Transcript Higher Learning Commission Self-Study: Highlights of Survey Results University Assessment and Student Learning Higher Learning Commission The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) is part of the North Central Association.

Higher Learning
Commission
Self-Study:
Highlights of Survey
Results
University Assessment and
Student Learning
Higher Learning Commission
The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) is part of the
North Central Association of Colleges and Schools
(NCA). NCA is one of six regional institutional
accreditors in the USA. Through its Commissions, the
NCA accredits educational institutions in 19 states.
The Higher Learning Commission
accredits the institution as a whole, not its
individual programs.
 verifies a university has the resources,
policies and people to offer its educational
programs.

The Higher Learning Commission
The HLC provides five major Criteria for
Accreditation. These define necessary attributes
of an organization accredited by the HLC. In
order to merit accreditation, an organization
must present reasonable and representative
evidence of meeting all Criteria. In this slide
show, we demonstrate how the results of
surveys are used for this purpose.
The Five Criteria of the Higher
Learning Commission are:





Mission and integrity
Preparing for the future
Student learning and effective teaching
Acquisition, discovery, and application of
knowledge
Engagement and services
Criterion 1: Mission and Integrity
The organization operates with integrity to
ensure the fulfillment of its mission through
structures and processes that involve the
board, administration, faculty, staff, and
students.
Criterion 2: Preparing for the Future
The organization’s allocation of resources and
its processes for evaluation and planning
demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission,
improve the quality of its education, and
respond to future challenges and
opportunities.
Criterion 3: Student-learning and
Effective Teaching
The organization provides evidence of student
learning and teaching effectiveness that
demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational
mission.
Criterion 4: Acquisition, discovery,
and application of knowledge
The organization promotes a life of learning for
its faculty, administration, staff, and students
by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity,
practice, and social responsibility in ways
consistent with its mission.
Criterion 5: Engagement and Services
As called for by its mission, the organization
identifies its constituencies and serves them in
ways both value.
The University Mission
is central to each of the 5 criteria.
 was updated to reflect the University’s
commitment to diversity in its programs,
faculty, students, and services.

Proposed Mission of Rush University
The mission of Rush University is to teach, study and
provide the highest quality health care, using a unique
and interdisciplinary practitioner-teacher model for
health sciences education and
research, while reflecting the
diversity of its communities in
its programs, faculty, students,
and service.
Data Sources used in the Self-Study
Multiple data sources were used to gather
evidence of how well Rush University meets
the accreditation criteria.
The purpose of this presentation is to
highlight data obtained through surveys of
Rush students, faculty, and alumni.
Rush University Surveys
Respondents were selected using a stratified
random process to ensure the four colleges
were equally represented.
Multiple surveys were created for students
and faculty to minimize time demands for
respondents.
Efforts were made to ensure minority
students were adequately sampled.
Student Satisfaction Surveys
Student surveys focused on satisfaction in
these three areas:
 Academic programs
 University services
 Campus climate & student engagement
Rush University Student Surveys
# of
responses
# of
invitations
Percent
responding
Educational Programs
293
551
53.2%
University
Services
298
551
54.1%
Student Engagement
and Campus Climate
468
758*
61.7%
* Students were over-sampled for the survey on campus climate to
ensure a better representation of minority students.
Combined Response Rates
on Student Surveys

Across colleges
–
–
–
–

CHS: 16%-18%
CON: 27%-32%
GC: 7%-9%
RMC: 41%-50%
Across ethnicity
–
–
–
–
–
–

Asian: 18%
Black/AA: 4%
Hispanic/Latino: 2%
White: 64%
Other: 1%
No response: 11%
Across levels
–
–
–
–

Baccalaureate: 21%
Masters: 28%
Clinical doctorate: 44%
Research doctorate: 6%
Across genders
–
–
–
Female: 65%
Male: 25%
No response: 10%
Rush University Student Surveys
Satisfaction rates are depicted in bar charts on
succeeding slides.
80% satisfaction or agreement was our
standard. Typically, such standards are set
lower at other institutions.
Rates reflect the combined percent of ‘satisfied’
or ‘very satisfied’ ratings.
Percent of Students Satisfied with the
Academic Programs
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
In
str
uc
tio
n
k
rs
e
Co
u
Ev
a
lua
tio
wo
r
n
g
isi
n
Ad
v
Fa
cu
lty
50
Student Satisfaction with the
Academic Programs
> 80% of Rush students feel that:
• Faculty are knowledgeable, supportive, respectful, and
ethical; have best interests of students at heart; really
care about teaching.
• Advisors are available, knowledgeable about their
programs, and aware of services.
• Evaluation and grading are fair, accurate, and useful in
helping them improve their performance.
• Courses have adequate rigor, breadth & depth of content,
and variety of learning experiences.
Student Satisfaction with the
Academic Programs
< 80% of students feel that:
• The majority of their faculty use effective teachingmethods, stimulate critical thinking, and provide an
environment conducive to learning
Percent of Students Satisfied with
Campus Climate
100
90
80
70
60
50
ry
ip
lin
a
ed
is
c
te
rd
C
on
pe
R
es
ne
ct
In
O
ve
ra
ll
c
li m
at
e
ct
40
Student Satisfaction with
Campus Climate
> 80% of students
• Are satisfied with the overall quality of campus life,
responsiveness of administrators, and student support
services
• Feel that their personal rights are honored and
respected, and that there is an environment of respect
regardless of diversity
• Have a sense of belonging to their departments and
programs
Student Satisfaction with
Campus Climate
< 80% of students
• Have a feeling of ‘community’ at Rush University
• Have adequate opportunity to interact with students
from other programs and disciplines
Ce
n
O
ffi
g
ET
C
y
ce
ra
r
sin
M
s
ns
Li
br
ar
ss
ist
rt
Ho
u
in
e
Re
g
sio
io
n
iss
Ad
m
is
Ad
m
te
rC
ou
Bu
s
h
C
Ru
s
RM
Percent of Students Satisfied with
University Services
100
90
80
70
60
50
Student Satisfaction with
University Services
Students were generally satisfied with many aspects of
student services:
• Accuracy of information provided by the office
• Accessibility/availability of staff
• Helpfulness and attitude of staff
• Hours of operation,
• Promptness of responses
Overall Student Satisfaction
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
d
Re
c
om
m
en
n
isi
o
De
c
lity
Q
ua
n
tio
pa
ra
Pr
e
Ex
p
ec
ta
tio
ns
50
Overall Student Satisfaction
In general, Rush students are satisfied with:
• Overall quality of their academic programs
• How well their programs are fulfilling their expectations
• How well their programs are preparing them to assume
the roles and responsibilities associated with their degree.
• Their decision to attend Rush.
85% are likely to recommend Rush to others.
Faculty Surveys
# of
responses
# of invitations
Percent
responding*
Mission and Satisfaction
384
852
45.1%
Quality and
Faculty Development
Assessment and
Campus Climate
Community & Professional
Service
384
858
44.8%
369
862
42.8%
639
2572
24.8%
* Note: One third of Rush faculty members were invited to complete each of the first
three surveys. All were invited to complete the fourth survey. Faculty response rates
were lower than for Rush students.
Focus of Faculty Surveys
• Program quality
• Professional role enactment
• Work environment
• Leadership
• Diversity
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with
Program Quality
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
ion
t
a
ut
p
Re
ing
h
ac
e
T
ho
c
S
hip
s
lar
rch
a
se
e
R
s
nt
e
ud
St
Faculty Satisfaction with
Program Quality
Rush faculty are satisfied with the quality of:
• Teaching within their colleges.
• Scholarship and professional competence of
colleagues in their college
• Overall research within their college
• Students admitted to their graduate and/or
undergraduate programs
Rush faculty believe the reputation of Rush in Chicago
and Illinois is good or excellent, but less known outside of
the state.
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with their
Professional Role Enactment
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
or
W
rth
o
kw
ty
ul
c
Fa
de
m
op
l
e
en
t
v
Ca
er
e
r
p
lo
e
v
de
m
t
en
Work Worth
> 80% faculty feel:
• that their work provides them with a sense of
achievement
• satisfied with faculty morale
• recognized for their teaching
< 80% faculty feel:
• recognized for their scholarship or their service to
their college, university, & community
Faculty Role and Career
Development
< 80% faculty felt satisfied with:
• Opportunities to develop skills in improving teaching
effectiveness of student learning
• Opportunities to improve their research and
publication skills
• Adequacy of mentoring for research development
• Adequacy of mentoring for teaching effectiveness
dv
is
in
g
k
ef
fe
ct
iv
en
es
s
co
ur
se
s
A
fe
ed
ba
c
n
en
t
at
io
ro
nm
va
lu
an
ag
in
g
Te
ac
hi
ng
M
E
nv
i
in
g
E
st
ra
te
gi
es
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
G
iv
Le
ar
ni
ng
Te
ac
hi
ng
Faculty Development Needs
Note: Higher numbers = greater need
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with the
Work Environment
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
t
ec
p
s
Re
n
Co
ct
ne
ed
Eq
lity
a
u
Faculty Satisfaction with the
Work Environment
> 80% of faculty:
• Were satisfied with the climate of the work environment
• Felt personal rights are honored and respected
regardless of diversity
• Felt there is mutual respect between faculty
• Have a sense of belonging in their departments and
college.
Faculty Satisfaction with the
Work Environment
< 80% of faculty:
• Feel a strong sense of a “faculty community” at Rush
• Have adequate opportunities to interact with other
disciplines
• Have adequate opportunities to form collaborative
relationships.
• Believe there is equality in salary, workload, opportunity
for advancement, and performance evaluations.
Differences are associated with gender.
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with Rush
University Leadership
Re
s
po
O
ns
i
ve
ve
on
Vi
si
e
nc
er
na
ov
G
ad
ra
ll s
m
at
ini
s
isf
ac
tra
tio
tio
n
n
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Faculty Satisfaction with
Rush University Leadership
> 80% of faculty:
• Are satisfied with leadership at the university, college,
and department or division levels.
• Feel administrators are accessible and responsive to
concerns of faculty and students
• Are satisfied with their ability to participate in faculty
governance.
Faculty Satisfaction with
Rush University Leadership
< 80% of faculty:
• Feel there is a clear vision for the future direction of
Rush University
• Are satisfied with how the University Council represents
faculty concerns
• Are satisfied with opportunities to influence policies at
the University & college levels
Percent of Faculty Satisfied with
Diversity at Rush
y
e
rs
D
iv
e
en
ud
st
e
rs
D
iv
e
fa
tb
cu
od
rs
ity
rD
iv
e
fo
ct
pe
R
es
lty
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Faculty Satisfaction with
Diversity at Rush
> 80% of faculty feel that:
• there is respect for diversity at Rush
• the university makes an effort to recruit and retain a
diverse student body.
< 80% of faculty feel that:
• the University’s efforts to recruit and to retain a
diverse faculty group are satisfactory.
Alumni Survey
Rush graduates from the last decade were invited
via email or by mail to participate in a web-based
survey.
The survey had five areas of focus:
• Employment history
• Scholarly productivity
• Professional and service contributions
• Continued engagement with Rush
• Overall satisfaction
Alumni Survey: Response rates
Based on responses to emails, we had a 28% response rate
(N=465). This is in the upper range of response rates as
compared with other schools’ recent surveys of alumni (which
range from 10% to 30%).
Response distribution:
 CHS-15%, CON-45%, GC-5%, RMC-35%
 25% male; 75% female
 78% Caucasian, followed by Asians, African Americans, and
Latino/Hispanics
 The majority of respondents (88%) graduated in the last 5
years.
 13% have received more than one degree from Rush.
M
ed
ic
al
ly
of
s
ar
ea
un
de
rs
er
ve
d
ca
go
en
t
tu
dy
ap
po
in
tm
el
d
Ch
i
Fa
cu
lty
Fi
Alumni: Employment History
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
Alumni: Employment History
• Nearly all obtained positions related to their field of study &
have stayed in the health field, even when changing roles.
• Many alumni hold leadership positions
• More than 33% hold appointments in a college or university
• The majority of their time is spent in practice (2/3), followed
by teaching , research, and administration
• The majority remained in the Chicago metropolitan or
surrounding area.
• Approximately 25% are still employed at Rush or within the
Rush system.
• More than 55% work with medically-underserved
populations.
Alumni: Numbers of Scholarly Works
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
s
er
p
Pa
rs
te
s
Po
i
in
l
C
s
le
tr ic
la
a
c
h
rc
a
se
e
R
a
cl
rti
es
er
th
O
Alumni: Numbers of Scholarly Works
33% have created scholarly works. These alums have:
• Presented over 374 papers and 233 posters locally,
regionally, and nationally or internationally
• Published or have in press over 634 manuscripts (29%
clinical, 31% research), abstracts, editorials, reviews, or
book chapters.
Alumni currently have another 91 scholarly works under
review for publication.
Alumni: Research Activities
Nearly two-thirds participate in research activities.
• 45% have served as PI or Co-PI
• 45% are research consultants, associates or
coordinators
• 27% have developed research proposals
• 10% are pre- or post-doctoral fellows
• Several alumni indicated they had received funding
from either private or national groups (from $3000$3 million).
Alumni: Continuing Education

All are involved in continuing education activities
either at their place of employment (78%) or through
professional organizations (85%).

16% are currently acquiring an advanced degree.
Another 16% plan to acquire an advanced degree
within the next 5 years.
Level of Participation in Professional
and Community Organizations
Percent participating
60
50
dark green = professional
light green = community
40
30
20
10
le
ct
te
d
E
C
ha
ir
it t
ee
C
om
m
m
em
be
r
C
om
m
it t
ee
ee
tin
gs
m
tte
nd
A
H
ol
d
m
em
be
rs
hi
ps
0
Level of Participation in Professional
and Community Organizations
The majority of our alumni are members of both
professional and community organizations. Many of
them have assumed leadership positions within their
organizations.
Nearly half reported they volunteered for various
projects and activities within their communities.
Continued Engagement
with Rush University
Many Rush alumni stay involved with the university:
 Attend alumni functions (24%)
 Serve on a board or governing body at Rush (3%)
 Serve on a college/department committee (5%)
 Assist graduates (25%)
 Precept students (61%)
 Give monetary donations (33%)
In addition, the vast majority indicate that they refer
prospective students to Rush.
Overall Satisfaction with Education:
Alumni and Enrolled Students
100
dark green = alumni
light green = students
95
90
85
80
en
d
m
ity
Q
ua
l
io
n
De
cis
Re
co
m
Le
ve
lo
fp
re
pa
ra
t io
n
75
Overall Satisfaction with Education:
Alumni and Enrolled Students
Graduates give higher overall ratings on satisfaction than
do current students. In their comments, they indicated
they realized how much better prepared they were
compared to their colleagues in the practice fields.
Alumni appear more satisfied with their level of
preparation, with their decision to attend Rush, and with
the overall quality of their preparation than our current
students. In addition, they are more likely to recommend
Rush to others than our current students. One should note,
however, that these measures for both alumni and current
students are all above our 80% benchmark for satisfaction.
Alumni: Overall Level of Preparation
90-95% of alumni felt prepared in these areas:
 Core knowledge of the discipline
 Clinical practice skills
 Critical thinking and analytic skills
 Collaborating with others
 Working with racially and socio-economically diverse
populations
Alumni: Ph.D. Preparation
80% of alumni who earned a Ph.D. at Rush felt
prepared in these areas:
• Conduct research ethically
• Manage research funds
• Review and referee academic papers
• Write and submit for publication
• Assume teaching responsibilities in an academic
program
Alumni: Ph.D. Preparation
Alumni who earned a Ph.D. at Rush felt less wellprepared in these areas:
• managing intellectual property rights
• preparing for rank promotion in an academic
program
What strengths will the Higher
Learning Commission Find?




Outstanding programs
Competent graduates
Committed faculty
Satisfied students
What concerns will the Higher
Learning Commission Find?




Four independent colleges
A Faculty desire for more interdisciplinary
and collaborative opportunities
Faculty development needs
Limited focus on University assessment
Initiatives
Five major initiatives have already been undertaken
to address some areas of concern identified by our
self-study process:





Office of University Assessment and Student
Learning
Revitalization of the University Council
Faculty orientation and development
Curriculum initiatives
Office of Multicultural Affairs
Initiatives: Assessment
The office of University Assessment and Student
Learning (UASL) has been created. It will seek to
support quality educational programs at Rush
University and to foster excellence in educational
practices by establishing and maintaining a culture
of assessment and improvement throughout the
University.
Initiatives: University Council

University Council is reforming. They have revised
the Rules of Governance for the University,
developed a faculty manual, sponsored an
orientation program for new faculty, and developed a
University Council webpage.

University Council is also sponsoring forums for
faculty discussion of the Rules of Governance.
Initiatives: Curriculum Reform
Changes in our curriculum are ongoing. For example:
• Rush Medical College is revising the first two years of
medical school.
• The College of Nursing is shifting to solely graduatebased programs.
• The College of Health Sciences is considering adding
some new undergraduate programs.
• The Graduate College created a core curriculum for
biomedical sciences programs and is convening a
college Curriculum Committee to provide oversight of
curricular issues.
Initiatives:
Office of Multicultural Affairs
As part of Rush’s efforts to centralize services for University students, a
new Office of Multicultural Affairs has been created.
The office will develop programs and work with existing resources to:
1) assist all Rush University recruitment teams to increase the depth
and breadth of diversity in applicant pools.
2) contact accepted applicants to show the value Rush places on a
diverse student body.
3) assist matriculated students in pursuing academic excellence.
4) provide administrative support to multicultural-based student groups.
5) promote a culture of acceptance and inclusion throughout the
University.
Site visit
The HLC site visitors will be on the Rush University
campus April 28-30, 2008.
Many faculty and students
will be involved with this
visit. Please watch for
additional information.
Closing comments
“The self-study and our accreditation should
not be viewed as an endpoint, but as the
indicators for a road-map for on-going work on
our university. I appreciate your interest and
continuing efforts to make Rush University a
leader in Health Care education.”
Thomas A. Deutsch, M.D., Provost
Self Study Coordinating Committee
• Lois Halstead, Ph.D., RN
Vice Provost and Vice President, University Affairs
• Rose Suhayda, Ph.D., APRN
Director, University Assessment and Student Learning
• David Barnett, Ph.D.
Associate Director, University Assessment and Student Learning
• William Karnoscak, MLIS
University Registrar
If you would like to provide comments, suggestions or recommendations
for the University after reviewing these results, please click on this link:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=SNYZba8qtczcPs7TCtmqPw_3d_3d
You may also visit the HLC self-study website at http://extranet.rush.edu/hlc/