· Web viewDrawing upon philosophical and theological scholarship, students will be able to offer...

AY 2014-2015 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY

Reporting School/College: St. John’s College

Program Reviewed: Theology and Religious Studies BA Q

Date Submitted to Department/Division Chair: September 30, 2015

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)

The Mission of our Bachelor of Arts in Theology program on the Staten Island campus is to equip undergraduate students to analyze, engage, and apply the Catholic theological tradition in all its historical richness and contemporary breadth. It provides students with the tools to wrestle with enduring and contemporary issues in a way deeply informed by scripture, the Catholic theological tradition, and dialogue with other world religions. Our discipline and our program are essential to the Catholic and Vincentian mission of the university. We support the church and the university community in its efforts to wrestle with the ethical dimensions of some of the most challenging social questions of our time. Vincentian mission is about service and social change, but in a university setting it is essential that those elements of the mission be supported by the robust intellectual activity that theology provides. The Catholic intellectual tradition is preserved and carried forward by people who go on to become theologians or who engage in the study of philosophy, history, literature, etc. from a perspective deeply informed by Catholic theology. Only with a proper Bachelor of Arts program can the breadth and depth of offerings be maintained to carry out that mission.

Our faculty members embody the university’s vision of innovative teaching that fosters spirited inquiry and intelligent reflection. Our faculty maintains active research agendas that support the growth of a learned practice of the Catholic faith, provide scholarly and pastoral insight into scripture and its interpretation, and advance the university’s goal to be known worldwide for addressing issues of poverty and social justice. We play a crucial role in the college’s efforts to develop a critical consciousness and ethical perspective in our students. In addition to learning discipline-specific content and skills, the program offers dynamic courses that contribute to the mission of St. John’s College by fostering critical skills in writing and oral communication while nurturing students’ moral growth for personal and systemic change.

LAS_THE_THEO_BA_SI Self-Study Template 1

The benchmarking process for this self-study found that our program’s curriculum is similar to that of peer institutions in that it is structured around five main sub-disciplines: Biblical Studies, Systematic Theology, Historical Theology, Moral Theology/Ethics, and World Religions. Our program is distinguished by the fact that it insists upon broad learning by requiring a more substantial foundation in each of these areas rather than narrow specialization. Our program curriculum almost perfectly mirror’s Marquette University’s BA in Theology for Catholic School Ministry. One of our strategic goals going forward is to develop a second major sequence specifically for double majors that strikes more of a balance between flexibility and fundamentals. Our benchmarking found that several peer institutions follow this pattern of a separate major sequence specifically for double-majors.

It is significant that despite the significant downturn in enrollment on the Staten Island campus overall, majors/minors in our program actually increased from 5 students in 2005 to 8 in 2009 before returning recently went back to 5 students in 2013. Consequently, there has been no significant shift in these numbers in the last 8 years.

This program review found that our curriculum is strong and the quality of our instruction is high. Courses offered by our program are rated significantly better than the college and university averages in terms of instructional vibrancy. The program has a very favorable student to faculty ratio that would allow substantial growth in the program without requiring any additional resources. The program has developed and is in the process of implementing a plan for comprehensive assessment that will provide assurance of student learning and give the department the data it needs to continue to enhance instructional outcomes.

Data show that there is not significant potential for growth in this field, however the department plans to increase enrollment by taking steps to make theology a more attractive double-major by allowing students more freedom to link their courses in theology to their planned careers and to their academic interests in allied disciplines. Given this limited, but real potential for growth, the mission-critical nature of the discipline, and the fact that data show the program to be cost effective, we recommend an overall rating of (2) MAINTAIN.

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? http://www.stjohns.edu/about/our-mission (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

The Department of Theology and Religious Studies serves every St. John’s University student through our service to the core curriculum. Our core offerings give students the opportunity to consider some of the most important and enduring questions about meaning, values, and belief. While investigating these questions, students develop important skills that are valuable to employers in every field: how to write clearly and convincingly, how to interpret a text carefully, how to dialogue with people whose beliefs differ from one’s own, etc. Our Bachelor of Arts program gives students the opportunity to engage the Catholic theological tradition even more deeply or to enhance their study of another field with theological


http://www.stjohns.edu/about/our-mission

analysis and insights with a double major. The Catholic intellectual tradition is preserved and carried forward by people who go on to become theologians or who engage in the study of philosophy, history, literature, etc. from a perspective deeply informed by Catholic theology. Only with a proper Bachelor of Arts program can the breadth and depth of offerings be maintained to carry out that mission.

The program is committed to further the metropolitan (and now global) mission of the university as well. Our majors are required to take a course in Religions of the World, and we have developed new elective offerings such as Global Catholicism that enhance the university’s commitment to providing a first rate education appropriate for the twenty-first century. Key offerings from our major sequence (e.g. Intro to Catholic Social Teaching, St. Vincent de Paul and the Neighbor, etc.) are also required courses in mission critical minors and programs across the university (e.g., the Social Justice: Theory and Practice in the Vincentian Tradition minor , the Ozanam Scholars program, the Catholic Scholars program, etc.).

1b. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the University’s vision. http://www.stjohns.edu/about/our-mission/vision-statement (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

Our faculty members embody the university’s vision of innovative teaching that fosters spirited inquiry and intelligent reflection. In recent years, three faculty members in our department (Ruiz, Clark, and Rivera) have been selected through a national, competitive process to participate in workshops on pedagogy at the Wabash Center for Teaching and Learning in Theology & Religion. Other faculty members have participated in the university’s Writing across the Curriculum program (Flanagan, Clark). Still others have utilized technology to support classroom instruction and to deliver engaging courses fully online, or promoted student research by encouraging students to develop research posters on human rights issues.

Our faculty maintains active research agendas that support the growth of a learned practice of the Catholic faith, provide scholarly and pastoral insight into scripture and its interpretation, and advance the university’s goal to be known worldwide for addressing issues of poverty and social justice. The department offers the only two required courses in the interdisciplinary undergraduate minor, Social Justice: Theory and Practice in the Vincentian Tradition. These required courses are Introduction to Catholic Social Teaching and the minor’s capstone course, the Integrating Interdisciplinary Seminar in Social Justice.

Our professors serve as featured speakers both locally and internationally, adding visibility to St. John’s academic and Catholic identity. They have served as scholarly representatives offering commentary and interpretation of current religious issues to local and national media.

1c. What evidence can you provide that demonstrates that the program embodies the vision and mission of the program’s School/College? http://www.stjohns.edu/academics/schools-and-colleges/st-johns-college-liberal-arts-and-sciences/about-st-johns-college-liberal-arts-and-sciences (Suggested limit 1/3 page)


http://www.stjohns.edu/academics/schools-and-colleges/st-johns-college-liberal-arts-and-sciences/about-st-johns-college-liberal-arts-and-sciences



http://www.wabashcenter.wabash.edu/programs/

http://www.stjohns.edu/about/our-mission/vision-statement

Our program is committed to furthering the college’s goals of providing a rich, challenging curriculum. We offer a large number of elective options to our students that allow them explore their particular theological interests: from theology & film or theology & the fine arts to the spirituality of the educator to global Catholicism. We play a crucial role in the college’s efforts to develop a critical consciousness and ethical perspective in our students, offering specialized courses on healthcare ethics, social ethics, the theology of peace, and so on. A significant portion of our full-time and part-time faculty is certified to teach online allowing us to offer a variety of program courses in a distance-learning format.

In addition to learning discipline-specific content and skills, the Department of Theology and Religious Studies offers dynamic courses that contribute to the mission of St. John’s College by fostering critical skills in writing and oral communication that creates new insights, research, and scholarship while developing moral value for personal and systemic change. This learning of value for self and social responsibility assists students in preparation for their particular professions and graduate studies.

The department contributes to our college’s mission of excellence in the liberal arts. First, our faculty has an active research agenda with several ground-breaking publications in book and article form. We are deeply engaged in scholarly dialogue and development within our fields of study. The department also encourages and recognizes excellence in student academic writing by sponsoring the Rev. Patrick Primeaux, S.M. Writing Contest, which recognizes superior writing in the fields of theology and religious studies at the undergraduate level.

STANDARD 2. The program attracts, retains, and graduates high quality students.

2a. Undergraduate SAT and High School Average

There is very little information available due to the fact that most of our majors enter the program after their freshman year and none of those students are tracked in these data. Data provided show one year in which the entering freshman was significantly above average and another where the entering freshman was slightly below the college and university average.

Freshmen SAT Scores

Fall 2012 Fall 2013

Computed Computed

Theology 1,290 970

Freshmen High School Average


Fall 2012 Fall 2013

High School High School

Theology 96 84

SAT Scores High School Average

2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013

School/ College - SI 1079 1113 1097 1104 87 88 88 90

Total University 1097 1087 1096 1104 87 87 88 89

Intended college major for 2012 college-bound seniors

SATTest-Takers Mean Scores

Intended College Major Number Percent (%)

Critical Reading

Mathematics Total

Theology and Religious Vocations 72 0.1% 514 496 1010

* For further information, please visit http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf.

2b. Undergraduate 1st Year Retention Rate

Our majors typically declare their major after their freshman year. Very few apply to enter the university as Theology & Religious Studies majors. Consequently there is very little data on first-year retention. The data that is available shows that the program retains all students in the program.

2009 2010 2011 2012

Total

Returned DNR

Total

Returned DNR

Total

Returned DNR

Total

Returned DNR

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %


http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf

THE 1 1

100%

Fall

2009 2010 2011 2012**

# Fresh # Ret %

School/ College - SI 85% 71% 85% 53 45 85%

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

Fall

2004 2005 2006 2007

School/College Average Rate - SI 56% 74% 65% 58%

Total University 58% 58% 59% 55%

2004 2005 2006 2007

Total Graduated Total Graduated Total Graduated Total Graduated

# % # % # % # %

THE 1 1 100%

2d. Graduate Standardized Test Scores

N/A

2e. Please describe how the program compares with peer and aspirational institutions. (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

The BA in theology centers around five disciplinary areas: Biblical Studies, Systematic Theology, Historical Theology, Moral Theology/Ethics, and World Religions. Benchmarking against peer local Catholic schools (Fordham and Manhattan College), sister Vincentian Schools (Depaul and Niagara), and


Big East partners (Marquette, Creighton, Seton Hall and Providence) was conducted. Our major offers a clear commitment to breadth of learning in the discipline similar to other institutions requiring courses in all five areas. We also have a senior capstone focused on a selected theme and involving a research paper - a uniform element to all theology programs examined. While the major offers a strong foundation in the discipline, our major currently offers students less choice in framing their studies with only two electives. A survey of peer and aspirational schools shows a range of 3-5 electives and greater student direction in selecting courses in the five major areas.

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)

N/A

2g. Number of majors and minors enrolled over the past five years. See table below.

Although the campus has sustained decreased enrollments since 2001, the program in Theology and Religious Studies has not been adversely affected. According to the supplied data, there was no significant change in the number of majors and minors from 2005-2013. In fact, the number of combined majors/minors actually increased from 5 students in 2005 to 8 in 2009, but recently went back to 5 students in 2013. Consequently, there has been no significant shift in these numbers in the last 8 years. This pattern can be considered a strength in the program; it has not been adversely affected by the downturn in enrollment for the S.I campus as a whole.

Fall

Number of Students 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Majors 3 3 3 4 4

Minors 2 2 1 1 4

Total 5 5 4 5 8

Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013

Majors Majors Majors Majors

MAJORS THE BA 2 1 3 3

BA/MA 1

Total 2 1 4 3



Minors Minors Minors Minors

MINORS Theology 2 2 2 1


Total Total Total Total

Total 4 3 6 4

2h. Number of degrees granted during the past five years. See table below.

Degrees Granted

Academic Year

04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09

MA 0 1 1 0 0

10/11 12/13

Degrees Conferred

Degrees Conferred

SJC-UG-SI THE Theology BA 1 2

Note: there are no students who have graduated from this program within the 11/12 academic years.

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 39-Theology and Religious Vocations.

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

Bachelors

Local 16 20 14


National 8,718 9,074 9,369

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.

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)

In addition to college advising and early alert programs, student progress toward degree is monitored through departmental advising. Currently, advising is provided by Dr. David Haddorff on the SI campus. All majors, including double majors, are scheduled for advising sessions and majors are made aware of general office hours and encouraged to check in aside from the registration period. Registration advising meetings focus both on progress in the major and progress on the St John’s general degree requirements

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)

We do not have data available that is specific to the SI campus.

2k. Please comment on the students’ competencies in the program. Support your response using data provided below and any other data available. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

GPA data provided by the Office of Institutional Research show that the program is attracting and retaining students with an overall GPA that is well above the average in St. John’s College (3.5 to 3.8 in our program vs. 3.3 in the college and 3.1 across the university).

The department revised and consolidated goals and outcomes for this program in 2013. Previously there were 23 learning objectives and six vague program goals. The department brought greater coherence and focus to the program by articulating a smaller set of measurable objectives.

Undergraduate Major Learning Outcomes (Approved 9/17/13)

1. Demonstrate familiarity with the Bible and the ability to employ appropriate methods of biblical interpretation.

2. Demonstrate the capacity to articulate a learned understanding of the history of Christianity. 3. Demonstrate the ability to think critically about theological ethics and to explain principles and

key concepts from the Catholic moral tradition.4. Demonstrate the ability to articulate an understanding of key elements of Christian and

especially Roman Catholic doctrine in dialogue with contemporary culture


5. Articulate the fundamental beliefs, practices, and moral commitments of one or more world religions; demonstrate an awareness of the contours of contemporary interreligious dialogue and of practices that are crucial for engaging in interreligious dialogue

6. Demonstrate the ability to locate and utilize appropriate theological sources and research tools, and to document those sources/tools appropriately.

7. Demonstrate the ability to write effectively and to use evidence and logic in presenting theological concepts

8. Demonstrate the ability to articulate the values held by St. Vincent de Paul and to explain the meaning and implications of Vincentian mission in today’s world

Standard 2. Additional comments if needed: (Suggested limit 1 page)

N/A

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 program’s strategic goal/objectives link to your School/College plan and the University’s strategic plan? http://www.stjohns.edu/about/leadership/strategic-planning


http://www.stjohns.edu/about/leadership/strategic-planning

In keeping with the 2008-13 University Strategic plan, the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at the Staten Island Campus has sought to strengthen the Catholic identity of the University within a diverse, pluralistic, and metropolitan environment. At the same time, the program has sought to extend the global reach of the University, by demonstrating how this Catholic identity can be understood within a global society. The Dean’s stated desire to increase our online course offerings has been met by the two Staten Island faculty members offering four online courses in recent years. We take a student-centered approach to teaching and learning, which leads to greater emphasis on service, leadership, and community involvement.

In response to these strategic goals and the last Program Review, the program at the Staten Island campus has also sought more effective ways of integrating faith and learning in our courses, which teaches more than the concepts, principles, and ideas of theology (in other words, the “what” of theology). The program has placed additional emphasis on the “why” of theology, that is, the intentions, motivations, beliefs, and ethical commitments behind theological and religious principles and ideas. This emphasis has encouraged a greater collaboration between the University and the Church by demonstrating how theology is more than ideas or concepts, and is rather a lived experience in the community and world. In recent years, Dr. Kenel worked with students on the SI campus to facilitate internships in theology at non-profits.

The second emphasis of the S.I. program has been to foster the Vincentian commitment to student-centered education by emphasizing service, leadership, and community involvement. There has been a concerted effort to implement Service Learning in our academic courses and to place more emphasis on teaching ethics in our classes. This focus works hand-in-hand with the previous emphasis on Catholic identity in a pluralistic and global world, by emphasizing the importance of Catholic Social Teaching in our courses, in particular, the Moral Theology courses required by programs in the Colleges of Business and Pharmacy.

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?

The sustainability of the program is dependent upon the sustainability of the Staten Island campus as a whole. Therefore, the weaknesses and threats to the program are linked to the weaknesses and threats that the entire S. I campus faces. Although the campus has sustained decreased enrollments since 2001, the program in Theology and Religious Studies has not been adversely affected. According to the supplied data, there was no significant change in the number of majors and minors from 2005-2013. In fact, the number of combined majors/minors actually increased from 5 students in 2005 to 8 in 2009, but recently went back to 5 students in 2013. Consequently, there has been no significant shift in these numbers in the last 8 years. This pattern can be considered a strength in the program; it has not been adversely affected by the downturn in enrollment for the S.I campus as a whole.

Recent extensive discussions about interdisciplinary work on the Staten Island campus had to recognize the reality of New York State requirements for individual departmental accreditation. Therefore, the


spirit of the interdisciplinary initiative has been preserved in this academic year’s series of public presentations, sometimes simple classroom visits, in which Professors discuss issues of interest shared by their disciplines.

The two full-time faculty members currently on the Staten Island campus maintain active involvement in the American Academy of Religion, The Karl Barth Society of North America, The Society of Christian Ethics, The Catholic Biblical Association, The Society of Biblical Literature, and a more intermittent participation in the College Theology Society. Conference presentations at national and international conferences have been complemented by various recent publications, including single-authored books, articles in books, and articles in refereed journals.

We have adopted various strategies in order to draw more majors to our Department. For example, we have updated and revised our department’s website, and have participated in the College Advantage Program that allows local high school students the opportunity to take courses, with permission from the Department, for credit at St. John’s. We have engaged in discussions with the University’s Career Services Office in order to learn more about what career opportunities presently exist for majors, and to expand opportunities for internship placements. Finally, since we recognize that there are more career options available when theology is paired with another major, our UEPC is presently considering streamlining the requirements for double majors in order to make it easier for our students to pursue such an option. This effort is being done with close attention to the major sequence requirements as peer institutions

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.

The future market demand of the program has remained constant for the last decade, as there is has been no significant shift in the number of student majors and minors in the period. The strategy, therefore, is to maintain rather than enhance or eliminate the program. It is important to maintain the program at the S. I. campus for students who choose to major or minor in Theology and Religious Studies. This program supports the Catholic, Vincentian identity of the university within a diverse, pluralistic, and metropolitan environment.

Over the last several years, the Department has launched a range of initiatives to assess our standing with respect to other comparable undergraduate programs, along with our strengths and weaknesses. On the whole, our Program falls within the standard range of such configurations. In particular, we offer a wide range of courses, possess a regional reputation for academic excellence, maintain cordial relations with the local Church, demonstrate respect for Roman Catholic tradition, and are dedicated to a balanced exposition of that tradition.

Weaknesses in our Program include the fact that our number of majors and minors remain relatively low when compared to various other departments in the university. Moreover, until recently our introductory-level course lacked clearly defined and streamlined standards for full-time and adjunct faculty who teach it. In response, we have begun a process aimed at reconfiguring our program while retaining our Catholic identity and the quality of our undergraduate instruction. For instance, our faculty have reviewed the introductory course and produced a list of “essentials” that all who teach it will incorporate into it. In dialogue with the University Core Curriculum Committee, we also have begun


trying to reformulate our core sequence that all students at the University must take and to make it more attractive to potential majors and minors.

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

Our major sequence is structured to ensure that students have a solid foundation in each of the sub-disciplines of theology: history of Christian thought, Christology, ecclesiology, moral theology, and biblical studies. Two years ago, the department determined that the biblical studies and historical theology courses offered in the sequence were too superficial. We moved to a two-course sequence in history and a two-course sequence (Reading the Old Testament and Reading the New Testament rather than a single “Intro to the Bible”) course, which is better aligned to norms in the field. This program review did determine that our program offers less student choice in terms of specific courses within the sub-disciplines of theology and also fewer opportunities to build up a concentration of courses within a single sub-discipline, but our faculty have made the determination that a more balanced background across the full discipline is more appropriate in an undergraduate context. Our program includes a senior seminar which is consistent with programs in our discipline as well as the broader pedagogical literature on high-impact practices.

2. Curriculum integrity, coherence, academic internships, teaching excellence, teaching vibrancy, and study abroad experiences.

As noted in the paragraph on “standards within the discipline” our program sequence provides a very clear, coherent structure that requires students to take a foundational course in each of the sub-disciplines in our field. The Senior Seminar provides further coherence to the program by requiring that student draw upon several of those sub-disciplines in the study of a broad question (e.g., a recent senior seminar focused on aesthetics and the theology of beauty).

The department recently revived its “Internship in Theology” program that allows students to combine concrete experience at a work site (most typically in a ministerial setting, or at a non-profit that engages in issues of religion and/or social justice) with theological engagement of the issues that arise in that context. The latter dimension of the experience is supervised by individual meetings with a member of our faculty, which allows for an academic experience that is tailored to the students interests and placement. Our relatively small major allows us to provide that kind of student-centered learning. Working with the career services office, we have been cultivating relationships with internship placements sites (campus ministry at Holy Cross high school, the Tanenbaum Foundation (works on peacebuilding and combating religious prejudice), the Jewish Museum, etc.) to provide more options for our students. Our major is fully compatible with a study-abroad experience. We recently shifted our department’s offering in Seville to an Intro to Islam course in order to make it relevant to the history of


https://tanenbaum.org/

that region. Students can take our offerings taught abroad or take advantage of our substantial distance learning offerings in order to stay on track with program progress while studying overseas.

3. The University Core competencies

Our program goals overlap substantially with the university’s core competencies. Like other majors in the humanities, our program ensures that students develop the ability to engage texts and traditions critically, develop the ability to write well, demonstrate the ability to analyze the ethical dimensions of contemporary issues, and so on. Our curriculum map ensures that each of our program’s learning outcomes are addressed and emphasize good writing in almost every course. Our curriculum also addresses several competencies that have been identified by the university as critical to its mission. See the “additional comments” at the end of this section (section #4) below.

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

In anticipation of the Middle States Accreditation visit, the UEPC reviewed and updated every master syllabus in the department. The committee made sure that every syllabus met NYS guidelines for credit hours, had appropriate units of study, and verified that every course syllabus was properly mapped to program learning goals and outcomes. The bibliographies for all courses were also brought up to date with the participation of all full-time faculty. During the review, the UEPC also noted which courses were in need of more extensive revision. The committee plans to return to those courses over the next two years (2015-2017) as part of a more thorough review of course offerings and the major sequence. The committee plans to add new courses where appropriate, drop others, and revise those that need to be updated.

In compliance with the CBA, the department collects a course outline for every course offered each semester. In 2012, a system for regular evaluation of instruction by adjunct faculty was instituted in the department. The Assistant Chair reviews 1/3 of the adjunct faculty each year (so each is evaluated every 3 years). The review includes a classroom visit as well as a review of course syllabi. Suggestions for improving the quality of classroom instruction, course design, and syllabus design are part of the review process.

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)

Admittedly, the department has lagged in the development of a program of assessment. Data was collected primarily on the senior seminar but only sporadically for other courses. Improving assessment practices that “close the loop” in order to ensure student learning and success is one of the department’s


https://stjohns.digication.com/

https://app.weaveonline.com//login.aspx

http://stjohns.campusguides.com/content.php?pid=71651&sid=984766

strategic goals. Dr. Michael Dempsey (our department’s assistant chair) has been charged facilitating the development and implementation of a comprehensive approach to assessment. Dr. Dempsey has developed a plan that can be summarized as follows:- Fall 2015: Pilot stage – Implement indirect measures for all learning outcomes in sampling of 1000C

sections. Implement direct measures for student work (artifacts) to measure our effectiveness in teaching two learning outcomes: 1) a learned understanding of the history of Christian thought; and 2) the ability to think critically and write effectively with evidence and logic in presenting theological concepts. Outcomes will be reported to UEPC and uploaded to WEAVE. UEPC will refine process for broader implementation.

- Spring 2016: we will increase our data collection for THE 1000C from full-time faculty and adjuncts. We will expand our assessment plan to include student surveys for courses with greater enrollment, e.g., THE 2200, 2215, 3300, and 3305. In addition, we will conduct a survey for our majors in THE 4990 Seminar to measure the degree to which our students are meeting the department’s program goals. All results will be reported to the Assistant Chair and uploaded to WEAVE. The Assistant Chair will then report these findings to the UEPC to make recommendations to the department for ways to improve our teaching effectiveness.

- Fall 2016: continued refinement of data collection process. we will begin to implement a rotation for different 2000 and 3000 level course over a three-year period

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)

N/A

Standard 4. Additional comments if needed. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The department has also been charged with measuring mission-specific competencies. We believe this fact highlights the mission-critical nature of our discipline and programs. There is considerable overlap between the mission-related competencies articulated by a UCCC subcommittee and our program goals. We plan to measure mission specific outcomes via our program assessment process rather than developing a free-standing system of assessment.

Mission-Specific CompetenciesDepartment of Theology and Religious

StudiesB.A. Program Learning Outcomes

Drawing upon philosophical and theological scholarship, students will be able to offer

sophisticated, learned answers to fundamental questions about the meaning

and value of human life (#1)

Demonstrate the ability to articulate an understanding of key elements of Christian and especially Roman Catholic doctrine in dialogue with contemporary culture (#4)

Students will demonstrate the ability to confront challenges to claims about the

dignity and value of human persons using

Demonstrate the ability to think critically about theological ethics and to explain principles and key concepts from the


sophisticated arguments (#2) Catholic moral tradition (#3)Drawing upon theological and philosophical sources, students will be able to explain how faith & reason, and/or religion & science can

be understood to be compatible (#3)

Mapped specifically to two courses:THE 3910 – Faith and Reason in Theology

THE 3920 – Religion and Science

Students will demonstrate familiarity with the Bible and the ability to employ

appropriate methods of biblical interpretation (#4)

Demonstrate familiarity with the Bible and the ability to employ appropriate methods

of biblical interpretation (#1)

Students will acquire a sufficient understanding of Catholicism to be able to

talk intelligently with others about the Catholic tradition in its historical and

contemporary complexity (#5)

Demonstrate the capacity to articulate a learned understanding of the history of

Christianity (#2)

Demonstrate the ability to articulate an understanding of key elements of Christian and especially Roman Catholic doctrine in dialogue with contemporary culture (#4)

Students will demonstrate the ability to identify a specific need or problem in the

community and address it via direct action by participating in academic service

learning, internships, experiential learning, etc (#6)

Articulate the fundamental beliefs, practices, and moral commitments of one or more

world religions; demonstrate an awareness of the contours of contemporary

interreligious dialogue and of practices that are crucial for engaging in interreligious

dialogue (#5)

Students will demonstrate the ability to draw upon philosophical traditions of ethics,

the Catholic moral tradition, and other religious traditions to analyze social

problems (#8)

Demonstrate the ability to think critically about theological ethics and to explain principles and key concepts from the

Catholic moral tradition (#3)

Demonstrate the ability to articulate the values held by St. Vincent de Paul and to explain the meaning and implications of Vincentian mission in today’s world (#8)


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 2009

FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total

Majors 2 1 3 3 0 3 2 1 3 3 1 4 1 3 4

Minors 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 4

Majors & Minors Combined 4 1 5 5 0 5 3 1 4 4 1 5 4 4 8

# of FTE Students

(Majors & Minors) 4.00 0.33 4.33 5.00 0.00 5.00 3.00 0.33 3.33 4.00 0.33 4.33 4.00 1.33 5.33

# of FTE Faculty

assigned to the

program 4 4 4 4 4

FTE Student/

FTE Faculty Ratio 1.08 1.25 .83 1.08 1.33


F P Total F Total F Total F Total

Majors Majors

Majors

Majors

Majors

Majors

Majors

Majors

Majors

MAJORS 2 1 3 2 2 4 4 3 3




Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total

Total MAJORS/MINORS 4 2 6 3 3 7 7 4 4



FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE FTE

Total FTE MAJORS 4 0.667 4.667 3 3 7 7 4 4

Important Notes:FTE Students = Number of FT Students + (number of PT Students/3)FTE Faculty = Number of FT Faculty + (number of PT Faculty/3) This methodology is used by STJ for all external reporting.The figure for majors includes first and any second majors.

5b. Below you will find the credit hours the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty (including administrators) and the total credit hours consumed by non-majors.

These data reflect a combination of Queens and SI campus enrollment and cannot be used to assess SI program. Determining credit hours taught by FT faculty on SI campus was too complicated for us to calculate at the dept. level.

Credit Hours Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009

Taught # % # % # % # % # %

FT Faculty5307 45% 4965 42% 4659 39% 5394 41% 5619 45%

PT Faculty 6504 55% 6798 58% 7329 61% 7722 59% 6828 55%



# of FTE faculty assigned to the program 4 4 3 3

FTE Student/FTE Faculty Ratio

1.17 .75 2.3 1.33

Total 11811 100% 11763 100% 11988 100% 13116 100% 12447 100%

% consumed by Non-Majors

96% 97% 97% 98% 97%

Credit Hrs Taught Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013

NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t

F-T Faculty 5,046 42% 5,736 44% 4,887 42% 4,752 39.0%

P-T Faculty (inc Admin) 6,852 58% 7,443 56% 6,870 58% 7,445 61.0%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Total 11,898 100% 13,179 100% 11,757 100% 12,197 100%

% Consumed by Non-Majors

11,598 97.5%

12,894 97.8%

11,400 97.0%

11,935 97.9%

5c. Below you will find the number of courses the department has delivered by full-time faculty and part-time faculty (including administrators).

Data provided by institutional research reflects a combination of Queens and SI programs. Below that you will find department data for the most recent 4 years (it has a red header). The data we collected show that about 45-50% of our courses are taught by FT faculty on the SI campus.

Courses Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009

Taught # % # % # % # % # %

FT Faculty 58 46%63 48% 55 40% 63 43% 62 44%

PT Faculty 69 54% 68 52% 81 60% 85 57% 78 56%

Total 127 100% 131 100% 136 100% 148 100% 140 100%


Courses Taught Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013

NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t

F-T Faculty 55 43.7%

63 43.8%

60 42.0%

55 39.9%

P-T Faculty (inc Admin)

71 56.3%

81 56.3%

83 58.0%

83 60.1%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Total 126 100% 144 100% 143 100% 138 100%

THIS CHART WAS PREPARED BY THE DEPT AND REFLECTS THE SI PROGRAM:

Courses Taught Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015

NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t NumberPercen

t

F-T Faculty 9 64.3% 5 41.7% 5 45.5% 5 50%

P-T Faculty (inc Admin) 5 35.7% 7 58.3% 6 58.0% 5 50%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Total 14 100% 12 100% 11 100% 10 100%


5d. What is the representative nature of faculty in terms of demographics, tenure and diversity? (See departmental information on next page). How well does this support the program?

At the present time the program has two full-time faculty members assigned to it. Both hold tenure at the rank of associate professor and both are white men. Demographic data for the part-time faculty was not available for that campus, but department estimates indicate that people of color are severely underrepresented in our program faculty on the SI campus (there are no people of color teaching in the program) as are women (only one woman is active there as an adjunct faculty member).


Departmental Data

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

FT PTTotal FT PT

Total FT PT

Total FT PT

Total FT PT Total

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Gender

Male 15 68% 17 46% 32 15 68% 20 56% 35 14 70% 2558% 39 16 70% 25 60% 41 15 68% 24 62% 39

Female 7 32% 20 54% 27 7 32% 16 44% 23 6 30% 1842% 24 7 30% 17 40% 24 7 32% 15 38% 22

Total 22 100% 37100% 59 22 100% 36 100% 58 20 100% 43

100% 63 23 100% 42 100% 65 22 100% 39 100% 61

Ethnicity

Black 0 0% 1 3% 1 1 5% 1 3% 2 1 5% 3 7% 4 0 0% 2 5% 2 0 0% 2 5% 2Hispanic 1 5% 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 3% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 4% 0 0% 1 1 5% 0 0% 1

Asian 1 5% 2 5% 3 0 0% 1 3% 1 0 0% 2 5% 2 0 0% 2 5% 2 0 0% 4 10% 4

White 20 91% 32 86% 52 20 91% 32 89% 52 18 90% 3684% 54 21 91% 36 86% 57 20 91% 31 79% 51

Unknown 0 0% 2 5% 2 1 5% 1 3% 2 1 5% 2 5% 3 1 4% 2 5% 3 1 5% 2 5% 3

Total 22 100% 37100% 59 22 100% 36 100% 58 20 100% 43

100% 63 23 100% 42 100% 65 22 100% 39 100% 61

Tenure Status

Tenured 17 77% 17 17 77% 17 17 85% 17 17 74% 17 16 73% 16Tenure-Track 4 18% 4 3 14% 3 1 5% 1 4 17% 4 4 18% 4

Not Applicable 1 5% 1 2 9% 2 2 10% 2 2 9% 2 2 9% 2

Total 22 100% 22 22 100% 22 20 100% 20 23 100% 23 22 100% 22


2010 2011 2012 2013

FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total FT PT Total

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Gender

Male15 75% 24 67% 39

16 73% 22 63% 38

16 73% 23 58% 39

16 76% 22 59% 38

Female 5 25% 12 33% 17 6 27% 13 37% 19 6 27% 17 43% 23 5 24% 15 41% 20

Total20 36 56

22 35 57

22 40 62

21 37 58

Ethnicity

Black 0% 2 6% 2 0% 2 6% 2 0% 2 5% 2 0% 2 5% 2

Hispanic 1 5% 0% 1 1 5% 0% 1 1 5% 0% 1 2 10% 1 3% 3

Asian 0% 2 6% 2 0% 1 3% 1 1 5% 2 5% 3 1 5% 2 5% 3American Indian/Alaskan Native 0% 1 3% 1 0% 0% 0 0% 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0

White18 90% 30 83% 48

20 91% 31 89% 51

19 86% 35 88% 54

17 81% 31 84% 48

2 or More Races 1 3% 1 3% 1 3% 1 3% 1

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 0% 0

Unknown 1 5% 0% 1 1 5% 0% 1 1 5% 0% 1 1 5% 0 0% 1

Total20 36 56

22 35 57

22 40 62

21 37 58

Tenure Status

Tenured15 75% 15

16 73% 16

16 73% 16

14 67% 14

Tenure-Track 4 20% 4 4 18% 4 5 23% 5 5 24% 5

Not Applicable 1 5% 1 2 9% 2 1 5% 1 2 10% 2

Total20 20

22 22

22 22

21 21


5e. What evidence exists that the program’s faculty have engaged in research and scholarship on teaching and/or learning in the program’s field of study? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

Our FT faculty who serve the SI BA in Theology program have not published research on teaching in our field.

5f. What initiatives have been taken in the past five years to promote faculty development in support of the program? (Suggested limit 1/2 page)

The department dedicates at least one meeting of all full-time faculty per semester to discussion of an issue related to teaching. Over the past few years, our focus has been largely on effective teaching in our intro course.

As part of the process of bringing consistency to THE 1000C across all sections, several full-time faculty have provided “teaching guides” to specific elements of that course (e.g., a class session on appropriate methods for interpreting the creation stories). The resource provides secondary source material, suggested in-class exercises, and primary texts that would be appropriate to engage with students. Each resource was developed by a different faculty member who has particular expertise on that topic/content area. These resources have been shared with the full department on Digication.

5g. The table below shows the amount of external funding received by the department. If available, please provide the dollar amount of externally funded research for full-time faculty supporting the program under review. (Program dollar amounts are available through departmental records.)

External Funding

Fiscal Year

04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09

$ Amount Program

$ Amount Department

External Funding

Fiscal Year

09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

$ Amount Program

$ Amount Departmen

t - 5,000 - -


5h. Please comment on the table below that shows trends in overall course evaluation and instructional vibrancy for your program (if available), your college and the university. (Suggested limit ½ page)

Data indicate that courses offered by our Department are rated consistently and significantly above average overall by students. Our department’s courses better ratings than the average for the college and university in terms of instructional vibrancy. Our faculty make a deliberate effort to develop pedagogical techniques that integrate active learning and high impact practices such as collaborative learning. These student evaluation statistics are especially impressive when you consider that students in the vast majority of our courses are fulfilling mandatory core requirements rather than taking something in their chosen field of study

Overall Evaluation (Spring)Instructional Vibrancy

(Spring)2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Theology & Religious

Studies (SI)4.03 4.29 4.25 4.49 4.48 4.57

Saint John’s College

3.95 4.01 4.00 4.28 4.33 4.33

Total Undergraduate

4.01 3.21 4.07 4.27 4.29 4.35

Note: Institutional Vibrancy is the average of the first 14 questions on the course evaluation, with questions pertaining to course organization, communication, faculty-student interaction, and assignments/grading. All course evaluation questions range from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).

5i. What percentage of full time faculty assigned to this program have terminal degrees or industry certifications renewed within the past 2 years? Comment. (Suggested limit 1/3 page)

100% of the full-time faculty assigned to this program hold a terminal degree (Ph.D.) in the field.

Standard 5. Comments: Indicate to what extent the program has the faculty resources required to meet its mission and goals. Include references from 5a – 5i. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The current level of full-time faculty serving the B.A. in Theology on Staten Island is barely adequate, but overall enrollment on the Staten Island campus will not support hiring additional FT faculty at this time. With the combination of our full-time faculty and part time faculty, students are able to complete their major sequence on the SI campus. It would be preferable for students to have the option of taking a


wider variety of full-time faculty, but Dr. Haddorff’s expertise in historical theology and ethics, Dr. Kiley’s expertise in Biblical Studies, and the expertise of our adjunct faculty in systematic theology constitute adequate resources to maintain the program.

In addition to offering our major sequence on a rotating basis over two years on the SI campus, our department consistently offers an array of quality distance learning offerings that our SI majors can take to enhance the variety of instructors and topics in their major program. Several courses that are required for the major sequence are offered online for the benefit of SI students and those studying abroad.


N/A

STANDARD 6. The program has adequate resources to meet its goals and objectives. And, it is cost-effective.

6a. Narrative/Supportive Technological Environment - Comment on classrooms and labs meeting industry-standards for quality and availability of hardware, software, and peripherals; library space, holdings and services; science laboratories, TV studios, art/computer graphic labs; etc. (Suggested limit 1 page)

Classrooms are adequately equipped with podium computers and other relevant technology for effective teaching and active learning. The library provides adequate space to work and conduct research. The collection of monographs on the SI campus is quite limited, but supplemented by the ability of faculty and students to have resources delivered to SI from the Queens campus. In addition, there are a number of online electronic books, journals and databases conducive for research. Classrooms, library resources, and information technology resources are all sufficient to support the current program.

6b. Narrative/ Supportive Physical Environment - Comment on level of faculty and student satisfaction with HVAC; faculty and student satisfaction with classroom lighting, crowdedness, and acoustics; flexible teaching environments, and faculty offices, etc.. (Suggested limit 1 page)

The university made a considerable investment in infrastructure on the SI campus about fifteen years ago. The faculty members in this program enjoy comfortable, relatively new offices. Comfortable, modern space is available for academic lectures and other events that support the program curriculum outside the classroom. The program experiences no difficulty in scheduling classes even at peak times.

Students and faculty are satisfied with the physical environment and facilities on campus. No facilities investments are required at this time to support maintaining this program.


6c. To what extent has the University funded major capital projects, e.g., renovations, which are linked directly to the program during the past five years? (Bulleted list)

The university has not funded major capital improvement linked directly to our program, although the program has enjoyed the benefits of general improvements to the physical plant (classrooms, office space, etc.).

6d. If external data that describes the cost effectiveness of the program has been provided by your School/College Dean, please comment on the program’s cost-effectiveness. (Suggest limit 1 page)

Data provided by the office of institutional research indicate that our program is cost effective. The department provides considerable support to the university’s core curriculum, and supports interdisciplinary minors (e.g., social justice). Our courses in the core (many of which overlap with our program’s major sequence) are a significant part of what makes a St. John’s University education unique, giving the university a competitive edge. Our program’s offerings add value to many majors across the university. None of those contributions are accounted for here. If our action plan for growth is successful, we will be able to build upon the existing cost-effectiveness of our program. A modest, but real contribution margin of nearly $30,000 is consistent with our recommendation to “MAINTAIN” the program.

Adj Credi

t Gross

TuitionFinancia

lNet

TuitionOther Direct Total Direct

Contrib-ution

Enrollment

Hours Tuition Fees & Fees Aid

Revenues

Revenue

Revenue

Expenses

Margin #1

3 99109,35

0 3,20

9 112,55

9 59,700 52,859 815 53,674 24,118 29,556


N/A

STANDARD 7. Effective actions have been taken based on the findings of the last program review and plans have been initiated for the future.

Comments: (Suggested limit 1page)

There have been specific actions undertaken by the university and the Department of Theology and Religious Studies that seek to maintain the BA major program at the Staten Island Campus. First, there has been a renewed emphasis on collaborative events between the programs at Queens and Staten


Island, including interpersonal and public gatherings and events. In 2013, the department chair, Dr. Christopher Vogt, planned and attended an informal gathering between theology students and full-time faculty at the S.I campus. This event sought to encourage student interest in the major program by providing an informal forum for discussion about the major at both campuses. In addition, in April 2014 Peter Steinfels, the Peter and Margaret D’Angelo Endowed Chair for the Humanities at St. John’s, gave a public lecture called, “Secularization and its Discontents: Is ‘Secular” a Four-Letter Word?” at the S. I. campus. This public event is only the latest in reoccurring collaborative efforts at maintaining the strong commitment to the theology major at the S.I campus.

A second strategy for maintaining the program has been to enhance Distance Learning (DL) Theology offerings for Staten Island students, and in particular, courses that are requirements for the BA major. The purpose here is not to replace traditional classroom course offerings for the major with DL offerings, but rather to supplement the major course offering in the classroom with additional courses, enhancing student choice for theology electives. Most required courses for the Theology major are offered both in the traditional face-to-face classroom and in the DL format. However, due to low enrollment for upper division 2000 and 3000 courses, sometimes it is necessary to offer these courses as DL courses. Regardless, with the increased DL offerings in the Theology major, the SI BA program can be effectively maintained in the future.

A third strategy for maintaining the BA program is the interdisciplinary efforts initiated at the S. I. campus, including the American Studies Program developed by Dr. Robert Fanuzzi (Associate Provost). Vital to these interdisciplinary efforts is the presence of a Theology program. Faculty members in other programs such as English, Political Science, History, and Philosophy, all affirm the importance of maintaining a Theology and Religious Studies major at the S. I. Campus.

The department also plans to take the following steps to improve this program as part of its strategic plan:

1. Ensure Student Successa. OBJECTIVE: Increase enrollment in the major

i. Action: Refresh curriculum: In the next three years we will bring our curriculum into the twenty-first century by adding new courses and refocusing some existing ones so that they have more cross-disciplinary relevance and appeal. We will develop and refine our curriculum so as to better enable our students to grapple with enduring questions and to tackle new ones that are emerging in other fields.

ii. Action: The UEPC will study the feasibility and (if feasible) take steps to develop and implement a new major sequence designed specifically for double majors. This new track would make theology a more attractive double-major by reducing the number of required courses and allowing students more freedom to link their work in theology to their planned careers and to their academic interests in allied disciplines (via the refreshed curriculum in action point i).

b. OBJECTIVE: Improve retention, persistence and graduation rates


i. Action: Make improvements to department advising process for majors. Faculty who serve as advisors to our majors will follow up with their advisees shortly after midterm grades are released.

c. OBJECTIVE : Ensure and improve the quality of student learning experiences i. ACTION: Implement program of assessment (see section 4c of the program review

for details of the assessment plan that we are implementing. ii. ACTION: Refresh curricular offerings (this action is explained above in the section

on increasing enrollment – 1.a.1)


· Web viewDrawing upon philosophical and theological scholarship, students will be able to offer...

Documents

Transcript of · Web viewDrawing upon philosophical and theological scholarship, students will be able to offer...