSICP is coordinated through IR, with contributions from the Finance Office. Participation allows Wilkes to benchmark Wilkes data generated through NSICP with that of other participating institutions. Results of the NSICP are made available to the University community [UA-IRDataT@W; SD-NSICPemail]. Additional information from the NSICP metrics can be found in Chapter 3. The IR Office is also responsible for conducting survey research used to assess and report on the student experience [SD-SRT]. Survey research reports are made available to the University community through a portal-based repository [WW-IRSRR]. Surveys administered through IR include first-year student surveys such as the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey, the Transition to College Inventory (TCI), the Fall Freshman Survey, and the Your First College Year (YFCY) Survey. Additional surveys including the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) and the Adult Student Priorities Survey (ASPS) are used to collect and report on the priorities and satisfaction of a cross-section of undergraduate and graduate students, respectively. End of season Athletic Surveys are administered to each team, each season. The College Senior Survey (CSS) and the Senior/P4 Exit Survey have been used by IR to survey graduating seniors and 4th year professional Pharmacy students. In Spring 2019, Wilkes began using the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) survey, administered to first-year freshmen and seniors (including 2nd year Pharmacy students) [UA-NSSE].

To support administrative units with their assessment processes, IR compiles selected data obtained through various survey tools into data profiles for administrative units [SD-AdmDPEx]. Some administrative units use an IR-generated data profile. In addition, several units employ surveying tools independent from IR to collect information from students served. For example, while both the Farley Library and Information Technology (IT) use student survey statistics collected and reported through the data profiles from IR, they also use the Measuring Information Services Outcomes (MISO) Survey. The MISO Survey is a web-based quantitative instrument, developed by the Association of Research Libraries, designed to measure how faculty, students, and staff view library and computing services in higher

education. All faculty and students are invited to take part in the survey, which measures the quality of services and helps to identify ways to improve them [AD-MISO].

FINANCIAL PLANNING AND BUDGETING (Criteria 3, 4, 9)

The Annual Budget Process The University’s annual budgeting process links resource allocation with the mission and strategic plan. The budgeting process begins in September for the following year. Initial budget assumptions are developed by the Finance Office and the Vice President of Finance and Support Operations (VPFSO), and are informed by campus leaders. The assumptions are based on historical data and projections that incorporate the goals and planned initiatives of academic and administrative units. For example, the budget includes funding for new academic programs once approved by the APC and CC (as discussed previously) [UC-APC090418]. These assumptions are forwarded to the University Budget Committee (UBC) for review. The UBC is chaired by the VPFSO and comprised of members from the academic units, administration, faculty, staff and students. The UBC follows ten “budget principles” when reviewing enrollment and revenue assumptions for the following year’s budget [PP-BP]. In considering funding requests, the UBC aligns budget priorities with the goals of the strategic plan. Periodic updates of GTTF identify progress to ensure the University meets the goals outlined by the end of the plan. These updates are included in the annual budget development as illustrated in Table 6-1. The UBC meets in October to review the preliminary budget assumptions and creates a balanced budget by December. Final budget recommendations are sent to the Finance Office so a comprehensive budget can be presented to the BoT Finance Committee in February for review. Upon approval, a final version of the annual budget is presented to the BoT for approval in March. Prior to the start of the new fiscal year, operating budgets are delivered to University Vice Presidents and College/School Deans for dissemination to the appropriate budget managers.

A capital projects budget is developed annually based on the Campus Enhancement Plan [SP-CEP]. In support of the GTTF, the FY19 and FY20 operating budgets

85

included $6.7 million and $7.5 million, respectively, to fund capital projects and improvements.

Enrollment PlanningWith the high dependency on tuition revenue, it is essential for the University to monitor and respond to factors that influence enrollment and retention. The University has taken steps to leverage the available data to identify and recruit an appropriate mix of students to support the current portfolio of programs, while increasing the diversity and academic profile of the incoming class.

Key enrollment and retention data is tracked and shared with the President’s Cabinet [SD-IRRBT]. This includes tracking retention of full-time undergraduates by class year fall-to-spring [SD-FTSRRPT] and then fall-to-fall [SD-FTFRRPT]. These retention reports show the original cohort number, the number returned, and the number who had graduated, to put the retention rates into perspective. Numbers of returning/non-new full-time undergraduate, P1 or P2 (first two Pharmacy professional years) students are also tracked for each fall [SD-FRSRPT] and spring [SD-SRSRPT] to indicate where the University stands in meeting the returning student budget goal in relation to the previous year’s point-in-time performance. The returning student reports also provide an estimate of the number of students expected to return who have not yet registered, and whether or not they have a financial hold. This information is provided as additional context for follow-up with non-registered students. Lists may be generated for contacting these students to better understand their situation and facilitate their registration, if possible. A Budget Indicators Report is provided to key individuals

on the leadership team and key individuals in the Finance Office, between early July and fall census in October [SD-BIRPT]. This serves as the ‘master report’ for sharing progress towards meeting budget goals, taking into account opportunity through the admissions pipeline for new students, freshman and transfer tuition and fee discount rates, full-time registered first-year/freshman and transfer student populations, the returning student and fall-to-fall percentages for the week, as well as students signed up for meal plans and living on-campus.

The graduate dashboard report provides an overview of graduate student enrollment, credit hour production, and associated gross revenue estimates by general disciplinary area and program, and is provided by IR to members of the leadership team and Finance Office every other week, year-round [SD-GDBRPT]. The numbers in these graduate reports are differentiated by new and continuing student status for the term, tracked by program and general disciplinary area, and provide an overview of the registration activity between reports, with year-to-date comparisons. Reports are also provided to decision-makers for winter/intersession [SD-INTRPT] and summer undergraduate registration activity [SD-SUMRPT], by the Director of Summer and Winter Sessions.

The Fact Book provides data useful for informing strategic planning and decision making through the provision of Fall enrollment trends as a function of various demographic variables (gender, ethnicity, full or part-time status, primary or secondary major, etc.). Yield rates by department and major are available through the ADDB.

Table 6-2. Trends in Student Enrollment

FALL 2014 FALL 2015 FALL 2016 FALL 2017 FALL 2018 FALL 2019

Undergraduate Students(full-time + part-time)

2,360 2,421 2,561 2,491 2,455 2,351

Graduate Students (full-time + part-time)

1,913 2,347 2,707 2,769 2,394 2,054

First Professional 289 285 284 285 283 275

International Students (Undergraduate + Graduate)

229 290 247 266 223 159

86

The University explored some previously untapped areas of student interest as a way of recruiting students. For example, the creation of a marching band and the addition of a new athletic teams (e.g., men’s and women’s ice hockey and swimming, men’s lacrosse and women’s golf) has engaged an additional 115 undergraduates since the implementation of the GTTF plan. To address academic interests of students and to improve the overall academic profile, an Honors Program was introduced, which currently enrolls 218 students as of Fall 2019. Wilkes has managed to keep undergraduate enrollments relatively stable during a period in which undergraduate enrollments in PA were declining [SD-NCES]. During that same time graduate enrollments saw a modest increase, as seen in Table 6-2.

Theme 3 of the GTTF includes a goal to grow the international student enrollment to 10% of the undergraduate first-year class. One way in which the University attempted to reach this goal was through the Latin American and Caribbean initiative. To support this initiative, an Executive Director of International Engagement was hired in 2015 and has successfully enrolled and integrated students from Panama in both post-baccalaureate and undergraduate programs including a non-degree seeking program for teachers, funded by MEDUCA, and a program designed to prepare students to eventually matriculate as undergraduate degree-seeking students, funded by IFARHU. The University has signed multi-year contracts for these programs with the Panamanian government. The University also employs an international undergraduate admissions counselor and consults with international recruiting organizations to assist in enrolling international students at the University.

While the University has had initial success with the Latin American and Caribbean initiative, the University has also made some decisions to discontinue initiatives that have not attained projected enrollment goals. In particular, two additional locations were approved by the MSCHE in Bartonsville, PA (in 2011) and Mesa, AZ (in 2012). The increase and availability of online instruction resulted in low enrollments, however, and a decision was made to discontinue operations at both locations [SD-BoT31017; UC-APC2916]. A substantive change proposal to close the Mesa, AZ location was approved in 2017. A substantive change proposal to close the Bartonsville, PA location was approved in January, 2020.

In addition, Wilkes entered into a partnership with HotChalk in 2014 to recruit and market graduate nursing programs. While there was some success and increased enrollment, ultimately, it was mutually agreed upon to discontinue the partnership. A teach-out will be completed in Summer 2020. Wilkes plans to continue to offer and expand graduate nursing programs without the partnership [SD-BoT6218].

FINANCIAL, PHYSICAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES (Criteria 4, 6, 7, 9)

Financial Resources The initiatives specified under Theme 4: Improve our Financial Strength of the GTTF are designed to maintain financial strength and stability. The long-term financial resources available for operations and institutional improvement of the University are monitored and managed by the administration with oversight from the BoT.

The Advancement Committee of the BoT plays a central role in efforts to garner support for the University through gifts and external funding. The previous President worked in partnership with the BoT to launch a comprehensive campaign to support GTTF with a goal to raise $50 million over a six year period in gifts and commitments. The goal was achieved early, and was consequently increased to $55 million. These key initiatives and progress to date for Theme 4 of GTTF, are documented in the Strategic Plan Update [SP-JUNE19].

The Investment Advisory Committee of the Board is responsible for the stewardship of University resources. The endowment includes both restricted and unrestricted funds and the draw from the endowment is used to support 1) scholarships and awards; 2) academic, research and student programs; and 3) capital projects. The BoT annually approves the percentage draw from the endowment to support the three items listed above while also monitoring the growth of the endowment. Prior to FY20, the drawdown rate had been 4.5% of the 12 quarter rolling average value on May 31. In an effort to be more fiscally responsible, the Finance and Support Operations Committee of the Board voted, in 2017, to gradually reduce the drawdown rate to 4.0% [SD-BoTFS92617]. Upon approval of the BoT, the drawdown

87

rate was reduced to 4.4% for FY20 [SD-BoT10518] and was approved to remain at 4.4% for FY21. Table 6-3 illustrates the growth and withdrawals from the endowment.

University operations are externally audited on an annual basis. From FY14 to FY18 the University reported favorable financial results in its annual financial audit, as shown in Table 6-4, allowing Wilkes to work toward its Strategic Plan goals. Nevertheless, Wilkes University is currently experiencing the same challenges facing the higher ed sector, managing increasing operating costs during a period of declining student populations. The University’s most recent Financial Statement for FY19 reports an operating deficit [SD-Audit19]. The revenue shortfall for FY19 can be attributed to not meeting budgeted enrollment targets, along with a higher than budgeted freshman discount rate. This shortfall prompted a review of operating expenses and a renewed effort to maximize graduate revenue. Two initiatives were put into place in Fall 2018 to curtail spending [SD-Leahy11518]. Those efforts were successful in reducing, but not eliminating a projected significant operating deficit for the year. The final operating deficit (unrestricted) for FY19 amounted to approximately $2 million. Now underway is a comprehensive review of budget assumptions (revenue and expense) and an evaluation of ongoing changes in the market, all of which will inform efforts to ensure that the University realizes surpluses from unrestricted operations in future years. The University hired a new VPEM, who will be instrumental in helping to shape the enrollment goals.

Even with the recent budget deficits, the overall financial stability of the University is also evidenced by its BBB/Stable rating from S&P. This rating, reaffirmed in November 2019, has remained unchanged since the last Middle States accreditation visit. The rating reflects S&P’s evaluation of operating performance, program diversity and budgetary flexibility [SD-S&P19]. Additionally, a financial dashboard was developed in Fall 2017 in an effort to communicate key financial information to the BoT and senior management. The focus of the dashboard is on financial performance as measured by the primary reserve, net income, viability and return on net asset ratios [SD-BoTFD].

Human ResourcesAs seen in Table 6-5, Wilkes has seen an overall growth in human resources. The addition of full and part-time personnel in administrative staff, maintenance, public safety, and coaches exceed the growth rates of students and full-time faculty. The increases in full-time faculty were consistent with the growth of new programs and student body until the recent downturn in enrollment. The increase in Public Safety can be attributed to the formation of the Wilkes University Police Department (see Chapter 4), which contributed to Theme 2 of GTTF: Invest in Our People, intended to enhance safety on and around campus. The growth in maintenance staff has been driven by the demands of the campus enhancement projects included in Theme 5 of GTTF: Strengthen our Campus Infrastructure [SP-JUNE19]. The additional coaching staff has come with the incorporation of additional athletic offerings (ice hockey, swimming, women’s golf, men’s lacrosse), a strategy contributing to

Table 6-4. Trends in Fiscal Resources

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Revenue $84M $86M $94M $102M $105M $102M

Net Annual Operating Surplus/Deficit

$5.1M $1.7M $2.6M $2.3M $2.5M -$2.0M

Table 6-3. Trends in Endowment Balance and Withdrawals

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Endowment Market Value $43.6M $44.1M $41.2M $47.4M $51.6M $51.7M

Endowment Draw $1.6M $1.6M $1.7M $1.9M $1.9M $1.9M

88

the achievement of Theme 3: Recruit, Retain and Graduate Undergraduate and Graduate Students. The sizable increase in administrative staff over this period can be explained by Wilkes serving as the home for the Luzerne County SHINE program (see Chapter I) and an increase in financial aid staffing. SHINE serves the community, providing school students with after school educational support, snacks, and STEAM-based projects. Wilkes began serving as the home of the Luzerne County SHINE program in 2015. While SHINE is included in the staffing numbers, these positions are grant-funded, and so there is no notable financial impact on the University’s operating budget. The need for additional financial aid staffing stemmed from Theme 3-related efforts to ensure Wilkes students each have a dedicated financial aid counselor available to them, to aid student success and retention efforts [UA-Nov19BAA].

Physical Plant In support of Theme 5: Strengthen Our Campus Infrastructure, Wilkes has invested considerably in the campus physical infrastructure [SP-JUNE19]. These changes have enhanced student learning opportunities and encouraged collaboration. To oversee the implementation of the Campus Enhancement Plan [SP-CEP] and several initiatives of the GTTF, a new Executive Director of Facilities was hired in 2015. Consistent with the recommendations of the Campus Enhancement Plan, a number of buildings on campus, including academic buildings and residence halls

were renovated and upgraded. In addition, deferred maintenance issues were handled and new buildings purchased to expand the campus footprint.

For example, the addition of the Cohen Science Center, Mark Engineering Center, and the Karambelas Media Center/Sordoni Art Gallery has added science laboratory spaces and collaborative study spaces, as well as specialized facilities for hands-on learning opportunities, such as the TV and Radio studios. Renovations to the Farley Library, Passan School of Nursing, and the Sidhu School of Business have created new spaces for learning, enhanced by technology (see Chapter 3). Major renovations to the athletic facilities have provided significant enhancement for intercollegiate athletics at Wilkes. Campus enhancements made since 2013 are highlighted on the Wilkes website [WW-CEproj]. Technology Infrastructure The last decennial Self-Study recommended the University analyze whether it should continue its practice of outsourcing all areas of Information Technology (IT) services to Ellucian (formerly SunGard). An analysis was completed and the contract with Ellucian was not renewed. Information Technology was brought “in house” in July of 2014, under the leadership of the Dean of the Library, who then became the Dean of the Library and Information Technology. To better serve the campus and its students, the IT Help Desk and Desktop Support Services were moved into one location in the library.

Table 6-5. Trends in Human Resources

FALL 2014 FALL 2015 FALL 2016 FALL 2017 FALL 2018 FALL 2019 NET CHANGE

Full-Time Faculty 172 173 182 180 193 196 14%

Administrative Staff 271 270 338 345 357 355 *31%

Clerical 67 70 78 66 58 58 -13%

Maintenance 49 48 52 55 58 60 22%

Public Safety 22 32 32 29 31 34 55%

Coaches 36 38 41 36 45 42 17%

IT 20 20 20 20 20 20 0%

Source: 2014-2019 Fact Books [UP-FB]. *Note: The 31% increase in the Administrative Staff can be largely attributed to the grant-sponsored SHINE program, which employed 75 staff members as of the Fall 2019 update.

89

Financial resources that previously had been used to pay fees to the outside IT contractor were reallocated to invest into the IT infrastructure. An outdated network was replaced with a state-of-the-art network. A grant was received to replace an out-of-date portal with a more streamlined and efficient one. Key IT trends are summarized in Table 6-6.

To better support faculty, staff and students, the Help Desk staff was increased and service was expanded. The lab replacement cycle was enhanced through streamlining and more efficient practices. Finally, classrooms were updated with new digital equipment installed to replace projectors, control units, document cameras, and media players.

The University employs Amazon Web Services (AWS) to ensure the integrity of IT systems, provide off-site access, and maintain business continuity in case of a failure to on-campus systems. This includes the Active Directory Domain Controllers that provide a secondary way of authorizing users to access the portal, D2L, library databases and e-mail services, and the University’s website. In addition, the University utilizes a Single Sign-On solution through AWS to ensure uninterrupted access to critical systems such as email communication and access to the Wilkes Portal.

Technological enhancements to the Farley Library span collections, capabilities, and access. Details about the Farley Library collection are discussed in Chapter 3. These digital resources are linked through the implementation of the Summon Discovery tool to optimize database searching. A proxy server housed with AWS allows off-campus access to online library materials in case of failure of on-campus systems.

Institutional Renewal The strategic plans, developed by Facilities, IT, and the Farley Library support the physical, educational, and technological infrastructure [SP-Fac; SP-IT; SP-Lib]. These plans specify upgrades, routine projects, and enhancements that need to be completed on an annual basis to ensure that each department functions at optimal efficiency and in a sustainable manner. Annual budgets are developed and approved following the regular budgeting process (see the Annual Budget Process section earlier in this chapter), and these units undergo regular administrative review, following the University’s PRP. Additional risk assessment studies have also been conducted for IT and Facilities [SD-ITRA; SD-FacRA]. Updates to these strategic plans are made on an annual basis. Planning, monitoring and refinement ensures that the infrastructure is current and is maintained at optimal working efficiency.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. With the projected revenue shortfall, the University should closely monitor its financial position and determine how to best allocate financial resources that will continue to foster excellence in existing academic programs while also strategically allocating resources to new programs to strengthen the University’s academic portfolio.

2. The University should ensure that future budget goals are realistic given the anticipated decline in prospective first-year students.

Table 6-6. Change in Technical Infrastructure

FALL 2014

FALL 2019

NET CHANGE

No. of Computers Available for Student Use

786 1,015 29.1%

No. of Computers Available for Administrative & Faculty Use

1,088 1,305 19.9%

No. of Servers 113 112 -0.8%

Storage (in Terabytes) 32 120 275%

No. of Network Printers 128 160 25%

No. of Wireless Access Points

264 750 184%

IT Staff 20 20 0%

90

CHAPTER 7: STANDARD VII

Governance, Leadership, and Administration

(RoA: 12, 13)

91

Wilkes University is committed to a system of shared governance, leadership, and administration that reflects the University Mission and Vision, and works toward achieving its stated goals. The President’s Cabinet provides the administrative leadership for the University, with the primary responsibility of ensuring the daily operations are completed in the context of the University goals. Chapter 7 demonstrates that the governance structure, the leadership team, and the administration serve the University, its students, and the community.

GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE (Criterion 1)

The governance structure at Wilkes University is clearly articulated and transparent, with delineated roles of the governing body, administration, faculty, staff, students and alumni in the decision-making process. Brief descriptions of each of these areas are included in this section, with more details describing the roles of the Board of Trustees, Chief Executive Officer, and Administration in subsequent sections. For information on assessment of the effectiveness of governance, leadership, and administration, please see the later section about general effectiveness.

Each administrative division is represented on the President’s Cabinet through a reporting relationship to a senior administrator, enabling appropriate advocacy for major decisions. The University Fact Book contains organizational charts [UP-FBOC] for the University’s administrative organization, finance and support operations, provost (academic affairs), enrollment management, information technology services, library, external affairs, development and alumni relations, marketing/communications, and student affairs.

Board of Trustees and AdministrationThe Board of Trustees (BoT) is entrusted with the fiduciary responsibility and accountability for the academic quality, planning, and fiscal well-being of the University. The composition of the Board is discussed in greater detail later in this chapter. The President’s Cabinet provides administrative leadership on campus, with the primary responsibility of managing the daily operations of the University. The President’s Cabinet consists of 17 senior administrative members, representing all aspects of the University — academic affairs, student affairs, finance

and support operations, enrollment, development and alumni relations, information technology, and external affairs. The expansion of the President’s Cabinet to include academic deans and other senior leaders over the course of the last seven years has provided broader representation for discussing important issues affecting the University. The President’s Cabinet meets bi-weekly and approved meeting minutes are available to the members of the Wilkes community through the University portal. Faculty The Faculty Affairs Council (FAC) serves as the voice of the Faculty in University governance matters. A description of the composition and functions of the FAC can be found in the Faculty Handbook [UP-FH 4.3.10.a]. The FAC consists of nine faculty members elected at large, with at least one member from each college/school, with the President and the Provost serving as ex-officio members. In addition, the academic deans and the Dean of the Library/Information Technology (IT) are invited to participate in all FAC meetings. As the “committee on committees,” the FAC monitors the composition and function of the faculty academic committees, faculty personnel committees, program advisory committees, University standing committees, and University ad hoc committees. Detailed descriptions of the composition and functions of these committees can be found in the Faculty Handbook [UP-FH 4.3]. Additionally, the FAC works closely with the administration on matters involving shared governance and University policy.

Beginning in 2012, in the spirit of transparent governance, a Faculty Handbook change resulted in faculty participation in Board of Trustees activities [UP-FH 4.6]. A Faculty Observer is elected by the Faculty for a term of three years. The Observer’s primary responsibility is to attend regular meetings of the Board of Trustees, record the general discussion of topics on the agenda, and provide a written summary of the meeting to the Faculty. In addition, elected members of the Faculty serve as non-voting members on several Board committees, including the Academic and Student Environment Committee, the Advancement Committee, the Audit Committee, the Finance and Support Operations Committee, and the Human Resources Committee. Faculty are also represented on the Alumni Board and attend Student Government meetings.

92

StaffEstablished in 2010, the University Staff Advisory Committee (USAC) provides a representative voice for all full-time and part-time staff of Wilkes University [PP-USACB]. The main purposes of USAC are to enhance the channels of communication and to serve as a liaison between the staff and administration. USAC focuses on issues affecting the staff community. USAC also works collaboratively with the Faculty Affairs Council (FAC) on issues of joint concern. Additionally, the President’s Cabinet often consults with the USAC leadership on matters involving shared governance and University policy.

The increased inclusion of faculty and staff representatives on various committees has resulted in an overall improved perception of shared governance, as indicated by survey results from 2018. Survey results from 2018 show a 20% increase in satisfaction on items related to shared governance, compared to 2010 [SR-GC18].

StudentsThe Wilkes undergraduate student body is governed by elected representatives, formally called Student Government (SG), whose purpose is to represent the student body, to act as a liaison between the students and administration, to plan and coordinate activities on campus, and to promote fellowship, scholarship, and the reputation of the University. SG represents nearly 2,500 undergraduate students, including over 100 clubs and organizations. The SG budget, funded through student activity fees, primarily supports on-campus events, student-centered trips, and conference attendance.

SG is comprised of representatives from each class year. The overall Board membership, as well as the membership of the Executive Board and the respective functions and duties are detailed in the SG constitution [PP-SGC]. SG holds weekly meetings that are open to all students. Individual students or clubs/organizations may request funding to attend events, take social trips, or participate in professional conferences. The Wilkes University student newspaper, The Beacon, is invited to every meeting to publish notes in the newspaper about the business completed that evening by the organization. More information about SG can be found on the website [WW-SG].

Because the majority of graduate programs are designed for the working professional, the establishment of a formalized representative body has not been needed. The Pharmacy program, as an exception due to the majority of students enrolled full-time, has developed a dedicated graduate student organization, the Pharmacy Student Senate.

Alumni The Alumni Association Board is composed of over 30 alumni and meets three times per year. The Alumni Board Membership Listing is available on the website [SD-ABM]. Board members serve for renewable three year terms, and are guided by a set of bylaws [PP-ABB]. Consistent with the “Invest in our People” theme of the GTTF, in 2014, the Alumni Board created a five-year plan to increase alumni engagement at Wilkes [SD-ABSI].

BOARD OF TRUSTEES (Criterion 2)

The University is governed by a Board of Trustees (BoT) who provides oversight of the legal and fiduciary responsibilities of the University, promotes academic excellence and student success, and fulfills the University’s mission and goals [PP-BoTB]. At the time of the Self-Study, the BoT consists of 29 members [SD-BoTM]. The BoT meets a minimum of three times per year. The President of the University serves as an ex-officio member of the BoT with full voting rights, and is the only member of the Board that is compensated. The Board relies on the President to manage the daily operations of the institution with the assistance and support of University officers and administration.

Trustees are elected to three-year terms and are limited to three consecutive terms after which a member may be re-elected only after a one-year absence. The bylaws that govern the Board were last revised in June of 2016.

In addition to hiring and evaluating the President, the Trustees are responsible for the following:1. Approval of the University’s mission, vision, and

values statements2. Disposition, acquisition, or encumbrance of real estate

and other property owned by the University in excess of $500,000

93

3. Approval of the annual operating and capital budgets4. Approval of promotions of full-time faculty and the

granting of tenure5. Approval of honorary degrees awarded by the

University6. Approval and monitoring of the strategic plan7. Approval of revisions to the Faculty Handbook8. Oversight of the work of the Alumni Association

The membership of the Board of Trustees is comprised of a diverse cross-section of alumni, community leaders and business professionals from across the country with a balance of men and women [SD-BoTM]. The President of the Alumni Association serves as an ex-officio member of the Board. Representatives from the student body, faculty and staff leadership are invited to present at each board meeting.

Through regular meetings and interaction, the senior administration supports the work of the Board committees. There are six standing committees and one advisory committee that regularly review the work of the University and the Strategic Plan. They are: 1. Finance and Support Operations Committee2. Audit Committee3. Advancement Committee4. Trustee Development Committee5. Academic and Student Environment Committee 6. Human Resources Committee7. Investment Advisory

A full description of each committee charge can be found in the Bylaws [PP-BoTB p.8-17]. As mentioned in the sections on faculty and staff governance above, members of the faculty and staff serve as non-voting members for some of these committees.

In addition, an Executive Committee, comprised of the officers of the Board and the chairs of the six standing committees, meets throughout the year as needed between board meetings. The Executive Committee may act for the Board in all matters not specifically reserved to the Board for ratification. Responsibility for oversight of the audit, risk and compliance functions resides with the Audit Committee. This includes an annual review and approval of financial, financial aid and retirement plan audits, review of the annual federal information return Form 990, oversight of the Conflict of Interest Policy for the Board (and related compliance with the trustee

annual reporting requirement), and periodic review of risk and compliance issues, including compliance with the Clery Act and Title IX. The Audit Committee meets at least four times a year.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (Criterion 3)

At the time of the Self-Study, the University is in a period of transition. Currently, Wilkes is led by an interim president, and a national search for the next University President was completed in December 2019. The new President will begin service in June 2020 [SD-PresCV]. The President of Wilkes University serves as the Chief Executive Officer and is appointed by the BoT following receipt of recommendations from a Presidential Search Committee. The search committee is formed by the Chair of the BoT [UP-FH 4.5], consisting of four trustees, two administrators, two full-time faculty, two students, and one non-administrative staff member. For the recently completed search process, the University hired an outside consulting agency to assist in identifying qualified and interested candidates. Open forums with the campus community helped shape a position description for the next University President [UA-OFN; UA-PresPD]. Through appropriate background searches and reference interviews, the search process is designed to ensure that the President has appropriate credentials and professional experience.

The President has the authority and power to preside at public exercises, confer degrees, and officially represent the University. The President also has the authority to confer the title of Vice President on the senior officers of the Administration. The appointment becomes official with Board approval [PP-BoTB Article V].

The President’s performance is evaluated annually by the Chair of the Board, with the review and consent of the Human Resources Committee. The last annual review of the President occurred in August, 2018. Compensation is also determined by the Board [PP-BoTB Article IV].

The President has the power to “direct the formulation and implementation of strategic plans and policies” [UA-PresPD]. The President is expected to assemble a senior leadership team tasked with driving functional successes in support of the strategic plan. The team currently

94

consists of the Senior Vice President/Provost, the Vice President of Finance & General Counsel, the Vice President of Student Affairs, the Assistant to the President for External Affairs, the Vice President for Enrollment Management and Marketing, the Associate Provost for Student Success, and the Chief Development Officer [SD-PLTCV]. Each member of the senior leadership team is reviewed annually by the President, who then reviews this assessment with the Human Resources Committee of the BoT at its summer meeting [PP-BoTB Article V].

ADMINISTRATION (Criterion 4)

The organizational structure of the Administration is clearly documented and the reporting relationships are clearly outlined in organizational charts [UP-FBOC]. These charts are reviewed and updated annually by Senior Administration prior to their incorporation into the University Fact Book which is publicly available on the University website.

The President ensures an administration of appropriate size and experience to assist with fulfilling leadership duties. The President’s Cabinet is comprised of leaders across campus, including the senior vice president/provost, vice presidents, deans, chief officers, an associate provost, and an associate vice president [WW-PCL]. The academic deans were added to the President’s Cabinet since the last Self-Study to increase transparency and to include academic leadership in decision-making meetings. This group meets on a bi-weekly basis to discuss overarching ideas and high-level issues that affect the university community.

Current members of the senior leadership team possess credentials, professional experience, and skills consistent with the mission of the organization and their functional roles as documented in their curriculum vitae [SD-PLTCV]. When hiring is done for a position at the senior leadership level, there are many vetting processes in place. In many cases, a search committee of faculty, staff and students is formed. Once that committee has thoroughly vetted candidates for the position, candidates are brought to campus to hold open forums, meet with specific departments and/or direct reports, meet with the President’s Cabinet, and meet with the search committee. Candidates’ CVs are shared with the campus community,

as well. All of these measures allow the entire campus to weigh in on qualifications and the “fit” of the leader with Wilkes University and its mission, vision and values. The Administration regularly engages and interacts with both faculty and students to enhance the academic experience and promote institutional goals. For example, the President’s Student Advisory Council was created in Spring 2018 so the President would have the opportunity to regularly engage with the students to improve the student experience. In addition, the President attends, and is given an opportunity to report at full faculty, FAC and USAC meetings. Participation at these meetings allows the President to better understand what these groups are achieving and to receive their input. Two to three times per year, FAC and USAC come together to engage on topical issues or have joint meetings. SG meetings are also regularly attended by campus leaders and have administrators present as advisors. Several members of the leadership team also choose to teach classes to stay connected with the students.

The Administration has systematic procedures for evaluating administrative units and for using assessment data to enhance operations. Administrative units complete a review each year to evaluate recent performance on their objectives. The review process is coordinated by the University Assessment Committee (UAC) and supported by the Institutional Research (IR) Office. Completed reviews are sent to IR to share with UAC. UAC members evaluate the reviews using guidelines for good assessment process, and provide additional feedback where warranted. For instance, the UAC may suggest an improvement to the assessment process used, to enhance the efficiency of planning and ongoing improvement efforts. Most recently, for 2018-2019, the participation rate of Administrative units in UAC’s review process was 91% [AD-P&URPR]. In addition, employees are evaluated by their supervisor on a yearly basis through the performance management process to discuss their individual performance, goals and objectives. Participation rates have ranged from 70% to 85% between 2012-13 and 2017-18. The resulting performance management reports are filed within HR. Extensive information and instruction about the process can be found online for employees to view [WW-PMgmt].

95

ASSESSMENT OF GOVERNANCE, LEADERSHIP, AND ADMINISTRATION (Criterion 5)

The information that follows provides an overview of the assessment methods by which governance, leadership, and the administration are periodically evaluated at the University. Formal evaluation of administrative service is official academic policy at Wilkes University.

Board of TrusteesThe bylaws of the BoT require an assessment of the performance of Board Officers on an annual basis [PP-BoTB]. The Trustee Development Committee of the BoT is charged with nominating the officers of the board, identifying and evaluating potential new board members, and assessing board participation and engagement. Each trustee is evaluated at the conclusion of each three-year term, and the evaluation takes into consideration participation in board and committee meetings, attendance at university events, and financial support of the University. Each trustee is required to complete a

self-evaluation form which is submitted to the Trustee Development Committee for review before the trustee is recommended to serve another term [PPBoTSE].

PresidentThe President of the University is annually evaluated by the BoT Chair for performance and to determine compensation, subject to review and consent of the HR Committee [PP-BoTB IV-2]. The last evaluation occurred in 2018. The President generates an annual list of goals [PP-BoTB V-6] and provides updates to the community regarding the progress made towards those goals [UP-PR19].

Faculty The Faculty are led by the FAC which is charged with oversight of all faculty committees and sets the agenda for all meetings of the full faculty. All faculty committees under the purview of the FAC are required to submit end-of-year reports that summarize completed work and suggested goals for the following academic year. These reports are made available to all faculty through the FAC website [WW-FAC]. In addition, the FAC submits an end-of-year activity report, which is presented to the

96

BoT during one of its regular meetings, and distributed to the full faculty at the start of the following year [UP-FH 4.3.8.i]. From 2014 to 2016, FAC implemented a process to assess effectiveness and progress relative to faculty governance. This included a survey and internal review, including a SWOC analysis. The findings are articulated in the Governance Task Force Report [UC-FAC-GTFR].

Provost and Academic DeansIn addition to the president’s annual review of the provost, the president conducts a periodic administrative performance evaluation of the provost using a process similar to the one used for deans (see below) [UP-FH 4.4.3]. Those under the purview of the Office of the Provost complete the evaluation. The provost was last evaluated in 2018 using a 360 degree feedback process.

Academic deans are evaluated in the spring semester of every third year. The provost may request a midterm evaluation for the deans if deemed necessary. The provost administers the evaluation of the academic deans. The evaluation form is sent to all faculty and other personnel within the dean’s college or school. The completed evaluation is to be returned to the Office of the Provost. The provost gives a tabulated summary and any written comments to the deans (with names removed). After each dean has had an opportunity to review these, the provost schedules an individual performance review meeting with each dean. The meeting provides an opportunity to discuss administrative strengths and weaknesses and, when necessary, to develop improvement plans for specific areas that have been identified as weaknesses [UP-FH 4.4.2].

The provost and deans receive performance feedback intended to provide the basis for the continuous improvement of administrative performance. Evaluation of administrative service may be requested from the faculty at other times as deemed appropriate by the provost. In 2018, initial feedback given to the provost and deans did not provide the specific comments offered by respondents. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of this oversight. This highlights the need to clearly articulate the evaluation process for administrators in the Faculty Handbook and to closely follow best practices.

Department ChairsDepartment chairs are evaluated during the spring semester of their third year [UP-FH 4.4.1.d]. The department chair submits a self evaluation of his/her performance to the

appropriate dean, who then distributes evaluation forms to all faculty members reporting to the department chair. These forms are submitted to the dean who reviews and compiles the responses. A summary that maintains the confidentiality of the respondents is then shared with the chair. The dean prepares a written evaluation based on his/her observations of the chair and the faculty evaluations, and makes a recommendation for reappointment. This report is shared and discussed with the chair, before being given to the Provost. The Provost makes the final decisions about reappointment.

Staff and AdministrationNon-academic administrators (i.e. directors, department heads) are reviewed for effectiveness based on an annual review administered by HR. This performance management program takes place during the summer months. Other assessment measures for effectiveness are gleaned through the UAC’s review process (discussed earlier), whereby administrative units provide annual progress reports on the assessment of their objectives. USAC is charged with strengthening the Wilkes community by enhancing the channels of communication and serving as a liaison between the staff and administration. To ensure that the needs of the staff are being met, periodic focus groups have been offered approximately every two years to obtain feedback, as a form of assessment. USAC also administered an effectiveness survey in Fall 2019, which will be used to determine areas in which USAC can best improve communication and support staff needs [SR-USACFA19].

Assessment of General EffectivenessAlthough there are processes and procedures in place for the sharing of information and discussion of important campus issues, feedback obtained primarily from the Great Colleges to Work For survey suggest there are opportunities to improve the communication of information between campus constituencies [SR-GC18].

Wilkes University has participated in the Chronicle of Higher Education Great Colleges to Work For survey periodically since 2010 [SR-GCTrend; SR-GCcomp]. The survey is administered annually by ModernThink LLC for the Chronicle of Higher Education. More than 53,000 people from 253 institutions responded to the survey in 2018. When the University began participation in 2010 there were 250 Wilkes respondents. That number grew to 326 respondents in 2018.

97

The Great Places to Work For survey covers 15 different thematic question categories with the following eight categories identified as the most relevant to this chapter: Shared Governance, Supervisors/Department Chairs, Senior Leadership, Faculty, Administration & Staff Relations, Communication, Collaboration, Fairness, and Respect & Appreciation. Results in all eight categories showed improvement from 2010 to 2018, reaching levels on par with the Carnegie Master’s Institution group used for benchmarking. For example, in 2010, the survey identified each item in the Senior Leadership category as poor. By 2018, all items within this category had improved to be at least “fair,” with a couple meeting the criteria for “good”. The Faculty, Administration & Staff Relations category was poorly rated overall in 2010, but had improved to “fair” by 2018. While additional work can be completed to further improve results in these areas, the improvement demonstrated over this eight-year period is substantial. As another example, the overall evaluations of Supervisors/Department Chairs have improved over this period from an overall rating of “good” to “very good to excellent” [SR-GCEB].

Despite these overall gains, analysis of survey items identified several items that need attention. This includes the following items, identified by category:

• (Shared Governance) Faculty, administration and staff are meaningfully involved in institutional planning - Improved from 42% to 54% agreement between 2010 and 2018;

• (Fairness) Issues of low performance are addressed in my department - Improved from 46% to 53% agreement between 2010 and 2018;

• (Respect and Appreciation) I am regularly recognized for my contributions - Improved from 45% to 52% agreement between 2010 and 2018;

• (Respect and Appreciation) Our recognition and awards programs are meaningful to me - Improved greatly from 31% to 52% agreement between 2010 and 2018; and

• (Communication) Changes that affect me are discussed prior to being implemented - No change since 2010 (52% in 2010 vs. 51% in 2018).

Although Wilkes would benefit from additional improvement in all of these areas, only the item related to communication has demonstrated no improvement since 2010. It is particularly important that the University focus on improving communication of change as it affects employees in light of the anticipated financial challenges

in the next fiscal year. The University plans to continue administering this instrument as a means for using employee feedback to guide progress and identify areas for improvement.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION

1. The University should explore ways of ensuring that decisions and their rationale that impact the University community are communicated clearly across and within constituent groups. This will be particularly important as the University addresses anticipated financial challenges.

98

The Self-Study Report has demonstrated that Wilkes has met the MSCHE Standards of Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation. The process has also revealed opportunities for improvement. These opportunities for improvement are presented below, organized by Standard.

Standard I

1. As Wilkes enters into a new strategic planning cycle, there is an opportunity to engage in shared University-wide review of the Mission and Goals. The University should approach and conduct this review in a manner that carefully considers the historical identity of Wilkes University, its aspirational identities, and relevant external forces, factors, and requirements, balancing change and innovation with historical institutional values and tradition.

2. The University should consider ways to further embed and enhance diversity and inclusion across the areas of recruiting, enrollment, the curriculum (including the delivery of diversity-related General Education and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes), and the overall student experience.

Standard II

1. Given that the post-tenure review policy, as written in the Faculty Handbook is not currently practiced, the University should complete the examination of post-tenure review to develop a feasible process and determine how it should be implemented. The Faculty Handbook should then be revised to reflect those changes.

2. The current language in the Faculty Handbook should be clarified to provide specific and clear guidelines for the implementation and reporting of the 360 administrative evaluation process to ensure that all constituencies understand and adhere to the process.

3. The University should ensure that the newly-formed IP Task Force complete its review, and upon approval, the policy be shared with the University Community and implemented.

Standard III

1. The University should consider a process for evaluating part-time and adjunct faculty for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook that can be regularly and consistently applied and is adaptable to accommodate the needs of individual academic departments.

2. The University should ensure that all graduate programs have graduate handbooks for their respective areas, and make those handbooks available online.

3. Given the likely increase in utilizing D2L for future course instruction, the University should consider a plan to increase resources and staffing of the OTTL to assist faculty and students in effectively utilizing online resources.

4. The University should create and implement a process to verify that all students, including transfers, have satisfied the Diversity Awareness skill area.

Standard IV

1. To improve the effectiveness of support for student learning success, the University should more fully leverage the Early Alert System to identify students in need of academic assistance, and for students requiring tutoring services, it will be important to ensure the amount and level of tutoring meets their needs.

Standard V

1. The University should investigate the viability of embedding the skills area assessment into the capstone course across disciplines.

2. The primary mechanism for general education assessment is directly tied to the program review process. Consequently, the collection and analysis of general education data has been difficult to fully implement. The University should consider revising the current system for assessing general education so it clearly articulates the ownership and responsibilities for assessing the various components of general education.

CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT

99

Standard VI

1. With the projected revenue shortfall, the University should closely monitor its financial position and determine how to best allocate financial resources that will continue to foster excellence in existing academic programs while also strategically allocating resources to new programs to strengthen the University’s academic portfolio.

2. The University should ensure that future budget goals are realistic given the anticipated decline in prospective first-year students.

Standard VII

1. The University should explore ways of ensuring that decisions and their rationale that impact the University community are communicated clearly across and within constituent groups. This will be particularly important as the University addresses anticipated financial challenges.