D P S -S R DRAFT - UMassD Web Site · PDF filerelated questions established under the UMD AQAD...

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC POLICY AQAD REVIEW COMMITTEE

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC POLICY

SELF-STUDY REPORT DRAFT

PREPARED BY:

THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC POLICY

AQAD REVIEW COMMITTEE

PREPARED FOR:

AQAD EXTERNAL EVALUATION TEAM

DATE PREPARED:

NOVEMBER 15, 2013

OF 65

- Draft Document -

1.0 Preamble The purpose of this report is to comply with the Academic Quality Assessment and Development (AQAD) process that has been instituted by the UMass Board of Trustees and outlined in further detail in the UMass Dartmouth AQAD Handbook: Policy and Procedure, May 2008 edition, developed by the Office of Academic Affairs and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter “UMD AQAD Handbook”)1. This self-assessment has been created based on the information provided in the UMD AQAD Handbook. The contents and presentation of materials have been created and presented in a manner that, to the extent practicable, mirrors the process identified in the UMD Handbook itself. In addition, the timeline adhered to in the preparation of this self-study conforms to the timeline indicated on Page 3 of the UMD AQAD Handbook for the development and presentation of the self-study. It should be noted that this Department was given a one-year extension from the normal AQAD review process that was to begin in Academic Year (AY) 2012-2013. Based on the reprieve granted from the Provost’s Office, the deadlines for this self-study begin in AY 2013-2014. To wit, the schedule being adhered to for the development, presentation, and review of this study is as follows:

DATE ACTIVITY March 1, 2013 By this date the Dean and (if desired) Provost’s designee have

met with the department to organize the AQAD process and review criteria. An AQAD review organization has been determined; the Provost/designee is available to meet with departmental representatives and the college Dean to review process, documents, and schedule.

March 15, 2013 The Chair has submitted timeline and procedure to the Dean. The Dean will present the plan and schedule to the Provost/designee by March 30.

May 30, 2013 (a) Data collection and analysis are concluded and a conceptual self-study has been drafted. (b) Final schedule and plan have been submitted to the Provost/designee.

October 1, 2013 The process for selecting the External Evaluation Team has begun. The process is to be concluded within the month.

November 1, 2013 By this date, arrangements for the visit will have begun. External reviewers’ visit occurs at the latest in February of the next year.

November 15, 2013 Draft of the self-study is presented to the Dean for review, changes, and approval.

1 The contents of the UMD AQAD Handbook are available for review here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/provost/Academic_quality_assessment_and_development_AQAD_Handbook.pdf

OF 65

- Draft Document -

December 15, 2013 The final self-study document is completed. The completed, approved self-study has been mailed to the reviewers by this date.

February 28, 2014 The deadline by which the external review is to occur on campus.

March 30, 2014 By this date the Dean has received the external reviewers’ report and circulated it to the department. The department may have exercised its right to submit to the Dean a program response to the reviewer’s report. The department will meet with the Dean to discuss findings and implications.

April 20, 2014 By this date, the department will have prepared a draft AQAD Action Plan, based on the self-study together with results of the external review, and submitted it to the Dean. Intensive discussions will result in a final Action Plan.

May 20, 2014 By this date a final Action Plan should exist. The Dean will forward review results (the self-study, external evaluators’ report, faculty response to the external report, if any) and the Action Plan to the Provost.

August 30, 2014 By this date the Provost will have submitted to the President’s Office an executive summary of this program review.

This self-study takes the following approach: it beings with an overview of the genesis and purpose of the Department of Public Policy, linking its creation to the mission and goals established by the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth. After this overview, the current makeup of the Department, including its programs offered and faculty, are described. With this introduction made, the study moves on to the core criteria and related questions established under the UMD AQAD Handbook, identifying first the criteria and then answering the set of questions established under each criteria. In answering the questions for each of the core criteria, the answers begin with descriptive statements (where applicable) and then move on to evaluative statements measuring the connection between the criteria under review and the question being posed. With this preamble in mind, the self-study is contained below. END OF SECTION.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

2.0 Overview of the Department of Public Policy 2.1 Purpose of the Department As noted in Department of Public Policy’s Standards for Annual Evaluation, Contract Renewal, Tenure and Promotion2 in effect as of September 2012 (pgs 1-2): The Department of Public Policy is structured around a multi-disciplinary faculty with documented interdisciplinary skills, knowledge, and interests in public policy. The program emphasizes the development of policy analysis and research skills with a particular focus on policy issues that concern state, regional, and municipal officials in Massachusetts and New England. The Department of Public Policy was established to implement distinctive components of the UMass Dartmouth Vision Statement and the UMass System’s strategic priorities. The University of Massachusetts has identified five strategic priorities that make it a distinctive public university serving citizens, government, and business throughout the state and within its identifiable regions. The central objectives of the Department of Public Policy are defined in Strategic Priority No. 3:

“The University shall offer and promote distinctive forms of public service. The University of Massachusetts shall provide the state with policy research, programs, and leadership to address public needs…The University shall continue to promote the economic development of the state and its regions” (UMD Catalogue, 2003-2004, 8, Strategic Priority No. 3).

The official UMass Dartmouth Vision Statement also emphasizes the importance of public service, such as improving the effectiveness of “municipalities through research and policy analysis, student internships, forums, training assistance, and community-based programs” (UMD Catalogue, 2003-2004, 9)3. The College of Arts and Sciences Strategic Plan: 2002, particularly Goal IV.A.6., also identifies “public policy studies” as a priority area that will enhance faculty-community collaboration. The Center for Policy Analysis Mission Statement and By-Laws (1992), which were approved by the Provost 2 The Department of Public Policy’s Standards for Annual Evaluation, Contract Renewal, Tenure and Promotion can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/departmentofpublicpolicy/standards.pdf 3 UMD Mission Statement (as of September 2012): The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth distinguishes itself as a public university offering a diverse mix of excellent, affordable, and personalized educational programs and experiences, both inside and outside the classroom, in an attractive SouthCoast location. Members of the University conduct research and provide innovative public service. The University advances knowledge and acts as a catalyst and partner for development of the region, the Commonwealth, and beyond. http://www.umassd.edu/masterplan/umassdartmouthmissionandvisionstatement/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

and Chancellor in 1992, also authorize the CFPA to conduct “university and community-based educational programming.” The Department of Public Policy is committed individually and collectively to realizing and promoting these objectives through its teaching, research, university service, and public service. The curriculum and its delivery is intended to provide students with the ability to reason and analyze from both a normative and problem-solving perspective, to develop technical methodological skills, and to develop substantive policy expertise in different policy areas. Faculty members in the Department are committed to both theoretical and applied scholarship, as well as active involvement in the academic profession, and the performance of public service that benefits diverse communities in the region, state, nation, and the world. The Public Policy Faculty is committed to assisting each other in promoting these endeavors and to providing the mutual support necessary for each member of the Program to succeed in fulfilling its mission and to meet its standards of professional achievement. 2.2 Department Program Offerings 2.2.1 Core Program Offerings The Department of Public Policy is structured as a mainly graduate program department primarily servicing its Master of Public Policy (MPP) Program that is based on a common curriculum of core courses with concentrations offered in three areas: education policy, environmental policy, and public management. In addition to the MPP, the Department also offers Graduate Certificate Programs in each of the MPP concentration areas: education policy and environmental policy. The Department is currently working on a certificate in public management as well, but has yet to finalize this program for reasons that are detailed below. Information on the programs described here as well as the courses offered for each program, can be found at the Department’s home website here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/ The MPP is offered in both face-to-face (f2f) and online formats, the online offering of the program being completed and launched in Fall 2010. The graduate certificate programs are offered solely online. 2.2.2 Undergraduate Courses Offered In addition to the graduate programs identified, the Department also services courses at the undergraduate level, particularly a foundation course in public policy

OF 65

- Draft Document -

entitled POL102: Introduction to Policy Studies. This course is capable of being offered in both the face-to-face and online formats and allows the Department to utilize the course as a means of providing teaching assistantships to graduate students in the MPP program who have taken POL500: Public Institutions and the Policy Process. In Fall of 2012 POL102 was approved by the Undergraduate University Studies Program so the course now services a critical part of the undergraduate study requirements. The Department of Public Policy also has a minor degree program on the books that was approved with the original development of the Department when it began offering courses within the College of Arts and Sciences.4 Since the Department was been moved to the School of Education, Public Policy, and Civic Engagement (SEPPCE), an entirely graduate school, the undergraduate minor program has not been actively managed or marketed by the Department. Currently there are no plans on revitalizing the undergraduate minor program within the Department as the growth of the graduate programs, particularly online, absorb all of the resources available. 2.2.3 JD/MPP Program The Department has a joint program with the UMass Dartmouth School of Law that offers students the ability to obtain both a Juris Doctor and Master of Public Policy in a 4-5 year timeframe on a full-time basis.5 2.2.4 BA/MPP Accelerated Program Beginning in the 2012-2013 academic year, the Department of Public Policy launched specific programs with the Department of Sociology/ Anthropology / Crime and Justice Studies and the Department of Political Science to provide the opportunity for select undergraduate students in these departments to complete both their undergraduate and the MPP program in a 5-year accelerated timeframe.6 2.3 Faculty of the Department The faculty members of the Department of Public Policy are comprised of experts

4 Further information on the minor program in public policy can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/prospectivestudents/programsoffered/undergraduateprograms/ 5 Information on the JD/MPP program can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/law/academics/degreeprogramsrequirements/jdmpp/ 6 More information on the BA/MPP accelerated program can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/prospectivestudents/programsoffered/bamppacceleratedprogram/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

in the fields that support the core curriculum of the Master of Public Policy (MPP) program, as well as the fields the compromise the concentrations within the MPP: education policy, environmental policy, and public management. Detailed profiles of faculty members can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whoweare/faculty/ END OF SECTION.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

3.0 Core Criteria and Related Questions for AQAD Review 3.1 Programs Shall Ensure That Their Goals and Missions are

Linked to the Campus Mission and Strategic Priorities Under this stated criteria, The Department of Public Policy should evaluate its purpose and planning in light of the campus mission and strategic priorities and answer the following questions:

• What is the program’s mission and how well is it clearly aligned with the campus mission and direction?

• How does the program’s mission relate to curriculum; enrollments; faculty teaching, research/professional/creative activity, and outreach? How well is it aligned with the campus strategic priorities?

3.1.1 Program Mission and Alignment with Campus Mission and Direction The current (September 2012) mission statement of the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth states the following:

The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth distinguishes itself as a public university offering a diverse mix of excellent, affordable, and personalized educational programs and experiences, both inside and

outside the classroom, in an attractive SouthCoast location. Members of the University conduct research and provide innovative public service. The University advances

knowledge and acts as a catalyst and partner for development of the region, the Commonwealth, and beyond.

The mission of the Department of Public Policy is to provide the Southcoast region, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and a national/international audience (through the online program) with a high quality and affordable education founded upon principles of management, program evaluation, and planning while currently emphasizing the education and environmental fields. By offering a graduate degree in public policy, the Department aligns its mission with the University by advancing the knowledge of public professionals and thus acting as a catalyst and partner for the development of the region, Commonwealth, and beyond. In addition, both the theoretical and applied scholarship conducted by the faculty within the Department of Public Policy (often in conjunction with the work engaged in by the Center for Policy Analysis) allows the Department to conduct research for the region, Commonwealth and beyond that provides innovative public service.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

3.1.2 Program Missions Relation to Curriculum, Enrollments, Faculty Teaching, Research/Professional/Creative Activity, and Outreach

3.1.2.1 Curriculum The curriculum of the Department of Public Policy is focused heavily on its commitments to: (1) graduate education; (2) the Master of Public Policy program; (3) the graduate certificates offered within the department; (4) online education generally including the development of online programs; and (5) supporting excellence in the specific undergraduate programs offered at UMD. These five stated commitments represent the focus and growth of the Department of Public Policy over the last 5 years and, more particularly, the alignment of the Department in playing a preeminent role in the advancement of its public policy program beyond the immediate region to a national and international audience. A listing of the courses offered within the Department categorized by core course requirements (MPP program) and concentration areas, and descriptions of each course can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/courseofferings/ Each course identified in the listings has been rethought and redeveloped specifically for online delivery between 2008 and 2012. In January of 2012 a remaining course in the MPP program (POL585) was redeveloped for online delivery, making the entire MPP program fully integrated for both on-ground and online delivery. The process of redeveloping each course included a programmatic discussion between faculty members and the College on the reasons for developing an online program and how those reasons are connected to the mission of the Department of Public Policy. In essence, it was agreed that that the mission of the Department is to serve the needs of public, private, and non-profit entities by providing a resource for the study and application of public policy principles (management, analysis, and practice) in larger society. The extension of courses within the department to an online format was, in many ways, an acknowledgment that there is a dearth of public policy resources at the local, state, regional, national, and even international level. Thus, the curriculum was designed to provide a set of common-theme principles in public policy that can be scaled to different levels of interest. An example of this ‘scaling’ of the Department’s mission to the curriculum can be seen in the design of courses to accommodate student interests from various perspectives. For example, most courses contain an applied element to the materials where students are asked to research a topic and apply the skill sets developed in the course to that topic; this application can take place both individually and also in a group setting. The topics chosen to apply to the skill sets in the exercise can vary from local to regional and even international applications. One example of this scaling can be seen in the online POL562 (Environmental Policy course). Students in this course learn principles of environmental

OF 65

- Draft Document -

policy heavily influenced by benefit-cost analysis and ‘total valuation’ approaches as tools in applying alternative approaches to environmental problems. The main application of these conceptual tools is through a summative paper in which students research an environmental issue of interest using a total value approach to discern different approaches to an environmental problem. The manner in which students determine ‘benefits’ and ‘costs’ in this analysis can vary depending on the criteria chosen to define these terms; the key is that the student validates the manner in which criteria are being chosen. In this process students must use validating measurements that vary depending on socio-political, cultural, legal, and other considerations. Students engaging in this analysis in the United States often have similar criteria to judge benefits and costs, although the criteria can change depending on the region or locality of the U.S. being analyzed. International online students may be working on criteria developed in other nations, including the cultural and legal differences that might apply. In all cases the capacity to apply the varying criteria based on location is possible through the manner in which the assignment has been developed. This is but one example of how the curriculum for the courses has been closely developed to ensure it matches not only the subject matter generally, but also the differences in working with the subject matter that may be experienced by students from different backgrounds and geographic regions. Thus, by matching the goals of the Department in both face-to-face and online delivery of the various programs and certificates in public policy, the curriculum is clearly matched to the overarching goals of both the Department and University. 3.1.2.2 Enrollments The program mission is connected to enrollments within the Department in a number of ways. First, as a directed graduate plan of study in public policy, the students enrolled in the program are specifically aware of the directed path and nature of the program itself. What this means is that applicants for the program are often ‘self-selected’ professionals currently working in the field of public policy and management who are seeking to enhance their understanding and competence in public policy. This subset of applicants are geographically diverse, with local applicants coming from the surrounding Southcoast region of Massachusetts and who work in both the public and private sphere at various levels and capacities. The online program extends the applicant pool to national and international boundaries. Applicants come from a wide section of backgrounds that are inclusive of local applicants but also extend to professionals in a state and federal roles from across the U.S. as well as professionals currently working in the U.S. military (including graduates from the armed forces academies). Internationally, successful applicants hail from small non-governmental organizations in countries such as Portugal and Nigeria, as well as large international institutions such as the United Nations. If the mission of the University is to provide opportunities for affordable education to students near and far, then this mission is clearly reinforced with the Department of Public Policy’s role as a developer and distributor of academic programs. The enrollments of our student body reflects a focus on this mission as we have a breadth of programming that offers students near and far the opportunity to study public policy, and

OF 65

- Draft Document -

specific disciplines within public policy, hosted by the Department. In providing the extension of our academic program online, the Department furthers the advancement goals of the University of Massachusetts by reaching beyond the geographic core of the region while still servicing individuals located locally. In addition, by combining students from various backgrounds who might not otherwise interact with one another (say a local public professional with a United Nations professional stationed in Geneva), we provide an opportunity for truly engaged learning between students from these different backgrounds allowing for the exchange of ideas and perspectives that enrich and enhance the overall academic quality of the program and thereby achieve the growth objectives of the University. Also, the development and enhancement of the JD/MPP joint program as well as the BA/MPP accelerated programs provide strong reinforcement of policy-related disciplines within existing student bodies of the university at both the undergraduate and graduate levels of education, thus enabling enrollments to reflect the larger missions of the University in developing and implementing affordable, quality education opportunities for its students. Admission data from Fall 2006 to Fall 2012 are contained in the following table7:

Admissions Indicators (Fall) Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012

Graduate

Graduate applicants 8 14 15 26 45 58 65

Masters in Public Policy 8 14 14 13 20 12 11

Master of Public Policy/Juris Doctor 0 0 1 2 3 5 3

Masters in Public Policy online 0 0 0 0 3 22 28

Grad Certificates 0 0 0 11 19 19 23

Graduates accepted 8 14 15 24 39 51 53





% Graduates accepted 100% 100% 100% 92% 87% 88% 82%

Masters in Public Policy 100% 100% 100% 100% 70% 100% 82%

Master of Public Policy/Juris Doctor 0% 0% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100%

Masters in Public Policy online 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 68% 68%

Grad Certificates 0% 0% 0% 91% 100% 100% 96%

Graduates enrolling 3 11 12 13 17 32 33





% Graduates enrolling 38% 79% 80% 54% 44% 63% 62%

7 Data provided to Department by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment at UMD: http://www.umassd.edu/oir/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Masters in Public Policy 38% 79% 86% 54% 36% 50% 44%

Master of Public Policy/Juris Doctor 0% 0% 0% 0% 33% 60% 0%

Masters in Public Policy online 0% 0% 0% 0% 33% 67% 68%

Grad Certificates 0% 0% 0% 60% 53% 68% 73%

Average new graduate student indicator

Policy Studies MPP NA NA NA 3.39 — 3.36 3.2

Grad Certificates NA NA NA 3.23 3.1 2.88 3.18

"—" indicates there is less than 4 students Fall 2009 is when GPA for new graduates started to be entered into Peoplesoft

The advent of the online MPP program has provided significant growth to the overall enrollment trends within the Department over the last several years. Since 2009, when the online MPP program was officially launched, applications to the MPP program have gone from approximately 15 applications in Fall 2009 to 65 for Fall 2012. In addition, the launch of the online MPP program has coincided with the development and launch of the online graduate certificate programs in educational policy and environmental policy. These programs began in earnest in 2010 and 2011 respectively. Collectively the programs are thriving and now account for 40 new matriculations into the program for the Fall 2012 entering cohort. Under current resources provided to the Department for faculty lines, there is strong information suggesting a maximum capacity for student enrollments that is somewhere around 40 total enrollments as a cohort of students beginning in a new academic year, with a division of approximately 25 enrollments in the online program and about 15 enrollments in the face-to-face program. Any additional enrollments would require adding additional sections to certain core requirement and popular course offerings, which would then require additional resources to service these sections. Part-time instructors have already been employed sparingly as a stopgap measure, but the Department needs to ensure its’ majority of its courses (including all core course requirements) are taught by resident full-time faculty members preferably all on a tenure-track basis.8 Recent expansions of the MPP program offerings such as the development of the expedited BA/MPP program and the JD/MPP options will help to service the face-to-face enrollment of the MPP program, likely resulting in pressure on the total enrollment numbers identified above under existing department resources. The Department is working with administration to ensure sufficient resources are made available to deal with the rapid rate of growth experienced in enrollments (and anticipated through newly launched initiatives) to support the additional enrollments as-needed. 3.1.2.3 Faculty Teaching

8 The Department follows NASPAA (National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration) guidelines regarding ratios of full-time faculty members teaching within defined programs outlined in their accreditation standards, available here: http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/NS/seek.asp

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Faculty teaching is defined by two components: (1) matching the area of faculty expertise to the programs and disciplines offered with the Department; and (2) complying with provisions of the currently in-force collective bargaining agreement between the University and the Faculty Federation (union) relating to faculty teaching assignments.9 The first component is constrained by the obligations and limitations expressed in the collective bargaining agreement. Thus, in order to assess faculty teaching in relation to the missions of this Department, it must be understood that all faculty teaching is constrained to some degree by the contractual language that defines faculty rights and responsibilities, and the Department must work within these constraints (as well as individually contracted agreements with faculty members for releases of teaching load, etc.) when seeking to match faculty teaching with the goals of the Department in its program offerings. Faculty teaching itself within the Department is currently based on a 3/3 schedule, meaning faculty members generally teach 3 course sections in both the Fall and Spring semesters during the regular academic year. As a graduate program, the 3/3 teaching load is being reviewed and there has been discussions on implementing a 2/2 schedule to better reflect the duties and obligations placed on faculty members within Public Policy when servicing the needs of the Department. However, under the current teaching load there is sufficient coverage to meet the basic requirements of the MPP program and its associated certificate offerings under the conditions and challenges identified later in this report. Faculty teaching within Public Policy is grounded in a basic understanding of the mission and goals of the Department as well as the purpose of the programs being offered within the Department. Regular meetings are held to discuss, reinforce, and explore the purpose of the programs offered (particularly the MPP and associated concentration/certificates) and ensure this purpose is grounded in the expertise of the existing faculty members and responds to the mission of the Department and University to service the region and beyond in providing a quality applied public policy program that responds to the needs of public and private organizations. Since the Department is relatively new and the programs offered have been developed (or redeveloped) over the past few years, the current faculty members have played a large role in the direction of the programs offered. For example, the development of the MPP for online delivery required a full exploration of the curriculum for the program, its rationale and fit, over the last few years. Faculty members were required to re-envision the courses for the MPP collective and separately as they worked to create online versions of those courses. In addition, the certificates were developed based on an assessment of current needs and specialty areas in the field of public policy and faculty were specifically hired over the last few years based on their particular expertise to service these areas of concentration. Thus, because of the nature upon which this Department has developed over the last few years, 9 The language of the collective bargaining agreement between faculty and UMD currently in-effect can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/humanresources/policieslawsunioncontracts/unioncontracts/Faculty_Federation_Agreement_July_01_2009_to_June_30_2012.pdf

OF 65

- Draft Document -

there is currently a strong connection between the mission of the programs offered and the faculty teaching. A current list of active faculty members within the Department, along with their individual expertise, can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whoweare/faculty/ 3.1.2.4 Research/Professional/Creative Activity The research, professional, and creative activities of the faculty are primarily based on advancing the practical, applied knowledge base of public policy in a way that furthers the mission of the Department and the University. This fact is reflected in the manner in which the Department works in conjunction with the its affiliated Center for Policy Analysis, and also the way in which real-life policy problems are used as the basis for teaching in the classroom setting. What results from these associations are policy-relevant research analysis reports, and also faculty/student collaborations of research that is published in primary and secondary literature venues. Faculty within the Department of Public Policy are involved in research, professional, and creative activities as part of their scholarship and service categories of evaluation identified in the currently in-force Faculty Federation contractual agreement between the University and faculty members. All core tenure-track faculty members are evaluated annually on their progression of research, professional, and creative activities as part of this process. In addition, the Department of Public Policy has developed a detailed set of departmental standards that explain the kinds of research, professional, and creative activities expected of tenure-track faculty members within the Department. A copy of the departmental standards currently in-force can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/departmentofpublicpolicy/standards.pdf Examples of faculty research, professional, and creative activities can be found housed online at the “What We Do” section of the Department’s website: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/ Here you will find updated News links identifying the kinds of professional activities currently being conducted by faculty members. The Public Policy Poll link provides information on ongoing collaborations between the Department and the Center for Policy Analysis in measuring the current ‘pulse’ of public sentiment across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on specified indicators.10 The full reports of the poll are

10 http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/publicpolicypoll/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

available online for viewing and downloading. The Policy Analysis Research Team (PART) link provides information on an inventive collaboration between faculty (Professor Michael Goodman) and MPP students in the required Policy Analysis course to understand the principles of policy analysis by engaging in a research project that benefits the community of the Southcoast region.11 The Center for Policy Analysis link provides information on the Center, including its mission and how it works in collaboration with the Department of Public Policy.12 Also, you will find a link to the Graduate Student Lecture Series, which highlights the work of graduate students in the program in a public lecture setting (videos of the lectures are available from the link).13 In addition to these collaborative applied research examples, there are also examples of direct scholarly research where faculty are developing lines of inquiry aimed at better understanding the disciplines that are taught with the Department. For example, Professor Chad McGuire has worked independently with graduate students in the Department on a number of scholarly projects related to environmental policy over the last few years. Examples of this work include: (1) publishing a peer-reviewed assessment of marine shipping practices with a graduate student in the environmental policy certificate program that was originally part of the student’s course project in the Ocean Policy & Law course offered in the program; (2) aiding two graduate students in publishing their research in the Environmental Policy course in trade publications; and (3) recently working with a MPP student on the publication of a peer-reviewed article on sea level rise adaptation policy and presenting the paper at a 2012 conference at The University of Connecticut School of Law hosted by NOAA Sea Grant. Faculty members also work collaboratively on projects within the Department. In 2011, Professor’s Goodman, Lynch, and McGuire presented at a conference hosted by the University of Vermont on the social, economic, and legal impacts of sustainability in the face of climate change challenges. Professor Barrow and Goodman collaborate on economic questions related to the casino gambling and its impact on Massachusetts and the Southcoast region. Professors Lynch and McGuire recently collaborated on a research article detailing the impact of sea level rise on coastal landscape features published in the Journal of Natural Resources & Environment in Spring of 2013. These are but a few examples of the kinds of collaborations between faculty members in the Department that further the mission of the Department and University in research, professional, and creative activities. Finally, a number of the Department faculty hold ongoing positions in key areas of local, state, and national significance all related to professional and creative

11http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/thepolicyanalysisresearchteampart/ 12http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/centerforpolicyanalysis/ 13http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/graduatestudentlectureseries/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

advancement in the mission of the Department and University. For example, Professor Barrow is the Director of the Center for Policy Analysis where he engages in applied policy research that benefits the University, Commonwealth, and beyond.14 Professor Goodman is an editor for MassBenchmarks, the primary publication of economic conditions within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.15 Professor McGuire is a governor appointee of the Stewardship Council for the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, the executive agency created to hold and manage all public lands in Massachusetts.16 Again, these are non-exhaustive, representative examples of the kinds of professional positions held by faculty members within the Department that further reinforce the programmatic goals of the Department while achieving the overall mission of the University related to public service focused in the primary areas of public policy being taught within the Department. 3.1.2.5 Outreach The Department, directly, through the Center of Policy Analysis, and via other outlets provides outreach to the Southcoast community, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and beyond through the kinds of applied scholarship and professional activities identified in the immediately preceding section. These outreach efforts are aimed at providing support to varied institutions while also providing students with applied learning opportunities. Many of the MPP students in the required Internship course within the MPP program engage directly with community entities and organizations, providing expertise and capacity to the community partner while affording the student experiential learning opportunities. The Department has created special relationships with local municipalities, non-governmental organizations, state/federal agencies, and political offices developing a resource-based role for those institutions in exchange for in-depth student learning experiences. Within the Center for Policy Analysis, members of the Department engage in community outreach activities connected to specific disciplines identified within a faculty member’s area of expertise. For example, the Center has created two new divisions in education and environmental policy in order to provide opportunities for applied research to include community outreach components. These divisions offer a locus for applying faculty-student research in these focus areas. An example of the Environmental Policy Division within the Center for Policy Analysis can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/centers/cfpa/divisionofenvironmentalpolicy/

14 For examples of Professor Barrow’s work at the Center for Policy Analysis, please see here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/centers/cfpa/researchandpublications/ 15 Further information on MassBenchmarks can be found here: http://www.massbenchmarks.org 16 More information on the MA DCR Stewardship Council can be found here: http://www.mass.gov/dcr/stewardship_council.htm

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Individual members of the faculty are committed to community outreach in the capacity as a ‘resource’ as envisioned in both the University and Department mission statements. Professor Chad McGuire has been awarded pro bono legal representation awards for his free legal work in the community over the last four years (2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012). In addition, Professor McGuire received the Pro Bono Attorney of the Year Award by the Massachusetts Bar Association in 2010, and was recently recognized by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court for his legal service to the Commonwealth. This is merely one example of the kinds of outreach commitments sought by faculty within the Department of Public Policy. OTHER EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH FOR CORE FACULTY SHOULD BE ADDED ABOVE. 3.1.3 Program Missions Relation to Campus Strategic Priorities In the University’s most recent planning period (it is currently undergoing an updated review of its strategic priorities) it identified graduate programs and online programs as key areas of growth and focus for the University. The Department Public Policy has been at the center of both of these areas of growth: first as an academic unit primarily focused on graduate courses, programs, and research; and second as a leader in the development of online courses and programs. As a leader in graduate and online education on the campus, Public Policy has created programs that are directly aligned with the strategic priorities of UMD and the UMass system. 3.2 Programs Shall Ensure That The Curriculum is Relevant,

Rigorous, Current and Coherent This criteria is focused on the need to provide a high quality education for students, reflecting this goal should be the primary consideration when evaluating the relevancy, currency, and coherence of curricula. Evaluation of the curriculum should reflect an awareness of changing knowledge, trends in the discipline, and the professional context for curriculum. The review should answer the following questions:

• How does the program determine curricular content? How well does the curriculum relate to current existing standards of the discipline?

• What internal or external measures of review are employed to ensure that the curriculum is relevant and up-to-date? How does the program assess its achievement of defined objectives and how successful is the program at using the results for improvement?

• Are the curricular offerings structured in a logical, sequential and coherent

OF 65

- Draft Document -

manner? Is there an appropriate balance between breadth and depth?

• If consistent with the program mission, how well does the curriculum adequately prepare students for further study or employment?

In what ways does the program contribute to the education of students in terms of general knowledge, critical thinking capacity and other essential cognitive skills?

3.2.1 Curriculum Content Development and Relationship to Standards 3.2.1.1 Curriculum Content Curriculum Content is determined by the Department of Public Policy through a two-step process. First the overall curriculum (course sequencing) for the program is determined. For example, the curriculum for the MPP program was developed in conjunction with national standards and standardized curriculum observed in premier public policy programs across the nation. The core requirements of the MPP contain emphasis areas of foundational materials, analysis, and concentration focus developed through an established set of requirements that include a common curriculum component, a concentration area, one elective course, and the internship experience. The requirements are laid out in detail here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/prospectivestudents/programsoffered/graduateprograms/masterofpublicpolicy/#requirements In summary, the goal of the curriculum is designed to provide students with the ability to reason and analyze from both a normative and problem-solving perspective, to develop technical methodological skills, and to develop substantive policy or management expertise in one concentration area. The concentration areas (public management, education policy, environmental policy) allow the student to gain content depth in three specific areas of policy that match current faculty expertise and are considered to be relevant areas of practice for graduates from UMD. Finally, the internship experience allows for the practical application of the analysis, management, and concentration area utilized by the student during their tenure in the program. The two graduate certificates offered in the program (educational policy and environmental policy) are meant to support the expertise of the faculty in the department while offering a practical skill-based introduction to students who desire exposure to public policy and the defined concentration area without deeply engaging the analysis or associated foundation components of the program. Students successfully completing the graduate certificate have the opportunity to apply to the full MPP program under an expedited basis of review17, and then ‘backfilling’ the analysis, complementary foundation, and experiential

17 The expedited review process includes a waiver of the GRE requirement for the MPP and acceptance of all courses taken in the graduate certificate program where the student has earned a 3.0 or higher in each

OF 65

- Draft Document -

(internship) components of the program into their educational experience. The second step in curriculum development focuses on each course in the program and the development and refinement of those courses over time to match the needs of the program to faculty expertise, as well as ensure the quality of each course meets or exceeds a standard expected amongst the faculty members of the department and the standards of policy programs across the nation. This step is a bit more intimate; where the essential components (the ‘skeleton’) of the program itself is generally well-defined and unchanging over longer periods of time, the individual courses represent a more proximate relationship between the individual professor teaching the course, the departmental expectations, and the program as a whole. In addition, and as noted earlier in this self-assessment, Public Policy has recently undergone a transition developing all of its graduate courses offered in the program into an online format. This process over the last three years has forced the faculty, as a group and also individually, to revisit each course and consider its relationship to the overall mission of the program, college, and university.18 In addition, each course has gone through a redevelopment so that it clearly fits within the online context. To understand what this means, a deeper context of online course development is required, as well as some understanding of the special circumstances applied to a wholly online program. Online course development is both structurally and pedagogically different than a face-to-face course development. Structurally, the online course must be developed in a way that meets a number of standards, some of which are based on legal frameworks and others that are determined based on nationally recognized best practices for online course delivery. A summary of the kinds of structural components to be considered for online course development is found here: http://www.umassd.edu/cits/id/mycoursesfaculty/onlinelearning/bestpractices/ When creating online courses, Public Policy has focused on identifying elements of visual continuity for students within the program. This means that courses adhere to a similar content formatting and visual flow that is consistent between the courses offered in the program. Faculty within the Department collaborated on the development of this visual continuity and adhere to its most basic elements to ensure students receive a consistent ‘interaction’ experience between courses (each course is similar in how students access materials, assignment, exams, post discussions, etc.). In addition, faculty members ensure their course sites meet best practice guidelines and subject their courses to review by university faculty expertise and departmental faculty review both before and after a course section is offered for online delivery. In this way, curricular content from all courses offered online are determined to be in compliance with university best practices course being sought for credit in the MPP program. 18 Note that including the online delivery of a program does not alter the overall mission of the program, but it does change aspects of the mission by altering the intended audience of the program. This is discussed in greater detail earlier in this assessment in terms of relating the programs mission to the mission of the UMD and how developing the online program altered the scaling aspects of the department’s program offerings.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

and also universally agreed upon departmental standards related to course structuring.19 Pedagogically, online courses are developed differently from face-to-face experiences. Lectures and associated learning instruments have to be thought out well in advance of the course offering, often being developed and created prior to the offering of the course. Greater details in lectures are often required in the online setting. This can include a more in-depth written explanation of the materials, creation of videos and presentations to further explain major points, and the integration of interactive materials into the lectures in order to provide depth of coverage for students with particular interests in subsets of areas being covered. In essence, the development of the online course requires a lot of up-front considerations by the faculty member that does not normally occur in the face-to-face course offering. Faculty members are not fully bound by this structure and often supplement it during the semester with relevant updates and information based on current events and student interests displayed during the running of the course. Student learning and assessment is also different than a face-to-face experience. Because faculty members cannot physically assess collective student learning capacity in a live setting, a more detailed and individual assessment of student comprehension often needs to take place in the online setting. Thus, faculty members must often alter the manner in which they engage students in the online setting, requiring a greater degree of daily interactions with the course materials, often leading to a more intense commitment by faculty members when teaching online courses. Because online learning requires a greater commitment of time towards the development and teaching of each course by the faculty member, they are impacted by the distribution of their time towards teaching. This fact impacts curricular content development in terms of the expectations placed on faculty teaching in an online program and needs to be mitigated by altering expectations for teaching load in an online program setting. In sum, the differences in structure and pedagogy applied to online learning – a major part of the programs now offered in Public Policy – impact the process in which curricular content is determined on an individual basis. 3.2.1.2 Curriculum Relationship to Existing Standards As mentioned previously, the curriculum offered in the Department of Public Policy can be linked to standards that apply to the program(s) offered, and also standards that apply to the development and delivery of online courses for the portions of the Department’s programs that are offered online. Because the Department offers all of its programs online (and the greatest growth in student enrollment is also online), the curriculum’s relationship to existing standards for online course delivery becomes an additional consideration when responding to these self-

19 For an example of the essential elements to an online course developed by the Department of Public Policy, please see the “Overview of the Online Course Environment” video available here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/helpfulvideos/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

assessment questions. Regarding standards that apply to the program(s) offered, the Department follows nationally recognized standards for graduate public policy programs generally, and the Master of Public Policy (MPP) program specifically, as outlined by NASPA (National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration). These standards are available for review here: http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/NS/naspaastandards.asp Specifically relating to the course of study standards for an MPP program, the NASPA standards indicate the following:

The normal expectation for students studying for professional degrees in public affairs, administration, and policy is equivalent to 36 to 48 semester credit hours of study. The intentions of this precondition are to ensure significant interaction with other students and with faculty, hands on collaborative work, socialization into the norms and aspirations of the profession, and observations by faculty of students’ interpersonal and communication skills. Programs departing from campus- centered education by offering distance learning, international exchanges, or innovative delivery systems must demonstrate that the intentions of this precondition are being achieved and that such programs are under the supervision of fully qualified faculty. This determination may include, but is not limited to, evidence of faculty of record, and communications between faculty and students.

The Department of Public Policy is achieving the above-references standards in the following ways:

NASPA Standard Achievement of Standard

• 36 – 48 semester credit hours of study • 39 semester credit hours of study required

• Ensure significant interaction between students.20

• Students in both face-to-face and online programs are provided with significant interaction opportunities that include the following: o Teaching and Research

Assistantships for eligible and qualified students.

o Membership and interaction with student run graduate organization in public policy.

o Mentoring of students through open door faculty/student interactions

20 See student testimonials on program interactions (two online students) here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whoweare/studentspotlight/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

(face-to-face, “f2f”) and online chat and synchronous sessions (online).

o Provision of student areas (including office space and study cluster space) in Department of Public Policy (face-to-face).

o Fostering student-student working groups both f2f and online through specific course development with identified student interaction and group learning outcomes.

• Ensure significant interactions between students and faculty.21

• Faculty mentoring of students in f2f and online programs outside of classroom setting.

• Teaching and research assistantship development to engage students in active learning and direct working relationships with faculty.

• Publishing scholarship with students both f2f and online.

• Fostering student-faculty working groups both f2f and online through specific course development with identified student interaction and group learning outcomes.

• Students engaging in hands on collaborative work

• Students engaging in real-world research in the classroom setting (policy analysis course as one example).

• Students actively provided with research assistantship opportunities with the Center for Policy Analysis and government entities.

• Students required to undertake internship experience (POL599) as part of their educational requirements

21 Example of student-student and faculty-student interactions (f2f) by engaging in real-world study of policy problem in region when taking policy analysis course: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whatwedo/thepolicyanalysisresearchteampart/ Example of student-faculty (f2f) collaboration on research that resulted in conference presentation and peer-reviewed journal article: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/centers/cfpa/divisionofenvironmentalpolicy/scholarship/updates/conferencepresentation/ Example of student-faculty (online) collaboration on research that resulted in peer-reviewed journal article: http://www.umassonline.net/news/2655.html

OF 65

- Draft Document -

for the MPP program. • Students actively researching and

publishing with faculty during their tenure in the MPP program.

• Students socialized into the norms and aspirations of the profession

• Students engaging in real-world research in the classroom setting (policy analysis course as one example).

• Students actively provided with research assistantship opportunities with the Center for Policy Analysis.

• Students required to undertake internship experience (POL599) as part of their educational requirements for the MPP program.

• Students actively researching and publishing with faculty during their tenure in the MPP program.

• Observation by faculty of students’ interpersonal and communication skills

• Students regularly observed in both the f2f and online course settings (in the online setting, students regularly respond to ‘classroom’ questions through written discussion board responses that require an assessment of the student’s ability to write and articulate a rationale clearly).

• Students are reviewed and assessed regularly for teaching assistantships, research assistantships, scholarship awards, and also through their experiential interactions with organizations through the internship experience.

• Students are summarily assessed at the conclusion of the MPP program through the development, submission, and presentation of a portfolio that reflects their work during the MPP program and requires an honest assessment where the student identifies the impact their coursework and experiences have had on their maturity

OF 65

- Draft Document -

throughout the entirety of the program experience.22

• Demonstration the online component of the MPP program achieves the standards identified above.

• Examples of how the online program provides for student-student interactions, faculty-student interactions, student engagement, assessment, and faculty evaluation of student performance have been highlighted, where appropriate, above.

• Students in the online program must complete all of the same requirements as the f2f students including the internship experience and professional portfolio requirement. Adjustments to the program (for example an electronic portfolio submission and presentation process) have been made to ensure full faculty involvement and supervision over the students so the same kinds of evaluations can be made for online students as f2f students.

In sum, this comparison of standards and achievement of those standards provides evidence that the Department of Public Policy’s current curriculum bears a strong relationship to existing standards. Beyond the program standards followed (using NASPA guidelines), there are also standards related to the development and delivery of online courses. To ensure the curriculum being established by the Department bears a strong relationship to existing standards, the ‘best practices’ developed by UMD for online course development and delivery are followed. These standards can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/cits/id/mycoursesfaculty/onlinelearning/bestpractices/ The practices are derived in large part from Quality Matters, a nationally recognized leader in online education content development and delivery. More information on this organization and its best practices standards and peer mentoring and review process can be found here: http://www.qmprogram.org

22 Details on the student portfolio requirement can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/mopp/#portfolio

OF 66

- Draft Document -

The process for ensuring the online courses are developed in-line with best practices within Public Policy and UMD are two-fold. First, the Department engages in an internal dialogue amongst faculty members to determine the basic elements of each course in relation to the program being offered and with an eye towards ensuring a consistent basic theme amongst all Department courses and the relationship of each course’s learning outcomes to the program itself. Once this is completed, the courses are created using best practice models as identified by UMD for online course development. An online content expert within the Department is identified and utilized by faculty members when creating their course content to ensure best practices and aesthetic consistency are being maintained. Second, once the courses are created, the university compliance and peer mentoring process begins to ensure basic legal requirements for the courses are met (ADA compliance for access, use of copyrighted materials within the course, etc.), and then to ensure the course meets basic notions of best practices. The evaluation results in an overall assessment of where the course exists within these defined parameters prior to delivery. Where identified, suggestions are made to the faculty member from faculty peer reviewers on improvements to the course structure and content based on best practice modeling. After this review is completed the faculty member can utilize departmental resources to further enhance and refine their course structure. Over time the Department engages in additional reviews of course content (often in conjunction with student course evaluations) to ensure course materials adhere to the standards identified above. 3.2.2 Internal/External Measures of Review Employed to Ensure Curriculum is

Relevant and Up-To-Date / Program Assessment Process and Use of Results from Assessment to Improve Curriculum

Most of the recent ‘upgrading’ of the department curriculum has occurred over the past four years. New faculty members have been hired since 2008 and, since that time, a focus has been placed on the curriculum as faculty members worked through the movement of the curriculum into an online format. As already summarized earlier in this self-study, the process of reworking courses for an online delivery format provided the faculty an opportunity to review the curriculum for the program (specifically the MPP), understand its overriding pedagogical objectives, consider faculty expertise, and then rework the development of the courses during the online transition to ensure the courses matched University, College, and Department missions and goals. Part of this process included understanding NASPA accreditation standards for graduate policy programs and viewing similar programs currently offered by leading academic institutions in the U.S. Through this process, the general course offerings and sequencing of the MPP program was determined to be meet all of the aforementioned missions, goals, and standards. In addition, concentration areas have been developed for the MPP within the last two years (public management, education policy, environmental policy) to better reflect the expertise of the faculty members currently within the Department, the hiring of which was designed to compliment these desired areas as being focus areas of growth for public policy professionals and careers. Indeed, the makeup of the faculty has prompted the creation of the environmental policy and education policy graduate certificate programs, both of which have launched in the last few years.

OF 66

- Draft Document -

The external measures of review employed include following NASPA standards in course curriculum development, and also the use of faculty members within the University who are identified as online course experts to review and comment on aspects of curriculum impacted in the online setting (as explained in greater detail above). With the conclusion of this internal study, the faculty of Public Policy will be looking to formally apply for NASPA accreditation within the next two years (part of our larger strategic plan). Through the application, review, and (hopefully) accreditation, NASPA would become an additional external evaluator of the Department’s programs and curriculum offerings. During the Department’s time of transition and redevelopment, the entire set of academic programs have been going through a review process (internally and externally) as described above. Still, the Department is constantly looking for evidence of ‘success’ in student learning and achievement. Fundamental means of measuring this include student course evaluations that help to determine the proximate quality of individual courses offered within the program. In addition, the professional student portfolio prompts students to discuss their perceived pros and cons with the program and its connection to their academic and career goals. The Department has also included a ‘student exit survey’ as students complete their professional portfolio assignment; the survey asks students to rate their experience in the program and university anonymously. An example of the survey can be viewed here: http://mppexampleportfolio.umassd.wikispaces.net/Example+Interview The Department is working with University officials and alumni associations to help track student employment trends upon graduation. Many of our students are working professionals currently employed in some capacity so it is difficult to get precise numbers of the ‘impact’ of the program on the students, for example providing employment for students who are already employed when matriculating into the program. However, the Department has launched a Facebook page that provides a forum for current and past MPP students to share information including employment and other interests. The Fecebook page can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/UMassDMPP Anecdotal evidence of student success includes the achievements of the students while still in the MPP program who work with faculty to publish research and present at major conferences in various disciplines within the policy field. In addition, students often stay in touch with faculty advisers to discuss career paths and opportunities as they arise during their academic careers. The information that is gathered, both formally and informally, on program achievement is digested within the department at faculty meetings and other formal structures within the department (department curriculum committee, etc.). Informally faculty often meet with one another to discuss learning outcomes and associated curricula issues as they arise (student evaluations, etc.). Assessment of the delivery mechanisms and

OF 66

- Draft Document -

course content often lead to a peer-sharing of opinions and best practices that aid in improving the learning outcomes of the course. More general issues (for example, the course management software being used to deliver online content) is often discussed when the issues are pervasive amongst the courses within the program and suggestions are proffered to improve the learning environment when possible. The University and its online development team offers additional expertise in course delivery issues and the Department avails itself of these resources on a regular basis to improve overall functioning of the academic programs. In summary, the Department utilizes a variety of approaches to assess program achievements that are both internal and external to the Department. As the program matures, additional measures will be taken to better understand areas of improvement. Because we have observed consistent and strong growth in student enrollment since beginning the online program in Fall of 2010, the Department cannot readily use this metric as a measure of success at this time (other than to suggest enrollment growth is some indicator of demand and, potentially, quality of program offerings). 3.2.3 Structure of Curricular Offerings and Balance Between Breadth and Depth The curriculum for the graduate programs offered by the Department of Public Policy can be divided into two main categories: graduate certificates and the Master of Public Policy (MPP).23 The graduate certificates are structured around a sequencing of four (4) courses, two (2) of the courses are required and two (2) of the courses are chosen amongst a set of elective course offerings. Of the two required courses, POL500 (Public Institutions and the Policy Process) a required course for both certificate programs. POL500 introduces students to public policy as a concept, and ensures a foundational understanding of both the concept of public policy and the manner in which policy is developed, implemented, and evaluated. The other required course is a foundational introduction to the subject area under consideration. For environmental policy, the required course is POL562 (Environmental Policy). For education policy, the required course is POL570 (Social, Historical and Philosophical Foundations of American Education). Beyond these required courses, students have access to a set of elective courses within each certificate that provides addition grounding in the field of study. Currently there are three (3) electives to choose from the education policy certificate and four (4) electives to choose from the environmental policy certificate. With additional resources, the goal is to increase the number of elective courses in each certificate to provide 23 In addition, the Department of Public Policy is currently working with senior administration on the finalization of an online Master of Sustainable Development (MSD) program. If the program receives final approval, then the Department would be responsible for administering the program and staffing the environmental policy track within the program (likely beginning Fall of 2014). A link to the current version of the MSD proposal is available for review here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/x2zaaup07lkziz0/MSD_Program_Proposal_2013.pdf

OF 66

- Draft Document -

students with several ‘paths’ of concentration in the set of electives offered. For example, of the four electives offered in the environmental policy certificate, a student can choose a focus on environmental and administrative law, providing the student a foundation in the legal/administrative aspects of environmental policy. Another path might include ocean policy and law along with administrative law to provide the student a foundation in marine law and policy issues. In sum, there is a logical progression to the courses offered for the certificate programs that provides students with a firm grounding in policy and a foundation of the field being chosen (education or environment). The details of the environmental policy graduate certificate program can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/graduatecertificateinenvironmentalpolicy/ The details of the education policy graduate certificate program can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/graduatecertificateineducationpolicy/ The Master of Public Policy (MPP) was developed to provide students with a logical progression throughout the program. Evidence of this intention can be found in the structure of the program itself. The MPP is broken into five main components that include 8 core course requirements under a common curriculum component, 3 courses that define the policy area concentration (management, education, environment), one free elective course, an internship requirement, and a professional portfolio with presentation to complete the program. A summary table of these requirements is provided here:

Credits Courses Common Curriculum Component 24 8 Policy Area Concentration 9 3 Elective 3 1 Internship 3 1 Total: 39 13

In addition to the categories of the MPP program offering a logical progression through the program, the Department has also defined and articulated a recommended course schedule for students as they matriculate into the program. The Department has consciously devised a teaching schedule that matches this recommended sequencing of courses to ensure students successfully complete the program within the time frames identified for the program (2 years full-time), while also ensuring the courses are taken in a manner that logically presents the materials to the students in a progressive fashion. The evolution of the course sequencing, conceptually, is meant to follow the following pattern:

• Initial courses are focused on foundational principles of public policy to ensure the

OF 66

- Draft Document -

students understand policy as both a concept and process.

• Foundational courses are then supplemented with analytical courses that provide students with an understanding of the tools (research methods, policy analysis, statistics) necessary to fully engage public policy questions.

• With foundational and analytical courses in-hand, students then apply the conceptual tools learned to specific areas of public policy including management and finance. In addition, students explore their concentration courses with the foundations of public policy and analytical tools available to fully delve into and explore content-specific courses.

• With the foundations, concepts, and applications of public policy mastered, students then apply their knowledge in a real-world setting through the internship requirement and fully engage a policy question through the applied policy research seminar.

• The final signal of student learning occurs at the end of the program when students prepare, present, and ‘defend’ their student portfolios where their entire experience in the program is summarized and related to their understanding and future applications of public policy. Faculty members in the department question students on the depth of their understanding. Students are asked to offer honest critiques of individual courses, course sequencing, and the entire program. The process allows faculty to identify areas for improvement while ensuring students have obtained an overall mastery of the experience as intended in the mission goals of the program.

A visual representation of the course sequencing as described above is represented here:

OF 65

- Draft Document -

A summary of the recommended course schedule that matches this intention is provided here: Year 1- Fall POL 500 - Public Institutions and Policy Process POL 540 - Microeconomics for Public Policy (prerequisite for POL 541) POL 581 - Research Methods for Public Policy (prerequisite for POL 530, 580, and 585) Year 1- Spring POL 510 - Public Management POL 530 – Policy Analysis POL 541 – State and Local Finance Year 2 – Fall POL 580 – Statistics Concentration Area Class or Internship Concentration Area Class or Internship

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Year 2- Spring POL 585 - Applied Policy Research Seminar Concentration Area Class or Internship Concentration Area Class or Internship The evidence presented above shows there is a meaningful approach to the structure of the curriculum that provides a sequential and coherent flow of the courses. For further indication of the appropriateness of each course offered in the program itself (matching the details of each course to the progression of course offerings listed above) please see the following list of courses with detailed descriptions here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/courseofferings/ In addition, both the breadth and depth of the MPP program is evidenced by the design of the curriculum to be in compliance with nationally recognized standards for MPP programs in general, and also the design of the program delivery described above that ensures students begin with foundational courses that focus on concepts, followed by courses that apply and evaluate the foundational concepts in practice, and then conclude with both practical experience and self-reflection of the courses in the program including the impact the curriculum has had on the student’s development in the course of study. In sum, the preparation, development, and delivery of the MPP program has been established in a manner that follows a structured process balancing both breadth and depth of course offerings.

3.2.4 Curriculum Preparation of Students for Further Study or Employment The MPP and graduate certificates fit more closely into the ‘professional’ graduate degree category than they do into a more research-orientated model. That said, students who have a strong interest in policy analysis and related fields of inquiry certainly have a base of preparation for such studies. As mentioned earlier in this report, the MPP program has been developed in-line with national models of graduate public policy programs offered throughout the nation. Students in the program are provided with the fundamentals of policy research and analysis so they have the foundation from which to engage in a more analytical and theoretical policy experience. Students concentrating in both the education and environmental fields within the program have gone on to doctorate level programs in related fields. In addition, some students seek the joint JD/MPP degree programs, and as such, supplement their policy education with an applied doctorate in law. Although this is does not represent the majority of current students in the MPP program, some have shown the capacity and desire to seek further education, and based on the evidence currently available to the department, those students have been successful in their additional studies. The majority of current MPP and certificate students are working professionals in one capacity or another. Many are taking the program to enhance their academic background and skill set for job advancement. The extent to which students are seeking

OF 65

- Draft Document -

the degree to move into a different field of work, and the success rates of students moving into alternate employment fields post degree, are not precisely known. The Department is working on a more precise means of measuring student effort and success after graduation. Indirect methods include the establishment of a Public Policy Alumni Association and the use of social networking sites (Facebook, LinkedIn) as ways of better understanding student movements post-graduation. While the actual impacts of graduates in the program are not fully understood, the preparation of those students for work in the public policy field based on current curriculum offerings and interactions are believed to currently meet or exceed department expectations. The curriculum is broadly based in the foundation of public policy development, implementation, and evaluation. Specialty areas are based on current faculty expertise and all faculty members in the department are both scholar/practitioners in their respective fields. This allows students the opportunity to work along faculty and engage in current issues that have real-life implications. For example, students have evaluated the banking system in Southeastern Massachusetts in terms of its capacity to meet the needs of low-income residents; this evaluation was done as the major project in learning program evaluation in the MPP program. Other students have commented on draft white papers to Congress from national interest groups on issues they are working on in ocean policy courses. Still others are reworking data sets and analysis that formulate the basis of peer-reviewed research of current professors in the Department as a way of learning statistics while ‘peer reviewing’ the work of the professors in education policy. These are just some of the examples of how the courses are brought to life through ongoing projects and current research so that students are well versed in policy dynamics and prepared to move into the working world with actual skill sets (and resumes) as they seek employment opportunities.

3.2.5 Curriculum Contribution to Student’s General Knowledge, Critical Thinking

Capacity and Other Cognitive Skills

The curriculum is graduate-level work centered in public policy. From the curriculum evolution standpoint, this means establishing foundational understandings of the policy process and then extending those foundational understandings to associated theories of policymaking, legitimization, implementation, evaluation and change. The common curriculum component of the program includes exposure to theory and practice of policy and, importantly, a three-course sequence of analytical tools applied to deeper levels of understanding policy dynamics (statistics, research methods, policy analysis). In this multi-phased approached to understanding policy, students are exposed to the hallmark what, why, and consequence questions related to policymaking. The ‘what’ question references an understanding of the core concepts of public policy. The ‘why’ question references the beginning of evaluating current policies against some kind of criteria (other policy approaches, normative ideals, etc.). The ‘consequences’ question begins to fully explore a deeper understanding of relationships between policy concepts, applications, and other factors. Students in the MPP program are fully engaged in working through each of these questions in their curriculum evolution. More importantly, these questions force the students to explore topic areas and concepts deeply, developing

OF 65

- Draft Document -

critical thinking and other cognitive skills in the process. Because of this process-orientated approach to developing public policy skills, the Department believes the program spans questions of general public policy knowledge while extending that knowledge to critical thinking and other cognitive skills including the capacity to discern between policy directions through evaluative and analytical techniques employed in policy analysis. The graduate certificate programs are structured to focus more precisely on content area and less on the deeper analytical and cognitive capacities. Students in both graduate certificate programs (current education policy and environmental policy) begin their academic course sequencing with POL500, the foundation course that introduces students to public policy as a concept and process. With this foundation students then take three (3) courses (one required, two electives) in the content area of the certificate program. These courses explore different aspects of the content area from a policy perspective. For example, the environmental policy certificate focuses on understanding the role of regulation and other dominant government interactions with environmental principles. Law courses help to define the legal frameworks from which the policy ‘environment’ is understood in this area, and tools such as cost-benefit analysis are used to help understand the role of tradeoffs and decision-making in choosing between different policy directions.24 Analytical tools are part of this process, but they are not the foundation upon which the students are judged within the course itself. Thus, the certificates represent a contribution to the education of students in terms of increasing their knowledge base within the concentration area of the certificate, but they do not necessarily aim to provide students with the kinds of analytical and cognitive skill sets that are provided in the MPP program. That being said, there is ample opportunity in the certificate programs for students to apply existing analytical tools developed in their undergraduate and professional careers. 3.3 Programs Shall Ensure Faculty Quality and Productivity Programs shall ensure that faculty possess the expertise to assure effective curriculum development, instructional design and delivery, and evaluation of outcomes. Faculty should exhibit awareness of trends in the discipline and the professional field as appropriate. Collectively, faculty should be involved in teaching, research/ professional/creative activity, and public service/academic outreach as appropriate to the mission and regional context of the campus. The review should answer the following questions:

• How appropriate are the faculty’s background, experience, and credentials?

24 Professor Chad J. McGuire utilizes his own authored textbook, Environmental Decision-making in Context: A Toolbox (Taylor & Francis, 2012), in the POL562 (Environmental Policy) course in order to help students understand how environmental decisions are made in the policy context. Students then supplement this required course with two elective courses that build off of the principles established in the required course sequence.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• Discuss faculty currency in relation to the knowledge base and content of the discipline and curricular offerings?

• Are the program’s expectations for faculty involvement in teaching, research/ professional/creative activity, and public service/academic outreach activities appropriate; and how are these expectations met? Are these expectations consistent with program policies regarding teaching assignments, merit allocations, and other aspects of faculty roles and rewards?

• How successfully does the program foster professional development and growth of faculty?

• How successfully does the program faculty lend its professional expertise – as expressed through teaching and research, scholarly and creative activity – to off-campus constituencies?

3.3.1 Appropriateness of the Faculty’s Background, Experience, and Credentials Information on current faculty members in the Department can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/whoweare/faculty/ As stated earlier in this report, faculty members within the Department of Public Policy are scholar-practitioners meaning they are sought out for both their capacity to teach and develop relevant policy-related scholarship as well as their capacity to apply that scholarship in an active ‘practice’ setting. Thus, faculty members are recruited on the basis of their ability to meld scholarship and active practice/engagement in the policy field. In addition, the Department of Public Policy is an interdisciplinary department. As stated in the Department’s Standards for Annual Evaluation, Contract Renewal, Tenure and Promotion:25

The Department of Public Policy is structured around a multi-disciplinary faculty with documented interdisciplinary skills, knowledge, and interests in public policy. The program emphasizes the development of policy analysis and research skills with a particular focus on policy issues that concern state, regional, and municipal officials in Massachusetts and New England. The Department of Public Policy was established to implement distinctive components of the UMass Dartmouth Vision Statement and the UMass System’s strategic priorities. The University of Massachusetts has identified five strategic priorities that make it a distinctive public university serving citizens, government, and business throughout the state and within its identifiable regions.

25 The Department Standards for Evaluation, Tenure, and Promotion can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/departmentofpublicpolicy/standards.pdf

OF 65

- Draft Document -

The central objectives of the Department of Public Policy are defined in Strategic Priority No. 3:

“The University shall offer and promote distinctive forms of public service. The University of Massachusetts shall provide the state with policy research, programs, and leadership to address public needs...The University shall continue to promote the economic development of the state and its regions (UMD Catalogue, 2003-2004, 8, Strategic Priority No. 3).

The official UMass Dartmouth Vision Statement also emphasizes the importance of public service, such as improving the effectiveness of “municipalities through research and policy analysis, student internships, forums, training assistance, and community- based programs” (UMD Catalogue, 2003-2004, 9). The College of Arts and Sciences Strategic Plan: 2002, particularly Goal IV.A.6., also identifies “public policy studies” as a priority area that will enhance faculty-community collaboration. The Center for Policy Analysis Mission Statement and By-Laws (1992), which were approved by the Provost and Chancellor in 1992, also authorized the CFPA to conduct “university and community- based educational programming.” The Policy Studies Faculty is committed individually and collectively to realizing and promoting these objectives through its teaching, research, university service, and public service. The curriculum and its delivery is intended to provide students with the ability to reason and analyze from both a normative and problem-solving perspective, to develop technical methodological skills, and to develop substantive policy expertise in different policy areas. The Policy Studies Faculty is committed to both theoretical and applied scholarship, as well as active involvement in the academic profession, and the performance of public service that benefits diverse communities in the region, state, nation, and the world. The Policy Studies Faculty is committed to assisting each other in promoting these endeavors and to providing the mutual support necessary for each member of the Program to succeed in fulfilling its mission and to meet its standards of professional achievement.

The above referenced section of the Department Standards outlines the expectation of faculty members as scholar-practitioners who are focused on community service and engagement as ways of both improving policy outcomes within the community and offering students ‘real-life’ learning contexts as identified throughout this report. The current makeup of the faculty within the Department is reflective of the standards for teaching, scholarship, and service excellence as outlined in the expectations for Department members above. The faculty members represent policy scholars-practitioners whose expertise adds to the development and delivery of core programs within the Department, while also defining the specialty areas offered (concentrations within the MPP and graduate certificate programs). In addition, the faculty members have developed teaching capacities in online course development and delivery in

OF 65

- Draft Document -

order to allow the programs offered by the department to be delivered in multiple formats. As discussed earlier, this special skill set makes the members of the Department unique because they not only have to possess relevant backgrounds in public policy generally and specialty areas specifically while also maintaining a interdisciplinary background of scholarship and service, but they also need to develop and maintain the specialized acumen required to successfully create, deliver, and refine courses in the online setting. This additional consideration is an essential component to faculty background, experience, and credentials as significant growth in student enrollment has occurred in the online programs since their inception in 2009-2010. The relevant background, experience, and credentials of each core faculty member within the Department is displayed in their individual curriculum vitae documents, which are available here: WEB CITATION WHERE ALL VITAS ARE MADE AVAIALBLE FOR CORE FACULTY MEMBERS 3.3.2 Faculty Currency in Relation to Knowledge Base, Content of Discipline, and

Curricular Offerings The Department of Public Policy is a small department, currently home to a core faculty of four (4)26 tenured or tenure-track full-time members as follows:

• Chancellor Professor Clyde Barrow o POL510 (Public Management) o POL585 (Applied Policy Research Seminar)

• Associate Professor and Department Chair, Michael Goodman o POL530 (Policy Analysis) o POL582 (Research Methods for Public Policy)

• Assistant Professor Chad J. McGuire o POL102 (Introduction to Policy Studies) o POL500 (Public Institutions and the Policy Process) o POL562 (Environmental Law) o POL599 (Internship) o POL611 (Administrative Law) o POL661 (Environmental Law) o POL663 (Ocean Policy & Law)

• Assistant Professor Shawna Sweeney o POL102 (Introduction to Policy Studies) o POL500 (Public Institutions and the Policy Process) o POL560 (Environmental Consequences of Globalization)

26 Note that at the time of preparing this report, Dr. Weiwei Lin had resigned her tenure-track position within the Department. Normally there would be five (5) core faculty members within the Department of Public Policy and the preparation is being done now to hire a tenure-track member within the Department to replace her position.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

In addition to this core group, the Department currently retains the services of affiliated full-time faculty as follows:

• Assistant Professor Devon Lynch, Department of Economics o POL540 (Microeconomics for Public Policy) o POL541 (State and Local Public Finance)

• Professor and Department Chair Joao Paraskeva, Department of Educational Leadership

o POL570 (Social, Historical, Philosophical Foundations of American Education)

• Assistant Professor Mark Paige, Department of Educational Leadership o POL542 (Law and Education) o POL561 (Public Finance in Education)

• Assistant Professor Ricardo Rosa, Department of Educational Leadership o POL511 (Organizational Behavior in Educational Settings)

Finally, the Department also retains the services of affiliated part-time faculty to aid in the service of certain courses or additional course sections offered by the Department. Because of the unique nature of the online programs offered by the Department, certain core associated part-time faculty members have been closely mentored into the program, delivering online content that has been created by core faculty members within the Department. The goal is to have a few highly qualified and committed part-time faculty members to help manage demand in certain courses through the offering of additional course sections as the programs continue to grow. Currently a few individuals have been identified as core associated part-time faculty members to aid in offering online content. These individuals currently include:

• Sibol Atasoy (PhD, Economics) o POL540 (Microeconomics) o POL541 (State and Local Public Finance)

• Sidney Castle (PhD, Educational Administration) o POL580 (Statistics)

• Fredrick Kalisz (PhD, Policy and Law), Former Mayor of New Bedford, MA o POL510 (Public Management)

• William Mangianello (JD, Law), Adjunct Faculty Member, UMass Dartmouth School of Law

o POL 661 (Environmental Law) All categories of faculty currently interacting within the Department as outlined above – core faculty, affiliated full-time faculty, and affiliated part-time faculty – aid in the development and implementation of program expertise, content of the discipline, and curricular offerings. Core faculty develop and implement the large-scale decision-making for the Department, including the programs to offer and the areas of expertise and concentration to focus on. Often this decision is made, in part, with an assessment of existing resources, as was done with the development of the online graduate certificate program in education policy in 2011. A new department,

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Educational Leadership, was being formed to host an EdD/PhD in the educational leadership discipline within the parent School at the time, SEPPCE. Hires were being made to staff this new department before the department itself was actually created and thus the ‘lines’ for these hires were initially established in Public Policy. During the transition semester (Fall 2011) it was agreed that a relationship be established between Departments to service certain courses within each department. As part of this agreement, the faculty members in Educational Leadership agreed to develop and staff courses to allow for both an educational policy graduate certificate and a concentration in education policy within the MPP program. The result of this agreement distributes ‘faculty currency’ amongst member expertise in two different departments; the Educational Leadership faculty members provide content expertise while the Department of Public Policy faculty members provide administrative support and supervision of the program and concentration areas offered.27 The goal of the faculty in Public Policy is to control, to the extent possible, the curricular offerings within each program. Currently oversight is done through the normal administrative processes within the university governance structure (department curriculum committee for example). For the core courses of the MPP and the environmental policy concentration/certificate, the Department of Public Policy maintains control over all phases of curricular development, implementation, and review. Faculty members within the Department have the necessary expertise in the subject areas of public policy and environmental policy to ensure a strong dominion over these content areas. For education policy, the Department work with affiliated faculty to ensure the education courses are developed and delivered with the baseline expectations inherent in the mission of the University, College, and the Department of Public Policy with respect to content areas and online course delivery, but there are limitations on this kinds of shared responsibility for course content between departments particularly when courses are offered in an online format.28 3.3.3 Program Expectations for Faculty Involvement in Teaching,

Research/Professional/Creative Activity, Public Service/Academic Outreach Activities; Meeting Expectations; Expectations Consistency with Program Policies Regarding Teaching Assignments, Merit Allocations, and Other Aspects of Faculty Roles and Rewards

27 In addition, faculty members in Public Policy also support a number of courses in the Educational Leadership Department. This reciprocal agreement between the two departments has both benefits and limitations that are further described in a recent report (October 2012) written by the Department of Public Policy entitled Challenges and Opportunities in Online Public Policy Programs: A Strategic Overview. This report was written at the request of the University to help it understand the needs of its online programs. The report, including a detailed explanation of the limitations of the reciprocal agreement between the Department of Educational Leadership and the Department of Public Policy, can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/centerforpolicyanalysis/publicpolicy/Pub_Policy_Online_Strategic_Plan.pdf 28 The limitations identified here are discussed in greater depth in the Challenges and Opportunities in Online Public Policy Programs: A Strategic Overview report cited in the preceding footnote.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

3.3.3.1 Program Expectations for Faculty Involvement in Teaching, Research/Professional/Creative

Activity, Public Service/Academic Outreach Activities Expectations for faculty involvement in teaching, scholarship, and service (both university and public) follow clearly established guidelines outlined in the currently in-force collective bargaining agreement between UMD and faculty members. The Department of Public Policy standards for annual evaluation, tenure, and promotion are developed to be in compliance with the collective bargaining standards and represent the Department’s stance on expectations for its faculty respecting teaching, scholarship, and service activities. The particulars of the departmental standards can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/departmentofpublicpolicy/standards.pdf Generally speaking, departmental standards reinforce the multidisciplinary nature of the program as discussed earlier in this report with an emphasis on activities that bridge the gap between scholar and practitioner. Faculty members within the Department undergo annual evaluations in compliance with collective bargaining language assessing the faculty member’s evolution in their teaching, scholarship, and service through criteria established in the departmental standards. The standards themselves represent the expectations for faculty members at different phases of their evolution. For example, the scholarship benchmarks for a faculty member being rated ‘excellent’ include the development of scholarly manuscripts that lead to, on average, the publication of one article per academic year.29 The benchmarks for service include evaluation of the faculty member’s service to the University (department, college, university) and to the public. Public service in the Department is an important part of both its mission and the role it plays in the development and implementation of core curriculum as discussed in greater detail earlier in this report. The ‘appropriateness’ of the Department of Public Policy expectations has to be viewed in light of the framework that derives from collective bargaining arrangements between UMD and faculty; faculty must be assessed on teaching, scholarship, and service in the manner prescribed by the collective bargaining agreement. Within that framework, the Department has established relevant quantitative and qualitative measures of faculty performance in light of the particular characteristics that define the purpose of the Department, its missions, goals, and also current faculty makeup. Since

29 The actual ratings system developed under the collective bargaining agreement currently in-force at UMD establishes different evaluative statements depending on how well the performance of the faculty member matches the criteria for review. There are four evaluative statements as follows: excellent, very good, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory. A rating of excellent (the highest rating) is given under specifically established departmental criteria for a faculty member who is averaging scholarship that shows evidence of publishing, on average, one article per year. A faculty member may average less than one article per year and still be considered ‘very good’ or ‘satisfactory’ based on the actual output of that faculty member. Specifics on the different quantity and quality of outputs used to come to these evaluative statements can be found in the departmental standards, several links to which is provided elsewhere in this document.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

faculty are judged in direct relation to the conditions for which they are originally hired, there is a strong connection between the department specific standards and the kinds of activities that drive the programs offered within the Department. For these reasons, there is indeed a strong connection between the departmental expectations for faculty and the programs offered by the Department; as such, the evidence presented suggests a clear connection between program purpose and faculty expectations. Importantly, faculty members within the Department are well aware of the expectations and have a direct say in the evolution of those expectations as the department continues to evolve in both its staffing, programs offered, and faculty expectations.30 One area that needs to be resolved for faculty members within the Department is the current teaching load established for faculty between the Department and the College. Currently faculty members are on a 3/3 course load, indicating a requirement of teaching 3 graduate course sections in the Fall and 3 graduate course sections in the Spring of each academic year. This load is deemed excessive for faculty in a graduate program generally,31 and it is particularly burdensome for faculty in this program who teach both face-to-face (f2f) and online sections of courses. Online course delivery requires a substantial amount of involvement from a faculty member that easily exceeds the normal preparation and face-time offered in similar f2f courses. In addition, online courses require constant refinement and updating, extending the normal preparation time for course delivery from semester-to-semester and year-to-year; updated materials must be integrated into the online courses, and this process involves a greater degree of effort than f2f courses.32 For these reasons faculty members are being asked to do an excessive amount of work that will ultimately cause the program quality to suffer. More to the point, the unequal treatment will likely make it difficult to both retain and recruit qualified faculty members. Thus, the expectations for the faculty in teaching need to be reduced to a 2/2 course load in order for those expectations to be considered fair and sustainable. 3.3.3.2 Meeting Program Expectations 30 For example, department faculty members have the ability to revise existing departmental standards to more clearly reflect the evolution of the department and its programs. Currently faculty are discussing the need to adapt departmental standards for those faculty members who are essentially fully committed to teaching in the online environment. Because online instruction requires a great deal of teaching commitment, faculty are discussing diminishing the standards of scholarship in order to accommodate the reality of commitment in order to ensure the quality of course delivery and student outcomes in the online courses and programs offered. 31 Peer departments at UMD and peer institutions both within and outside the UMass System have a standard 2/2 course load in graduate programs. 32 For example, a change to content in an online setting may require a revision of written lecture materials to include the addition of hyperlinks and other information that provide depth on online learning. In addition, relevant video and audio captures of lectures and explanatory insights must be revised to include the updated materials and this usually means redoing the entire sequencing, which is time consuming. Contrast this with a face-to-face course offering where changes are integrated into the planned ‘live’ lectures of the professor, which require limited alterations in comparison to the online course.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Currently the expectations of faculty involvement in teaching, scholarship, and service are being met by a small and dynamic core faculty within the Department of Public Policy, along with strategic alliances with colleagues in the Department of Education Leadership and a core group of adjunct faculty members specifically recruited and vetted by Public Policy faculty members. This combination of commitment and collegiality within the Department and associated faculty is a paramount force in ensuring current enrollment growth in the program is being met while faculty still commit themselves to the scholarship and service functions that ensure the continued vibrancy of the program. To place the question of ‘meeting program expectations’ into context, the current workload of the faculty members in relation to course offerings can provide a visual focus from which further insights can be made to help answer the question, or at least identify factors that influence a positive or negative response to the question. By understanding how courses are being distributed to current faculty members within the Department of Public Policy, one can begin to identify the overall ‘capacity’ of the Department to deliver current programs. Once this ‘capacity’ is established, then a clearer understanding of the overall impact of program expectations on faculty can be placed into context. For example, if a faculty member has a course release in order to provide an important adjunct activity to departmental missions and goals, such as the running of the Center for Policy Analysis, then the faculty member is certainly meeting ‘program expectations’ but their overall capacity to provide teaching support is diminished by the course release given to allow the other goals of the Department to be realized. To help place these issues into perspective, a summary of course scheduling and faculty load is provided below for the 2012-2013 academic year:

The core members of the faculty are identified above, and their course load is presented in the following column. Following this is a ‘course release’ identifying the basis upon which a faculty member is relieved of teaching a particular section. Thus in order to understand the ‘capacity’ of faculty within the Department of Public Policy, one needs to do more than count heads and multiply by a given number of course sections; actual course load identified in conjunction with course releases needs to be assessed so the ‘net’ capacity of faculty can be identified. In the case of core faculty, Professor Goodman

OF 65

- Draft Document -

receives 1 course release each semester as Chair of the Department in compliance with the currently in-force collective bargaining agreement. Professor Barrow receives 2 course releases each semester to support his role as Director of the Center for Policy Analysis. Professors Sweeney and McGuire both teach 3 sections per semester, with Professor McGuire overseeing 2 separate sections of POL599 (Internship) each semester. Professor Lin resigned her position with UMD effective September 1, 2012 and there is currently no replacement for her position.33 This distribution of teaching load effectively gives the Department a wholly internal capacity to teach 12 sections per semester if Professor Lin’s position is filled, and 9 sections per semester if her position remains unfilled. According to the chart above, there are 16 sections of graduate courses that need to be filled for the Fall 2012 semester, and 18 sections of graduate courses that need to be filled for the Spring 2013 semester.34 Simply put, the requirements of the program offerings currently exceed the capacity of the Department of Public Policy to meet the teaching needs of the program. This is why affiliated faculty members and part-time faculty are utilized. Professor Devon Lynch is committed by the terms of appointment in the Department of Economics to teach 1 section each semester for the Department of Public Policy. Thus, Professor Lynch’s availability provides the Department with an additional guaranteed capacity of 1 course section per semester. The other sections are filled by faculty members in the Department of Educational Leadership (essentially teaching the courses in the graduate certificate and MPP concentration in education) and part-time faculty hired by the Department to teach additional sections of core MPP, MPP concentration, and graduate certificate courses. Moving back to the question of faculty expectations, the current faculty members within the Department of Public Policy are fully and solely committed to the programs serviced by the Department (MPP, graduate certificates, joint programs, etc.). There is currently no additional room for faculty within the Department to service additional course sections within the program. If the Department were to be singularly responsible for administering all course sections to service every program offered, then it would need the following resources35:

33 The ‘line’ for Professor Lin’s replacement (tenure track faculty member) has been approved and the search is being conducted as of Fall 2013. 34 The winter and summer intersession courses currently being offered by Professor McGuire service the graduate education and environmental policy certificate program, the education, public management and environmental policy concentration in the MPP. These sections are paid as additional compensation through Professional and Continuing Education (PCE) to Professor McGuire as they are taught ‘over load.’ 35 Note that this assessment is based on a current ‘load’ allocation of 3/3 (3 sections per semester) per faculty member. As noted earlier in this report, the Department needs to move its teaching obligations to a 2/2 allocation per faculty member to properly represent the teaching load of a graduate faculty with the additional responsibilities of applied scholarship and community engagement placed on faculty members within the Department based on its mission and unique methods of integrating real-life work into the classroom setting.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• The replacement line for Dr. Lin’s position = 12 sections/semester capacity. • Continued support of Dr. Lynch = 13 sections/semester capacity. • Additional full-time hire36 = 16 to 17 sections/semester capacity. • Second additional full-time hire = 19 to 20 sections/semester capacity.

One reason for the lack of teaching capacity is the loss of 3 sections/semester through the course load reductions currently offered within the Department. The release provided Dr. Goodman for serving as Department Chair is required by contractual obligations, providing the time for Dr. Goodman to engage in the myriad of administrative responsibilities borne to the Department. The 2 sections/semester release given to Dr. Barrow dilutes his capacity as a teaching resource for the Department, but the releases reflect the important work done by Dr. Barrow in directing the Center for Policy Analysis, which serves as a critical hub of applied policy research for the Department, its students, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Professors Chad McGuire and Shawna Sweeney have both served as senior research associates with the Center, and have used it as a launching pad for creating research initiatives that have led directly to student-faculty collaborations yielding conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. The point here is that the entire capacity of the faculty within the Department must be viewed in relation to the overall objectives of the Department that extend beyond the confines of servicing the teaching requirements of the program. When viewed from a holistic standpoint of the entirety of program requirements (where teaching is one component), the faculty members currently within the Department of Public Policy are not only meeting program expectations, but by any reasonable measure they are exceeding those expectations. 3.3.3.3 Consistency of Program Expectations The descriptive and evaluative statements made in the immediately preceding section speak directly to the question of how expectations are defined for faculty within the framework established by the collective bargaining agreement. Faculty members are reviewed annually on three main criteria: teaching, scholarship, and service. The evaluations are based on criteria developed at the department-level (identified in departmental standards) that result in contractually mandated evaluative statements of excellent, very good, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory. Depending on the combination of evaluative statements, an overall evaluation is given for the faculty member. For annual reviews it is highly recommended, recommended, or not recommended; for promotions it is recommended or not recommended. Within the university’s evaluative framework, the Department of Public Policy creates the criteria by which faculty are judged in their teaching, scholarship, and service. For example, what specific actions and outcomes constitute an ‘excellent’ rating in teaching, scholarship, and service versus the kinds of actions and outcomes that would

36 If the full-time hire is a full-time lecturer, then the teaching load is 4/4 leading to a greater teaching capacity for the Department. Note: In Spring of 2013, the Department was given the ability to hire a full-time lecturer to help service its course requirements in the program.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

constitute a lower rating of very good, satisfactory, of unsatisfactory in any or all of these categories. The expectations for faculty members are, generally speaking, the following:

• Fully engage with their assigned teaching duties each semester and subject themselves to both peer evaluation and student evaluation of their teaching. For online courses, faculty follow identified best practices in the development and delivery of their course materials. Courses are updated on a regular schedule as required to ensure the materials are relevant to the subjects being delivered and meet the overall goals and expectations of the program(s) in which the courses are being offered.

• Develop a coherent plan of individual scholarship that meets the requirements and expectations of the Departmental, School, and University missions and goals. The track of scholarly pursuits (including focus areas, quantity and quality) should follow the guidelines established in the adopted departmental standards for review, tenure, and promotion.

• Identify service opportunities that align with the missions and objectives of the Department, School, and University. Included in the faculty member’s service are considerations of the applied role of public policy faculty both within and outside the University.

Faculty members who meet these general and more specific criteria are provided with rewards consistent with those outlined under the currently in-force collective bargaining agreement. For example, faculty who meet the departmental standards in the categories of evaluation identified above are normally given excellent and highly recommended ratings on annual reviews. These ratings allow the faculty member to receive contractually defined merit pay increases in salary based on their performance. In addition, faculty members meeting departmental standards are generally recommended for promotions allowing them to achieve important career milestones such as tenure and further promotion to associate, full, and potentially chancellor professor. Beyond rewards outlined through collective bargaining, the Department of Public Policy endeavors to reward faculty members intra-department due to its small size and lack of resources that, at times, calls upon individual faculty members to take on additional duties in a given semester and academic year. The kinds of rewards undertaken by the Department vary, but the following are examples that have been used in recent years to recognize faculty members for their commitments to the program:

• Providing departmental funding for travel to conferences and to support research initiatives.

• Moderating teaching loads in a given semester or academic year to accommodate tenure-track faculty members in their pursuits of scholarship to meet departmental expectations.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• Identification of resources to aid faculty members in the development, implementation, and review of their online courses.

• Providing supplemental ‘start-up’ funds to new faculty (when available) to aid them in their teaching, scholarship, and service pursuits.

• Working with faculty members to identify areas of expertise and personal interest in planning/reviewing current concentration areas and the potential for new concentration areas based on individual faculty member interest.

• Finding ways to reward faculty members who go above-and-beyond their current rank and assignments to ensure the successful implementation of department programming, course offerings, etc.

These are but a few of the examples of how the department rewards and supports faculty members for meeting departmental objectives in teaching, scholarship, and service. In summary, the Department adheres to all official standards of rewarding faculty members for meeting and exceeding program expectations in-line with contractual obligations. In addition, the Department has developed rewards that are more unofficial in nature, but provide important support to faculty members within the Department to reward their actions, while supporting their initiatives in a way that helps to ensure program expectations are being met. 3.3.4 Department Success at Fostering Professional Development and Growth of Faculty The Department of Public Policy fosters professional development and growth of faculty members through a variety of mechanisms; some of these mechanisms are built into the structure of the Department and its relationship with the Center for Policy Analysis, while other mechanisms are defined through a mix of mandatory and voluntary initiatives implemented at the departmental level. The historical structure of the Department includes a close relationship with the Center for Policy Analysis. The Center was originally contemplated to act as the applied research arm of the Department, where faculty members within the Department (and more broadly within the University) could collaborate and focus on their professional development through the pursuit of scholarship and research. In many ways the Center was intended to act as an incubator for faculty members, allowing them to identify ongoing research areas, initiate new research directions through a central location, and collaborate with colleagues of the Department, School, University, and larger community. This goal remains today as the Center is the foci for a number of projects that coalesce faculty members and initiatives into directed research areas. For example, within the last two years the Center has added a number of additional divisions of research focus, including a division of environmental policy37 and a

37 Details on the Division of Environmental Policy can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/centers/cfpa/divisionofenvironmentalpolicy/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

division focusing on education policy38 to reflect the added concentration areas for the Department’s academic programs. Also, the Center houses the Urban Initiative, which is currently headed by an MPP graduate (Colleen Dawicki, MPP 2012) and serves as an incubator for research projects and ideas for MPP graduate students.39 These divisions help to provide a forum for student-faculty, faculty-faculty, student-student, and university-community research opportunities. In addition, the various divisions within the Center allow for cross-fertilization of research interests between individual divisions and curriculum offered in the academic programs of the Department of Public Policy. Publications through ongoing research are often added to curriculum for courses, providing policy students with the latest areas of research in a given field. In this holistic sense, the Center for Policy Analysis offers an important structural component that fosters the professional development and growth of faculty within the Department of Public Policy. Mandatory initiatives to foster professional development and growth of faculty are primarily found in the language and implementation of the collective bargaining agreement. There are provisions in this agreement that provide faculty with both support and development through a mix of mandates and prohibitions. For example, newly hired faculty members are provided with startup funds in order to help catalyze scholastic and professional goals. In addition, first-year faculty members are given a 1/1 course release in that first academic year to attend a New Faculty Institute40 that integrates faculty members into the culture of the University, providing important training on the expectations placed on them and helping to identify resources and support mechanisms geared towards meeting those expectations. In addition to these affirmative actions to aid faculty, the collective bargaining agreement also places important limitations on the use of faculty members, thus aiding in ensuring those members can properly manage and utilize their time in an effective manner. For example, limits are placed on the number of courses a faculty member can be assigned in a particular semester and there are mandates that require the duties and obligations between faculty members in a department be distributed as evenly and equitably as possible. These kinds of constraints help to ensure no single faculty member is being over-utilized and thus allows for each faculty member to have equivalent opportunities for development and growth. Voluntary initiatives include opportunities the Department, College, and University offer to help support faculty members above and beyond the mandatory elements described above. For example, the University maintains a number of

38 Details on the Division of Social Policy, Education, and Curriculum can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/centers/cfpa/divisionofsocialpolicyeducationcurriculum/ 39 Details on the Urban Initiative can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/urbaninitiative/ 40 More information on the New Faculty Institute can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/nfi/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

opportunities to support faculty members professionally throughout the academic year. There are regular seminars offered by the Office of Faculty Development41 that provide an important resource for faculty development personally and professionally. The Provost Office also offers a travel grant system that provides an important funding supplement to support faculty travel, attendance, and presentations at conferences and similar scholarly venues. These initiatives are supported by the Department of Public Policy and supplemented by the Department through the ‘bullet-list’ of items contained in the immediately preceding section outlining intra-department faculty rewards. Combined, the mix of the Department’s structural relationship with the Center for Policy Analysis along with the mandatory and voluntary initiatives outlined above provides a holistic system of support for the professional development and growth of faculty members within the Department. 3.3.5 Success of Program Faculty Lending Professional Expertise to Off-Campus

Constituencies Because of the structure and nature of the Department of Public Policy, its faculty members lend their collective expertise to off-campus constituencies at a rate that is likely equivalent to or exceeds that of any other academic departments within the University. Focusing solely on the core faculty members of the Department, it becomes readily apparent that faculty members are truly scholar-practitioners in their respective fields of public policy and provide an invaluable resource to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the manner in which they engage with off-campus constituencies. Examples of the work provided to constituencies can readily be found in the curriculum vitas of each faculty member, as well as a review of the reports and services delivered by faculty members available in the online links provided throughout this report. A highlight of some of the examples provided by core faculty members within the Department is summarized here: Professor Clyde Barrow INSERT EXAMPLES Professor Michael Goodman INSERT EXAMPLES Professor Chad J. McGuire Stewardship Council Member, Massachusetts Department of Conservation and

41 Information on the Office of Faculty Development can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/ofd/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Recreation (DCR) (2012-2019)

• Appointed by Governor Patrick to the Stewardship Council of DCR in October of 2011 to serve out an existing term. Reappointed by the Governor in January 2012 to a full 7-year term by statute. The 13-member Stewardship Council of DCR is created by legislation to oversee the activities of DCR in the management of all public property located within the Commonwealth. The Council serves as the policy-making and oversight body of DCR, ensuring the activities undertaken by DCR staff are in compliance with statutory mandates to balance preservation, recreation, and cultural values of the public property environmental resource. As a member of the full Council and a member of the policy subcommittee within the Council, my expertise in environmental policy is sought to help determine whether DCR management plan (resource management plans) are in accordance with both legislative requirements and best practices for environmental stewardship. My recurring responsibilities are to attend 12 annual public meetings of the Council (1 per month) at various locations throughout the Commonwealth to make recommendations, hear public comment, and vote on the approval of DCR management plans.

• For more information on DCR’s Stewardship Council, including makeup of the council and legislative mandates, please see here: http://www.mass.gov/dcr/stewardship_council.htm

Advisory Board Member, Coastal Systems Group Estuaries Project, SMAST (2012- Present)

• In February of 2012 I was asked by administration at UMass Dartmouth to become part of an advisory board to oversee the activities of Dr. Brian Howes’ research that underpins the Massachusetts Estuaries Project. The purpose of this advisory board is, in part, to aid in the development of policies that make sense out of the research being conducted, most particularly the questions that ultimately derive from the data identifying major sources of nitrogen flow within the coastal watershed areas of Massachusetts. My expertise was sought in both law and policy on these issues, particularly my experience with nitrogen management in the past (see Nitrogen Management Committee information below).

• For more information on the Coastal Systems Group Estuaries Project, please see here: http://www.smast.umassd.edu/Coastal/research/estuaries/estuaries.html

Co-Chair, Marine Resources Committee, Division of Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources, American Bar Association (ABA) (2011-2012)

• I was elected Co-Chair to the Marine Resources Committee of the American Bar Association, along with Robin Craig (Professor of Law and Associate Dean of Environmental Programs, Florida State University College of Law). My duties as Co-Chair are to develop the programming applicable to committee members for the year, as well as serve on committees within the ABA for the development of policy actions (white papers, lobbying efforts, etc.) to enhance the responsible protection and use of our marine resources.

• For more information on the Marine Resources Committee, including my

OF 65

- Draft Document -

leadership role in the committee, please see here: http://apps.americanbar.org/dch/committee.cfm?com=NR250800

Appointed Hearing Committee Member, Board of Bar Overseers, Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2011-2014)

• I was appointed by the Board of Bar Overseers to be a hearing member to oversee disciplinary hearings against attorneys licensed within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who have been accused of misconduct in the practice of law. The hearing committee sits as a quasi-judicial board to hear evidence on the complaint brought forward by Bar Counsel and any defenses offered by the attorney accused of misconduct. Findings of fact and recommendations are made by the hearing board and then forwarded to the Board of Bar Overseers for further review, adoption, etc. My role on this board is to use my legal expertise (12 years of practicing in CA, NV, and MA) to help make determinations and recommendation on the alleged misconduct.

• For more information on the Board of Bar Overseers Hearing Committee, please see here: http://www.mass.gov/obcbbo/

Steering Committee Member, Southeastern Massachusetts Council on Sustainability (SMCOS) (2009 - Present)

• I was elected to the inaugural group of steering committee members for the establishment of this group. The purpose of SMCOS is to provide a umbrella organization for community members and organizations interested in issues touching upon sustainability to meet, organize, share ideas, and finally take action on those ideas. My role is that of an advisor based on my background in environmental law and policy. I aid in helping the council to direct its actions towards the above stated goals. I have also been asked to provide commentary, talks, and more formal presentations at both SMCOS meetings/conferences as well as meetings/conferences established by associated organizations.

• For more information on SMCOS, please see here: http://www.councilonsustainability.org/

Vice-Chair for Publications, Marine Resources Committee, Division of Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources, American Bar Association (ABA) (2009-2011)

• Served as the main editor for the major publication for this committee, the Marine Resources Newsletter. The purpose of the newsletter is to provide a forum for members and others in the ABA and legal communities (practical and academic) a publication focused on recent trends in the development of marine resource law and policy. As the editor, I was the initial contact for submitted manuscripts, and I worked with associate editors and ABA publications officials to review proposed articles, provide feedback, and ultimate to prepare accepted articles for final publication. I left this role when I was elected to the C0-Chair position of the committee.

Nitrogen Management Committee, Town of Dartmouth, MA (2009-2010)

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• I was appointed in 2009 to the Town of Dartmouth, MA nitrogen management committee. The purpose of the committee is to review the published data on nitrogen loading within the local watershed community and to devise methods for dealing with loading to reduce impacts and comply with state and federal statutory mandates. I was appointed to the position because of my expertise in the areas of environmental law (specifically the Clean Water Act), as well as my expertise in land use law and policy related to coastal zone management.

Atlas Tack Restoration Project Team Member (2005-2008)

• I was a co-investigator, supported by a $60,000.00 grant from the Jessie B. Cox Foundation, on the impacts and effects of the remediation of the Atlas Tack Superfund Site (Fairhaven, MA). The focus of the work was to identify impacts that extended from the direct environmental effects to the impacts on the social fabric of the community. The goal of the team was to work with EPA in helping to plan and assess the cleanup of the site from a wider perspective than is often done under historical superfund cleanups. My expertise was sought to aid in the interpretation of federal hazardous waste site law (CERCLA, RCRA) as well as aid in the development of policy guidelines that helped to achieve our initial grant goals. Co-investigators included faculty members of UMass Dartmouth and Susan Jennings with the Office of Campus and Community Sustainability.

Recipient of Multiple Pro Bono Awards for Legal Services Provided to the Commonwealth and Citizenry to Support the Advancement of Legal Services to Underrepresented Groups

• Supreme Judicial Court Pro Bono Recognition Honor Roll

o 2012

• First Justices’ Award for Pro Bono Publico Excellence

o 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012

• Massachusetts Bar Association Pro Bono Attorney of the Year Award

o 2010

Professor Shawna Sweeney

INSERT EXAMPLES All of the examples provided above, as well as the more detailed information available online and in additional resources provided throughout this report, indicate the program faculty within the Department of Public Policy are overwhelmingly successful at lending their professional expertise to off-campus constituencies.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

3.4 Programs Shall Ensure Teaching/Learning Environments that Facilitate Student Success

Programs shall provide learning environments that promote student success. Students are expected to learn both content and skills appropriate to the discipline. The program should indicate clear expectations for student learning outcomes. The teaching/learning environment should be accessible to all students, should include a variety of instructional methodologies, and should provide timely feedback to students. The review should answer the following questions:

• To what extent does the program have articulated learning outcomes (content and skills) for students? By what means are these outcomes measured? Are they achieved by most students? How successful is the program at using the results for improvement?

• How well is assessment of student learning outcomes used in reviewing or evaluating program curriculum and faculty?

• How successfully does the program evaluate student success following graduation and the programs’ contribution to that success?

What is the role of the core faculty in teaching lower division, upper division and graduate courses? What is the rationale for these assignments? 3.4.1 Extent of Articulated Learning Outcomes for Students (Content and Skills); Means

of Measuring Outcomes; Outcome Achievement by Students; Utilizing Results for Improvement

The programs offered by the Department of Public Policy contain articulated learning outcomes based on the content of each program and the skills developed by each student within each respective program. The specific learning outcomes differentiate to some small degree based on the particular program, for example focusing on the graduate certificate program versus the Master of Public Policy (MPP). However, the MPP program provides the foundation upon which learning outcomes are generally defined, measured, and ultimately evaluated. Thus, it logically follows an examination of the program goals within the MPP program serve as the basis of answering this question, and variations in program goals will be identified after this primary program is explained. The MPP program was modeled on national programs in public policy at other institutions where the purpose of the program is to develop a set of theoretical and applied skills in students grounded in the primary discipline of public policy. To achieve this goal, the program itself is structured categorically to provide students with a variety of conceptual and applied tools in the following manner:

OF 65

- Draft Document -

Program Area Course(s) Learning Outcome(s)

Required – Foundational Requirements in Public Policy

POL500 Foundational understanding of principles and processes of public policy. Ensure students are grounded in policy as a concept of government action, and as a process for directing goals and evaluating existing frameworks.

Required – Understanding of economic principles on public policy and the policy process.

POL540 Creating an understanding of economics as a measuring tool to analyze and understand policy –relevant issues in context. Use of economic instruments to gauge alternative policy actions and measure relative merits (value) between policy choices.

Required – Considering policy through the context of research methodologies.

POL581 Understanding underlying policy principles (reinforcement) and extending those principles through the development of methods for researching policy questions. Defining policy-relevant questions and developing methodologies for testing those questions in a way that can lead to information that is helpful in answering the question(s).

Required – The role of public management in policy.

POL510 Understanding the operational side of public policy in terms of the implementation of policy. In addition, the practical side of policy development within the spheres, influences, and roles associated with public management

Required – Understanding the impacts and consequences of current and proposed policy directions.

POL530 Exposure beyond the basic development and implementation of public policy. Students develop skills at understanding the impacts of proposed and current policy directions through the development and use of analysis techniques.

Required – Financing fundamentals of public institutions.

POL541 Exposure to the mechanisms of public finance at state and local levels. Exposure to fundamental mechanisms provides students with background knowledge from which analytical techniques may be developed and employed.

Required – Develop and POL580 Develop basic comprehension and

OF 65

- Draft Document -

exercise fundamental quantitative and qualitative analytical techniques

application of statistical techniques in order to provide a capacity for analyzing quantitative and qualitative data that underlies theoretical and applied understandings of public policy.

Required – Develop a full policy research proposal and engage in the research in order to answer the question asked in the proposal utilizing the theoretical and applied policy information learned throughout the program

POL585 Putting policy knowledge learned throughout course sequencing to practice by developing individual policy research question and then applying techniques learned in program (economic, statistics, research methods, etc.) in order to obtain information to answer the question posed.

Required – Experiential interaction applying policy information and techniques learned to real-world setting.

POL599 Internship experience meant to provide students with real-world application of concepts, theories, and analytical techniques in a real-life public policy setting.

Required – Development of reflective summation of experience

Portfolio Requirement

Development of reflective piece meant to ensure student has internalized the major goals and understanding of the program. Presentation of portfolio to provide faculty with an assessment of student’s total comprehension of overall program objectives.

Required – Concentration Courses

Education Environment Management (3 courses)

Develop a specialized area of public policy expertise in each student so the theoretical and applied pieces of the program can be channeled through a concentration area depending on the student’s area of interest. Create a specialization for the student to make the degree meaningful to employers in the particular field of specialization.

Once completed, students have achieved the following learning outcomes:

• A foundational understanding of public policy as both a concept and process that is extended to the roles of public management, public finance, and an area of concentration chosen by the student (education, environment, management).

• Students have developed appropriate analytical skills that are generally recognized and utilized in the areas of public policy development, implementation, and evaluation. These skills include: economic analysis, statistical analysis, and policy analysis.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• Students are capable of developing, implementing, analyzing, and presenting a

research proposal in applied policy.

• Students have applied the theories and skills developed in the program to a real-world experience through an internship.

• Students have shown comprehension of the entire program through the development of a reflective portfolio that is presented to faculty members and based on connecting their entire academic experience to these learning outcomes above. Evidence of overall student comprehension is substantiated through faculty members who inquire as to the student’s depth of knowledge and understanding during this presentation and Q&A session.

The main mechanism for measuring student outcomes is through an iterative process that includes successful course completion, advisement, and importantly the portfolio creation and ‘defense’ that occurs at the end of the student’s career in the MPP program (a student cannot graduate from the MPP without successfully completing the portfolio requirement, which includes a consensus assessment by faculty members that that students has achieved a minimum threshold for meeting the overall goals of the program to prepare the student for a career in public policy and related fields). During this process students are evaluated by individual faculty members in each course they take to ensure minimum mastery of the content and incremental goals within each course. As students progress through the program the incremental goals are aggregated until as the student is assessed in more complex courses (moving from content understanding to more analytical and cognitive-intense courses of analysis and research). Later in the program the student is assessed in their application of concepts both academically (in applied policy courses) and practically (via the internship experience). Finally, most to all faculty members within the Department participate and evaluate the student comprehensively during the portfolio assessment, presentation, and defense. During this time faculty ensure the student comprehends the larger purposes and goals of the program through an exploration of the connections between individual courses within the program and the overarching themes of policy within the program as a whole. Through this process, the program is assessing its achievement of its defined goals and objectives and measuring the student outcomes both incrementally (through each course completion) and holistically (through the portfolio review and defense). The current matriculation and graduation rate of the students in the MPP program exceeds 75%.42 Most of the failures in matriculation occur within the first full year of academic study where student performance in individual courses provides sufficient information to determine the student will have problems successfully completing the program. Thus, the grades and performance in initial conceptual courses usually provides the important threshold by which student success in the program is defined. Once students have completed this initial hurdle, they are generally successful in

42 Of students who are accepted to and begin the program, greater than 75% matriculate through the program and graduate.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

matriculating throughout the program. It is quite rare for a student who has successfully completed the initial phase of conceptual courses within the first academic year to not fully complete the program. To date, no student who has made it through to the portfolio presentation and defense has been denied graduation. Based on this evidence the Department believes there is a strong correlation between the inculcation of the program goals within each course, the incremental nature of the course development coinciding with the program goals, and the overall success of students in achieving those goals by the end of their tenure in the program represented by their successful performance during the portfolio presentation and defense at the conclusion of the program. The MPP program has been successful at using the results of student performance in completing course-to-program objectives for improving the delivery and content of the program. The program content and delivery has been refined in the past few years to coincide with the redevelopment of courses for online delivery. During that process, the overarching program goals were discussed and refined with existing and new faculty members within the Department. It became obvious that establishing a consistent course sequencing would be an instrumental part in ensuring the program learning outcomes were being met in a way that allowed the courses to gauge student performance and understanding. Thus, the Department knew that if it was to use course sequencing as a measure of learning outcome achievement, then it needed to make sure the courses were taken in a way that provided students the opportunity to learn program objectives within each course and build upon these overarching outcomes from course-to-course. This strategy seems to work well as student retention and overall satisfaction seems to parallel the logical sequencing of courses within the program now employed. 3.4.2 Degree of Using Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes in Reviewing or

Evaluating Program Curriculum and Faculty As mentioned in the immediately preceding section, student learning outcomes have been at the foundation of the reworking and ordering of the public policy program to coincide with the development of the courses to be taught in the online setting. The work engaged in by the faculty in the department in 2009-2011 has centered on two primary questions:

• Can we create an effective online Master of Public Policy Program?

• If we can create such a program, how do the program goals relate to each course being offered and the sequencing of those courses so there is a consistent and logical progression for the student?

These two questions were the basis for the ‘de-facto’ review of the program that coincided with the development of the online courses. The reason these questions were at the heart of the online push was because of the unique nature of online programming; because faculty would not regularly see the students and interact with them face-to-face, they needed to be particularly sure individual course content and overall course sequencing

OF 65

- Draft Document -

was closely matched with the goals of the program. In essence, in order to answer the first question, there needed to be a clear understanding of expected student outcomes in each course and relating those outcomes to an incremental development, course-to-course, of overall public policy program objectives. Thus, the development of the online program has been the recent impetus for the re-envisioning of the entire MPP program in the manner described in the immediately preceding section. As a result, student outcomes have been the driver of the evaluation of the program as it was developed, course by course, to accommodate online students. Faculty assessment is an integral part of student learning outcomes, both formally and informally. Formally, student evaluations in individual courses are a critical part to rating teaching performance of faculty members within the Department, and this rating is critical in the advancement of faculty members through the annual reviews, evaluations, and promotion guidelines at UMD. In essence, poor teaching performance through student evaluations can prevent merit pay increases and faculty promotion within the University. Assuming student evaluations are effectively correlated to student learning outcomes (assuming graduate students would not rate a course highly if they did not achieve stated learning outcomes), there is a strong formal relationship between faculty assessment and student learning outcomes. The informal methods of evaluating faculty in relation to student learning outcomes includes a variety of measures used by the Department in the MPP program and also in mentoring the creation, delivery, and assessment of online course delivery. During the student portfolio presentation, individual students are asked to discuss the overall relationship to their evolution within the program to each course taken. Students are encouraged to provide feedback on individual courses, particularly the extent to which those courses aided in developing strong learning outcomes for the student (both course-wise and from a programmatic standpoint). Student candor leads to insights about individual courses that are then used to help provide assessment of faculty and peer counseling that aids in refining course content and procedures in order to best align the course materials to the identified learning outcomes of the course and program. Repeated instances where a course is deemed to not meet student expectations may result in additional actions through the formal channels of faculty review, but only when peer mentoring and other resources are made available to that faculty member in accordance with departmental standards and mandated university policies and procedures. The goal is to help faculty provide their courses in a manner where they meet the course and program objectives in an efficient and meaningful way; if this cannot be done after numerous attempts then the Department’s role is to seek alternate ways of ensuring the integrity of the course for its students. Beyond student candor through questioning in the portfolio presentation, the Department also employs an end-of-program survey that students complete as part of their portfolio requirement.43 Within this anonymous survey questions are asked about

43 An example of the survey is available here: http://mppexampleportfolio.umassd.wikispaces.net/Example+Interview

OF 65

- Draft Document -

program offerings and the degree to which courses reinforce stated learning outcomes. The results help to further inform the Department about the relationship of student learning to MPP program delivery. This information is then used in-line with university policies and procedures to help review and evaluate the programs overall effectiveness including course sequencing and individual course structure. 3.4.3 Effectiveness at Evaluating Student Success Following Graduation and the

Programs’ Contribution to that Success Currently there is limited means by which the University (Graduate Office) follows student success indicators. The Department has a limited capacity as well, but has enacted a number of measures to try and capture this information in mostly informal methods. For example, the Department has supported the development of a Graduate Student Association for public policy students during their tenure in the program that helps to foster a community around the discipline and to engage students as alumni upon graduation. In concert with supporting these measures, the Department has begun a Facebook page44 for current students and alumni and it is working with the Alumni Association to better interact with students who have completed the program. All of these measures are geared towards maintaining contacts and creating a means by which information can be assessed about the students in terms of their future employment post-graduation. One of the difficulties in measuring student employment rates after graduation is the fact that many of our students are working professionals already employed in a policy-related field at the time of matriculation through completion of the program. Some students indicate their reason for attending the program in their application essays is to provide them with additional credentials for advancement in their current employment or to expand their employment opportunities in the same or similar field as currently employed. The extent to which the degree is offering students these opportunities is not ultimately known through precise measurement, but the growth of applications and enrollments in the program is some evidence the degree adds value to career opportunities for graduates. Anecdotal evidence of specific students known to the program who keep in contact after graduation suggests a relatively high rate of employment engagement in specified areas. For example, students who concentrate in the environmental policy option have found success in a variety of public and quasi-public sectors dealing with issues from environmental analysis and impact to land use and coastal zone management. Other students have used the MPP as a gateway to higher education opportunities, including doctorate programs in public policy and related fields. Finally, certain students like our JD/MPP double major concentrations tend to use the MPP as a means of gaining access to public sector employment even though their focus might be on

44 The Facebook page can be accessed here: https://www.facebook.com/UMassDMPP

OF 65

- Draft Document -

other applications such as the law. The extent that the MPP had added to the job opportunities of these students is not precisely known by the Department. Students in the certificate programs tend to utilize the certificate for a variety of purposes. Some use the certificate to gain specialization in the areas of concentration offered (education, environment) as a means of resume enhancement and career advancement. Others use the program as a ‘feeler’ for the more in-depth MPP program and utilize successful completion as the means by which they then apply and matriculate into the MPP program. Like the MPP, there are no precise numbers available to the Department currently measuring the impact of the certificate on employment. This is certainly an area the Department wishes to expand upon as it settles into its program offerings and obtains full staffing capacity. 3.4.4 Role of Core Faculty in Teaching Lower Division, Upper Division and Graduate

Courses; Rationale for Assignments The Department of Public Policy is a primarily graduate department where the degree granting programs are currently all at the graduate level. As such, core faculty member’s roles are to teach graduate courses that service the Master of Public Policy (MPP) and graduate certificate programs. Since programs are offered in both face-to-face and online formats, faculty members within the Department are expected to be capable of teaching sections of their courses in both the face-to-face and online setting. Currently each faculty member in the Department teaches a core course requirement in the MPP program and they also service the courses required in the concentration areas for the MPP and online graduate certificates. The actual courses taught by faculty members are laid out in section 3.3.2 above. The rationale for assigning courses to specific faculty is defined by two factors: expertise and coverage. Faculty expertise matches the faculty member’s background with the area in which they teach; for example Professor McGuire has a strong background in environmental policy and law and so he teaches a number of courses in this discipline. Professor Goodman has substantial experience in policy analysis and research methods so his expertise is matched to these courses. Professor Barrow has a strong background in applied policy research so he covers this area of focus academically. Professor Sweeney has a sound background in public policy concepts and applications and so she covers the introductory course requirements for the MPP. Coverage is the second concern as the Department currently has four full-time faculty members capable of teaching 9 sections per semester where the Department is offering between 16 and 18 sections of courses each semester. Thus, core faculty need to be distributed to the areas most needed in a given semester and this is a secondary consideration used in making staffing assignments for particular course sections. For example, additional sections of POL500 to accommodate student enrollments may require the redistribution of a core faculty member to that section in a given semester in order to accommodate the immediate demand. Ultimately the Department is seeking additional core faculty members in order to handle the capacity issues and ensure there is

OF 65

- Draft Document -

an ideal distribution of faculty based primarily on expertise. The other factor that influences the rationale for distributing faculty teaching assignments are the institutional requirements such as releases mandated by collective bargaining. As mentioned previously in this report, the Department Chair is entitled to course release each semester to allow for the additional obligations associated with running the Department. This release is a valid requirement and needs to be adhered to in order to assure the efficient running of the Department’s programs. However, it does influence capacity and thus helps to define the rationale for teaching assignment distribution depending on the expertise of the faculty member currently acting as department chair. Otherwise, given the limited resources available to the Department, the roles of the faculty members in teaching assignment based on expertise and coverage needs are as fairly and equitably distributed as possibly, aligning closely with expertise in most instances. 3.5 Programs Shall Ensure Resources Are Used Wisely Programs shall ensure that the resources available are used to meet program goals and objectives, and, as appropriate, engage in use of innovation to enhance resources; should engage in both intra- and inter-campus collaboration; and should demonstrate a commitment to effective and efficient use of resources. The review should answer the following questions:

• What process does the program use to allocate resources?

• In what ways and how well does the program maximize the use of its human resources?

• In what ways and how well does the program maximize the use of material resources such as space, equipment, operating funds, etc.?

3.5.1 Process Used to Allocate Resources Prior to discussing the process used to allocate resources, a summary of the existing and planned programs of the Department are listed and described. The Department of Public Policy currently administers or co-administers the following graduate programs:

• Face-to-face and online Master of Public Policy (MPP) Program45

45 A detailed description of the MPP program can be found at: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/mopp/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• Online Graduate Certificate in Environmental Policy46 • Online Graduate Certificate in Education Policy47 • Joint JD/MPP program • MBA with concentration in environmental policy.48 • Servicing of the certain educational leadership courses (ELP) within the

Department of Educational Leadership at SEPPCE.49 The Department also currently offers two sections of the following undergraduate course each semester:

• POL102 (Introduction to Policy Studies)50 The following is a list of program initiatives the Department is currently implementing or planning:

• BA/MPP accelerated programs with the Departments of Sociology & Anthropology, Political Science, and (potentially) Economics.51 These programs are a critical part of the Department’s efforts to build a student pipeline for its face-to-face programs.

46 A detailed description of the online graduate certificate in environmental policy can be found at: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/graduatecertificateinenvironmentalpolicy/ 47 A detailed description of the online graduate certificate in education policy can be found at: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/gettingthroughtheprogram/graduatecertificateineducationpolicy/ 48 Students in this program complete the majority of courses offered in the graduate online environmental policy program. 49 POL580 (Statistical Analysis), 581(Applied Research Methods), and 585 (Applied Policy Research Seminar) are three courses currently taught by Public Policy faculty that service both MPP and doctoral students in Educational Leadership. These courses are cross-listed under the ELP designation. 50 This undergraduate course is supported by the Department primarily as a means of supporting the undergraduate mission of the University while also providing qualified graduate students with teaching assistantship opportunities. 51 The BA/MPP accelerated program offers selected outstanding undergraduate students to be identified in their second semester of their sophomore year by home department representatives. Up to five (5) students in each department can apply for acceptance into the MPP program. If accepted, the student can gain credit for both their undergraduate and MPP degree during their junior and senior year. The effect of the program is that students can complete both their undergraduate education and MPP in 5 years rather than a 6-year timeframe. Currently there are agreements in place with the Departments of Sociology and Political Science, with negotiations to include the Department of Economics in the near future. Further information on the accelerated program can be found here: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/prospectivestudents/programsoffered/bamppacceleratedprogram/

OF 65

- Draft Document -

• Development of an online public management graduate certificate.52 Currently, public management is the only MPP concentration area without an associated standalone certificate program (which have been important feeders for the MPP program).

• Development, implementation, and administration of an online Master of Sustainable Development (MSD) program.53

All of the initiatives described above, both current and proposed, are logical extensions of the purposes and goals of the Department Public Policy, as well as the Department’s response to current needs identified by SEPPCE and University leadership. In each case there is strong reason to believe that there is significant actual or potential growth for each program initiative. The process of allocating resources within the Department is dependent on a number of factors but primarily based on the following rank ordering of priorities:

1. Supporting the development and delivery of the MPP program in both face-to-face and online formats.

2. Supporting the development and delivery of the online graduate certificates.

3. Extending the online graduate certificate program offering to include a public management focus.

4. Fully developing the BA/MPP accelerated program to include the Department of Economics and achieving an annual rate of 15 students (5 students from each department) in the face-to-face program on a regular basis.

5. Ensuring the capacity to offer POL102 on a regular basis and thus supporting at least one MPP graduate student each semester to teach the course in exchange for a TA stipend.

6. Institutionalize the agreement between the law school and the Department to ensure a certain number of courses count between programs to offer students true value in the joint JD/MPP program.

52 The online graduate certificate in public management would follow the same structure as the online certificates in education and environmental policy. The courses for the public management certificate would be derived from the courses currently offered to support the public management concentration in the MPP, available here for review: http://www.umassd.edu/seppce/departments/publicpolicy/currentstudents/courseofferings/ 53 The Master of Sustainable Development (MSD) has been approved for full development by the President’s Office. SEPPCE and the Department of Public Policy are taking a lead role in moving the proposal of the program through academic review and, ultimately, administering the program through the Department. A copy of the proposal with a detailed analysis of the policy track layout (and associated startup costs) is available for review here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/c0e503yc30fwp2s/p63OehYoPn

OF 65

- Draft Document -

7. Expanding the MPP program in student enrollment based on an increase in

faculty capacity within the Department.

8. Develop, adopt, and administer the Master of Sustainable Development (MSD) proposal.

In order to achieve these outcomes, the Department currently focuses its faculty resources on delivering and supporting the MPP and online graduate certificate programs. The Department is currently in discussions with the College administration and University about the limitations on its ability to grow based on current faculty resources within the Department. To mitigate the impact of inter-department limitations, Public Policy currently collaborates with the Department of Educational Leadership (DEL) in order to administer the online graduate certificate in educational policy and the MPP concentration in educational policy. However, there are limitations to this association that places constraints on Public Policy when planning for the continued management and growth of this concentration area.54 The Department does take full advantage of other collaborations between faculty and departments throughout the University. As indicated above, Public Policy offers a joint JD/MPP program with the Law School. This joint program includes allowing courses taken in the law program to be counted towards certain MPP requirements and certain MPP courses taken in public policy to be counted towards the JD requirements.55 Also, the BA/MPP accelerated program involves the cooperation of multiple departments at the University (currently Sociology and Political Science) in the planning of each program with Public Policy. Once the program is completed, the undergraduate students in respective departments begin taking MPP courses during their upper-class years allowing for multiple interactions between Public Policy faculty and colleagues across the campus in different colleges and departments. Finally, the potential Master of Sustainable Development (MSD) program would be administered by the Department of Public Policy and would allow the Department to utilize faculty members across the campus to teach core course requirements within the program as well as concentration tracks under the current proposal. In sum, the Department is currently utilizing its available resources to service both existing programs with an eye towards expanding those programs while also developing new initiatives and programs that collaborate with faculty members between departments and colleges across the University.

54 An explanation of these limitations is detailed in the report available at the following link: http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/seppce/centerforpolicyanalysis/publicpolicy/Pub_Policy_Online_Strategic_Plan.pdf 55 Students in the law program have approximately 9 units of courses that can be taken as ‘free electives’ and certain MPP courses have been allowed to count for this purpose. The MPP program has one free elective course that can be fulfilled through a law course. In addition, an appropriate externship in the law school setting can count towards the internship experience in the MPP program.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

3.5.2 Ways and Efficiency of Maximizing Human Resources Currently the Department has limited human resources, but it does take full advantage of its existing resources. As mentioned previously, the Department currently has 4 core faculty members and 1 associated faculty member56 committed by contract to teaching 1 section per semester. Incorporating mandated and contracted releases57 the Department currently has the capacity to teach 10 sections of courses per semester utilizing core faculty. Meanwhile the Department currently offers between 15-18 sections of courses per semester to maintain current obligations in course offerings to support the MPP and graduate certificate programs. The Department currently works with affiliated faculty members in the Department of Educational Leadership and the Charlton College of Business to provide support for course sections where it does not have the internal capacity to satisfy. In addition, the Department utilizes strategic part-time lecturers to supplement course section offerings in specific areas. In addition to faculty resources, the Department currently has a part-time secretary employed 20 hours per week to service all of the administrative needs of the Department. As a fully functioning graduate department with multiple graduate programs offered in multiple formats (both f2f and online) there are limitations placed on the ability of the current administrative arrangement to fully support the activities of the Department. That said the secretarial help is utilized as efficiently as possible under current circumstances. Unfortunately this often means a number of basic administrative tasks being handled by core faculty members within the Department so that important functions (student record keeping, file maintenance, compliance) can be the priority issues handled by the secretary. When faculty provide their own administrative services for basic departmental tasks, there is a ‘dilution’ factor on the ability to service other critical functions including the core teaching, scholarship, and service functions that define faculty roles at the University. The reasonable solution is to have a full-time administrative staff member to service the Department. By providing this additional resource, the Department could better focus on handling its current workload while also looking to the expansion opportunities defined above. The maximization of existing human capital comes about in the Department through a legacy of limited resources but large plans. Over the past few years the Department has hired a few strategic faculty members that have allowed it to develop its current programming (both f2f and online) that includes the MPP program and the online graduate certificate programs with the additional development systems currently in place (JD/MPP, BA/MPP Accelerated Program). This process of redeveloping the program has been largely successful, evidenced by the 40 matriculated graduate students who have begun their studies in Public Policy for Fall 2012. At this time the Department is at a crossroad when considering its continued development of existing and

56 Professor Devon Lynch from the Economics Department. 57 Professor Michael Goodman, as department chair, receives 1 course release per semester per faculty federation agreement. Professor Clyde Barrow has a contract for 2 course releases per semester as the Director of the Center for Policy Analysis.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

planned programs; while current plans identified in this report include continued growth and development, the ability to fully engage that growth will be dependent on increasing capacity within the Department. At current levels of staffing the objective numbers clearly indicate the Department has reached a logical capacity to grow enrollments and programs. Thus, without further capital, the Department must revert to a position of increasing admission requirements as applications rise, while tabling new initiatives for the foreseeable future. 3.5.3 Ways and Efficiency of Maximizing Material Resources The Department of Public Policy currently resides immediately off campus in a building it shares with the Center for Policy Analysis and the NCAA Little East Conference administrative offices.58 Sections of the building used by the Department include a secretary area, faculty offices, and spaces currently being used as ‘student spaces’ for graduate students in the MPP program59 and also undergraduates from various departments doing work with the Center for Policy Analysis and its subsidiary units. In addition, affiliated faculty from other departments within SEPPCE and across the university sometimes occupy spaces at the building to work on associated projects or hold meetings in the conference room that is shared between the Department and the Center for Policy Analysis. Overall, the space is utilized in an egalitarian and open manner, often allowing for ‘organic’ interactions between faculty, students, and staff. Beyond the physical space described, the Department does not have any significant equipment to speak of. Faculty members are afforded desks, chairs, and computers in their offices in compliance with relevant provisions of collective bargaining language dealing with faculty workspace. Other equipment (printer, copier, fax) exists and is either owned directly by the Department or is shared between the Department and the Center for Policy Analysis. Operating funds are dependent on factors outside of the Department’s immediate control. To the degree the Department receives funds for discretionary items such as faculty development those funds are utilized sparingly where faculty members seek funding mechanisms outside the Department first (such as the Provost’s travel grant) and then seek internal departmental funds based on availability. The Department works collegially with faculty to meet their individual travel needs on a case-by-case basis. The fact the Department teaches a substantial proportion of its course sections online allows for the efficient utilization of material resources, for example significant reductions in

58 The physical space is a converted house that used to be used as the Chancellor’s domicile in previous iterations of the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth. It is located at 128 Chase Road, Dartmouth, MA adjacent to the University. 59 The building accommodates spaces for graduate students in Public Policy (MPP, certificate, etc.) who are geographically proximate to the offices. In addition, specific graduate students who have received either research assistantships or teaching assistantships regularly use these spaces for their associated tasks involved in research, course preparation, and also personal studying. Students at the facility regularly interact with faculty members in the Department informally on a daily basis.

OF 65

- Draft Document -

paper, copying, and other teaching aids are reduced in the online teaching environment. As such, given its unique dynamics, the Department uses its scarce resources wisely and effectively to implement and manage existing programs while still looking at ways to develop and build in new directions. END OF SECTION.

D P S -S R DRAFT - UMassD Web Site · PDF filerelated questions established under the UMD AQAD...

Documents

Transcript of D P S -S R DRAFT - UMassD Web Site · PDF filerelated questions established under the UMD AQAD...