Accreditations

The strength of our academic programs is confirmed through our consistent record of receiving institutional and specialized accreditations. Millersville University is accredited by the Commission on Higher Education of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools and the Pennsylvania Department of Education. The National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education accredits our 20 teaching certification programs, and eleven academic programs are individually accredited (Appendix 3-1).

Academic Goal-Setting

In 1995-1996 the Provost initiated "conversations across the disciplines": discussions with faculty to develop and articulate a vision of our educational requirements and expectations as we enter the next century. Faculty were asked about the knowledge, skills, dispositions, and programs that students need today, faculty professional development needs, and strategies to maximize our fiscal resources. The conversations reaffirmed our continued commitments to a strong liberal arts education; to a curriculum that provides multiple opportunities for learning discipline-based knowledge; to the systematic assessment of our educational programs; and to developing collaborative relationships with other entities for mutual benefit. These conversations led to the following goals for our academic programs, which largely remain in place today:

• To continue to provide an academic experience grounded in the liberal arts which maximizes student knowledge, academic skills and intellectual/humanitarian perspectives;
• To articulate clearly our high expectations for student performance and behavior and for each student taking responsibility for decisions and actions affecting his or her academic life;
• To continue supporting programs designed to strengthen the lifelong learning aspects of the curriculum; and
• To strengthen graduate education by incorporating explicit references to it in academic policy decision making and review, by developing new graduate programs in response to regional needs, and by sponsoring graduate student participation in scholarly activities.

Program Review

In 1988, we began a systematic process of program review in compliance with a State System policy that all university programs undergo such reviews at least once every five years. Since 1995, 15 academic programs including the General Education curriculum completed program reviews. These program reviews have led to a number of substantive improvements, including the following.

• In Business Administration, overload was eliminated to comply with ACSBP guidelines and a third Finance faculty member was hired to provide continuity and help with the department's heavy advisement load.
• In Economics, new faculty members have been hired with specialties in environmental, health, quantitative, and international economics and computer equipment has been upgraded.
• In Educational Foundations, the new certification program in Educational Leadership has been implemented, and the secondary education "junior block" has been restructured to strengthen classroom management skills, teaching strategies, and the use of technology.
• In English, topical variety in literature courses has been increased by adding courses on women writers in the Middle Ages, Scottish and Irish literature, and American ethnic literature. New faculty members have been hired with specialties in African-American literature and English education and the department's facilities have been greatly improved (see Chapter 11).
• As noted above, the Honors Program is investigating the feasibility of creating an Honors College. As noted in Chapter 8, a new scholarship program has been created to attract new students to the program.
• The National Association for Industrial Technology has accredited our Industry and Technology department, and the department is developing an associate degree program in Industrial Technology. The department has also created a Safety and Technology Center (see Chapter 9) and is planning a major facilities renovation and expansion (see Chapter 11).
• In Philosophy, a new faculty member specializing in the philosophy of aesthetics has been hired, and increased secretarial support has been provided.
• In Political Science, a new faculty member specializing in constitutional law has been hired.
• In Social Work, increased secretarial support has been provided.
• In Sociology/Anthropology, criminology specialists have been hired, and a senior seminar has been established as a capstone course.

In 1997, we placed a moratorium on academic program reviews in order to redesign the process better to articulate its components, increase data analysis, emphasize the assessment of student outcomes, and align the process with specialized accreditation reviews. A pilot process was launched in 1998-99 with program reviews undertaken by three departments.

Academic Outcomes Assessment

Millersville initiated institution-wide academic outcomes assessment in 1992, when the Faculty Senate established the Academic Outcomes Assessment Committee (AOAC). AOAC is charged with sponsoring faculty development, disseminating information, soliciting and awarding grants, and annually reviewing assessment implementation. AOAC's efforts led to the participation of faculty, administrators, and staff at outcomes assessment conferences and workshops.

In 1997, we retained assessment consultant James Nichols to guide us through the design and implementation of academic outcomes assessment across the University. We have adopted the five-step model advocated by Dr. Nichols: (1) clarify the department's mission statement; (2) establish intended outcomes; (3) develop assessment methods and criteria; (4) obtain assessment results; and (5) use the results for program improvement.

We launched implementation of this model with a series of two-day workshops. Academic departments and support units were divided into three groups, each beginning their assessment activities in consecutive semesters. Each group underwent professional development, developed department assessment plans, and launched a two-year cycle of collecting assessment information, studying the results, and using the results for program improvement. As part of an effort to "train the trainers," AOAC members reviewed and critiqued department assessment plans, which were then forwarded to the consultant, who critiqued both the plans and AOAC's comments.

All academic departments and academic support units have completed the first three steps of the Nichols model, and virtually all have completed the fourth step. The departments have implemented a wide variety of assessment measures. For example:

• Biology administers a variety of standardized tests to seniors, surveys graduates, and has developed a skills checklist for faculty to use to evaluate seniors.
• Chemistry surveys seniors and administers the Major Field Achievement Test to them.
• Communication & Theatre surveys graduates and the supervisors of students in cooperative education placements.
• Computer Science administers the Major Field Achievement Test to juniors and seniors and surveys graduates and the supervisors of students in cooperative education placements.
• Cooperative Education surveys students.
• Earth Science surveys seniors and tracks the placement of graduates.
• Economics surveys graduates and has incorporated a poster session into a seminar.
• Educational Foundations surveys student teachers and their supervisors, and the Educational Leadership master's program has piloted a Principal Development Inventory.
• Elementary Education reviews Praxis exam results, surveys graduates, and reviews supervisors' evaluations of student teachers.
• English surveys seniors.
• Geography surveys seniors and tests their spatial knowledge.
• Music reviews student practice journals, surveys graduates, and has outside evaluators review seniors' scholarly writing.
• Nursing conducts a broad variety of assessments in compliance with National League for Nursing Accreditation Commission.
• Physics reviews senior research projects, administers the Major Field Achievement Test and other tests to seniors, and surveys them.
• Political Science surveys seniors.
• Psychology reviews seniors' GRE scores and the acceptance rates of graduate school applicants, surveys graduates and faculty on graduate school readiness, surveys employers of graduates, and tracks graduate placement.
• Social Work surveys seniors and graduates.
• Sociology/Anthropology reviews seniors' GRE scores and analyzes senior seminar papers.
• Special Education reviews Praxis exam results and student self-ratings on course objectives.

Already several departments have implemented the fifth step, using the results to improve their programs:

• Chemistry now reviews the progress of all majors each semester to track their progress and catch problems before they become too severe.
• Economics has increased student participation in research and increased department contact with the regional community.
• Educational Foundations has restructured its junior block to strengthen its special education and multicultural education components.
• Elementary Education has incorporated topics covered by the Praxis into required courses.
• Geography is improving the delivery of basic geography skills and knowledge in all classes and is emphasizing map skills and interpreting spatial data.
• Nursing changed the focus of the clinical experiences in one course to provide more community experiences.
• Political Science is increasing the number of core required courses from one to four.
• Psychology is putting more emphasis on helping students identify independent and dependent variables correctly.
• Social Work now offers some prerequisites for junior-level courses during the summer, to help transfer students graduate in a timely fashion.

Assessment of the General Education Curriculum

Millersville's current General Education curriculum, instituted in 1988, aims to introduce students to the arts and sciences and to educate students to reason logically, think critically, express themselves clearly, and better understand the human condition and the role of value judgements in the human experience. To meet its goals, the General Education curriculum is organized into three components: communications (writing and speech) fundamentals, the liberal arts core, and Perspectives, an interdisciplinary and/or multicultural experience requiring a high level of educational maturity, knowledge and thinking.

The liberal arts core is the heart of the General Education curriculum. Students must take 12 credits in each of three areas: humanities, science and mathematics, and social sciences. They must also complete at least three courses at the 200 level or above, at least one laboratory science course, at least two courses from the physical or life sciences, and at least one course in mathematics. At least four courses in the student's liberal arts core, major, or electives must have a significant writing component and, within each of the three liberal arts core areas, two courses must be from a single department. The curriculum is described more thoroughly on pages 31-32 of the 1998-2000 undergraduate catalog.

In 1993 the Faculty Senate formed the General Education Review Committee (GERC) to review, evaluate, and recommend changes in the General Education curriculum. In 1994 GERC retained a consultant who commended the program for "encouraging high standards of performance, integration of the curriculum and the application of knowledge, skills and abilities in a variety of settings" and made several recommendations. GERC incorporated the consultant's report into a 1996 program review, which made the following recommendations:

1. Make the curriculum more understandable to students, prospective students, parents, and employers, and provide more guidance for advising students on the curriculum.
2. Continue faculty development on the presentation of the curriculum.
3. Implement an assessment strategy to determine the effects of the curriculum.
4. Designate a "champion" of the curriculum, responsible for making the curriculum "work."

To fulfill the first recommendation, in 1996-97 we launched the Degree Audit Records System (DARS), a computer-generated summary of an undergraduate's academic record, explicitly identifying which degree requirements have been met. This system is far more reliable than previous paper-and-pencil records and has been of enormous help in providing accurate and timely academic advisement. Plans are now being made to place DARS on a secure Web site.

We have continued to provide faculty development opportunities that address the second recommendation. Progress on implementing the third recommendation is discussed below. No final action has been taken on the fourth recommendation.

Concurrently with this program review, the Provost formed the Curriculum Cost Analysis Task Force in 1995 to evaluate the cost of the General Education curriculum, which appeared significantly higher than the previous curriculum. The task force concluded that cost increases were due to several factors, only two of which were a result of the new curriculum: (1) the new requirement that four liberal arts core courses be at the 200-level or above, which led students to choose smaller 200-level classes instead of larger 100-level classes; and (2) the new requirement that four courses include a significant writing component (such classes are relatively small). The task force concluded that other factors leading to cost increases were additional laboratory offerings; more courses offered off-campus for the benefit of adult learners (such courses enroll fewer students than their on-campus counterparts and therefore generate less tuition revenue to offset expenses and yield a lower student/faculty ratio); and shifts in departmental enrollments (some departments that had previously offered very large lecture classes were no longer offering them).

When the task force submitted its report, the President and the leadership of APSCUF, the faculty union (see Chapter 10) formed a Task Force on the General Education Curriculum and its Resources to consider the report and GERC's program review and make recommendations for modifying the curriculum. As a result of this task force's recommendations, Faculty Senate has approved the following changes.

1. Reduce the required number of 200-level or higher courses in the liberal arts core from four to three.
2. Relax the definition of the "significant writing component" required in four courses, to allow class size increases.
3. Eliminate the requirements that four courses with a communications or quantitative emphasis be completed.
4. State the objectives of the General Education curriculum in measurable form.
5. Establish an outcomes assessment program for the General Education curriculum.

The first three recommendations have been implemented. To implement the last two recommendations, GERC established working groups to state the General Education curriculum's objectives in measurable terms and develop an outcomes assessment program. In 1999 the Faculty Senate approved the curriculum's new objectives (Appendix 3-2).

Also in 1999, GERC began assessing the General Education curriculum by pilot-testing a random sample of 600 students. Students were divided into six groups that were each given a different assessment: the College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) writing module, the CAAP reading module, the CAAP scientific reasoning module, the CAAP critical thinking module, the short version of the Academic Profile, and a locally developed mathematics placement test. GERC is presently studying the results to determine the effectiveness of these measures and design outcomes assessments for General Education's mathematics, critical thinking, communications, and scientific reasoning objectives.

Surveys of Students and Graduates

Surveys of Millersville students and graduates indicate that our academic programs contribute strongly to students' learning during and after their University experience.

In a 1996 State System survey of 400 Millersville undergraduates, nine out of ten rated Millersville's overall quality as "excellent" or "good." One in three rated Millersville's overall quality as excellent, compared to one in four State System students as a whole. The top three reasons our students chose Millersville were academic reputation (32%), location (30%), and financial reasons (14%). Millersville students also gave high marks to our academic programs. Ninety-two percent said Millersville met or exceeded their expectations for providing a wide range of courses; 90% said Millersville met or exceeded their expectations for quality of major courses; and 87% said Millersville met or exceeded their expectations for quality of instruction in their major and the value of General Education courses.

A survey of second semester sophomores conducted in 1998 by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA showed that 76% of Millersville students were satisfied with the overall quality of academic instruction, slightly more than students nationally. Nearly two-thirds were satisfied with their science and mathematics courses, compared to about half of students nationally. Nearly three-quarters were satisfied with their humanities and social science courses, compared to about 60% or less of students nationally.

In 1995 the Career Services office surveyed 1290 recent graduates on their educational and employment experiences. Of the 43% who responded,

• 96% rated the University overall as good or excellent;
• 96% rated the quality of academic instruction as good or excellent;
• 90% to 93% rated the quality of courses as good or excellent;
• 92% felt Millersville prepared them adequately or very well for employment;
• 91% felt somewhat or very well prepared for their present employment (46% very well prepared);
• 95% felt Millersville prepared them adequately or very well for graduate, professional, or technical school; and
• 92% would recommend Millersville to others.

These results show the high regard our students have for our academic programs and the effectiveness of our programs in preparing our students for their future pursuits.