LIVING THE LAND-GRANT MISSION IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT Institutional Self-Study: January 13, 2015 Prepared for: The Middle States Commission on Higher Education The Pennsylvania State University Page | i Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 1 THE PROCESS ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 THE SELF STUDY ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 1. INTRODUCTION AND SELF-STUDY DESIGN ..................................................................................................... 7 1.1 NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE SELF STUDY ................................................................................................................ 9 1.2 SELF-STUDY DESIGN AND THEME ....................................................................................................................... 10 1.3 INTENDED OUTCOMES ..................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEES ....................................................................... 12 1.5 COMMUNITY INPUT AND FEEDBACK .................................................................................................................... 13 2. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT AND FOUNDATIONS ........................................................................................... 14 2.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 MISSION AND GOALS ....................................................................................................................................... 15 2.3 ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................................................................ 24 2.4 INTEGRITY ...................................................................................................................................................... 29 2.5 FACULTY ........................................................................................................................................................ 33 2.6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................... 38 3. PLANNING, BUDGETING, AND GOVERNANCE .............................................................................................. 42 3.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 42 3.2 PLANNING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION, AND INSTITUTIONAL RENEWAL ......................................................................... 43 3.3 INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 45 3.4 LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE ......................................................................................................................... 57 3.5 INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................. 72 3.6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................... 84 4. EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT AND OFFERINGS ................................................................................................... 87 4.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 87 4.2 EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS................................................................................................................................. 88 4.3 GENERAL EDUCATION .................................................................................................................................... 106 4.4 RELATED EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................... 114 4.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................. 127 5. STUDENT EXPERIENCE ............................................................................................................................... 131 5.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................................... 131 5.2 STUDENT ADMISSIONS AND RETENTION............................................................................................................. 132 5.3 STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES ........................................................................................................................... 143 5.4 ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING ................................................................................................................ 159 5.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................. 164 The Pennsylvania State University Page | ii 6. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 169 APPENDIX A: ACCESSING SUPPORTING MATERIALS ON ANGEL ......................................................................... 171 APPENDIX B: SELF-STUDY STEERING COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP .................................... 172 APPENDIX C: PENN STATE ACRONYMS REFERENCE SHEET ................................................................................. 175 APPENDIX D: ORGANIZATIONAL CHART............................................................................................................. 177 The Pennsylvania State University Page | iii Executive Summary The Process Preparation of this institutional self-study began in the summer of 2012, when President Rodney A. Erickson and Interim Executive Vice President and Provost Robert N. Pangborn asked Blannie E. Bowen, Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, to oversee the University’s self-study process in preparation for Penn State’s 2014/15 decennial re-accreditation. Dr. Bowen was supported in the process by Michael J. Dooris, Executive Director of the Office of Planning and Institutional Assessment. A Steering Committee, comprising 18 members and chaired by Dr. Bowen, was formed and charged in the spring of 2013. The Steering Committee appointed four subcommittees, organized around four areas critical to the functioning of the University: 1) Institutional Context and Foundation, 2) Planning, Budgeting, and Governance, 3) Educational Context and Offerings, and 4) Student Experience. Each subcommittee addressed a subset of the 14 standards that the Middle States Commission for Higher Education outlines in Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: Requirements of Affiliation and Standards for Accreditation. Each subcommittee was chaired by a member of the Steering Committee and assisted by a staff member from the Office of Planning and Institutional Assessment. Subcommittee membership was diverse and included trustees, faculty, administrators, students, and staff from a variety of campus locations. Overall, 48 members of the Steering Committee and the subcommittees contributed to the composition of the self-study report. In April 2013, Tito Guerrero, Vice President at MSCHE, visited the University Park campus to meet with Drs. Bowen and Dooris, the Steering Committee, and University administration to discuss the self-study design. With input from Dr. Guerrero, it was agreed that in addition to University Park, a number of undergraduate campuses would be visited by the evaluation team during its visit. On June 26, 2013, the self-study design was submitted to Dr. Guerrero for review and was approved. Once approval was received, the Steering Committee began to expand the design into the self-study report. The theme of the report is Living the Land-Grant Mission in a Global Context. This theme builds from Penn State’s historic objectives toward what the land-grant mission means for the University today. This approach has provided the Penn State community with an important opportunity to reflect on its past and to guide its future. A preliminary draft of the self-study report was reviewed by the Steering Committee in early spring, 2014. After review by the Committee, the draft document was sent for further review to various constituencies—administrators, trustees, faculty, staff, and students. As a result of these reviews, further revisions were made, and a revised draft was distributed to the Steering Committee for final comments and update. The Pennsylvania State University Page | 1 The Self Study The self-study identifies strengths and challenges that the University faces in 2014 and the future. The study links its self-assessment to the 14 MSCHE standards and to opportunities for Penn State to better achieve its mission. Even though the standards are grouped thematically, there are dimensions of effectiveness – for example, achievement of the University’s goals for diversity and educational equity – that cut across standards, themes, and subcommittees. Thus, in order to assist readers referring to specific sections of the report, there are some intentional redundancies, combined with many cross references for additional detail. Relevant supporting materials are available to the site team via Penn State’s course management system, ANGEL. Instructions for accessing these materials are located in Appendix A. For readers’ reference, the following additional supporting materials are also located in the following appendices: • Self-study Steering Committee and Subcommittee membership, Appendix B • List of commonly used Penn State Acronyms, Appendix C; and • Penn State organizational chart, Appendix D. The organizational framework for the self-study is keyed to four chapters (Chapters 2 through 5): Chapter 2: Institutional Context and Foundation (Standards 1, 5, 6, and 10) The Institutional Context and Foundation chapter reaffirms the University’s steadfast commitment to realizing its historical land-grant mission, while also meeting the challenges of st the 21 century. The University has been and will continue to be committed to serving the Commonwealth, nation, and world through teaching, research, and service. Over the last several years, numerous economic and social challenges have emerged that threaten the ability of American colleges and universities to carry out their important social functions. In order to meet these threats and support the work of the University, Penn State has sought to implement innovative, mission-centered approaches to cost-cutting and revenue enhancement that will enable the University to live out its mission for years to come. The success of the University has been and will continue to be enabled by an effective administrative structure that supports the work of faculty, staff, and students. The heart of Penn State is its faculty who enable the University to meet its core land-grant mission. The University provides an environment that is strongly supportive of scholarly research, scholarship, teaching and service. Effective teaching is expected at all levels and is aided by community resources. By several measures, Penn State students are highly successful, which speaks to the quality of instruction and faculty mentorship. The University’s research model, through its Institutes, strongly supports interdisciplinary scholarship that promotes the development of faculty and undergraduate and graduate students. Penn State is now considered among the top research universities in the nation, and many departments and programs are ranked among the best in the world. The Pennsylvania State University Page | 2 Penn State is an institution of integrity that is committed to actively assessing and reviewing important ethics and integrity measures. The management infrastructure created by the University leadership will continue to seek better and more efficient ways to promote a culture of ethics and integrity. The Director of University Ethics and Compliance makes and will continue to make regular reports to the Board of Trustees Legal and Compliance Committee so that its members may assess the University’s progress. Penn State is committed to being a leader in ethics, integrity, and setting the standard for the higher education community nationally. Chapter 3: Planning, Budgeting, and Governance (Standards 2, 3, 4, and 7) Chapter 3 addresses the extent to which Penn State’s planning, budgeting, and governance resources and mechanisms enable the University to support its mission. Because aspects of that topic involve questions about structures, policies and practices concerning communication with and participation of various groups (such as administrators, trustees, faculty, staff, students, and other stakeholders), Chapter 3 is closely related to, and builds upon, Chapter 2: Institutional Context and Foundation (Standards 1, 5, 6, and 10). Penn State has long been as deeply committed to strategic management as any large university in the United States. Its ongoing, participative, institution-wide process dates to the early 1980s. While Chapter 3 does address typical matters of strategic planning and budgeting, and provides appropriate evidence on those topics, there is little question that Penn State has a strong foundation of proactive and effective management. What may also be of interest to reasonable observers are questions about governance, especially in light of the Sandusky scandal, the Freeh Report (an independent report by Louis Freeh and his law firm Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, into the facts and circumstances of the actions of the University surrounding the child abuse committed by a former employee, Gerald A. Sandusky), and related matters that earned Penn State considerable attention in 2011/12. Chapter 3 thus provides information on unique issues connected to the events of 2011/12, including various reports and investigations, financial implications, leadership transitions, actions by the Board of Trustees and the University Faculty Senate, communication mechanisms, and relevant policies and procedures. Penn State clearly has the resources and infrastructure necessary to support its mission and the University utilizes extensive, well-documented, and coordinated management systems. That said, Penn State, like many colleges and universities, continues to seek opportunities to improve in the areas of planning, budgeting, and governance. For example, the balance between centralized and decentralized administrative structures is under review throughout higher education. Penn State is reviewing existing structures and considering changes in the balance points in areas such as Human Resources, Information Technology, and shared governance. These reviews will continue. Penn State today is, of course, especially sensitive to the importance of good communication across various parts of the University. It is increasingly important for the academic side of the University to be closely connected to administrative areas such as finance and business, and human resources and vice versa. Efforts to build bridges The Pennsylvania State University Page | 3 across these functions will continue in light of the recommendations of the Freeh report and recent efforts to make changes in the University’s underlying administrative systems. In short, the evidence indicates that the University’s planning, budgeting, and governance structures and practices create a firm foundation for achieving institutional goals and for Penn st State to thrive as a 21 century public research university. Chapter 4: Educational Context and Offerings (Standards 11, 12, and 13) This chapter presents evidence demonstrating that Penn State meets Standard 11—Educational Offerings, Standard 12—General Education, and Standard 13—Related Educational Activities. Discussion around the three standards describes the range and diversity of educational offerings at Penn State, and the related policies and resources. Also presented are recommendations for improvement and suggested directions for new areas of opportunity. The chapter focuses primarily on process, describing relevant policies, procedures, and resources related to these three standards. Evidence from the assessment and evaluation of these areas is presented in Chapter 5, Student Experience, Success and Development. Chapter 5: Student Experience, Success, and Development (Standards 8, 9, and 14) Chapter 5 provides an overview of the student experience at Penn State by examining student admissions and retention (Standard 8), student support services (Standard 9), and the assessment of student learning (Standard 14). As the demographics of the college-going population changes, the Undergraduate Admissions Office continuously evaluates and improves processes to ensure the University meets its strategic goal of enrolling a diverse and inclusive population that includes traditional-age students, adult-learners, international and domestic students, and students of color. Like other public institutions whose state funding has decreased, Penn State has maintained its efforts to make education affordable to all those who are admitted to the University. Chapter 5 details recruitment initiatives that range from the recruitment centers in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh through a web application system that helps students and their families to understand whether and why Penn State is a good academic and financial fit. The success of the Penn State educational experience cannot be solely attributed to an Admissions Office that admits only academically strong students. Collaborative efforts between the Offices of Undergraduate Education and Student Affairs have greatly enhanced the student experience. Through the revamped New Student Orientation program, students receive academic advice and learn about the social and co-curricular opportunities available to them at Penn State. The University has devoted ample resources and services to ensure both undergraduate and graduate student success, and a sampling of these programs is detailed in this chapter. Depending on the college or campus at Penn State, students are also exposed to a variety of high-impact educational practices endorsed by the Association of American Colleges and Universities. These include: first-year seminars and experiences, common intellectual The Pennsylvania State University Page | 4 experiences, learning communities, writing-intensive courses, undergraduate research, diversity/global learning, service learning and community-based learning, internships, and capstone courses and projects. Thus, Penn State provides students the opportunities and services to help them develop and achieve their educational goals. Penn State works hard not only to ensure that students have ample opportunities to learn, but also to assess whether student learning is occurring in the curriculum and the co-curriculum. Chapter 5 illustrates that assessment has become an important part of Penn State’s culture. One remaining issue is that the quality of assessment varies around the University. However, serious efforts are in place, especially through the cross-University, high-level Administrative Council on Undergraduate Education Assessment Coordinating Committee, to evaluate and support assessment efforts, especially with regard to general education and baccalaureate programs, across Penn State. These initiatives are designed to be supportive and helpful (not punitive) in improving and implementing assessment plans and programs. With a solid infrastructure in place, Penn State is seeing assessment coming to greater fruition, as information is better communicated, best practices shared among units, and assessment results used to drive decision-making. Making information more accessible may help ameliorate the silo effects that can occur at such a large and complex university as Penn State. Conclusion Penn State’s leadership chose the theme of this self-study – Living the Land-Grant Mission in a Global Context – purposefully, with the intent of providing a sense of balance, gaining perspective, and producing a useful, honest, and meaningful analysis. Penn State is a distinguished university with a history of excellence and strong ambitions for the future. There is no doubt that recent years have been tumultuous for Penn State; it has been necessary and appropriate that this self-study face head-on the highly publicized and troubling Sandusky scandal. Yet Penn State has been and remains a great public research university. It is committed to building on its 160-year history, and to becoming an even greater university in the decades ahead. While the events of 2011/12 were painful and disruptive, Penn State responded with honest self-examination and positive change. The University continues to look ahead, and remains committed to shaping lives, pursuing excellence, and remaining in the forefront of higher education. As documented in this self-study, Penn State is a strong university with a full range of achievements in teaching, research, and outreach. The University has the resources, processes, and structures necessary to achieve its public land-grant mission, fulfill its responsibilities, and undertake necessary assessment and ongoing improvement. Along with all colleges and universities, of course, Penn State faces change and uncertainty on all sides. Technological, economic, and societal forces – weakening state support, constraints on tuition increases, demographic shifts, globalization, cost pressures, the emergence of new competitors, the potential and the threat of the digital revolution – are converging to transform higher education. Penn State faculty, The Pennsylvania State University Page | 5 students, staff, and administrators need to continue to question the status quo, to be agile and flexible, to go outside the approach of business as usual, and to seek innovative, cost-effective ways to achieve high-quality outcomes in everything the University does. This self-study suggests ways in which the University can sharpen priorities and act strategically in the years ahead. Penn State must continue devoting attention to governance, communication, integrity, and transparency, as it has been doing, in particular, through implementation of the recommendations of the Freeh Report. Penn State should continue to pursue paths to more efficient and effective operations, and to align resources with its most important needs and priorities, as it has with strategic planning and initiatives such as the Core Council and the Budget Planning Task Force. Penn State should follow through on technology initiatives, including new student information systems, human resource information systems, information technology governance, and plans to grow online learning. Penn State should continue to think and act globally, in terms of its global engagement strategy, research and service programs, curricula, experiences of faculty and students, and international recruitment. Penn State should continue to build its capability to assess and improve student learning. The University has greatly improved its capacity and ability to collect and analyze internal data in recent years; now Penn State should continue its commitment to become more conscientious and intentional about sharing and acting on assessment information. In addition, the effort to review and update the fifteen year-old general education curriculum should remain a high priority. Faculty, staff, students, and administrators working together can create a foundation for ever greater accomplishment. The elements are in place for the University to extend its reach and impact through teaching and learning, research, and service. With continued hard work, creativity, and dedication, Penn st State can become an even greater university, living its land-grant mission as a 21 century global university. The Pennsylvania State University Page | 6