AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE
Reporting School/College: College of Professional Studies
Program Reviewed: Legal Studies – BS Queens
Date Submitted to Department/Division Chair:
Overview and Program Review Summary: Please summarize this program’s mission and its relationship to the vision and mission of St. John’s University, and the program’s School/College. Identify similar programs regionally and nationally and distinguish this program from them. In addition, summarize your findings as they relate to (1) program quality, (2) market growth potential, and (3) student learning. Also, summarize any significant changes, achievements (by faculty and students and the program itself), and plans for the future. Finally, based on the information gleaned from the data in the self-study, give an overall rating of the program’s Enrollment/Market Potential by categorizing it as one of the following: (1) Enhance; (2) Maintain; (3) Reduce support, Phase out, Consolidate, or Discontinue.
(Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 1. The purpose of the program reflects and supports the strategic vision and mission of St. John’s University, and the program’s School/College.
1a. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the Catholic, Vincentian, and metropolitan identity of St. John’s University? www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
1b. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the University’s vision. www.stjohns.edu/about/out-mission/vision-statement. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
1c. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the vision and mission of the program’s School/College? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 1. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.
2a. Undergraduate SAT and High School Average
SAT / High School Average2005 / 2006 / 2007 / 2008 / 2009 / 2005 / 2006 / 2007 / 2008 / 2009
Program / 1074 / 1071 / 1080 / 1077 / 1072 / 87 / 87 / 88 / 87 / 88
School/ College / 977 / 1006 / 997 / 1017 / 1019 / 82 / 83 / 84 / 84 / 85
University / 1068 / 1075 / 1075 / 1087 / 1092 / 86 / 87 / 87 / 87 / 88
Freshmen SAT Scores
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
Computed / Computed / Computed / Computed
legal studies bs / 1,087 / 1,071 / 1,068 / 1,087
Freshmen High School Average
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
High School / High School / High School / High School
legal studies bs / 88 / 87 / 88 / 88
SAT Scores / High School Average
2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2013 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2013
School/ College - Q / 1013 / 1014 / 1025 / 1028 / 84 / 84 / 85 / 86
Total University / 1097 / 1087 / 1096 / 1104 / 87 / 87 / 88 / 89
SAT / Test-Takers / Mean Scores
Intended College Major / Number / Percent (%) / Critical Reading / Mathematics / Writing
Legal Professions and Studies / 4,280 / 3.2% / 497 / 496 / 487
* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.
2b. Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate
Fall2003 / 2004* / 2005 / 2006 / 2007 / 2008**
# Fresh / # Ret / %
Program / 76% / 79% / 85% / 83% / 87% / 92 / 76 / 83%
School/ College / 75% / 76% / 72% / 71% / 71% / 949 / 712 / 75%
University / 78% / 78% / 78% / 79% / 76% / 3268 / 2557 / 78%
Note* The % of students started in Fall 2004 and returned to the program in Fall 2005
** The % of students started in Fall 2008 and returned to the program in Fall 2009
2009 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012Total / Returned / DNR / Total / Returned / DNR / Total / Returned / DNR / Total / Returned / DNR
# / % / # / % / # / % / # / % / # / % / # / % / # / % / # / %
LES/3 / 83 / 63 / 76% / 20 / 24% / 77 / 68 / 88% / 9 / 12% / 82 / 59 / 72% / 23 / 28% / 68 / 47 / 69% / 21 / 31%
Fall
2009 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012*
# Fresh / # Ret / %
School/ College - Q / 74% / 74% / 71% / 766 / 575 / 75%
Total University / 78% / 78% / 76% / 2757 / 2195 / 80%
* The % of students started in Fall 2012 and returned to the program in Fall 2013
2c. Undergraduate 6 Year Graduation Rate
Fall1999 / 2000 / 2001 / 2002 / 2003
Program / 86% / 60% / 70%
School/ College Average Rate / 60% / 55% / 56% / 52% / 51%
University / 64% / 59% / 61% / 61% / 58%
Fall
2004 / 2005 / 2006 / 2007
School/College Average Rate - Q / 53% / 52% / 50% / 47%
Total University / 58% / 58% / 59% / 55%
2004 / 2005 / 2006 / 2007
Total / Graduated / Total / Graduated / Total / Graduated / Total / Graduated
# / % / # / % / # / % / # / %
LES / 47 / 30 / 64% / 61 / 43 / 70% / 78 / 58 / 74% / 60 / 43 / 72%
2d. Graduate Standardized Test Scores
Not Applicable
2e. Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions.
(Suggested limit 1/2 page)
Information not available.
2f. If applicable, describe the program’s student performance over the past five years on licensure or professional certification exams relative to regional and national standards. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.
FallNumber of Students / 2005 / 2006 / 2007 / 2008 / 2009
Majors / 333 / 366 / 362 / 403 / 374
Minors / 7 / 13 / 13 / 8 / 14
Total / 340 / 379 / 375 / 411 / 388
/ Fall2010
/ Fall2011
/ Fall2012
/ Fall2013
/
/ Majors
/ Majors
/ Majors
/ Majors
/
Q / LES / BS / 384 / 392 / 360 / 351
LES2 / BS/MA / 1 / 1 / 4
LES3 / BS/MA / 1 / 4
Total / 385 / 392 / 362 / 359
/ Fall2010
/ Fall2011
/ Fall2012
/ Fall2013
/
/ Minors
/ Minors
/ Minors
/ Minors
/
MINORS / LES / 8 / 15 / 14 / 17
/ Fall2010
/ Fall2011
/ Fall2012
/ Fall2013
/
/ Total
/ Total
/ Total
/ Total
/
Total / 393 / 408 / 376 / 376
2h. Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.
Degrees Granted / Academic Year04/05 / 05/06 / 06/07 / 07/08 / 08/09
Undergraduate BS / 88 / 73 / 102 / 101 / 104
09/10 / 10/11 / 11/12 / 12/13
Degrees Conferred / Degrees Conferred / Degrees Conferred / Degrees Conferred
CPS-UG-Q / Legal Studies / BS / 97 / 84 / 116 / 91
Legal Studies/Gov & Politics / BS / 1
Total / 98 / 84 / 116 / 91
Below is comparison degrees conferred data for local and national institutions based on data retrieved from the IPEDS website. This is based on the Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) Code of 22-Legal Professions and Studies.
2009-2010 / 2010-2011 / 2011-2012Bachelors
Local / 0 / 0 / 0
National / 3,866 / 4,429 / 4,592
1Local institution include: Adelphi University, Columbia University, CUNY Queens College, Fordham University, Hofstra University, Iona College, C.W. Post University, Manhattan College, New York University, Pace University, Seton Hall University, Stony Brook University, and Wagner College.
Comments : Based on the data in 2g and 2h, how do these trends compare to institutional, regional and national patterns? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
2i. What mechanisms are in place to monitor students’ progress toward degree? And, to what extent is there a collaborative effort to provide quality advising and support services to students? (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
2j. If available, provide information on the success of graduates in this program as it relates to employment or attending graduate school. (Suggested limit 1/4 page)
2k. Please comment on the students’ competencies in the program. Support your responses using data provided below and any other data available. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 2. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 3. The program engages in ongoing systematic planning that is aligned with the University and School/College planning, direction, and priorities.
3a. How does your programs’s strategic goal/objectives link to your School/College plan and the University’s strategic plan? http://www.stjohns.edu/about/leadership/strategic-planning.
3b. What is the evidence of monitoring the external and internal environments, specifically what are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats facing the program? How were they identified? What actions have been taken in response to these findings? What characteristics of the program suggest a competitive edge against other programs regionally and nationally?
3c. What is the current and future market demand for the program? Support your response using the data provided below or any other internal or external sources to justify your response.
Fastest Growing Occupations / Change, 2010-20 / Occupations having the largest numerical increase in employment / Change, 2010-20Percent / Numeric / Percent / Numeric
Bailiffs, Correctional Officers and Jailers / 5% / 26,000 / Law Enforcement Workers / 7% / 58,700
Private Detectives and Investigators / 21% / 7,100
Law Enforcement Workers / 7% / 58,700
Grow much faster than average – Increase 21% or more / Changes, 2010-20
Percent / Numeric
Private Detectives and Investigators / 21% / 7,100
Grow about as fast as average - Increase 7 to 14.9% / Changes, 2010-20
Percent / Numeric
Law Enforcement Workers / 7% / 58,700
Bailiffs, Correctional Officers and Jailers / 5% / 26,000
*For more information please visit: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.toc.htm
Standard 3. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 4. The program provides a high quality curriculum that emphasizes and assesses student learning and engagement.
4a. Please indicate how the program curriculum is in alignment with the following three items:
(Suggested limit 1/2 page for each of the three categories below)
1. Standards within the discipline
2. Curriculum integrity, coherence, academic internships, teaching excellence, teaching vibrancy, and study abroad experiences.
3. The University Core competencies
4b. The syllabi for the courses within this program incorporate the suggested elements of a syllabus – an example of which can be found at the following St. John’s University Center for Teaching and Learning link. (Suggested limit 1/3 page) http://stjohns.campusguides.com/content.php?pid=71651&sid=984766
4c. Describe the assessment model currently in place for the program and indicate the extent to which disciplinary and core knowledge, competence, and values are met, as well as findings and action plans for improvement. For reference, visit WeaveOnline – https://app.weaveonline.com//login.aspx; Digication – https://stjohns.digication.com/. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)
4d. What, if any, external validations, e.g. specialized accreditations, external awards, other validations of quality has the program received? (Suggested limit 1/3 page)
Standard 4. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)
STANDARD 5. The program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals.
5a. Below you will find the number of students enrolled as majors and minors in the program. Please complete the table by adding the number of full-time faculty assigned to the program. Then calculate the student to full-time faculty ratio.
# Majors/ FT Faculty / Fall 2005 / Fall 2006 / Fall 2007 / Fall 2008 / Fall 2009FT / PT / Total / FT / PT / Total / FT / PT / Total / FT / PT / Total / FT / PT / Total
Majors / 309 / 24 / 333 / 344 / 22 / 366 / 345 / 17 / 362 / 386 / 17 / 403 / 362 / 12 / 374
Minors / 6 / 1 / 7 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 8 / 8 / 13 / 1 / 14
Majors & Minors Combined / 315 / 25 / 340 / 357 / 22 / 379 / 358 / 17 / 375 / 394 / 17 / 411 / 375 / 13 / 388
# of FTE Students (Majors & Minors) / 315 / 8 / 323 / 357 / 7 / 364 / 358 / 6 / 364 / 394 / 6 / 400 / 375 / 4 / 379
# of FTE Faculty assigned to the program / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
FTE Student/ FTE Faculty Ratio / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total
Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors / Majors
MAJORS / 369 / 17 / 386 / 374 / 19 / 393 / 348 / 15 / 363 / 343 / 16 / 359
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / Total
Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors / Minors
MINORS / 6 / 2 / 8 / 12 / 3 / 15 / 13 / 1 / 14 / 17 / 17
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total
Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total / Total
Total / MAJORS/MINORS / 375 / 19 / 394 / 386 / 22 / 408 / 361 / 16 / 377 / 360 / 16 / 376
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total / F / P / Total
FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE / FTE
Total / FTE MAJORS / 375 / 6.333 / 381.333 / 386 / 7.333 / 393.333 / 361 / 5.333 / 366.333 / 360 / 5.333 / 365.333
Fall 2010 / Fall 2011 / Fall 2012 / Fall 2013
# of FTE faculty assigned to the program
FTE Student/FTE Faculty Ratio
Important Notes: