Capacity and Preparatory Review Report. 1 Introduction

Transcription

1 1 Introduction The timing is fortuitous for California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (Cal Poly Pomona or CPP) to reaffirm its accredited status with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The campus is preparing this report for its Capacity and Preparatory Review while two other important activities are underway: we are beginning a strategic planning process that builds on the University Identity and Vision initiative while simultaneously planning for a significant budget reduction at the state and campus levels. These events both inform and constrain our thinking about how our campus can achieve its goal of building a learning centered polytechnic university. The theme based approach introduced in Cal Poly Pomona s 2006 WASC Institutional Proposal continues to guide the 2008 Capacity and Preparatory and 2010 Educational Effectiveness Reviews. The campus used a broad based, consultative process that gave students, staff, faculty and alumni input into the three overarching themes of this report: Titled Cultivating Excellence: Building a Learning centered Model Of Polytechnic Education, this self evaluation focuses on the themes Institutional Excellence, Evolution of the Teacher Scholar, and Student Success. Each theme connects with major campus initiatives that have structured work on learning centeredness, assessment of student learning, facilitating graduation, enrollment management, university vision and identity, and strategic planning. For each theme a set of key, researchable questions were used to guide the inquiry. In this Introduction Essay, we provide a context for the theme based reflective essays. We discuss progress achieved since the submission of the 2006 Institutional Proposal, challenges the campus faces, how Cal Poly Pomona intends to meet these challenges, and how we organized the inquiry process. At the end of our report, we summarize the results of our discoveries, discuss the progress achieved regarding the reaccreditation outcomes, and describe the university s readiness for the 2010 Educational Effectiveness Review. Institutional Context Our Campus. Cal Poly Pomona covers 1,438 acres in the Los Angeles metropolitan area and is the second largest CSU campus in terms of acreage. The internationally known Kellogg Arabian Horse Center and the student run Farm Store at Kellogg Ranch are important reminders of Cal Poly Pomona s origin as a working ranch and the close and enduring ties with the W. K. Kellogg family. The campus first opened its doors in 1938 as the Voorhis Unit of the California State Polytechnic College. In 1949 cereal magnate W. K. Kellogg deeded his Arabian horse ranch, 813 acres of land in Pomona, to the state of California and in 1956, 508 students and 44 faculty and staff relocated from the Voorhis Unit to the Kellogg campus. In 1961, 329 women joined the student body. The Pomona campus separated from the San Luis Obispo campus in 1966 and became the California State Polytechnic College, Kellogg Campus. University status was granted in Cal Poly Pomona is a part of the 23 campus California State University (CSU) system. A 25 member Board of Trustees provides oversight of all aspects of the CSU (CFR 3.9). California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 1

2 The campus shares a commitment to accessible education with other campuses in the system. As one of six polytechnic universities in the United States, Cal Poly Pomona has the additional hallmark of a learn bydoing philosophy, which is expressed in our campus motto (CFR 1.1). Cal Poly Pomona achieves its emphasis on practice oriented, hands on education by blending theory and practice in all its disciplines. Our students solving classroom problems today will be the leaders solving real world problems tomorrow. Our Students. The campus currently enrolls more than 19,000 undergraduate students and over 1,800 postbaccalaureate students in 99 different degree programs The Cal Poly Pomona Mission: To advance learning and knowledge by linking theory and practice in all disciplines, and to prepare students for lifelong learning, leadership, and careers in a changing, multicultural world. Motto: Instrumentum Disciplinae (Application of Knowledge) across eight colleges. Two thirds of entering undergraduates are first time freshmen who rank in the top one third of their high school class. The remaining one third of entering undergraduates are upper division transfer students who have demonstrated their potential for success by completion of 60 transferable units, including 30 units of general education (GE). Cal Poly Pomona provides access to higher education for a large number of students from traditionally underrepresented groups; 68% of all students enrolled at Cal Poly Pomona in the Fall of 2007 identify themselves as nonwhite. The campus celebrates and actively supports the diversity of our students (CFR 1.5). In the 2008 U.S. News and World Report College Rankings, Cal Poly Pomona ranked third in campus diversity in the western region for all private and public schools in its category. In Fall 2007, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Caucasian students represented 35%, 28%, and 22% of all students enrolled respectively. African American students comprised 4% while American Indian/Alaskan Native and nonresident students represented 1% and 3% respectively. Currently Cal Poly Pomona is experiencing an increase in the percentage of Latino students, which mirrors the trends in higher education as a whole and in the community that we serve. English is the native language for 72% of our students. Fifty two percent of our undergraduates and 52% of our graduate students are first generation students and are highly motivated to succeed. Many of our students come from low socioeconomic backgrounds as indicated by the fact that 66% of students receive financial aid. More than 75% of students work. Males and females are 56% and 44% of the student population respectively. This gender distribution is the reverse of the norm for universities and is reflective of the polytechnic curriculum. The average age of undergraduates and graduates is 22 years and 32 years respectively. First time freshmen during the period from 2003 through 2007 presented academic records that predicted their potential for academic success (see Snapshot of CPP First Time Freshmen ). However, only 73% were prepared for college level math and 50% for college level English. These percentages are above the CSU system wide average of 63% California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 2

3 for math and slightly below the system wide average of 54% for English. The high percentage requiring English is reflective of California s diverse population. These percentages have been declining as the campus has become more selective in its admissions process. Snapshot of First Time Freshmen Eighty five percent of students are residents of California and come primarily from the five southern California counties (Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange and San Diego). While 91% of students are United States citizens, approximately 15% are born in other countries. Fifteen percent of students live on campus. Additional housing will become available in Fall 2010 to meet the current unmet demand, making Cal Poly Pomona a more residential campus. Average GPA range: Average SAT score range: Math Proficiency Score (70.1) exceeded the CSU system average (65.9%) in Gender: Female = 44%, Males=56% One third of all freshmen live on campus English as the first language: 72.4% Age: 97.5% are 18 or 19 years of age Our Staff. Cal Poly Pomona staff members reflect a broad range of skills, degrees, and specializations required to support our polytechnic mission. In a wide range of job classifications and duties, ranging almost literally from A to Z, staff provide essential support for university operations. The staff provide diverse role models for students and model an inclusive community. In Fall 2007 full time staff members were predominantly female (64%). The degree of staff diversity is closer to the levels of diversity among students than is the faculty diversity, that is, 55% of staff members identify themselves as non white (compared to 36% for faculty and 74% for students). The university is committed to enhancing individual and organizational effectiveness by providing employees with opportunities to improve their professional performance. The office of Organizational Development and Training (ODT) was established in 2006 to provide on going professional development for staff. The staff are represented by several collective bargaining units. Our Faculty. As of Fall 2007, there are 592 full time faculty; of those, 76% have a doctorate or other terminal degree. Of the 586 part time faculty, 32% have a doctorate or other terminal degree. The majority of full time faculty are male (62%) and white, non Hispanic (62%). Similarly, part time faculty are male (65%) and white, non Hispanic (67%). Departments recruit faculty through nationally advertised searches that yield applicants from major doctoral programs, from industry, or from other postsecondary institutions. The university s polytechnic focus means that the campus particularly values new faculty with experience in industry, and with active engagement in their discipline including the performing arts, research, and other professional settings outside the academy. In many disciplines, this focus translates into an increase in faculty participation in grants, consulting contracts, and industry partnerships. The California Faculty Association represents both fulland part time faculty. Twenty years ago, faculty received little support for scholarly and creative activities. Today, faculty are more likely to function as scholars in the full sense of the word by maintaining California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 3

4 active participation in their discipline and by bringing this experience into the classroom. In 1987, the university received approximately $3 million in external grants and contracts. Since the academic year, faculty and staff have submitted a total of 677 proposals for external funding for an average of 135 When I joined the faculty in the fall of 1963, I soon learned that scholarly research by faculty members was discouraged due to the belief that it would take time away from teaching duties. In fact, involving students in research is an important aspect of undergraduate teaching." Glenn R. Stewart, Professor Emeritus of Zoology and Environmental Science proposals per year. In 2006 alone, faculty submitted proposals for nearly $13 million. Cal Poly Pomona provides various forms of support for scholarly and creative activities, including grant proposal development assistance and support opportunities such as the Provost s Teacher Scholar Program and the Research, Scholarship, and the Creative Activity (RSCA) Program. The evolution of Cal Poly Pomona from a rural campus with a few technical disciplines in 1938 to a large metropolitan campus with 99 disciplines that span the range of human knowledge in 2008 is dramatic. Students now reflect the diversity that enriches the Los Angeles area. The parallel evolution of the faculty is equally significant. Fifty years ago, faculty focused almost exclusively on excellence in teaching. Today departments hire faculty who are dedicated teachers with expertise as practitioners in their respective disciplines that deepens the impact they can have on student learning. However, active practice means that faculty are increasingly challenged to balance time for scholarly and creative activities with the time needed to ensure quality of instruction. The evolution of faculty work demonstrates the university s growing emphasis on achieving a synergistic teacher scholar model that is different from a model for a research university or a liberal arts college. In 2008, a growing tension on campus mirroring a similar tension nationally is emerging in relation to these two major components of faculty work. The university s efforts to achieve synergy are detailed in Thematic Essay Two: Evolution of the Teacher Scholar. Progress Since the 2006 Institutional Proposal Shared Vision and Shared Governance. Cal Poly Pomona s current and fifth president, Dr. J. Michael Ortiz, joined the campus community in In the same year, the campus hosted a WASC Special Visit in response to concerns in the March 2001 WASC Action Letter to the campus. Recognizing there was more work to be done to fully resolve the concerns related to governance, the campus developed the Shared Vision Briefing Paper, which was reaffirmed by President Ortiz in Since then Cal Poly Pomona s commitment to shared governance has grown. Important campus initiatives have been led by committees and task forces with administrative appointees, faculty selected by the Senate Executive Committee, and students selected by the student government, Associated Students, Inc. (ASI). Examples include: the Enrollment Management Advisory Council (EMAC), the Information Technology Governance Committee, and the University Learning Centered Task Force. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 4

5 Cal Poly Pomona s ability to utilize an external initiative for internal improvement is exemplified in the campus response to the CSU strategic plan Access to Excellence. Cal Poly Pomona designed a campus process to give members of all campus constituencies the opportunity to discuss and suggest priorities for the system s plan. In March of 2007 almost 500 faculty, staff, and students gathered at the Bronco Student Center to listen to panel discussions and to participate in breakout sessions. Subsequently each division and college met to summarize input from its members. These conversations generated ideas that continue to inform campus developments such as the University Identity and Vision initiative and the revision of the Campus Master Plan. Perhaps the most informative example of Cal Poly Pomona s effort to achieve both a shared vision and shared governance is the Prioritization and Recovery (P&R) process. Launched in April of 2005, the P&R process began as an examination of where the university should invest new dollars when recovering from previous years of budget reductions. President Ortiz appointed two committees to lead this examination, one for academic program areas and the other for support program areas. Faculty members selected by the Academic Senate joined administrative appointees on the Academic Programs Committee. The Support Programs Committee was comprised of administrative appointees from each division. Each committee developed a rubric which was used to standardize data collection efforts as well as to evaluate programs for future investment opportunities. The committee solicited campus feedback on these procedural aspects of its work by administering multiple campus wide surveys on the development and weighting of the criteria that would be used to evaluate programs. However, when the results were released, it became evident that not everyone shared the vision of the university reflected in the committee s recommendations. Extensive discussions were held with all campus constituencies and with external stakeholders to identify recommendations that would have enough support for use in the current budget cycle. Ultimately, the deeply divided opinions that emerged in these discussions, combined with a widespread perception of a rushed timeline and concerns about the information base, prompted the Academic Senate to request a delay for the project. During a public discussion with President Ortiz, the Senate encouraged him to restart a planning process that could identify a shared vision for the campus. Initiated in January of 2008, the first phase of this project, articulating the campus vision and core values, has just been completed. The President will convene task forces in the fall to work on the implementation of this vision. The P&R experience illuminated a key point that sharing the development of a process and sharing representation on key committees is not sufficient to ensure the emergence of a shared vision. Representation must be accompanied by communication. Our work in this area will be discussed further in Thematic Essay One: Institutional Excellence. The Assessment of Student Learning. Since 2003 the university s commitment to the assessment of student learning has become explicit and intentional. The theme for one of the 2003 faculty learning communities was: How well are students learning? This faculty group identified assessment as the core of a learning centered institution and placed the assessment of student learning at the center of the continuous improvement of teaching and California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 5

6 learning. In 2005 President Ortiz expanded this Faculty Learning Community into a Task Force, with representatives from all five divisions. The Task Force engaged in a more indepth and focused discussion about what constitutes a learning centered institution. Their work culminated in a month long focus on learning centeredness in the fall of There were multiple activities each week that enabled students and staff to gain a better understanding of their role in the development of a learning centered campus. For faculty and administrators, these activities reinforced the importance of learning centeredness to campus initiatives. In 2007 Cal Poly Pomona s maturation as a learning centered university reached a tipping point. Each division and each college developed a plan aimed at institutionalizing the work of the Learning Centered Task Force. The plans included a focus on student learning, opportunities for professional development of both faculty and staff, and recognition of student, faculty, and staff achievements. Assessment for continuous improvement was the centerpiece of each plan. Once completed, each plan was reviewed by John Tagg and revised in light of his input. To ensure that the plans are living and working documents, the President requires a progress update of the plan every six months. While Cal Poly Pomona faces challenges in terms of the complete institutionalization of assessment, there is progress, e.g., the development of campus wide learning outcomes and the continuing maturation of the institutional assessment function. This topic is discussed further in Thematic Essay Three: Student Success. Planning and Institutional Research. In response to the 2000 WASC visit and the 2003 WASC Special Visit, the office of Institutional Research, Assessment and Planning (IRAP) was created to focus on comprehensive institutional reporting and assessment. Additional staff members were hired to coordinate and implement institutional assessment activities, including the 2005 campus alumni survey, the 2005 administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and the continued campus participation in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) project since the fall of In 2004 the implementation of the PeopleSoft Student Administration System led to the formation of a cross divisional Data Warehouse Team. Their goal is to develop a comprehensive campus reporting environment that promotes and supports evidence based decision making at all levels of the university. The Data Warehouse builds on the collaborative work that preceded the introduction of BroncoDirect, the user interface for students and departments to access information on courses, progress towards degree, and other student based information. Our progress in these three areas shared vision and shared governance, the assessment of student learning, and planning and institutional research is further discussed in Thematic Essay One: Institutional Excellence. Current Challenges As the academic year ended, the campus faced many challenges but four are noteworthy. While not new or unique to Cal Poly Pomona, these issues shape the approaches to current and future strategies of the campus. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 6

7 Enrollment Growth. Since the 2000 Cal Poly Pomona self study, the university has experienced a 15% increase in full time equivalent student (FTES) enrollment (see the FTES Enrollment Sidebar). Steady growth has been occurring primarily at the freshmen level where student demand now exceeds campus capacity. In 2004 the CSU system approved campus wide freshmen impaction, allowing the university to manage the size of its freshman class as well as the freshman academic FTES Enrollment profile. Implementation of the impaction plan allows CPP to meet the needs of students in the Cal Poly Pomona service area while : 16,226 being more selective in admitting freshmen from other regions in : 18,695 California. Despite efforts to manage new student enrollment, the campus exceeded its enrollment target by 4% without a parallel increase in enrollment growth funding. Academic departments, not yet recovered from budget reductions in previous years, struggled to offer enough seats to meet student demand for courses during the academic year. There is a residual unmet demand for courses at all levels that will carry over to the academic year. In addition to a significant drop in course offerings for the Summer of 2008, the campus is planning to reduce the number of freshmen in the entering class. A new impaction plan has been submitted for system approval that increases the geographic area where the campus can be selective in making admissions decisions. Increased selectivity for entering freshmen is expected to significantly reduce the number of remedial English and math courses needed. Architecture has been impacted for many years. Now, three additional majors have been proposed for impaction at the program level because they meet the criteria of enrollment pressure: Civil Engineering, Animal Science, and Animal Health Sciences. The campus is looking beyond as it designs an enrollment management strategy that achieves an optimal balance between local and regional needs and programmatic resources. The enrollment management staff are preparing a systematic marketing and recruitment strategy that can be adjusted to meet changes in campus direction. This will help the campus face the challenge of maintaining access and diversity while simultaneously sustaining quality of instruction. Budgets and Planning. Planning at the campus level is difficult because allocations made at the Chancellor s Office for both funding and enrollment growth reflect political and economic conditions within the state and within the CSU system. The volatility of these conditions over the last eight years has hampered the ability of the campus to strategically plan ahead. Allocation decisions lag behind the deadlines for enrollment and budgeting plans at the campus level, adding to the complexity. As the university finalized this report, the State of California budget was still tentative. Despite the inherent uncertainty, the campus has the Summer and Fall 2008 course schedules in place thus allowing students to enroll in a timely fashion. To advise the vice presidents and President Ortiz on university resource management issues, the Resource Management Advisory Council (RMAC) was formed in Comprised of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 7

8 the senior financial manager in each division and in the President s Office, initial RMAC activities focused on ensuring the transparency of divisional resources and resource management advising. For several years the Academic Senate has requested the formation of a university budget committee. In response President Ortiz expanded the RMAC in January of 2008 to include the Academic Senate Chair, a faculty representative appointed by the Academic Senate, and the ASI President. President Ortiz also expanded the RMAC charge to include a review of the base allocation for each division and directed each vice president to include at least one faculty member on divisional budget committees. At the time of this report, the Academic Senate is discussing a proposal to establish a standing Senate budget committee that would serve as a cross college faculty committee to review and to advise on budgetary matters. As budgets become increasingly strained, the university must turn to private fundraising for support. Cal Poly Pomona engaged the firm of Grenzebach and Glier to survey and assess the university s capacity to raise major funds. Based on their findings, the university expects to soon begin its first comprehensive campaign. In 2007 a new National Advisory Board was formed. This group of alumni and key partners will play a role in advising the campus on its fundraising priorities. The university is also examining space planning issues. The Campus Master Plan articulates the alignment of the university s physical resources with the university mission. Cal Poly Pomona s current plan assumes an enrollment capacity of 20,000 on campus FTES. During the Spring 2008 quarter, Cal Poly Pomona began open forums and workshops for the crosscampus consultation and planning process upon which the Campus Master Plan will be revised and updated. External consultants will assist the campus with assessing, evaluating, and prioritizing future space needs and utilization requirements. The current planning process must address a fundamental question: should the campus FTES enrollment capacity increase or remain unchanged? Current capital improvement funding and proposed future academic projects for the next five years (through ) show that instructional capacity will continue to support projected enrollment targets. However, formulas do not effectively capture the changing needs of space configurations for effective student learning. Based on CSU formulas, the campus currently has an instructional capacity of 102% in lecture, 144% in lower division laboratory, and over 329% in upper division laboratory courses. In reality, we are much more constrained than these formula based numbers imply. Current facilities are being updated as projected in the existing Campus Master Plan. For example, the $62.2 million initial phase of the Library Renovation and Addition project, consisting of a new, four story, 101,000 square foot addition and renovation of 91,100 square feet, will be completed by August of The $31.3 million renovation of Building 3, one of the oldest buildings on the campus, will provide updated teaching laboratories, computer laboratories, research areas, and faculty offices. Planning at the System Level. Cal Poly Pomona s new strategic plan and facilities master plan will unfold against the backdrop of a larger, system wide plan. The CSU Board of Trustees recently adopted their new strategic plan entitled Access to Excellence. This plan California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 8

9 addresses projected changes in the state s need for higher education, demographic changes likely to emerge in the near future, the rapid change in the use of technology in teaching and learning, and workforce needs and the impact on the CSU teaching, research, and service mission. Consistent with the increased prominence of assessment, the plan places new emphasis on student learning and, acknowledging the continuing fiscal challenges, increased funding and more strategic use of resources to invest in faculty, teaching innovation, and undergraduate research. Unit Leadership and the Campus Vision. Since the 2003 Special Visit report, Cal Poly Pomona has experienced significant turnover in key leadership positions. All of the five vice presidents are or will be new to their positions, as are most associate vice presidents. The university is now searching for new deans for five colleges: Business Administration; Agriculture; Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences; Education and Integrative Studies; and the Extended University. Organization of the Inquiry In January of 2005, a small WASC working group began their work. Consisting of faculty and the leadership from Academic and Student Affairs, the group launched an iterative, grassroots based process aimed toward the identification of the themes presented in the 2006 Cal Poly Pomona Institutional Proposal. In the fall of 2005, President Ortiz appointed the WASC Steering Committee, whose membership included Academic Senate leaders as well as representatives from the university s five divisions. Since this time, the Steering Committee has maintained a regular meeting schedule with minutes recorded. In Spring 2005 a five minute video on the accreditation process was presented throughout campus with a link to a survey. In Fall 2005 we asked the campus community to refine the main points collected from the previous survey. 1,353 members of the campus community shared their views on the issues important to them. Using the information, the Steering Committee identified the three themes initially described in the university s Institutional Proposal. In February 2006 President Ortiz announced the formation of two committees, the Capacity and Preparatory Review (C&PR) Committee and the Educational Effectiveness Review (EER) Committee. Each committee includes members from university constituencies., The C&PR committee developed outlines and identified content for the C&PR Report based upon campus feedback. As the report development proceeded, a series of events were held, including a brown bag lunch event hosted at the Faculty Center for Professional Development in May of 2007, presentations at the 2007 Fall Conference, ongoing e mail feedback, and ten focus group sessions in the 2008 Winter Quarter focusing on each of the three themes. Students, faculty, staff, and administrators attended the focus group sessions. The focus group data, viewed as primary data and commentary for the report, were used to refine the essay drafts. During the process of examining this evidence, three questions guided our efforts: how are we doing, what should we be doing, and how should we proceed. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 9

10 Conclusion This essay provides the context for the three thematic essays in which we explore issues and challenges of special interest for the university and demonstrate Cal Poly Pomona s capacity to address these challenges. Ultimately, this report reaffirms Cal Poly Pomona s commitment to WASC s Core Commitment One, that is, that the university functions with clear purposes, high levels of institutional integrity, fiscal stability, and organizational structures to fulfill its purposes. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 10