4.1:General Requirements of the Educational Program

4-1

Chapter 4

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

4.1:GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

4.1.1All aspects of the educational program must be clearly related to the purpose of the institution.

The Mission Statement and Purpose of the University are delineated on page 5 of the 2001-2003 Troy State University Undergraduate Bulletin (hereinafter cited as the Bulletin). The purposes of each college, department, and degree program are published in the Bulletin at the beginning of each unit’s course offerings and are fully complementary to and congruent with the University’s purpose statement. In addition, each educational program has outlined the relationship of its purpose to the purpose (mission) of Troy State University in the Six Points of Institutional Effectiveness (SPIE). At the close of each calendar year, each unit of Troy State University updates its SPIE as part of the Institutional Effectiveness Cycle which won a National Association of College and University Business Management Achievement Award in 1996. One of the Six Points addresses the purpose and how the purpose relates to the University’s purpose (mission). In the SPIE for the Marketing Program, for example, the Program supports the purpose of the University by being “dedicated to the preparation of students in a variety of fields in…business…”; the purpose of the Marketing program relates specifically to the University’s objectives of providing “programs that enable students to read, write, compute, speak effectively, and think critically,” and the program prepares “students to demonstrate competence in their chosen field(s) of study at appropriate degree levels.”

In another example relating to the University’s purpose as “global in perspective,” the K-6 Collaborative Teacher Program reaches a diverse population of “traditional and nontraditional students;” encourages students “to realize their unique potential and to become productive members of society,” and in keeping with the institutional objectives, the Program is committed to preparing students who “demonstrate competence in their chosen field of study.” Additionally, the Program encourages “excellence in student learning.”

Further evidence of the educational programs being related to the University’s purpose can be found in the copies of the SPIE which are available in the Office of institutional Research, Planning, and Effectiveness and on its website at

4.1.2 The institution must provide a competent faculty, adequate library/learning

resources, and appropriate computer resources, instructional materials/ equipment and physical facilities.

Troy State University maintains a competent and qualified faculty, adequate library and computer resources, and appropriate learning materials and equipment. As evidence of faculty competency and qualification, the following table provides students’ ratings from surveys administered during Academic Year (AY) 2000-2001.

Table 4.1.2A

Students’ Ratings of Academic Areas

Survey / Item / % Rating Good, Excellent
Graduating Student Survey (N=766) / Knowledge of subject matter and processes in their major / 94%
Knowledge of issues and trends in their major / 92%
Knowledge of theories in their major / 90%
Strategies for applying skills in their field / 90%
Knowledge of management and organizational skills in their major / 89%
Instruction in their major / 89%
Courses in their major / 92%
General education courses / 80%
Accessibility of instructors in their major / 84%
Attitude of faculty towards students / 82%
Graduate Student Survey (N=166) / Students’ academic experience / 88%
Classes students have taken / 89%
Quality of courses in preparing students for employment / 84%
Quality of instruction in students’ courses / 87%
Overall quality of students’ graduate education / 87%
Undergraduate Survey (N=584) / Students’ academic experience / 83%
Classes students have taken / 83%
Students’ professors / 84%
Quality of instruction in courses in the major / 84%
Professional competence of departmental faculty in the major / 85%

Ninety percent (90%) of graduate students strongly agreed or agreed that their respective programs of study were exposing them to the theories most fundamental to their field; 90% strongly agreed or agreed that their program was educating them in the current methodologies in their field; and 83% strongly agreed or agreed that their program was giving them the practical training they needed in their field (Compendium of Survey and Test Results for 2000-2001). The competency and qualifications of faculty can be further determined from the annual evaluations and the faculty files located in the Office of the Provost.

The adequacy of the Library/learning resources is substantiated by the results of student surveys.

Table 4.1.2B

Students’ Ratings of Library/Learning Resources 2000-2001

Survey / Item / % Rating Good, Excellent
Graduating Student Survey (N=766) / Students’ education in using the Library / 76%
Library Services / 75%
Library Facilities / 75%
Writing skills improvement services of the Writing Center / 82%
Science and math skills improvement in the Natural Science Center / 79%
Graduate Student Survey (N=166) / Library / 78%
Quality of library holdings in students’ programs / 76%
Quality of library holdings for students’ research / 75%
Undergraduate Survey (N=584) / Natural Science Center / 81%
Writing Center / 79%

All ratings were based on the opinions of students who actually used the facilities (Compendium of Survey and Test Results 2000-2001).

Appropriate computer resources and instructional materials and equipment are provided, and evidence may be found in the results of student surveys.

Table 4.1.2C

Students’ Ratings of Computer Resources

and Instructional Materials and Equipment

Survey / Item / % Good & Excellent 00-01
Graduating Student Survey (N=766) / Computer Facilities / 73%
Laboratory/instructional equipment / 74%
Academic computer services and labs / 75%
Graduate Student Survey (N=166) / Quality of computer support for students’ research & studies / 81%
Quality of lab facilities for students’ research & studies / 77%
Computer Center/ ComputerWorks / 76%
Undergraduate Survey (N=584) / Journalism Computer Lab / 81%
Bibb Graves Computer Labs / 66%
ComputerWorks in McCartha Hall / 69%

All ratings were based on the opinions of students who actually used the facilities (Compendium of Survey and Test Results 2000-2001).

Troy State University’s physical facilities are adequate, and several renovation projects are ongoing or have been recently completed, including a major renewal of the Math/Science Complex which houses many of the departments in the College of Arts and Sciences. On the Surveys, 78% ofgraduating students rated building and grounds excellent or good; 72% of graduate students rated campus facilities as excellent or good; and 70% of undergraduate students rated campus facilities overall as excellent or good.

4.1.3The student enrollment and financial resources of an institution must be sufficient to support an effective educational program.

The University’s student enrollment and financial resources are adequate to support an effective educational program. Over the past 10 years, Troy State University has encountered several rounds of proration (reduction of funds) in the Alabama State budget emanating from the governor’s office and the State legislature, but the University leadership has managed to maintain sufficient financial resources to support effectively the educational programs of the University.

Because the instruction expenditure per FTE student is an expenditure statistic to demonstrate that student enrollment and financial resources are sufficient, a comparison was made between the expenditures per FTE student for Troy State University in various disciplines and national benchmark expenditures per FTE student provided by the University of Delaware National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity in year 2000. For 19 disciplines, this study reported expenditures per student FTE for both a national benchmark and the University. The information summarized in Table 4.1.3A is based on Troy State University’s instructional cost and productivity compared to schools having a similar comprehensive Carnegie classification. Table 4.1.3A shows that the University's expenditures per FTE Student exceeded the national benchmark expenditures in 7 of 19 disciplines and were less than $1,000 (ranging from $56 to $633) per FTE difference for four more disciplines; therefore, of the 19 disciplines studied eleven exceeded or were near the national benchmarks based on Carnegie classification.

Table 4.1.3A

University of Delaware National Study of Instructional Cost and Productivity

Comparison of TSU Direct Instructional Expenditure per Student FTE

With National Direct Instructional Expenditure per Student FTE

Based on Carnegie Classification (Comprehensive)

Discipline / National Exp./FTE / TSU Exp./FTE
Communications / $3,269 / $3,478
CIS1 / $4,101 / $2,357
Education2 / $4,050 / $2,142
English / $3,170 / $2,537
Speech / $3,509 / $3,874
Biology/EAM / $3,919 / $2,833
Mathematics / $3,153 / $3,499
Kinesiology& HP / $4,099 / $5,325
Chemistry3 / $5,119 / $1,758
Psychology / $3,051 / $2,815
Criminal Justice / $3,423 / $4,515
Public Admin.4 / $4,263 / $2,935
Soc. Sciences5 / $2,390 / $1,025
Fine Arts / $4,271 / $4,517
Music / $6,753 / $8,257
Nursing / $8,927 / $7,499
Business / $4,627 / $4,571
Foreign Language / $4,097 / $1,644
Military Tech. / $2,659 / $2,492

1The CIS program was reorganized with Computer Science (CS) moving to the Mathematics Department and Information Systems (IS) housed in the College of Business. IS has been down graded to a concentration. Much of the work has been shifted to IS in the College of Business. A cooperative program between TSU-Troy and TSU-Montgomery is in the final stages of development to revitalize the CIS program.

2At the time of comparison, several faculty positions in Education were vacant. Since that time, seven faculty members have been employed.

3A concern exists that at the time data were submitted for comparison, the reorganization of the science departments caused the data submitted to be somewhat flawed; the actual expenditures per FTE are far greater. Moreover, this department is small in majors and minors; the major focus is on service courses for other disciplines. It should also be noted that fees held in escrow accounts heavily subsidize all of the science areas, and these subsidies are not accounted for as direct institutional expenditures.

4This is a new program on the Troy campus, for which additional funds will be earmarked for the AY 2003-2004.

5As the university has moved to “teach out” several concentrations in this area, and in the absence of a pure department of “social sciences,” no statistical validity may be drawn from the data.

Another chart in the Delaware study reported the University's instructional cost and productivity compared to schools based on the highest degree offered. As shown in Table 4.1.3B below, the University's expenditure per FTE Student exceeded the national benchmarks in seven of the 19 disciplines and was within less than $1,000 (ranging from $211 to $982) per FTE difference for 5 more disciplines; therefore, 12 of 19 disciplines exceeded or were near the national benchmarks for 19 disciplines when compared based on highest degree (Fact Book, March, 2002, pp. 94-95).

Table 4.1.3B

University of Delaware National Study of Instructional Cost and Productivity

Comparison of TSU Direct Instructional Expenditure per Student FTE

With National Direct Instructional Expenditure per Student FTE

Based on Highest Degree

Discipline / National Exp./FTE / TSU Exp./FTE
Communications / $3,164 / $3,478
CIS1 / $3,937 / $2,357
Education2 / $4,091 / $2,142
English / $3,478 / $2,537
Speech / $3,570 / $3,874
Biology/EAM / $3,815 / $2,833
Mathematics / $3,330 / $3,499
Kinesiology& HP / $4,426 / $5,325
Chemistry3 / $5,210 / $1,758
Psychology / $3,026 / $2,815
Criminal Justice / $3,576 / $4,515
Public Admin.4 / $4,597 / $2,935
Soc. Sciences5 / $2,562 / $1,025
Fine Arts / $4,479 / $4,517
Music / $6,115 / $8,257
Nursing / $9,112 / $7,499
Business / $4,857 / $4,571
Foreign Language / $3,492 / $1,644
Military Tech. / $3,164 / $2,492

2At the time of comparison, several faculty positions in Education were vacant. Since that time, seven faculty members have been employed.

4This is a new program on the Troy campus, for which additional funds will be earmarked for the AY 2003-2004.

It should be noted that these comparisons are made with national averages and not regional averages. The continued decrease in State appropriations is a major factor in the lower expenditures for some disciplines, and the changes in programs, reorganization of programs, and size of programs may also explain some of the lower expenditures. Because the accounting system is organized by departments, the monetary amounts are calculated by departmental budgets, and there was no pure department for Social Science. As noted in the footnotes, the CIS program was reorganized with CS going to the Mathematics Department which exceeds the national average and with IS housed in the College of Business which is very near the national average. In Education, there were faculty vacancies that would reflect a lower expenditure for the discipline. Public Administration was a new program to the Troy campus, and Chemistry primarily supports other programs and the core curriculum studies.

Based on these national benchmark comparisons and the explanations provided in the footnotes and narrative, Troy State University’s enrollment and financial resources are sufficient to support an effective educational program. Additional information regarding financial resources can be found in Chapter 6 of this Self-Study.

4.1.4In addition, the institution must ensure appropriate levels of student achievement and equivalent quality of programs regardless of method of instruction or location of program.

Through various means of internal and external assessment, the University ensures appropriate levels of student achievement and maintains equitable levels of program quality throughout Troy State University.

Internal assessments are required in all academic programs. In addition to course assessments of instructors for all courses in a program, the Six Points of Institutional Effectiveness are defined for all educational programs, and the SPIE provide for each program the purpose, objectives, expected results, assessment methods, procedures for assessment, and positions responsible for assessment reporting. Following the parameters established by the SPIE, each program provides an Annual Assessment Report that gives the actual results of assessment and the comparison of actual results to expected results. Whether a program is offered on the Troy campus, Phenix City campus, or at one of the University College sites, the method of assessing student achievement of the program is the same. This process provides one means of ensuring appropriate levels of student achievement and equitable quality of programs regardless of the method of instruction or location of the program.

The SPIE and Annual Assessment Reports are available in the Office of Institutional Research, Planning, and Effectiveness and on the OIRPE website Inspection of these documents will reveal that a wide variety of assessment instruments is used. For undergraduate program assessment, instruments include Major Field Tests (MFT), exit examinations, surveys, portfolios, and other assessment methods appropriate to the particular program.

For graduate programs, results from comprehensive exams, capstone seminars, focus groups, and surveys are used for assessment. External assessments are made in Troy State University programs that have achieved special accreditation, and these special accreditations ensure appropriate levels of achievement and quality of programs. Professional accreditation is provided for teacher education (NCATE), music (NASM), nursing (NLNAC), social work education (CSWE), business (ACBSP and IACBE), athletic training (CAAHEP) and counseling and psychology (CACREP). In all programs, assessment is sufficient to ensure appropriate levels of achievement of students and equitable quality of programs regardless of method of instruction or location of the program.

4.2 UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM:

4.2.1 Undergraduate Admission

4.2.1.1 General admission policies must be established by the governing board on recommendation of the administration. The board is responsible for deciding the size and character of the student body. Implementation of specific admission policies, however, is the responsibility of the administration and faculty of the institution.

Troy State University’s general admission policies described in the Undergraduate Bulletin 2001-2003 (pp.45-51) are established by the Institution’s Board of Trustees, based upon recommendations from the Administration and the Enrollment Services Committee. In the Standing Committees of Troy State University, August 1, 2001, through July 31, 2002, (pp. 12-13) the purpose of the Enrollment Services Committee is given:

This committee recommends to the administration and the Board of Trustees the adoption of policies related to admissions, retention, financial aid, scholarships, pre-registration, and registration. It works closely with staff in Admissions, Financial Aid, and University Records. (p. 12)

Under this administrative arrangement, the Board is responsible for determining the size and character of the Troy State University student body, but the Board’s decisions are based on recommendations from the administration. The admissions policies adopted by the Board of Trustees are in compliance with a July 11, 1983, consent decree (United States of America v. the State of Alabama, et al, Civil Action No. CV-83-M-1676-S). Under the terms of this consent decree, the University may not modify admission standards and policies without providing written notice to the United States Department of Justice.

4.2.1.2The unit responsible for administering the policies must be clearly identified.

The Office of Enrollment Management, chaired by the Dean of Enrollment Management and located in the Division of Student Affairs, implements the University’s admissions policies. The Dean of Enrollment Management is responsible to the Vice President for Student Affairs. Also, the Dean of Enrollment Management is a member of the Enrollment Services Committee which is chaired by the Vice President for Student Affairs (StandingCommittees of Troy State University, August 1, 2001, through July 31, 2002, pages 12 and 35).

4.2.1.3In those institutions in which various subdivisions maintain separate admission requirements, there must be institution-wide coordination of all admission policies and procedures.

Various subdivisions of the University may maintain separate admission requirements, but the Office of Enrollment Management coordinates the admission policies of all divisions. An Admissions Coordination Committee with representation from all subdivisions and chaired by the Dean of Enrollment Management, meets regularly to ensure adherence to all admission policies and procedures under the guidelines of the University bulletins. The Table 4.2.1.3 below provides a clearer illustration of the subdivisions included in the Committee.