2008 Eastern Michigan University Systems Portfolio for ... · EaStErn MIcHIgan UnIvErSItY aQIP...

Eastern Michigan UniversitySystems Portfolio for Accreditation

2008

Eastern Michigan University Systems Portfolio

June 1, 2008

www.emich.edu/aqip/systemsportfolio.html

Eastern Michigan University Office of the Provost 106 Welch Hall Ypsilanti, MI 48197734 487-3200www.emich.edu

EaStErn MIcHIgan UnIvErSItY aQIP SYStEMS POrtFOLIO | 2008

II

tabLE OF cOntEntS

Institutional Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

IO1 Distinctive features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1IO2 Scope of educational offerings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2IO3 Student base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4IO4 collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4IO5 Faculty and staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5IO6 Facilities, equipment, and technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6IO7 competitive Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7IO8 Opportunities and challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

category1: Helping Students Learn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

1c1 common student-learning objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91c2 aligning learning with mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91c3 Key instructional programs and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91c4 Preparing students to live in a diverse world . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101c5 Maintaining climate of diversity, intellectual freedom, inquiry, and reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101P1 Determining common student-learning objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111P2 Designing new courses and programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111P3 Determining required student preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121P4 communicating expectations to students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121P5 Helping students select programs that match needs, interests, and abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121P6 Documenting effective teaching and learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131P7 building effective and efficient course-delivery systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131P8 Monitoring currency and effectiveness of curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131P9 Determining student and faculty support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141P10 alignment of curricular and co-curricular goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141P11 Determining processes for student assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141P12 Student preparation for further study or employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161P13 Measures of student performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161r1 Student-learning achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161r2 Student-competence evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161r3 teaching-and-learning process results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171r4 comparative results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171I1 Improving current processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171I2 Setting and communicating targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

category 2: accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2cI Other distinct objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182c2 alignment with mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182c3 Support for helping students learn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182P1 Determining other distinctive objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192P2 communicating expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192P3 Determining faculty and staff needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192P4 assessing and reviewing distinct objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19


III

2P5 Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192r1 results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192r2 results comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202r3 Strengthening the University and enhancing relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212I1 Improving systems and processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212I2 targets and improvement priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

category 3: Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ needs . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3c1-3c2 Student-stakeholder groups, expectations, and requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223P1 Identifying, analyzing, and responding to student needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223P2 building and maintaining student relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223P3 Identifying, analyzing, and responding to stakeholder needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233P4 building and maintaining stakeholder relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243P5 Determining new student and stakeholder groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243P6 collecting complaint information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253P7 Determining student and stakeholder satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253r1 Student satisfaction results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253r2 Student relationship-building results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263r3 Stakeholder-satisfaction results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263r4 Stakeholder relationship-building results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273r5 results comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273I1 & I2 Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

category 4: valuing People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

4c1 Organization of work environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294c2 Key institutional and geographical factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294c3 Demographic trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294c4 Key training initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294P1 Job requirements and hiring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304P2 recruiting, orienting, and retaining employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304P3 Ensuring work processes, activity contributions, and ethical practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314P4 training and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324P5 Determining training needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324P6 Personnel evaluation system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324P7 recognition, reward, and compensation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334P8 Determining key motivational issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344P9 Evaluating employee satisfaction, health and safety, and well-being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344P10 Measures collected and analyzed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344r1 results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344r2 results in processes associated with valuing people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344r3 Employee productivity and effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354r4 benchmarking comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354I1 Improving processes for valuing people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354I2 Setting targets for improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

category 5: Leading and communicating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

5c1 Leadership and communication systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365c2 Leadership alignment with board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375c3 Institutional values and expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375P1 Directions aligned with mission, vision, and values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375P2 Future opportunities and the learning environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385P3 Decision-making processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38


Iv

5P4 Use of information in decision-making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395P5 communication among institutional levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395P6 communication of shared mission, vision, values, and institutional directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395P7 Encouragement and development of leadership abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415P8 Leadership succession to ensure mission, vision, and values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425P9 Measurement of leading and communicating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425r1 results for leading and communicating processes and systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425r2 comparative results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425I1 & 5I2 Improvements and targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

category 6: Supporting Institutional Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6c1 Key student and administrative support service processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436c2 reinforcing EMU’s key student and administrative support services processes and systems in category 1 and category 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446P1 Identifying student support service needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446P2 Identifying key stakeholder administrative support service needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446P3 Managing student and administrative support service processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456P4 Using information and results to improve support services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476P5 Measures of student and administrative support services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476r1 results of student support services processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476r2 results of administrative support processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496r3 comparison of results with other higher-education institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496I1 Methods of improvement of current processes and systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506I2 Identification and communication of improvement priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

category 7: Measuring Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

7c1 Data collection and availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 517c2 Key institutional measures for tracking effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527P1 Selection, management, and use of information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527P2 Determining information needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527P3 Determining needs for comparative data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537P4 analyzing and sharing data at institutional level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537P5 alignment of data with institutional goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537P6 Ensuring effectiveness of information systems and processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537P7 Measures of the effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547r1 results of systems for measuring effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547r2 results comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547I1 Improvement of current systems and processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547I2 Setting targets for improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

category 8: Planning continuous Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

8c1 Institutional vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558c2 Short-term and long-term strategies aligned with mission/vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558P1 Institutional planning process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558P2 Selecting short-term and long-term strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558P3 Developing key action plans to support institutional strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568P4 coordinating and aligning planning processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568P5 Selecting measures and setting performance projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588P6 accounting for resource needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588P7 Ensuring faculty, staff, and administrator development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588P8 Measuring planning effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588r1 results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588r2 Projections of performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58


v

8r3 comparisons of performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598r4 Evidence of effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598I1 Improvement of current processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598I2 Setting and communicating targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

category 9: building collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

9c1 Key collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609c2 relationships support institutional mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609P2 Ensuring needs are met . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629P3 building and integrating internal relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629P4 Measures of collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639r1 results from building collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639r2 results comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639I1 Improving processes for building collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639I2 Setting targets for improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

List of abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67


vI

FIgUrES

Figure IO.1: Mission and core Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure IO.2: revenue Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure IO.4: Strategic Directions - april 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure IO.3: Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure IO.5: number of Degrees granted by college . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure IO.6: Student Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Figure IO.7: Sample of collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure IO.8: Employee Workforce by Employee classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure IO.9: Employees by gender within classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure IO.10: Faculty by rank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure IO.11: Key competitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Figure IO.12: Opportunities and challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Figure 1.1: Online, Hybrid, and Web-Enhanced courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 1.2: Sample of Documents reflecting climate of Diversity, Intellectual Freedom, Inquiry and reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Figure 1.3: communicating Expectations to Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figure 1.4: Determining and Providing Student-Learning Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Figure 2.1: comparison of Peer Institutions’ grants awarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 3.1: Stakeholder requirements and Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Figure 3.2: tools to Measure Student and Stakeholder Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Figure 3.3: results from alumni Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Figure 3.4: nSSE benchmark Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Figure 4.1: Departments Serving Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Figure 4.2: recent Professional-Development Programs at EMU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Figure 4.3: Illustrative EMU Employee recognition Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Figure 4.4: Faculty awards granted and applied For . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Figure 4.5: Faculty tenure and Promotion, 2005-2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Figure 4.6: Sources and amounts of External awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Figure 5.1: EMU IDEa Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Figure 5.2: EMU communication Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Figure 5.3: EMU Formal Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Figure 5.3: EMU Formal Meetings (continued) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Figure 6.1: Key Processes and Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Figure 6.2: Sample of Methods to Identify needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Figure 6.3: Sample of Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48


vII

Figure 6.4: FDc-Planned Initiatives and Progress report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 6.5: total Library Expenditures Per FtE Student 2005/2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Figure 7.1: Sources and availability of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Figure 7.2.: Identified Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Figure 8.1: Short-term Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Figure 8.2: Stategic-Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Figure 8.3: Integrated Program review and continuous-Improvement cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Figure 9.1: collaborative relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Figure 9.2: Student/EMU relationship-building Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Figure 9.3: alumni gifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

EastErn Michigan UnivErsity aQiP systEMs POrtFOLiO | 2008

inDEX | 1

indexindex to the location of evidence relating to the commission’s

Criteria for Accreditation found in Eastern Michigan University’s Systems Portfolio

Criterion One – 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.

Core Component 1a. the organization’s mission documents are clear and articulate publicly the organization’s commitments.

• The University Mission is publicly articulated in many sources (IO1, Figure IO.1, 1C2, 5P1).• EMU is committed to a University-wide focus on learning as its core mission (IO1, Figure IO.1,

6C1, 6C2).• EMU commitment extends beyond the campus boundaries (IO1, Figure IO.1, IO4, 9C2).

Core Component 1b. in its mission documents, the organization recognizes the diversity of its learners, other constituencies, and the greater society it serves.

• One core principle is “Taking pride in our diversity as a resource for learning” (IO1).• The General Ed. Program includes strong focus on both U.S. and Global Diversity (1C1).• EMU takes pride in using its diversity as a resource for learning across colleges, programs, and

academic levels (IO1, 1C4).• Core values include “Diversity” and “Human Dignity & Respect” (5C3).• In accord with its mission, EMU has adopted a policy on Gender Identity (5P1).• The mission requires that data about students be collected, managed, and accessible. (7P1).• One of the four strategic directions includes diversity and multicultural perspectives (8C1).

Core Component 1c. Understanding of and support for the mission pervade the organization.• Within the context of the mission, EMU responds to student and stakeholder needs (3C1).• New-faculty orientation and faculty-development programs focus on understanding EMU’s student

base and approach to serving students (4P2).• Departmental orientations for new staff and administrators typically include a focus on how the

department supports the educational mission of the University (4P2).• Faculty, staff, students, and stakeholders have input (5C1, 5P1).• Short-term strategies were developed within the structure of the mission, vision, and four directions

(8C2).

Core Component 1d. the organization’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the organization to fulfill its mission.

• Regents, administrators, faculty, staff, and students are involved in setting policies, fiscal oversight, directions, and learning opportunities in accord with mission (IO1, 4P3, 5C1, 5P1, 5P2, 5P5).

• All divisions design specific training programs for their staff in response to current issues (4C4, 4P2).• Cross-divisional teams, collective-bargaining agreements, Faculty Council, and interested

stakeholders provide input for decisions (4P3, 5P3).• New iteration of strategic planning for developing priorities and directions is consistent with mission

(5P6).• EMU’s long-term strategies are being determined by the strategic-planning process (8C2, Figure 8.1,

8P2).• Short-term goals were developed within the structure of the mission, vision, and four directions (8P2).


inDEX | 2

Core Component 1e. the organization upholds and protects its integrity. • Many processes and offices foster the creation and maintenance of a climate that celebrates

intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions (Figure 1.2, 1C5).

• The Office of the Ombudsman is the general office for student and stakeholder concerns (3P6).• The “EMU Advantage Program” is open to every person at every level at EMU to enable confidential

communication regarding unethical, illegal, or suspicious behavior (3P6).• EMU has policies and infrastructure in place to address sexual harassment, academic dishonesty,

protection of human subjects, health and safety, etc. (4P3).• A core value is “Integrity” (5C3).• EMU has established an ethics- and compliance-reporting system, which enables any faculty or staff

member to bring compliance and ethics issues directly to the Board of Regents (5P1).

• EMU’s partnerships and contractual agreements uphold the University’s integrity (9C1, 9C2, 9P1).

Criterion Two – Preparing for the Future. the organization’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill the mission, improve the quality of its education, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

Core Component 2a. the organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic trends.

• New programs and courses are designed in response to an array of inputs, including advisory boards, specialized accreditation standards, employer requests, the development of new technologies or methods in particular disciplines, and student-learning outcomes data (1C5).

• EMU examines demographic trends in the campus workforce, student body, and pools of potential students in planning (4C3, 4P10, 4R1).

• Strategic directions and strategies are derived from scans that address social, technological, economic, educational, and political current and emerging conditions and factors (8P2).

Core Component 2b. the organization’s resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

• EMU is engaged in campus-wide planning (IO1, 8C1).• EMU has made commitments to improve facilities, equipment, and technology (IO6).• The new General Education Program won an award for “commitment to student-learning objectives”

(1C1).• EMU draws robust and diverse applicant pools for faculty, staff, and administrative vacancies (4C2).• Orientation programs for new faculty, staff, and administrators prepare employees to work effectively

with EMU students (4C4, 4P2).• Professional-development programs for faculty, staff, and administrators provide opportunities for

the campus workforce to hone their current skills and acquire new skills aimed at enhancing support for student learning and service (4P2, Figure 4.2, 4P4-6, Figure 4.3).

• EMU has increased the breadth and frequency of campus safety training; additional campus policies, procedures, and security measures have been established (4R1).

• AHR and HR have drafted a new manual for searches and other personnel policies to provide more uniform processes throughout the institution (4R2).

• EMU faculty, staff, and administrators regularly are recognized by professional organizations and funding agencies for outstanding accomplishments (4R3, Figure 4.5).

• EMU has instituted a professional-management training program for mid- and upper-level administrators and hired a training director (4I1).

Core Component 2c. the organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement.


INDEX | 3

• Strategic planning at EMU is aligned with the mission, directions, and continuous improvement (IO1, Figure IO.12, 8P4).

• All academic programs participate in annual planning and program review (1C1, 8P4).• Numerous data sources are utilized to assess effectiveness (3R5, 7C1, Figure 7.1).• A gap between performance standards and performance observed triggers discussion about training

that can assist the employees in improving (4P5).• Training focused on continuous improvement is ongoing (4P5).• Annual performance reviews provide an effective procedure to monitor strengths and identify

areas of improvement, processes to notify employees of unproductive or inappropriate behavior, or violation of University policy (4P6).

Core Component 2d. all levels of planning align with the organization’s mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.

• Steps to strengthen performance focus on increasing teaching effectiveness for most EMU employees (4P5).

• Divisional and unit work plans support EMU’s mission, vision, and directions (8P3).• Integrated program review leads to annual plans utilized to fulfill the mission (8P4).

Criterion Three – Student Learning and Effective Teaching. the organization provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission.

Core Component 3a. The organization’s goals for student-learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible.

• Eastern Michigan University’s (EMU) common student-learning objectives are embodied in the learning outcomes of the new general Education Program: Education for Participation in the global Community (IO2, 1C1).

• Student-learning outcomes for particular programs are established by the relevant program faculty in that disciplinary area; common learning objectives are established by faculty committees in consultation with advisory boards, student representatives, and other stakeholders and are reviewed on a regular basis (1C2, 1P1).

• One AQIP Action Project focuses on establishing the parameters for data collection and analysis related to student outcomes and performance in three foundational areas: effective oral communication, effective written communication, and quantitative reasoning (1R1).

• A key focus in both the new faculty-orientation and the subsequent department/college orientation programs is successfully working with EMU students (4P2).

• The General Education Action Project promises to align the goals of general education with assessment (7P5).

• The academic program-review process requires the alignment of departmental and program goals with the HLC criteria and overall institutional directions (7P5, 8P4).

Core Component 3b. the organization values and supports effective teaching. • Teaching excellence is at the core of the University mission statement (IO1, Figure IO.1).• A number of offices, centers, and groups on campus work regularly to determine student and faculty

needs relative to learning support (Figure 1.4, 1P9).• Measures of effective teaching and learning are constantly being updated and tracked (4P6; Figure

7.2, 7P1).• EMU offers several annual awards to celebrate teaching excellence (4P7; Figure 4.3).• Student evaluations, nominations for faculty awards, and annual faculty reports document teaching

effectiveness (4P10).

Core Component 3c. the organization creates effective learning environments. • In addition to institutional accreditation through the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), EMU


INDEX | 4

academic programs for which specialized accreditation is available hold that accreditation in virtually all cases (IO2, Appendix A).

• University Physical Plant employees “provide an environment for education first,” creating state-of-the-art facilities and implementing preservation techniques on its older structures (IO6).

• EMU has recently invested in course- and facilities-scheduling software to provide longitudinal data on which to base decisions for balancing student and institutional needs (1P7).

• Numerous environmental supports exist (3P2, 3R1, 3R5, Figure 6.1).• A key focus in both the new-faculty orientation program and the subsequent department/college

orientation programs is successfully working with students (4P2).• Student evaluations, nominations for faculty awards, and annual faculty reports document teaching

effectiveness (4P10).• Diverse offerings provide for professional development of administrators, faculty, and staff (5P7).• EMU maximizes educational opportunities and personal/professional growth for students from

diverse backgrounds through its array of programs in a student-focused learning environment that extends beyond the University boundaries (6C1, 6C2, 9P1).

Core Component 3d. the organization’s learning resources support student learning and effective teaching.• A number of offices, centers, and groups on campus work regularly to determine student and faculty

needs relative to learning support (IO2, Figure 1.4, 1P9).• Support for students includes Honors College, Academic Advising, Health Center, Computer Support,

Library, etc., (IO2, IO6, 3R1).• A key focus in both the new-faculty orientation and the subsequent department/college orientation

programs is successfully working with EMU students (4P2).• The Faculty Development Center surveys faculty needs every three years in addition to annual

feedback and planning sessions (4P5, 6R2).• EMU offers several annual awards to celebrate teaching excellence (4P7, Figure 4.3).• Resources provided include the Faculty Development Center, conference attendance (HLC), teaching

awards, research fellowships, etc., (5P2, 5P7).• Faculty-student partnerships are at the center of engagements with the community (9C1, 9C2).

Criterion Four: 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.

Core Component 4a. the organization demonstrates, through the actions of its board, administrators, students, faculty, and staff, that it values a life of learning.

• Teaching and learning are at the core of the EMU mission statement (Figure IO.1).• Administrators and staff of the Physical Plant strive to create and sustain an environment that

promotes learning by creating state-of-the-art facilities (IO6).• EMU’s commitment to creating a climate celebrating intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect

for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions is enshrined in the institution’s values and key documents (1C5, Figure 1.2).

• All EMU employees participate in ongoing professional-development programs, both on campus and at professional-society meetings (4C4, 4P2, Figure 4.2, 4P4).

• Part of the agenda for performance-evaluation meetings between an EMU employee and the supervisor is identification of professional development, training, or enrichment experiences in which the employee is interested (4P5).

Core Component 4b. The organization demonstrates that acquisition of a breadth of knowledge and skills and the exercise of intellectual inquiry are integral to its educational programs.

• EMU’s recently implemented General Education program teaches students to think critically and


INDEX | 5

communicate effectively, provides an introduction to the methodologies and practices of core academic disciplines, and includes co-curricular learning opportunities (IO2, 1C1).

• EMU faculty members are successful in garnering external support for research, including teaching-related research (2R2, 4R3).

• Community settings are utilized for internships, practice experiences, and service-learning activities (3P4, 9C2).

• An ongoing training program for EMU’s new General Education curriculum includes workshops focused on advising under the new curriculum, developing gE courses, and writing outcomes for learning (4C4).

• EMU supports faculty, staff, and administrators’ travel to professional conferences and workshops (4P4).

• EMU invests in faculty members’ scholarly work via the Sabbatical and Faculty Research Fellowship programs (4R1; Figure 4.3).

• Learning and opportunity are key strategic directions for EMU (8C1).

Core Component 4c. the organization assesses the usefulness of its curricula to students who will live and work in a global, diverse, and technological society.

• EMU’s newly implemented General Education Program: Education for Participation in the Global Community, is an outcomes-based curriculum and is consistent with the University’s emphasis on continuous improvement (IO2).

• Student needs are evaluated in both formal and informal ways (3P1, 3P7, 3R1).• Benchmarking is done related to active and collaborative learning and level of academic challenge

(3R5).• Program Review and annual reporting requires tracking the strategic directions and setting goals

(8P4, 8P5).

Core Component 4d. The organization provides support to ensure that faculty, students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.

• Processes and offices foster creating and maintaining a climate that celebrates intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions (Figure 1.2, 1C5).

• Student input is obtained regarding quality and satisfaction with support services (3P2, 3R2).• Faculty-development programs include foci on ethical issues in teaching and conducting research

(Figure 4.2).• EMU has policies and infrastructure to address such matters as sexual harassment, academic

dishonesty and misconduct in research, protection of human research subjects and ethical treatment of animals used in research, and protection of employee and student health and safety (4P3).

• EMU has established an ethics and compliance reporting system that enables any faculty or staff member to bring compliance and ethics issues directly to the Board of Regents (5P1).

• Innovation, knowledge-sharing, and empowerment are encouraged through a wide range of processes (6P3).

• Selected academic and research operations are tracked and made available (Figure 7.1, 7P1).• The budgeting process is aligned with the four key directions, along with emerging strategic

directions (8P6).

Criterion Five: Engagement and Service. as called for by its mission, the organization identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways both value.

Core Component 5a. the organization learns from the constituencies it serves and analyzes its capacity to serve their needs and expectations.

• Needs of external constituencies are assessed and monitored (3C1-3C2, 3P3, 3P4, 3R3).• The FDC, AHR, and HR conduct surveys regarding training interests, and evaluations from workshops


inDEX | 6

and training programs are reviewed to determine their impact and identify additional topics of interest (4P5).

• Student evaluations and annual faculty reports provide regular accounts of faculty work and students’ perceptions of that work (4P10).

• Engagement and advancement operations are tracked using several measures (Figure 7.1, 7C1).• The strategic-planning process utilizes internal and external scans to help determine how EMU can

best serve (IO1, 8P1, Figure 8.2).• Constituent groups are engaged in identifying directions based on environmental changes in the

state and region (9C1, 9C2).

Core Component 5b. the organization has the capacity and the commitment to engage with its identified constituencies and communities.

• To fulfill General Education requirements, students participate in extracurricular and co-curricular activities, including community service and alternative spring breaks, (IO2).

• EMU’s commitment to outreach and service encompasses many aspects of community life, ranging from health and public safety concerns to the dissemination of information and the availability of facilities (IO4).

• Numerous activities demonstrate engagement with constituencies (3P4).• Multiple community settings are utilized for mutually beneficial learning experiences and research

(3P4, Appendix A).• EMU faculty, staff, and administrators are regularly recognized by their respective professional

organizations for outstanding accomplishments (4R3).• EMU’s structure and processes enable effective communication, connections, and positive impact

upon its immediate locale, region, nation, and global communities (9R1, 9R2).

Core Component 5c. the organization demonstrates its responsiveness to those constituencies that depend on it for service.

• EMU is very much of and in its community (IO1, Figure IO.1).• Continuing Education offers individual classes and full-degree programs at seven off-campus

locations; classes are offered in face-to-face, hybrid, and online formats throughout the University (IO2).

• Continuing Education (CE) offers both credit and noncredit professional-development opportunities (IO2).

• EMU enhances the economic well-being, the cultural vitality, and the quality of life in its regional community through service and research (2C1).

• Strong relationships exist with stakeholders (3R4).• All divisions design specific training programs for their staffs in response to current issues (4C4).• Part of the agenda for performance-evaluation meetings between an EMU employee and the

supervisor is the identification of professional development, training, or enrichment experiences in which the employee is interested (4P5).

• Core values include “Public Engagement” (5C3).• Advisory boards are utilized across colleges, departments, schools, and programs (5P2, Appendix A).• External scans help guide strategic directions and action plans (8P1, 8P3).• EMU builds cooperative partnerships using synergies in the community as well as such formal means

as articulation agreements, internships, and practicum experiences (9C1, 9C2).• Partnerships focus on shared educational, economic, and social goals (9C1, 9C2, 9P1).• Outreach programs, such as Upward Bound, provide evidence of building bridges among diverse

entities (9R1, 9R2).

Core Component 5d. internal and external constituencies value the services the organization provides. • Requirements and expectations of external constituencies are valued (Figure 3.1, 3R3, 6P2).


INDEX | 7

• EMU faculty, staff, and administrators are regularly recognized by their respective professional organizations for outstanding accomplishments (4R3).

• External stakeholders participate in University activities and programs that are open to the public (6P2, 9R1, 9R2).

• Distinct objectives include enhancing the economic well-being and cultural vitality of the regional community (9C1, 9C2).

• EMU’s facilities are available to and used by the community (9R1, 9R2).

Institutional Overview


InStItUtIOnaL OvErvIEW | 1

Institutional Overview

IO1 – Distinctive features

Established in 1849, Eastern Michigan University opened its doors as the Michigan State normal School, the first teacher-training school west of the alleghenies. In 1959, the name was changed to Eastern Michigan University to reflect the height-ened scope and broadened level of its offerings at the beginning of its second century. EMU is now one of fifteen state-supported four-year universities in Michigan. the University’s mission statement and the core principles that guide decision-making appear in Figure IO.1.

EMU is governed by an eight-member board of regents, which is appointed by the governor of the State of Michigan, with the advice and consent of the Michigan Senate. regents are appointed for staggered eight-year terms. the EMU president reports to the board of regents and is the campus chief Executive Officer. Each of the major University divisions is administered by a vice president who reports to the president. the Organizational chart shown in appendix b, provides additional details about campus administration and governance.

Michigan does not have a formal state-wide system integrating its 15 state universities. Each institution receives an annual funding allocation from the Legislature, competing with other state agencies and with one another for funding, capital allocations, etc. However, the university presidents and chief academic, enrollment, and business officers meet regularly. Each university also networks extensively with state executive and legislative officers.

EMU’s annual operating budget is $324,188,000. Major sources of revenue and expenditure are illustrated in Figures IO.2 and IO.3. as with many public institutions, EMU has grown more dependent on tuition/fee revenue as state appropriations have declined in recent years.

the past five years at EMU have been turbulent in terms of institutional leadership, with three campus presidents in that period. recently, the Provost/Executive vice President has served as head of a four-person Executive council comprised of the chief government relations and Special Projects Officer, the Director of charter Schools, and the vice President for business and Finance, in addition to the Provost/Executive vice President. On May 14, the regents announced the selection of a new president.

Figure IO.1: Mission and core Principles

Mission core Principles

Eastern Michigan University is committed to excellence in teaching, the extension of knowledge through basic and ap-plied research, and creative and artistic expression. building on a proud tradition of national leadership in the preparation of teachers, we maximize educational opportunities and personal and professional growth for students from diverse backgrounds through an array of baccalaureate, master’s, and doctoral programs. We provide a student-focused learning environment that positively affects the lives of students and the community. We extend our commitment beyond the campus boundaries to the wider community through service initiatives and partner-ships of mutual interest addressing local, regional, national, and international opportunities and challenges.

becoming a university of choice

Working to ensure student and faculty success

being passionately engaged in disciplinary and interdisciplin-ary pursuits

taking pride in our diversity as a resource for learning

being engaged in the community



During the transition time, an earlier approach to strategic planning – the original six Strategic Directions – continued to be used as a decision-making framework for the University. In January, 2008, the Strategic Directions were reviewed, and four revised Strategic Directions formally adopted in april, 2008 (Figure IO.4). these Directions will continue to guide decision making for the University.

EMU is currently engaged in a thoughtful, evidence-based approach to campus-wide planning (8c1, 8P1). Some processes and infrastructure are in place. Environmental Scans and Economic Impact analyses are conducted periodically. the most current such analysis is underway. EMU has an Office of continuous Improvement and Planning, which identifies, coordinates, and supports steps towards an institutional culture of the highest educational quality.

EMU’s participation in aQIP has been extremely helpful in this regard, providing a set of anchors through which campus-wide constituents have been introduced to cI principles. administrative, faculty, staff, and student leaders have participated in retreats, workshops, and focus groups to become informed about assessment, planning, and continuous improvement. the continuous Improvement

Operating council (cIOc) oversees cI and aQIP-related activities and identifies ways in which EMU’s engagement in cI can grow.

as indicated in the mission and core Principles in Figure IO.1, EMU is very much of and in its community. More than 80 percent of EMU graduates remain in Michigan to live and work. both students and faculty members contribute to their respective communities within southeastern Michigan. In fact, EMU is respon-sible for more than 25,000 hours of student volunteer community service annually. More tangibly, EMU’s total impact on the Michigan economy of more than $2.8 billion for the 2002 fiscal year reflected a return of $30 for each dollar received from the state.

IO2 – Scope of educational offerings

Founded in 1849 as a teachers’ training school, today EMU consists of a graduate School and five colleges: arts and Sciences; business; Education; Health and Human Services; and technology. 312 undergraduate majors, minors, and concentrations and more than 175 graduate-degree and certificate programs are offered. the number of degrees granted in each college in 2006-2007 is shown in Figure IO.5.

Figure IO.3: Expenditures

EMU’s Strategic Directions

Learning and Opportunity

Service and Engagement

Diversity and Multiculturalism

building for the Future

Figure IO.4: Strategic Directions – april 2008

Figure IO.2: revenue Sources

EMU General Operating Expense Revenue FY08EMU Operating Budget FY 08 ($324,188,000)

tuition and Fees $170,591,00068%

general $252,275,000 (78%)

restricted$26,924,000 (8%)

auxiliary$39,693,000 (12%)

Designated $5,296,000 (2%)

State appropriations$76,955,00030%

Other Sources$4,778,0002%



also, each year between 950 and 1,000 students are enrolled in the Honors college, pursuing an enhanced curriculum comprised of interdisciplinary, discussion-based, accelerated courses developed to fulfill general education, professional core, and major requirements. Honors college students complete a community-service requirement and additional co-curricular activities in the categories of civic engagement and cultural and intellectual involvement. Students earning Honors college distinction in the major must complete a significant senior thesis or project.

EMU’s newly implemented general Education Pro-gram: Education for Participation in the global community, is an outcomes-based curriculum and is consistent with the University’s emphasis on continu-ous improvement (1c1, 1P1). the new curriculum is designed to prepare students for their majors and for their professional and personal lives beyond EMU. Education for Participation in the global community teaches students to think critically and communicate effectively, and provides an introduction to the meth-odologies and practices of core academic disciplines (1c1, 1c2, 1P1).

because a university education is about more than classes, the new general Education program includes a Learning beyond the classroom component. Students are required to participate in extracurricular and co-curricular activities – including community service, alternative breaks, career-exploration workshops, participation in cultural and academic events, and undergraduate research to allow them opportunities to apply what they have learned in the classroom, laboratory, or studio (1c1).

Students also have an opportunity to take classes at seven off-campus locations through continuing Education, which offers both individual classes and full programs leading to a degree. classes are offered in face-to-face, hybrid, and online formats throughout the University. continuing Education (cE) also offers noncredit professional-development opportunities. the academic Programs abroad (aPa) office provides opportunities for study abroad, as well as student- and faculty-exchange programs with foreign universities. Shortened study-abroad programs are offered for credit during the winter break and in the summer.

Student support is also provided through the University Library, with more than 939,000 volumes, 175 indexes and databases, and 20,000 full-text journals. the library provides an array of resources that support teaching, learning, and research. additional student support is provided through the Holman Learning center (which offers mentoring and tutoring services), the academic Project center, and the centers for Mathematics and Writing (6c1, 6P1).

EMU’s dedication to excellence in academics is reflect-ed in the high-quality of its graduates who are making a positive impact in all areas of professional endeavor and as citizens of their communities.

In addition to institutional accreditation through the Higher Learning commission (HLc), EMU academic programs for which specialized accreditation is available hold that accreditation in virtually all cases. Specific accreditations and certifications are included in appendix a.

college bachelor’sPost-bac. certificate Master’s

Post-Master’s certificate Doctoral

grand total

academic affairs1 58 3 61

arts & Sciences 1,375 47 319 2 1,743

business 480 38 237 755

Education 448 238 364 16 16 1,082

Health & Human Services

323 65 128 516

technology 261 7 99 367

Grand Total 2,945 395 1,150 16 18 4,524

1 Organizational home for a few interdisciplinary programs

Figure IO.5: number of Degrees granted by college



IO3 – Student base

today’s student body reflects the national trend of mature adults returning to college to continue their education and prepare for new careers in a changing society. Fall 2007 data showed an enrollment of 17,962 undergraduates and 4,886 graduate students. EMU is noted for its ethnically diverse student population. Fall 2007 student-profile data appear in Figure IO.6.

Many EMU students receive tuition reimbursement from an employer; however, firm data exist regard-ing only a fraction of those situations. Many times, a company reimburses the employee upon submission of grades, and does so directly to the employee. there is no interaction between EMU and the employer, and thus firm data are not available regarding how many

students benefit from these arrangements. Some additional companies and the U. S. Military contract with EMU directly to pay the costs of their students. In Fall 2007, 609 students benefitted from these arrangements.

nearly all EMU students work in addition to pursuing their degrees. 1,810 EMU students work at on-campus jobs; 12% work more than 20 hours a week. anec-dotally, it is known that many EMU students work at multiple jobs while attending EMU.

IO4 – collaborative relationships

EMU’s dedication to community outreach and service is illustrated in the activities of its various divisions, centers,

Figure IO.6: Student Profile

characteristic category number Percentage

Origin

Michigan

Ohio

Other States

International

20,266

876

884

822

88.7%

3.8%

3.9%

3.6%

age range

Under 18

18 – 21

22 – 29

30+

372

8,260

9,072

5,144

1.6%

36.15%

39.71%

22.5%

SexFemale

Male

9,201

13,647

40.3%

59.7%

Ethnicity

caucasian

african american

Hispanic

asian/Pacific Islander

native american

non-resident alien

Unknown

15,271

3,874

532

606

143

822

1,600

66.8%

17.0%

2.3%

2.7%

.6%

3.6%

7.0%

residence

On campus

commuter

Fully online/satellite campus

3,248

17,968

1,632

14%

79%

7%

Freshman academic Preparation

High School gPa 3.75+

High School gPa 3.50 – 3.74




High School gPa< 2.49

High School gPa Unknown

Mean act Score

194

272

351

434

729

328

10

21.24

8%

11%

15%

18%

30%

17%

4%



institutes, and departments as well as through the dedi-cated work of faculty, staff, and students. these outreach and service efforts extend to various facets of communi-ty life, ranging from health and public-safety concerns to the dissemination of information and the availability of facilities (9c1). collaboration with multiple community partners provides opportunities for Service-Learning, Internships, and clinical Practica (9P1, 9P2).

EMU collaborates through several entities, including accrediting agencies; business collaborations; centers and Institutes; targeted Industry training grants; research grants and agreements from Industrial Partners; non-Profits; advisory boards and Steering committees; community colleges; and K-12 districts. a sample of these is shown in Figure IO.7. See appendix a for the entire listing.

EMU collaborates with community college partners by providing on-site degree programs as well as establishing program-to-program articulation agreements. these agreements provide community college students and counselors with guidance regarding courses that the students should complete as part of their associate’s-degree program and the credits that will be required to complete a specified degree at EMU (9P1, 9P2). these articulation agreements thus provide students who ultimately

plan to obtain a bachelor’s degree with a cost-effective, clearly identified path toward that goal. the agreements also establish relationships between faculty and advisors/counselors at EMU and at the partnering community colleges. as of Fall 2007, EMU had 75 articulation agreements established with 13 community colleges in Michigan and Ohio.

IO5 – Faculty and staff

Most of EMU’s employees are represented by unions. these bargained-for groups are the faculty; lecturers; professional/technical; food service/maintenance/custodial; clerical; police sergeants; and police officers. non-bargained-for employees are administrative/professional, confidential clerical, and coaches. Operating in an environment with several unions presents both challenges and opportunities. EMU’s recent history includes challenging labor relations, particularly with the aaUP faculty union.

EMU employee demographics are presented in Figures IO.8 and IO.9. Faculty demographics are shown in Figure IO.10. In addition, in Fall 2007, EMU employed 420 graduate-student assistants and 1,810 student workers.

Figure IO.7: Sample of collaborative relationships

Partnership Entity type of Unit Involved representative Example

accrediting agencies

college of arts & Sciences

college of Health & Human Services

american Music therapy

american assoc. of colleges of nursing (aacn)

business collaborationsEMU continuing Education at Foote Hospital

On-site Health administration Program

centers and Institutes center for Quality non-credit training

Industry training grants Workforce Education adult basic Ed.

research and agreements with Industrycollaboration between the EMU coatings research Institute and the U.S. Dept. of Defense

$1 Million Earmark to develop protective/resistant coatings for military equipment

non-Profit agencies EMU Dining Services Ypsilanti Meals on Wheels

advisory/Steering groups community college relations boardInsight & advice on issues important to constituents

community collegesMonroe community college

13 community colleges

On-site baccalaureate degree programs

75 articulation agreements

K-12 Early college alliancecollaborative training for high-demand health-service jobs



IO6 – Facilities, equipment, and technology

EMU’s main campus in Ypsilanti, Michigan, is situated southwest of the larger metropolitan Detroit area and includes 275 acres on the south side of the Huron river, an additional 182 acres to the west of the main campus where student residences, athletic facilities, and the convocation center are located, and 350 acres in off-campus holdings.

the Physical Plant at Eastern Michigan University encompasses approximately 4,500,000 square feet within 73 buildings, and includes more than 18 miles of walkways and jogging trails. Fifty-three of the buildings were constructed prior to 1970, and 31 were constructed prior to 1960. the approximate value of the deferred maintenance for campus state buildings is $65 million, and $45 million for auxiliary buildings. current economic conditions in Michigan present challenges in updating these facilities and in constructing additional facilities.

EMU has not received any state funding for capital expansion or improvements since 1996. nonetheless, it has always been the intent of the University Physical Plant “to provide an environment for education first.” to support this mission, the Physical Plant strives to create and sustain an environment that promotes learning by creating state-of-the-art facilities, while at the same time respecting EMU’s history by adapting and implementing preservation techniques on its older structures.

Despite the financial challenges, the University has made several major capital improvements since 2005, including the construction of a new $35M Student center, a $4.7M improvement to the McKenny building (the former student union), a $5M improvement to Downing residence Hall, and a $2.5M preservation project on Pease Hall (auditorium). Furthermore, $900,000 were spent in FY07 on classroom renovation, including both physical aspects and instructional-technology improvements.

Upcoming projects include a $100M addition and renovation to the Mark Jefferson Science complex (the largest capital improvement project ever under-taken at EMU), a $57M addition to the Pray-Harrold classroom building, and a $34M renovation to Strong Hall, a science building. Obtaining state appropriations for these remains a challenge.

technological Improvements have resulted in 41 computer labs, seating 1,258 students. an additional

Figure IO.8: Employee Workforce by Employee classification

Figure IO.9: Employees by gender within classification

classification Male Female total

ranked faculty 357 326 683

Lecturers 46 53 99

adjunct Lecturers 178 270 448

Exec/admin/Mgr. 83 72 155

Other Professional 205 244 449

technical 16 7 23

clerical/Secretarial 17 255 272

Skilledcrafts 36 - 36

Serv/Maint. 121 48 169

Grand total 1,059 1,275 2,334

Figure IO.10: Faculty by rank

rank number

Professor 325

associate Professor 175

assistant Professor 172

Instructor 11

Full time Lecturer 99

Total 782

classification total

athletic coach 46

administrative Professional 222

confidential clerical 13

campus Police 16

clerical/Secretarial 273

Faculty 684

Food Service/Maintenance 199

Lecturer 99

Police Sergeant 4

Professional/technical 380



16 computer classrooms provide 293 seats. at this time, 42 buildings (including all classroom buildings) have wireless networks.

Safety and security concerns have been paramount at EMU, especially since December 2007. Measures taken include physical upgrades (cameras, swipe card-based security systems, and re-keying buildings and rooms), safety programs and forums, additional emergency-assistance stations, and developing and implementing protocols for rapid communication regarding safety concerns to the entire campus community.

IO7 – competitive Institutions

EMU competes for students with regional community colleges, public comprehensive and research universities, private institutions, various providers of non-credit continuing education, and for-profit institutions. Figure IO.11 identifies key competitors in these categories.

It should be noted, however, that EMU considers the community colleges its partners as much as competitors. as noted earlier, many students transfer to EMU from a community college (or less frequently,

from another comprehensive university). Indeed, students who would not otherwise consider a four-year degree to be a realistic goal often begin their studies at a community college and transfer to EMU. the greatest challenge in working with the community colleges is the increasing competition from other comprehensive universities, who are also attempting to recruit their students.

IO8 - Opportunities and challenges

Figure IO.12 presents key opportunities and chal-lenges for EMU.

Figure IO.11: Key competitors

type of Organization Key competitors

community colleges

Washtenaw community college

Oakland community college

Schoolcraft community college

Henry Ford community college

Wayne community college

Public comprehensive colleges

Michigan State University

Wayne State University

central Michigan University

University of Michigan – ann arbor

Oakland University

grand valley State University

University of Michigan - Dearborn

Private InstitutionsMadonna University

University of Detroit - Mercy

non-credit continuing Education

baker college

Davenport college

area community colleges

For-Profit Institutions University of Phoenix



Figure IO.12: Opportunities and challenges

Key Institutional Opportunities Key Institutional challenges

High levels of regional need for an educated workforce in areas of EMU programming (e.g., technology; health care; business)

Forming an effective and forward-looking leadership team

Establishing a campus culture that understands and welcomes continuous-improvement principles and practices

Ensuring that vital and mission-critical academic programs are not weakened by budget challenges

the need for workforce education/career redirection programs for former industrial employees

Improving relationships between the faculty and the administration

Initiation of a comprehensive fund-raising campaignthe anemic Michigan economy, and a declining population and tax base in Michigan

an integrated branding campaign focused on the theme of “EMU - Education First”

Decreasing new-student enrollments, and low rates of continuing-student retention

Planned capital investment in Science complex, renovation of Pray-Harrold

Decreased state funding for higher education

Increased trend toward collaboration across University divisionsbacklog of deferred maintenance on state and auxiliary buildings

Strong record of receiving federal-earmark grantsrecent negative media related to student death and institutional response

renewed commitment to campus safety and securityrecent hiatus in strategic planning as a consistent practice across campus

Category1: Helping Students Learn


catEgOrY 1: HELPIng StUDEntS LEarn | 9

category 1 Helping Students Learn

1c1 – common student-learning objectives

Eastern Michigan University’s (EMU) common student learning objectives are embodied in the learning outcomes of the new general Education Program: Education for Participation in the global community. this program, inaugurated in September 2007, won a 2007 association for general and Liberal Studies award for Improving general Education in the category “commitment to common student-learning objectives.” the common learning objectives for the general Education program constitute the founda-tional pattern of knowledge and skills that students are to possess upon completion of their bachelor’s degrees. these Learning Outcomes [http://www.emich.edu/gened/requirements-LearningOutcomes.html ] require all students to master effective communication (both written and oral), quantita-tive reasoning, and knowledge of the disciplines in four key areas (arts, humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences). In addition, students are required to meet diversity requirements in two distinct areas: U.S. Diversity and global awareness. Finally, through the Learning beyond the classroom initiative all students are required to engage in experiences in one of these six areas:1. Self and Well-being, 2. community Service, citizenship, and Leadership, 3. cultural and academic activities and Events, 4. career and Professional Devel-opment, 5. International and Multicultural Experiences, and 6. Undergraduate research. the Learning beyond the classroom requirement means that all students must, according to their interests and career ambitions, engage in their campus, regional, national, or inter-national worlds through study-abroad opportunities, involvement in student government, attendance at lectures and artistic performances, social-service work, or other activities. Every student is also required to take an upper-division Writing Intensive course in his or her academic major area.

currently, each specialized major and graduate pro-gram has a distinct set of goals. as part of EMU’s new

web-based Integrated Program review and continu-ous Improvement cycle [IPr] process, which began formal implementation in Fall 2006 [http://www.emich.edu/public/aa/pr/ ], all academic programs on campus now articulate longer-term goals and annual objectives in alignment with the Higher Learn-ing commission’s (HLc) Five criteria. these goals and objectives are entered into web-based templates and can be electronically aggregated at the depart-ment, college, and divisional levels. as time passes, this process will allow for the emergence and eventual formalization of common learning objectives for all students, regardless of status or program of study.

1c2 – aligning learning with mission

EMU’s Mission [http://www.emich.edu/president/emu_mission.html] establishes the broad parameters of EMU’s educational mission: excellent teaching, the extension of knowledge through basic and applied research and creative and artistic expression, and a student-focused learning environment. Student-learn-ing expectations for specific programs are developed within the broad parameters of EMU’s mission as they respond to the specific needs of particular disciplines, employers, specialized accrediting bodies, and other vital stakeholders. For example, the student-learning expectations, practices, and development objectives for EMU’s general Education Program were devel-oped by a large interdisciplinary team of faculty and staff working with constituencies across campus and with national leaders in general education. EMU’s IPr process asks all programs to align their goals and objectives with the HLc’s Five criteria. Fulfilling EMU’s obligation to address effectively each of these five criteria is a key part of EMU’s mission.

1c3 – Key instructional programs and methods

EMU’s three largest majors are Elementary Education,



general business, and Psychology. the wide array of teacher-preparation programs reflect EMU’s origin as Michigan State normal School. the Professional Education Unit, which includes the college of Education and three other colleges across campus, is currently among the largest preparers of educational professionals in the country, as well as one of the largest preparers of minority educational personnel in Michigan. EMU has long been the largest preparer of special educators in the nation. Other key programs are crucial in other ways. For instance, the nursing Program serves vital regional needs. the general Education program is also one of the key programs.

EMU currently offers courses and programs on campus and via weekend courses, independent-learning options, academic-programs abroad, and courses and programs offered at eight off-campus locations as well as within partnering companies. as Figure 1.1 shows, the number of classes offered fully online has increased from 391 in 2004 to 846 in 2007.

Instructional technology use varies by degree program and course level, but a number of recent initiatives have greatly enhanced the effective use of instructional technology across the institution. the Faculty Development center (FDc) hosts communities of Practice groups focused on faculty members’ sharing experiences and skills with podcasting, clickers, and wikis. the FDc also organizes annual technovations Forums designed to introduce faculty and staff to emerging instructional technologies. the Smart classroom technology Upgrade Initiative identified minimum technology standards for each classroom on campus and has committed extensive resources to ensure that every classroom on campus meets this minimum standard. by spring 2007, all EMU classrooms met the minimum standard, and all academic buildings were wireless.

1c4 – Preparing students to live in a diverse world

EMU’s faculty draw on many sources of information and expertise as they design and prepare student-learning opportunities, including disciplinary standards, accrediting-body standards, and specialized research on student learning in the various disciplines, including the FDc, the Holman Learning center, the Promote academic Survival Success (PaSS), the Summer Incentive Program (SIP), access Services, and the center for adaptive technology.

EMU takes pride in using its diversity as a resource for learning across colleges, programs, and academic levels. EMU’s commitment to preparing students to live in a diverse world is clearly evident in the framework of the general Education curriculum, which requires students to complete coursework in two distinct areas—U.S. Diversity and global awareness. the Office of Diversity and community Involvement [http://www.emich.edu/dci/] and campus Life support student groups, lectures, performing arts events, and other options focused on preparing students to live in a diverse world, and the Learning beyond the classroom component of the general Education program strongly encourages students to participate in these opportuni-ties. Programs in Education, business, nursing, Social Work, technology, and many other areas require student course work and site work related to diversity as they respond to the needs of employers and the guidelines of specialized accreditors.

1c5 – Maintaining climate of diversity, intellectual freedom, inquiry, and reflection

EMU’s commitment to creating a climate celebrating intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect

Figure 1.1: Online, Hybrid, and Web-Enhanced courses

course classification

FISC. YEAR REGULAR # OF COURSES HYBRID WEB

ENHANCEDTOTAL SECTIONS % REGULAR %FULLY

ONLINE % HYBRID % WEB ENHANCED

2004 10927 391 0 0 11318 96.5% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0%

2005 10750 657 0 0 11407 94.2% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0%

2006 10467 778 0 0 11245 93.1% 6.9% 0.0% 0.0%

2007 10221 846 39 70 11176 91.5% 7.6% 0.3% 0.6%



for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions is enshrined in the institution’s values and key documents. the EMU board of regents code of Ethics requires all regents to pledge support for intellectual freedom. EMU’s values [http://www.emich.edu/aboutemu/fastfacts/emuprofile.html#values] include strong statements on academic freedom. article II of the 2006-2010 EMU-aaUP Faculty contract states that, “EMU and the association fully affirm the principle of academic freedom in both teaching and research. the right of academic freedom shall be the right of every Faculty Member.” Each of these documents and statements of philosophy and values ensures that intellectual freedom is enshrined in EMU’s operations from the board of regents through senior leadership and suffuse the institution.

the statement of philosophy for the general Educa-tion program emphasizes that respect for intellectual freedom and diverse opinion is built into the bedrock of EMU’s undergraduate educational experience. Other processes and offices foster the creation and maintenance of a climate that celebrates intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions.

Each year, the Undergraduate Symposium and the graduate research Fair engage students in the protocols and standards of undergraduate and gradu-ate research and allow students to engage in scholarly debate and the exchange of ideas within a structured climate of respect for different opinions. Student government, campus Life, and myriad student orga-nizations [http://www.emich.edu/campuslife/glso/orglist.php] provide opportunities for students to find

like-minded peers and interact with students and community members from diverse backgrounds and opinions. In effect, nearly every office and division on campus contributes to the creation and maintenance of a climate that celebrates intellectual freedom, inquiry, reflection, respect for intellectual property, and respect for different opinions (Figure 1.2).

1P1 – Determining common student-learning objectives

common learning objectives for EMU’s general Education program are articulated by the general Education advisory committee and widely published on University websites, course syllabi, and EMU catalogues (1c1). Student-learning outcomes for particular programs are established by the relevant program faculty in that disciplinary area. In each area, common learning objectives are established by faculty committees in consultation with advisory boards, student representatives, and other stakeholders and are reviewed on a regular basis.

1P2 – Designing new courses and programs

new programs and courses are designed in response to an array of inputs, including advisory boards, spe-cialized accreditation standards, employer requests, the development of new technologies or methods in particular disciplines, and student-learning out-come data. at present, the evaluation of these inputs and the design of new programs and courses largely begins at the department level; EMU’s course and

Figure 1.2: Sample of Documents reflecting climate of Diversity, Intellectual Freedom, Inquiry and reflection

Office or Statement Link

EMU’s Student conduct code www.emich.edu/sjs/conductcode.html

the Division of Student affairs: academic Integrity Program for new and transfer Students

www.emich.edu/campuslife/myfy/academics/academicintegrity.php

the Office of Student Judicial Services: guidelines for Faculty on Promoting academic Integrity

www.emich.edu/sjs/academic_integrity.html

Halle Library www.emich.edu/halle/plagiarism.html

the Office of research Development: Online Instruc-tional Module Devoted to the responsible conduct of research for Faculty and Staff

www.rcr.emich.edu



Program Development Process, outlined in the course and Program Development Handbook, ensures robust review of each newly proposed program or course first by faculty from other departments in that col-lege and then by faculty committees from all other colleges, as well as by senior academic-administrative personnel including college deans and the Provost. Each course and program-proposal form asks the orig-inating department to specify market issues as well as student needs, and careful analysis of this balance is part of the course input process. In addition, the office of continuing Education (cE) works closely with departmental faculty and administrators in gathering and analyzing market data prior to the start-up of new off-campus or online programs.

1P3 – Determining required student preparation

the preparation required of students for the specific curricula, programs, and courses is determined by relevant faculty members in consultation with advisory boards and specialized accreditation bodies, and in response to review of student-outcome data. currently these processes tend to be local to particular depart-ments rather than systematic across the institution.

1P4 – communicating expectations to students

EMU uses multiple methods to communicate its expectations regarding student preparation and student-learning objectives (for programs, courses, and the awarding of specific degrees or credentials) to prospective and current students. these key commu-nication vehicles are summarized in Figure 1.3.

EMU’s academic advising aQIP action Project has presented recommendations, currently under review by an implementation team, designed to enhance communicating expectations to students even more effectively.

1P5 – Helping students select programs that match needs, interests, and abilities

Students are offered support in selecting programs of study that match their needs, interests, and abilities through a number of different processes. For students just entering EMU, whether as their first time in college or as transfer students, the Fast track program offers students advising and registration support including a review of student test and placement data

Figure 1.3: communicating Expectations to Students

Means of communication

What is communicated

Who Manages the communication Process

target audience

Undergraduate and graduate catalogues

curricula, Degree requirements, graduate requirements, Learning Objectives for Specific Majors, Policies and Procedures, academic Honesty Standards

academic affairsProspective and current Students

FUSIOn new Student Orientation

Degree Options, Policies and Procedures

Student Life new Students

general Education course Syllabi

general Education course OutcomesDirector of general Education working with all faculty and instructors

Students Enrolled in general Education courses

EMU Department and Program Websites

Learning outcomes for specific programs and majors; expectations regarding student performance

Program-area Facultycurrent and Former Students

Fast track

Expectations regarding student performance and learning objectives for specific programs and for the general Education Program

academic advising new Students

advising Worksheets; Major and Program Work-sheets

Expectations regarding student performance and learning objectives for specific programs

Faculty and college advisors

current Students

Program course SyllabiSpecific learning outcomes; expectations regarding student performance; respect for intellectual property

Program coordinators

current Students



where relevant [http://www.emich.edu/admissions/undergraduatestudents/fasttrack/]. Students being admitted to some programs meet directly with faculty in those programs to discuss programs of study and necessary preparation. Students are also offered regular group-advising sessions related to general Education, pursuing careers as educational personnel, and in many particular majors and programs. In some areas, such as Math and Foreign Languages, placement tests are employed to determine student preparation and to guide students into appropriate courses. the First-Year Writing Program uses guided Self-Placement materials to help students select an appropriate First-Year Writing course [http://www.emich.edu/english/gsp/]. both career Services and academic advising utilize interest inventories to help students select programs of study. as noted in 1c4, many offices and processes on campus support faculty members and academic departments with explaining and helping to address a wide range of learning styles.

1P6 – Documenting effective teaching and learning

Evaluating the Instructional Effectiveness of EMU’s faculty members and full-time lecturers is a clearly defined process in both the EMU-aaUP and EMU-Ft contracts (4P6). the EMU-aaUP contract specifies that “With respect to Instruction (and advising), Faculty Members have responsibility to engage in pursuits that enable them to be current in their respective disciplines, to continually improve their understanding of the learning process and use of pedagogical methods that promote learning, to provide students with clear and explicit expectations, and to be available for consultation on academic matters with their students” (Marginal Paragraph 184).

Discipline-specific expectations are developed by particular departments, reviewed by the administration, and codified in Department Evaluation Documents all of which are available online: http://www.emich.edu/ahr/deds.html. these documents also specify what materials and modes of documentation are appropriate for documenting effective teaching and learning in accordance with disciplinary standards.

Marginal Paragraphs 169 and 170 of the EMU-Ft contract articulate expectations for instructional effectiveness for full-time lecturers: http://www.emich.

edu/ahr/PDFs/contracts/Ft-2005.pdf . Expectations for determining and documenting effective teaching and learning are also disseminated by the FDc and the general Education advisory committee.

1P7 – building effective and efficient course-delivery systems

course-delivery systems vary with discipline and in every instance are determined by the faculty special-izing in that discipline. In weighing the merits of various online and off-campus programs, department and program faculty work closely with the staff of continuing Education and utilize cE market research and student surveys as well as their experiences with their own students. course evaluations allow students to comment on delivery methods as well as course content, and this information provides the basis for decision-making about new technologies and new methods of instructional delivery. EMU has recently invested in course- and facilities-scheduling software that should provide longitudinal data on which to base decisions about how best to balance student and institutional needs. a task force is reviewing the range of online platforms in use and preparing to make recommendations about the University’s selection and support of online platforms.

1P8 – Monitoring currency and effectiveness of curriculum

Primary responsibility for monitoring the currency and effectiveness of the curriculum rests in the academic departments with faculty specialists in each disciplin-ary area. In accordance with the EMU-aaUP contract, each department has a formal committee charged with input on curricular matters. Decisions to revise or discontinue programs or courses usually originate with disciplinary faculty. Information and recommenda-tions from advisory boards, disciplinary accreditation bodies, student surveys, licensing bodies, and other discipline-specific organizations are regularly reviewed to maintain the currency and effectiveness of all curricula. In general, proposals to revise or discontinue programs pass from departments to the representative faculty bodies of their colleges and then to the office of academic Programming. From this office they are distributed to the college councils of all other colleges for comment. Once this process is completed, the



materials are reviewed at the Provost’s level, and the requested changes are typically implemented.

In 2006-2007 EMU began piloting a new, web-based Integrated Program review and continuous Improve-ment cycle (IPr) process, which is aligned with the HLc accreditation criteria (8P3). Department Heads, School Directors, and Program coordinators use rele-vant data from EMU’s Office of Institutional research and Information Management (IrIM), along with their own internal data, to analyze and discuss their programs and departments within the framework of the accreditation criteria. Programs and depart-ments evaluate their performance, which results in the development of draft long-term goals and short-term objectives. Once the college deans add their responses, the reports are locked and made public on the University’s intranet for comment by interested members of the campus community. the comments are followed by a roundtable discussion, which is open to the public, including the specific college dean, department head, and faculty, along with the executive administration for the Division of academic affairs. the feedback and findings from the process are used to finalize long-term goals and develop forward-looking, short-term objectives for the coming year in the form of an annual plan. the plan is developed and then reviewed for two consecutive years before undergoing a full program review again.

the outcome of the IPr and continuous Improve-ment cycle may result in the revision to curricula and programs based on empirical data and identifica-tion of programmatic strengths and weaknesses in a systematic manner. revisions or other changes may then cycle through the course and Program Develop-ment process to ensure that there are no objections to proposed changes.

1P9 - Determining student and faculty support

a number of offices, centers, and groups on campus work regularly to determine student and faculty needs relative to learning support (3P1, Figure 3.2). the key offices and centers involved in this work are summa-rized in Figure 1.4.

One of EMU’s first aQIP action Projects focused on mapping the various means by which academic advising is provided across campus. a follow-up group

will work with the recommendations developed by the action Project team. Efforts to collect and analyze such information about student and faculty needs relative to learning support, tend to be local and occasionally ad hoc rather than centralized or systematic.

P10 – alignment of curricular and co-curricular goals

While in general co-curricular development goals align with curricular learning objectives, an intensive effort is currently underway to align more inten-tionally and precisely particular co-curricular and curricular learning objectives in the new general Education curriculum. Since Fall 2007, all students are expected to complete a Learning beyond the class-room requirement. While some courses have been designated as ways to fulfill the Learning beyond the classroom requirement, most students will fulfill the requirement through co-curricular activities (1c1).

the parameters for the Learning beyond the class-room requirement, and the specific learning outcomes for each area, were devised by cross-divisional teams of faculty and staff from the Division of Student affairs working closely together to align learning outcomes, whether students fulfill them with cur-ricular or co-curricular activities. currently, more than 250 student clubs and organizations are recognized by campus life, many of them aligned with particular programs, disciplines, or professional organizations.

1P11 – Determining processes for student assessment

Processes for student assessment are determined by relevant-area faculty. Program faculty develop student-assessment activities relevant to their dis-ciplines and national standards; these processes are reported to the Director for academic assessment each year. the processes used are then communicated by the Director of academic assessment to all depart-ment heads and senior administrators on campus. the general Education Evaluation committee is currently piloting an ePortfolio process for assessing student learning in five different areas. For each of the piloted courses, rubrics have been developed, and student work is evaluated by raters from different disciplinary backgrounds. the committee is currently assessing the



Figure 1.4: Determining and Providing Student-Learning Support

Service Provider Support Provided target audience

Holman Learning centerHelp with studying, note-taking, student learning styles, Supplemental Instruction, Peer tutoring

Students at all levels

Faculty Development centerHelp with continuous improvement of course syllabi, instructional materials, instructional technologies

all instructors/faculty

academic Projects centerSupport for strengthening writing skills, research skills, and information literacy

Writers and researchers at all levels

University Writing centertargeted course Workshops integrated with EMU courses

Writers and researchers at all levels

Writing across the curriculumSupport for faculty teaching Writing Intensive courses across the curriculum

Faculty teaching Writing Intensive courses

Mathematics Student Services centerSupport for strengthening mathematical skills

all students

International Student resource center

Support for International Students including ESL support, help with protocols for student conduct and academic honesty

International Students

Information Literacy centerSupport for strengthening Information Literacy across the curriculum

Students mastering Informa-tion Literacy for any course or project

counseling Services Support for dealing with test anxiety, procrastinationStudents struggling with the emotional components of learning

career ServicesSupport for exploring career options, finding co-ops and internships

Students exploring possible career paths

college and Departmental advising

Support for making appropriate curricular choices, preparing graduate school and job applications, support with moving from major area of study to chosen career path

Students in upper-division classes

academic advising centerSupport with selecting a major, understanding expec-tations about student-preparation course selection

Students entering EMU and undeclared students

Student athlete Support Services

Focuses on such student-athlete special needs as:

Monitoring academic performance Providing learning assistance Evening study table assisting with priority-registration procedures assisting in monitoring athletic eligibility Educating student-athletes in regard to ncaa, Mac, and University rules and regulations

Student athletes

access ServicesProvides accommodations for students with disabilities and assists faculty and staff implementing those accommodations

Students, faculty, and staff

center for adaptive technologies training on adaptive equipment, Exam accommodation Facilities, equipment loans

Students, faculty, and staff with disabilities

PaSS – Promote academic Survival & Success Program

a two-semester program designed to benefit students during the transition from high school to college

the program is optional, but aimed at students with act scores slightly below average

SIP - Summer Intensive Program an intensive, seven-week summer-academic program High-risk high school graduates



merits of the pilot programs and evaluating these and other means of collecting and analyzing data from the new general Education program. One of EMU’s action Projects currently focuses on developing assessment processes for foundational general-education courses.

1P12 – Student preparation for further study or employment

EMU’s programs use a wide array of methods to discover how well prepared their students are for additional education and employment, including capstone courses, culminating exams, licensure-exam pass rates, and placement rates. Programs with specialized accreditation report these data as their accreditation bodies require. More systematization and sharing of processes and results across departments and colleges will likely enhance EMU’s effectiveness in this area.

1P13 - Measures of student performance

Data is collected in a number of areas.

• TheGeneralEducationAssessmentCommitteeiscurrently piloting processes for analyzing student-performance data for the new general Education program inaugurated in September 2007.

• AcademicAssessmentcollectsreportsonassessment activities in academic programs.

• Enrollmentandpersistencedataarecollectedandreported by IrIM.

• IRIMalsoregularlycomputesaggregategrade-point averages at the undergraduate and graduate levels for each department.

• InstitutionalAssessmentregularlyadministerssuchlarge-scale surveys as nSSE and the graduating Senior Survey, which include data on student perceptions of their performance.

• Professionalprogramstrackandanalyzepassrateson licensure, certification, and registry exams and use that data to make curricular and pedagogical revisions.

• TheProfessionalEducationUnitbegancollectingand analyzing student artifacts using the Livetext software in Fall 2006. this system enables faculty to

assess student performance in both pedagogical theory and content knowledge in all disciplines and allows for detailed reports to generalize and compare student performance across levels and among disciplinary areas in the Professional Education Unit.

• EMU’sofficeofCommunityCollegeRelationsregularly collects data on transfer students from community colleges, including gPas and degree completion, and reports this information back to feeder schools. this office works with feeder community colleges to determine what data they most need and how they need it broken out, and helps EMU track the performance of the majority of its transfer students.

1r1 – Student-learning achievement

Work on exploring processes for assessing the general Education Program and its learning outcomes began in the Fall term 2007. a system using ePortfolios to collect student work has been piloted in a small number of courses in the 2007-08 academic year (the first year of the general Education program). One of EMU’s aQIP action Projects focuses on establishing the parameters for data collection and analysis related to student outcomes and performance in three foundational areas: effective oral communication, effective written communication, and quantitative reasoning.

as mentioned in responses to 1c1 and 8P4, EMU has also just finished its first pilot round of Program reviews. In completing their Program review reports, all programs must discuss how they are addressing the five criteria of the HLc and their specific program learning objectives. because EMU’s large-scale efforts are relatively young, there are no detailed results at the institutional level to report at this time.

1r2 – Student-competence evaluation

a recent graduating-senior survey indicates levels of student satisfaction with their education at EMU. the following table lists the percentage of students indicating high or very high agreement with the following statements:



“I received a high-quality education from EMU.” 76.8%

“the quality of education from EMU is comparable to other universities its size.” .............................. 71.9%

“EMU prepared me well for my future career.” ....................................................................................... 69.7%

“Employers will have a great deal of respect for my EMU degree.” .............................................. 59.6%

Programs in which graduates take licensure or certifi-cation exams track student-pass rates on these exams. For instance, results related to pass rates on teacher-certification exams can be found at this link: http://college.livetext.com/doc/2398708.

1r3 – teaching-and-learning process results

the scale of EMU’s operations is such that new courses and programs are constantly being designed and introduced while others are being phased out. as of March 2008, three new programs are under review, nine program revisions are under review, and four new course proposals are under review. EMU also has a new initiative underway to implement resource 25 from collegenEt, which will allow better data to support scheduling decisions.

the new academic Projects center, which opened its doors in January 2008, had already reported 499 service requests by april 3, 2008. three hundred twenty-seven (327) of these were requests for writing support, 118 were requests for research support, 26 were requests for technical support, and 28 did not specify. average daily traffic was 13.37 students.

1r4 – comparative results

EMU has no significant comparative results to report at this time.

1I1 - Improving current processes

Improvements to current processes and systems for helping students learn typically have originated in particular academic and support departments. these will be addressed in future portfolios.

1I2 – Setting and communicating targets

targets for improvement are determined and communicated by relevant program faculty; current results are reported to advisory boards and specialized accreditation bodies. these will be addressed in future portfolios.

Category 2:Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives


catEgOrY 2: accOMPLISHIng OtHEr DIStInctIvE ObJEctIvES | 18

category 2 accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives

While Helping Students Learn is the bedrock of EMU’s Mission, EMU enhances the quality, depth, and vibrancy of student learning through its fundamental commitments to two other closely related distinctive objectives: enhancing the economic well-being and cultural vitality of its regional community and placing faculty-student partnerships at the center of its engagements with the regional community and its scholarly/creative activity. these two distinctive objectives are deeply intertwined.

2cI – Other distinct objectives

EMU enhances the economic well-being, the cultural vitality, and the quality of life in its regional community through service and research. EMU’s Mission states, in part, “We extend our commitment beyond the campus boundaries to the wider community through service initiatives and partnerships of mutual interest addressing local, regional, national, and international opportunities and challenges.” collaboration between faculty and both graduate and undergraduate students is vital to all these efforts. EMU’s commitment to fostering effective communities of diverse individuals infuses these efforts. Of those Michigan universities whose graduates primarily stay in the state of Michigan, EMU is the most racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. EMU seeks to use this diversity as a resource for learning as students collaborate with faculty in research, service, and creative activities.

EMU continues to foster its long tradition of effec-tive student-faculty collaboration in research and service as well as classroom learning. EMU’s commit-ment to strong student-faculty partnerships extends far beyond helping students learn in classroom settings. Even work initially conducted in classrooms is often carried beyond traditional classroom walls in research fairs, service-learning activities, or under-graduate research. In every instance, faculty-student

partnerships play a vital role as faculty members supervise, mentor, and work together with students.

2c2 - alignment with mission

EMU’s other distinctive objectives are distillations of EMU’s Mission Statement: “Eastern Michigan University is committed to excellence in teaching, the extension of knowledge through basic and applied research, and creative and artistic expression. building on a proud tradition of national leadership in the preparation of teachers, EMU maximizes educational opportunities and personal and professional growth for students from diverse backgrounds through an array of baccalaureate, master’s, and doctoral programs. EMU provides a student-focused learning environment that positively affects the lives of students and the community. EMU extends its commitment beyond the campus boundaries to the wider community through service initiatives and partnerships of mutual inter-est addressing local, regional, national, and interna-tional opportunities and challenges.” EMU reviews its mission statement regularly and periodically makes revisions after consultation with all stakeholders. When the mission is revised, the other distinctive objectives may change as well.

2c3 – Support for helping students learn

both of EMU’s distinctive objectives support and complement its processes for helping students learn in many ways. as EMU staff and faculty serve as volunteers, consultants, performers, advisors, board members, tutors, supervisors, and friends to area businesses, schools, non-profit organizations, and other community groups, EMU students serve alongside them. EMU’s close faculty-student partnerships foster learning outside the classroom, and EMU’s engagements with the economic well-being and cultural vitality of its region provide



students with internships, coops, clinical opportunities, service-learning opportunities, and options for students at all levels and in all programs.

2P1 - Determining other distinctive objectives

EMU draws on many sources of information and advice to determine the other distinctive objectives, including data collected through Institutional assess-ment, regular Environmental Scans, advisory boards, and directives from accrediting bodies. EMU began its first Strategic Planning process in 2000, and com-pleted Environmental Scans in 2002, 2004, and 2007 and Economic Impact Studies in 2004 and 2007. these tools help the University determine and refine the other distinctive objectives as well as track progress in meeting goals. Senior leadership reviews data from all these sources during annual retreats, and uses system-atic StEEP and ScOt analyses to determine and refine the University’s strategic directions including other distinctive objectives (8P1, Figure 8.2).

2P2 – communicating expectations

EMU communicates its expectations about community engagement and the importance of faculty-student partnerships through its statements of guiding Principles, Strategic Directions, and values.

2P3 - Determining faculty and staff needs

Faculty and staff needs relative to these objectives are determined through the same processes used to determine faculty and staff needs more generally – through Strategic Planning, Program review, and other regular communication and planning processes.

2P4 – assessing and reviewing distinct objectives

the objectives are assessed and reviewed by the President, regents, and members of the Strategic Operations council.

2P5 - Measures

EMU’s balanced Scorecard Development and Implementation action Project team is currently

working on identifying key measures related to the distinctive objectives. In terms of EMU’s contributions to the economic health and cultural vitality of its region, Economic Impact Studies are valuable sources of information. the Office of research Development tracks data on external awards for activities related to Service and corporate/community training (a total of more than $5 million was awarded in these two areas combined in the 2007 fiscal year). In terms of data related to faculty-student collaborations, individual offices like american Humanics, academic Service-Learning, campus Life, the Honors college, and others collect local data, but as yet there is no centralized data collection.

2r1 - results

EMU’s service initiatives and partnerships include EMU’s center for regional and national Security, the coatings research Institute, multiple charter schools, including the ann arbor Learning community (designated one of the 53 best charter schools in the United States in 2007 by the center for Education reform), the counseling clinic, the Speech and Hearing clinic, the Psychology clinic, the reading clinic, the Small business and technology center, the Institute for the Study of children, Families, and communities, the Institute for geospatial research and Education, and the Institute for Language Information and technology. Students work alongside faculty in these centers, clinics, and institutes, whether as supervised clinicians, research partners, or volunteers. EMU’s vISIOn program (volunteers Incorporating Service Into Our neighborhoods) has nearly 1,600 student volunteers and work-study students placed in various local communities.

EMU’s Undergraduate research Symposium is the oldest in the United States, inaugurated in 1981 with 17 student presentations. the 28th annual Undergraduate research Symposium had more than 300 students working closely with faculty mentors as they presented original research and creative work. the rapid success of EMU’s Undergraduate research Symposium Fellowships, in which area corporations support undergraduate Fellows and their faculty mentors for four years of undergraduate research, indicates the high esteem with which the Symposium is regarded by corporate community partners. the graduate research Fair, inaugurated in 2004, showcases the original scholarly and creative work of



EMU’s graduate students working closely with faculty members. From regular operations like the Office of academic Service-Learning to more focused projects like the $3.4 million federally funded gear-UP grant focused on helping to prepare low-income middle school students for college, EMU students work closely with faculty members in every area of service, pure and applied research, and community engagement. In all this work, EMU’s student-faculty partnerships support the core principle of being passionately engaged in disciplinary and interdisciplinary work.

2r2 – results comparisons

EMU uses survey data of peer institutions to compare its results at obtaining grants and contacts with those of peer institutions. In Fiscal year 2007, EMU ranked second in the number of external awards obtained; however, this was tenth in the actual dollar amounts awarded (Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1: comparison of Peer Institutions’ grants awarded

benchmarks, FY07

# Internal awards

amount Internal awards

# External awards

amount External awards

# External Proposals

$ amount External Proposals

total amount awards

ball State University 219 $492,896 225 $18,084,449 353 - $18,577,570

california State University-Fresno - - - - - - $0

University of central Missouri 13 $13,967 95 $10,700,000 121 $10,900,000 $10,714,062

Eastern Illinois University 31 $115,192 98 $6,847,690 144 $14,052,886 $6,962,980

Eastern Michigan University 59 $421,000 272 $10,114,705 353 $29,751,279 $10,535,977

Florida atlantic University $0

Indiana State University 110 $106,056 156 $14,944,784 225 $26,189,325 $15,050,996

Middle tennessee State University 70 $421,100 92 $37,097,521 154 $55,665,764 $37,518,713

Missouri State University 154 $21,779,154 226 $41,263,930 $21,779,308

Montclair State University 39 $100,192 57 $7,414,729 112 $27,399,285 $7,514,978

northern arizona University - - - - - - $0

Oakland University (Michigan) - - - - - - $0

Stephen F. austin State University 74 $222,019 62 $8,846,000 99 $17,960,000 $9,068,081

towson University-Maryland 40 $142,614 200 $19,045,341 302 $57,773,632 $19,188,155

University of northern Iowa 188 $29,200,606 273 $34,855,950 $29,200,794

Western Illinois University - - -- - - - $0

Western Kentucky University 74 $331,718 323 $24,271,622 346 $48,607,491 $24,603,663

Wichita State University - -- - $42,000,000 - - $42,000,000

Youngstown State University 15 $43,590 108 $5,873,266 153 $18,693,743 $5,916,964

Totals 744 $2,410,344 2,030 $256,219,867 2,861 $383,113,285 $258,632,241



2r3 – Strengthening the University and enhancing relationships

EMU’s two Other Distinctive Objectives work as entwined efforts: student involvement with service, outreach, and cultural programming prepares students to be active leaders and effective professionals in their communities long after they leave, while at the same time, community-service efforts, support of K-12 educators, artistic and creative programming, institutes and clinics, all rely on the energy, originality, and initiative of students and on the strength of student-faculty and student-staff partnerships. EMU understands these two distinctive objectives as two facets of the same core parts of EMU’s mission: “We maximize educational opportunities and personal and professional growth for students from diverse backgrounds through an array of baccalaureate, master’s and doctoral programs. EMU provides a student-focused learning environment that positively affects the lives of students and the community. We extend our commitment beyond the campus boundaries to the wider community through service initiatives and partnerships of mutual interest addressing local,

regional, national, and international opportunities and challenges.” EMU’s student researchers, activists, and leaders strengthen bonds with area feeder schools, employers, and donors.the opportunities these bonds offer to students attract students to EMU and raise its profile among prospective students, supporting its core principle of becoming an institution of choice. Finally, these two distinctive objectives, taken together, integrate EMU’s educational opportunities for students to have a real-world impact on their communities and strengthen EMU’s position as a source of enrichment and support for all its constituencies.

2I1 – Improving systems and processes

as EMU’s processes for analyzing results become more robust, improvement opportunities will be identified.

2I2 – targets and improvement priorities

as EMU’s processes for analyzing results become more robust, targets and priorities will be identified.

Category 3: Understanding Students’

and Other Stakeholders’ Needs


catEgOrY 3: UnDErStanDIng StUDEntS’ anD OtHEr StaKEHOLDErS’ nEEDS | 22

category 3 Understanding Students’ and

Other Stakeholders’ needs

3c1 – 3c2 – Student-stakeholder groups, expectations, and requirements

With a mission that identifies the education of un-dergraduate and graduate students with a focus on “Education First” as its highest priority, EMU actively responds to student and other stakeholder needs. EMU focuses on five broad, overlapping, categories of students: undergraduate, graduate, international, residential, and commuter. as a state-assisted institu-tion, EMU is active in identifying other stakeholders and their needs, who are defined and differentiated by their unique investment in and relationship to the institution. EMU places special emphasis on parents, taxpayers, State Legislators, board of regents, alumni, local communities, employers, and such feeder groups as high schools and community colleges.

Student expectations are assessed and monitored through the University’s participation in several national surveys [http://www.emich.edu/strategicplanning/ia_surveys.htm].the needs to engage and involve external stakeholders are assessed and monitored by programs and units on campus through a variety of focus groups, direct and indirect communications and networking, the network of charter schools, and feedback from external accreditation organizations. From these assessments, student and stakeholder requirements and expectations are identified. Some of these are shown in Figure 3.1.

3P1- Identifying, analyzing, and responding to student needs

the changing needs of students are identified in both formal and informal ways. Formal means include the aQIP Project advising Survey, cIrP, graduating Senior Survey, Housing and Dining annual survey, national Survey for Student Engagement (nSSE), and the noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI).

Informal means include feedback from the Division of Student affairs Student Leader group that reports to the board of regents, enrollment data collected by admissions (i.e., Sat and act scores, enrollment reports), student-government surveys and feedback, academic departments via analyzing program enrollment numbers, student-employment exit surveys, departments’ satisfaction/needs-analysis surveys, scan and evaluation of environmental trends and community needs (i.e., enrollment trends, changing workforce trends), student evaluations of courses, and professional organizations/conferences.

analyzing and selecting a course of action occurs primarily at the departmental level. Most departments are asked to develop work plans and submit them to appropriate vice presidents. the work plans are often developed based on University goals, but are also individualized to the departments’ needs for improve-ment and change.

3P2 - building and maintaining student relationships

Eastern Michigan University builds and maintains relationships with students through a variety of methods. these interactions are focused on the needs of both prospective and current students. Some examples include orientation sessions (Fast track), advising (central, off-campus, college, and depart-mental), “One-stop shopping” at Service EMU, student associations, student government, career services, and surveys related to a variety of topics. Students are also involved in major University committees, including a committee of the board of regents.

the Student center, recreation Intramural facility, and intercollegiate athletics are the focal points of activi-ties for students. Students can participate in activities and locate resources that are designed to reflect the interests and needs of the University’s diverse student



Figure 3.1: Stakeholder requirements and Expectations

Stakeholders requirements and Expectations

STUDENTS SHORT TERm LONG TERm

Undergraduate

Undergraduate-degree, high-quality instruction, advis-ing, sequenced courses, suitable scheduling, help with job searches, learning beyond the classroom, afford-ability

retention, additional education, jobs, lifelong involvement with the University

graduate

graduate degrees, certificates, high-quality instruction, advising, sequenced courses, suitable scheduling, help with job searches, help with additional graduate educa-tion, integration of theory and practice in chosen fields, collaborative-research experiences

reputation, jobs, high-quality graduate programs

Internationalgood orientation programs and services, good living conditions, food, entertainment, safety, comfort, social activities, recreation, and health

Jobs, lifelong relationships

residentialgood living conditions, food, entertainment, safety, comfort, social activities

Lifelong relationships

commuterconvenient parking, opportunities to join and contrib-ute to campus culture

Lifelong relationships

OTHER STAkEHOLDERS SHORT TERm LONG TERm

ParentsSafe environment, convenient location, easy access, affordability

High-quality education, good value, informa-tion sharing, affordability

taxpayers / LegislatorsHigh-quality education, highest return on investment, responsible fiscal management, relevant curriculum

Well-educated work force, most graduates remain in the state, sound fiscal management, response to community needs, responsible citizens

board of regentsHigh value for the taxpayers, responsible fiscal management, relevant curriculum

good value for the taxpayers, responsible fiscal management, academic excellence, response to community needs, University leadership congruent with mission and values

“Friends of the Uni-versity”/ non-alumni Donors

Worthy investment, commitment to EMU good reputation, investment in the future

alumnigood job preparedness, continuing connection to institution

good reputation, bragging rights, continuing education, high-value degree

Local communitiesgood symbiotic relationship, educational and cultural enhancements

Positive “town and gown” relationship, educational and cultural enhancements

Employers Well-prepared employees, interns, and coops response to changing needs of work force

Prospective Studentsacademic program availability, affordable tuition, housing, safety, stimulating campus life

High-quality education, good job preparedness

guidance counselors/High School, community colleges

academic-program availability, affordable tuition, housing, articulation agreements

High-quality education, continuing articula-tion agreements, regulation

body, and that promote educational, cultural, and social enrichment. the University seeks students’ input as to what services are needed, the quality of these services, and the students’ level of satisfaction with the services. two of the initial aQIP Projects (academic advising and Quality Service) were directly linked to input and feedback received from students relative to the importance of building and maintaining positive relationships with students.

3P3 – Identifying, analyzing, and responding to stakeholder needs

Stakeholder needs are identified via both formal and informal methods. Some of the more formal methods include the alumni Survey, Fast track evaluations completed by parents/families of newly enrolled students, and employer surveys conducted by Human



resources and various University departments. Less formal methods have included career Services surveys, “Secret Shopper” programs, information garnered from professional organizations, feedback from community service/activities, advisory boards in the colleges/departments, and meetings with State Legislators. Data from the surveys and feedback from informal sources are brought forward through the divisional vice-presidents, and a course of action is taken based on congruence with the University mission and resources available.

3P4 – building and maintaining stakeholder relationships

Eastern Michigan University builds and maintains relationships with key stakeholders by a) maintaining effective relationships with high schools and community colleges via school visits and annual update meetings; b) participating in community service and academic service-learning programs with community groups and employers; c) participating on community boards and councils; d) utilizing several communication methods to inform students and parents before enrollment, during matriculation, and after graduation; e) including students in a wide array of University committees; f ) participating in such Ypsilanti community activities as United Way, the relay for Life, and the Heritage Festival; g) meeting with state senators and representatives; h) offering such experiential learning activities as internships and practicums; and i) maintaining smooth articulation and transfer processes.

Partnerships are also established through stakeholders serving on University committees and advisory boards. they provide input and guidance in developing innovative programs that can attract both students and new stakeholders. the recently developed EMU caucus, through the Office of governmental relations, consists of dedicated members of the EMU community who pledge to advocate, when needed, on behalf of the University at the local, state, or federal level. Having a strong community of institutional advocates is critical in securing the resources for Eastern Michigan University to remain a world-class, comprehensive University. this program also provides a means through which every employee and student at EMU can be involved in building relationships with key legislators and government officials.

Faculty and students interact with employers in community settings throughout the state of Michigan and beyond, through such applied-learning activities as internships, practice experiences, and service-learning activities. Faculty and students consult with many area agencies and carry out research in multiple community settings and businesses. the Office of community college relations works collaboratively with the faculty and staff of EMU and area community colleges to promote a smooth transfer process to minimize the loss of academic credit and save time in obtaining a bachelor’s degree. relationships are also maintained through the University’s fourteen research institutes and centers. the University is well known for merging theory and practice for the benefit of the community. the Eastern Michigan University Foundation, through collaborative relationships with individuals, corporations, foundations, and other organizations, creates opportunities that provide additional support to the students, programs, services, and educational community. the Office of alumni relations is the coordinating body for all alumni activities and the means by which personal relationships established during student days can be maintained and renewed.

3P5 – Determining new student and stakeholder groups

EMU surveys a wide range of student groups as well as stakeholders, including faculty, staff, community members and both local and state governmental agencies and business. tools utilized by EMU to identify new student and stakeholder groups include but are not limited to: a) admission reports and Enrollment trends; b) Outside consultants; c) Faculty Evaluations and academic Program reviews; d) Student Leader group reports; e) University Faculty council recommendations/reports; e) Labor Union recommendations/reports; f ) changes in Economic Factors in local and state economies; g) Eastern Echo news reports and Local Media; h) Surveys / Focus groups / Evaluations conducted by the University through the offices of the Ombudsman, career Services, Student government, and commuter Focus groups; and i) Institutional research reports. the current state of the economy in Michigan places greater importance on identifying critical stakeholder groups and developing or revising these relationships.



3P6 – collecting complaint information

Eastern Michigan University encourages students and other stakeholders to contact the appropriate office with complaints and concerns. those who contact these offices can expect that their concerns will be investigated and addressed appropriately, keeping in mind the importance of confidentiality. a detailed grade-grievance procedure is in place and communi-cated via the student handbook [https://www.emich.edu/ombuds/handbook.html].

the Office of the Ombudsman is the general office at Eastern Michigan University for student and other stakeholder complaints. Information tracked by the Ombudsman includes gender, race, and current student status. complaints are categorized into six categories: academic, Financial, Staff/Faculty, Disciplin-ary, club/Organizational, Personal, and Other. In order to identify patterns and devise improvements, annual reports are generated and shared with the Provost, and starting in 2008 these reports will also be shared with the academic Deans.

In its efforts to ensure responsibility and accountability, the “Eastern Michigan University advantage” program has been implemented [https://www.compliance-helpline.com/welcomePageEMU.jsp]. this program is open to every person at every level within the Univer-sity and to all its students and stakeholders. It enables individuals to communicate confidentially if they believe that they have observed unethical, illegal, or suspicious behavior. Examples of situations to which this program applies are those that involve ethics and compliance issues; employee relations, human resourc-es, and equal opportunity; environmental health and safety; and loss prevention and asset protection.

3P7 – Determining student and stakeholder satisfaction

Key tools used to measure student and stakeholder satisfaction are listed in Figure 3.2. EMU surveys students with regard to academic services, student-affairs services, and institutional perceptions. the Office of Institutional research and Information Management (IrIM) oversees many of the surveys that assess student and stakeholder satisfaction. Some surveys, however, are administered by individual departments based on needs and / or external accreditation requirements.

3r1 – Student satisfaction results

Strengths identified by students in the noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory include: a) major requirements are clear and reasonable, b) the academ-ic advisor is knowledgeable about requirements in the major, c) the quality of instruction received in most classes is excellent, d) the instruction in the major field is excellent, and e) nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their fields. One of the challenges listed for EMU on the SSI was “My academic advisor is approachable.” related to this documented challenge, EMU instituted an aQIP project focused on academic advising. Several changes resulted, including a new comprehensive online-advising module, degree audits expanded to online format, and the formation of a University retention council to address barriers to advising identified in the aQIP project.

the Housing and Dining Survey (Winter, 2007) explored satisfaction with residence hall program-ming and personnel. Key findings indicate that 80.5% of the students are satisfied with their resident advisor; 80.8% are satisfied with the courteousness of hall office staff; and 76.4% are satisfied with services provided by hall office staff. One of the challenges was students’ dissatisfaction with the physical environ-ment, such as room temperature and the process for submitting work orders. the Department of Housing has been working closely with Physical Plant person-nel to increase the levels of communication as well as to establish procedures for following up on student work orders in a timely manner. analysis of these data as time passes will yield additional areas for explora-tion.

Data from the graduating Senior Survey indicates a “high” or “very high” level of satisfaction with academic advising through the colleges, Snow Health center, computer technical support, Halle Library services, Halle Library holdings, and the EMU student center. additional data are needed for comparison across a longer time frame.

Fast track, the cross-divisional collaboration enrollment program for prospective students and their parents, yields the following results:

• DoyoufeelthatyouarereadytoattendEMUintheFall? Yes: 1,431 no: 18



• DidtheFastTrackexperiencehelpprepareyouforEMU? Yes: 1,445 no: 4

• Pleaserateyouroverallexperience: 1,089 – above average; 330 – average; 30 - neutral

all the data cited above need additional analysis for patterns and trends over time.

3r2 - Student relationship-building results

Some results in the area of student relationship-build-ing include:

1. advising Survey: 85% of students indicated they had seen an academic advisor.

2. graduating Senior Survey:

a. 85.9% of students reported they “had good relationships with faculty.”

b. 66.6% reported having “positive interactions with office staff.”

c. 68% reported that they felt the “faculty really cared about me.”

3. alumni Survey: 54.68% of respondents reported participating in activities sponsored by EMU includ-ing reading publications, attending on- or off-cam-pus functions, or other.

3r3 - Stakeholder-satisfaction results

In the 2004-05 alumni Survey, 7,577 graduates were surveyed with 1,747 responses. twenty-eight percent

Figure 3.2: tools to Measure Student and Stakeholder Satisfaction

Survey Description

cooperative Institutional research Program (cIrP)conducted annually; a report of national normative data on the character-istics of students attending colleges and universities as first-time students.

Student Satisfaction with administrative Services (SSaS)

conducted every three years; last conducted in Winter 2005; measures student satisfaction within the Divisions of Enrollment Services, business and Finance, and academic affairs.

Student Learning Evaluations in Student affairs Program (SLE)

conducted annually; evaluation is administered to students who attend the Division of Student affairs sponsored programs. total number of pro-grams analyzed annually is ~250.

Housing and Dining Services resident Surveyadministered annually; longitudinal data provide information on trends in student satisfaction throughout the years.

alumni Surveyconducted annually. the alumni survey is mailed to ~7,500 alumni each year.

all Employee culture / climate benchmark Study conducted in Fall 2005.

graduating Student SurveyUtilized to provide feedback to departments and programs for program review and accreditation; all students are asked to participate after they apply for graduation.

2004 Your First college Year Survey (YFcY) conducted for the first time in Winter 2004; now conducted annually.

LibQUaL Satisfaction regarding Library Services

Examines the quantitative data according to EMU user groups and disciplines.

Housing Floor Environment Survey

commuter Student Survey & Focus groups

Orientation – Fusion Satisfaction Survey

conducted annually.

teaching Evaluation Surveysconducted each academic semester; includes two all-campus questions regarding instructional effectiveness and quality of instruction; individual departments, programs create individual question sets.

career Services – Senior Survey a five year-out survey.

noel-Levitz Satisfaction Survey (SSI) conducted in 2006.



of the responses were from 2002-03 graduates (1-year graduates), and 17% of the responses were from 1998-99 (5-year graduates). results are shown in Figure 3.3.

Parents were surveyed regarding their satisfaction with Fast track, EMU’s enrollment program. When asked, “Did you learn more about EMU today?,” 1,101 responded “Yes,” and only 10 responded “no.” their overall experience was rated at above average by 802, average by 293, and neutral by 24.

Jumpstart, the community stakeholder program pairing college students with preschool students, has experienced strong satisfaction levels. In 2006/07, 89% of the preschool programs rated overall services as outstanding, and 3% as above average. In a family satisfaction survey conducted in March 2007 regarding a new program where families received up to 25 new books during the course of the year to build a learning library at home for their students, 100% of the families rated the service as outstanding.

3r4 – Stakeholder relationship-building results

Some results indicative of the strong relationships that exist between EMU and its stakeholders are:

• CommunityCollegeArticulationAgreementsincreased from 45 (2004/05) to 74 (2007/08).

• ThenumberofHighSchoolCounselorworkshopsincreased from 2 in 2006/07 to 5 in 2007/08.

• AlumniAdmissionsRecruitmentTeamvolunteersincreased from18 in 2006 to 33 in 2007.

• Morethan50localbusinessesnowcooperatewithEMU to offer students, faculty, and staff discounts when they show their student I.D. cards.

• EMUreceivedan$86,000grantfromtheAmericanHonda Foundation to run an innovative after-school program, titled “Designed by nature.”

• EMUreceived$2.3millioninfederalgrantstocontinue its Upward bound Program.

• EMU’ssocialGreekFraternitiesandSororitiesraised $32,000 for St. Jude’s children’s research Hospital and $10,000 towards the Ometta M. Smith Memorial Playground in Ypsilanti.

• EMU’sstudentchapterofRelayforLife(2007)raised$33,315 through 400 participants and 35 teams, a 12 percent increase over last year.

• TheEarlyCollegeAllianceprogram,apartnershipbetween EMU and the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, enrolled 139 high school students for college credit at no cost to the students.

3r5 - results comparisons

Some national benchmarking results include data from nSSE. based on the 2006 national nSSE benchmarking data, EMU compared closely with “highly engaging institutions” (Figure 3.4). Housing, the Student center, and campus Life will be conducting EbI surveys in Winter 2008 that will provide national comparison data.

3I1 & I2 – Improvement

EMU is currently refining its processes and is not yet ready to report process improvements in this area.

Figure 3.3: results from alumni Survey

Do you feel that the amount paid to earn your degree was worth the investment? YES 79.5% YES 86.5%

What best reflects your attitude towards EMU?

great University 41.8% 46.8% Satisfactory 51.7% 49.3% not Satisfactory 3.3% .9% Wish had transferred 2.9% .9%

What is the one thing you liked most about EMU? classes and Departments 246 Professors 214 campus Experiences 170

What is the one thing you liked least about EMU? Parking 273 Student life 94 Programs 92

1-YEar graD 5-YEar graD



active and collaborative Learning (acL)

First-Year Senior

0

25

50

75

100

38.4

48.754.6

58.6

45.850.7

First-Year Senior

0

48.555.8

60.554.2

59.364.1

Level of academic challenge (Lac)

25

50

75

100

First-Year Senior

0

56.9

64.769.7

49.5

67.762.8

Supportive campus Environment (ScE)

25

50

75

100

Student-Faculty Interaction (SFI)

First-Year Senior

0

25

50

75

100

31.8 34.8

48.256.9

37.142.0

Enriching Educational Experiences (EEE)

First-Year Senior

0

25

50

75

100

25.532.0

46.6

57.9

30.034.4

Figure 3.4: nSSE benchmark Data

EMU

top 50%

top 10%

Category 4: Valuing People


catEgOrY 4: vaLUIng PEOPLE | 29

category 4 valuing People

4c1- Organization of work environment

EMU’s personnel system encompasses several units, as illustrated in Figure 4.1. this structure enables close focus on the issues most relevant to the various employee groups. It promotes strong focus on stu-dent needs and learning-related issues in personnel matters involving faculty and lecturers.

Most EMU employees are represented by unions, in-cluding the aaUP (faculty) [http://www.emu-aaup.org/faculty_contract]; the Federation of teachers (lecturers) [http://www.emich.edu/ahr/PDFs/contracts/Ft-2005.pdf]; the UaW (1975 – clerical and Secretarial employ-ees; 1976 – Professional and technical employees); aFScME (Food Service and Maintenance employ-ees); the Police Officers’ union; and the Police Ser-geants’ union. non-represented employee groups are administrators (including academic department heads) confidential clerical employees, and athletic coaches.

4c2 - Key institutional and geographical factors

EMU is located in a culturally diverse area and typically attracts well-qualified and diverse candidate pools for vacancies. given EMU’s location in a traditional stronghold of organized labor, it is not surprising that union agreements provide the guidelines for the work environment and hiring procedures. State

and regional unemployment rates are high; therefore, EMU is able to draw robust pools for staff positions recruited through local/regional searches. Part-time and temporary staff are used across campus to fill gaps in instructional and support services. Faculty released time is also used to address emerging needs and unexpected vacancies.

4c3 - Demographic trends

Student demographics, including high school-graduation projections, transfer-student markets, and potential sources of non-traditional students, are part of the University’s analysis when anticipating work-force needs. Demographics of the instructional work-force, including likely numbers of retirements, and consequent recruitment needs are also considered. Employee turnover at the institution averages 7.5% annually, a rate that compares favorably with other institutions. this rate is essentially constant across employee groups. Key demographic descriptors of the EMU workforce are included in IO5.

4c4 - Key training initiatives

new faculty members attend an orientation workshop prior to fall term. the Faculty Development center [www.emich.edu/facdev/index.html], often

Figure 4.1: Departments Serving Personnel

Personnel Unit Personnel Processes Overseen

Human resources (Hr)all staff positions; all administrative positions outside of aca-demic affairs

academic Human resources (aHr)Faculty; full- and part-time lecturers; academic administrative positions

graduate School graduate assistants

career Services (within the Division of Student affairs) all student employees



in partnership with the Division of Information technology (DoIt), offers ongoing training opportunities for all faculty. another ongoing training program concerns EMU’s new general Education curriculum. Workshop topics have included advising under the new curriculum, developing gE courses, and writing learning outcomes.

all divisions design specific training programs for their staffs in response to current issues. a particularly poignant example is the recent need for training in campus safety, crisis management, and clery act reporting. there is now a greater emphasis on such mandatory training issues as clery act training, emergency response, and sexual harassment. the office of Human resources recently hired a director of training and professional development to initiate, coordinate, and assist in disseminating safety training programs to the EMU workforce.

Funding is available from departments and divisions to attend professional conferences. Historically, cross-divisional teams have attended the Higher Learning commission and noel-Levitz conferences. Many offices collaborate on development opportunities so that as many people as possible can benefit from a speaker, workshop, conference, etc.

4P1 – Job requirements and hiring

Identification of the credentials, skills, and values required for faculty, staff, and administrators begins with the hiring authority (Ha) – the supervisor in the case of staff and administrators, and the department head and department personnel committee in the case of faculty. In determining the skills required for a grant-funded position, the respective Ha will submit a Position-review Questionnaire (PrQ) to Hr for review; Hr reviews the PrQ to determine the proper position classification and grade. Evaluation of candidates follows somewhat distinct processes for staff positions as compared to faculty and administrative positions. Search committees are involved in all cases; search committees are composed of individuals who will work closely with the candidates and are familiar with the operations of the unit in which the candidate will work.

Evaluation of staff candidates. an online job posting is used for staff positions. candidates submit applications and related documents (e.g., cover

letters, résumés), and search-committee members screen applications using this information. the Ha and search-committee work closely with Hr staff to identify candidates meeting minimum qualifications and ensure that evaluations are carried out consistently; the committee selects 3-5 candidates for interviews. Per bargaining-unit contracts, internal applicants are given preference.

Evaluation of faculty and administrative candidates. Department heads work with their faculty colleagues and deans as they specify the essential and desired qualifications for new faculty hires. Each department’s Department Evaluation Document (DED) [www.emich.edu/ahr/] provides basic parameters (e.g., degree level required for various faculty ranks). applicants submit hard copies of their applications to Hr or aHr. Search committees use weighted screening matrices to identify 3-5 candidates for campus interviews.

candidate Interviews. Interview itineraries always include a meeting in which search-committee members pose a standard set of questions to all candidates, as well as meetings with individuals who will work closely with the candidate. Hr advocates the use of behaviorally based interview questions. Following interviews, the search committee formulates recommendations to the hiring authority.

4P2 - recruiting, orienting, and retaining employees

Faculty and administrators at the department-head level and above are normally recruited through national searches; executive search firms are used for presidential searches. the campus conducts regional (e.g., Detroit metropolitan area) or internal searches for staff and lower-level administrative positions. the hiring processes are described in 4P1.

all newly hired faculty members participate in a faculty orientation program prior to their first semes-ter on campus; academic departments and colleges and the faculty union conduct subsequent orientation programs focused on the evaluation and promotion process. a key focus in both the new-faculty orien-tation program and the subsequent department/college orientation programs is the ability to work successfully with EMU students. relevant topics include considerations (e.g., student learning styles)



important in working with a diverse student popula-tion, the institutional framework for coordinating didactic and experiential education, and campus resources supporting instructional technology.

new staff and administrators participate in a new-employee orientation focused on benefits, high-quality service standards, and universal considerations (e.g., parking; safety and security) as well as a departmental orientation. Departmental orientations typically include a focus on how the department supports the educational mission of the University.

EMU addresses employee retention in several ways. When an employee receives a competing employment offer, the institution can make a counter-offer. Employ-ees in one of the bargained-for units receive “longevity benefits” in the form of wage bonuses or added steps to their pay grade. Feedback from annual evaluations is often a retention mechanism. Faculty and staff receive annual across-the-board salary increases according to the provisions of their current contracts.

the FDc, the provost’s office, and the academic colleges and departments offer structured professional-development programs for faculty members and support faculty members’ scholarly work. Human resources and DoIt offer professional-development programs for staff members. Figure 4.2 presents examples of recent professional-development programs for faculty and staff members.

typically, units request that positions vacated be refilled. Hiring authorities and related administrators act on these requests taking into consideration the nature of the vacated position as well as competing needs for resources.

4P3 - Ensuring work processes, activity contribu-tions, and ethical practices

Shared governance at EMU incorporates the coordinated work of the Faculty council, graduate council, and college councils; key administrative bodies (e.g., Provost’s council, Strategic Operations council); campus-wide planning bodies (e.g., Institutional Strategic budget council; continuous Improvement Operating council; Institutional Strategic Planning council); and unions. communication within, between, and among these bodies takes many forms, including meetings and memoranda, email, and postings on “EMU today” (a campus electronic bulletin board).

EMU has policies and infrastructure in place to address such matters as sexual harassment, academic dishonesty and misconduct in research, protection of human research subjects and ethical treatment of animals used in research, protection of employees, and student health and safety.

Figure 4.2: recent Professional-Development Programs at EMU

Programs aimed Primarily at Faculty

good course Design for newer Faculty (FDc)

Scholarship of teaching and Learning (FDc)

Quality Matters (FDc)

community-based Participatory research (cHHS & FDc)

Qualitative Data analysis Using nvivo (cHHS & FDc)

Livetext training (DoIt & cOE)

Introduction to Webct (DoIt)

responsible conduct in research (Office of research Development)

Programs aimed Primarily at Staff

banner: various programs focused on budget, student information, admissions, grants, scheduling (DoIt)

EMU e-training (DoIt)

clery act Documentation and reporting (business & Finance)

MIcrosoft Survival Skills (DoIt)

Web Design (DoIt)



4P4 - training and development

the FDc offers a broad array of professional-develop-ment programs on topics ranging from pedagogical approaches, to technology applications in the class-room, to data analysis (Figure 4.2). these programs are open to all instructional staff, including graduate assistants. the FDc and DoIt jointly offer an e-Fellows program through which faculty members receive funding and support for incorporating technology in teaching. Other professional-development programs aimed specifically at faculty include the Sabbatical Leave program and the Faculty research Fellows (FrF) program, both of which provide released time from teaching so that faculty members can focus on a scholarly agenda.

EMU supports faculty, staff, and administrators’ travel to professional conferences and workshops. On cam-pus, training is available on various software packages through DoIt; e-learning opportunities are available to all employees for a wide range of technology- and management-related topics (Figure 4.2). all employees also have tuition waivers on EMU regular courses as an employment benefit.

4P5 - Determining training needs

the performance-evaluation processes are the most common sources of information about training needs. a gap between performance standards and performance observed triggers discussion between the employee and the supervisor regarding training that can assist the employee in improving. Even in the absence of an observed performance deficit, part of the performance-evaluation agenda is always identification of professional development, training, or enrichment experiences in which the employee is interested. In addition, the FDc, aHr, and Hr occasionally conduct surveys regarding training interests. Surveys of Faculty Professional Development needs are held every three years. Evaluations from faculty-development workshops, technology-training sessions, and general Education workshops and training programs are reviewed to determine their impact and identify additional topics of interest.

training focused on continuous Improvement is ongoing. a first step in the initiation of all aQIP projects is training on cI principles and EMU’s IDEa model (Figure 5.1). this training is provided to

cross-divisional groups on an annual basis. the Office of continuous Improvement and Planning offers training on these and related cI topics for individual offices and units upon request.

EMU’s training efforts inevitably focus on helping students learn because the largest segment of the campus workforce is the faculty (including lecturers and other instructional staff ). the instructional-evalua-tion process focuses heavily on teaching effectiveness, as judged by students, peers, and self evaluation. thus, steps to strengthen performance almost always have a bearing on increasing teaching effectiveness for most EMU employees.

4P6 - Personnel evaluation system

Hr works with departmental personnel on effective supervision skills by assigning Hr consultants to EMU divisions. Hr maintains a performance-management system in collaboration with unions (where applica-ble) that provides an annual review process for all staff and administrators. this review system also includes probationary reviews for new hires, transfers, and promotions. the annual performance reviews provide an effective procedure to monitor strengths and identify areas of improvement and processes to notify employees of unproductive or inappropriate behav-ior, or violation of University policy. When corrective action is required, a progressive disciplinary process providing both verbal and written feedback occurs.

aHr maintains the performance-management system for faculty and lecturers in collaboration with unions. aHr, with EMU-aaUP, has oversight of student evaluations for all courses. the faculty personnel-evaluation process is outlined in the EMU-aaUP contract. all faculty members complete an annual Faculty activity report (Far), which is one element of both probationary-faculty members’ pre-tenure evaluations and of tenured-faculty members’ Periodic Performance Evaluations (PPEs). Prior to tenure, faculty members are evaluated annually on their teaching, scholarship, and service. the standards against which the evaluation occurs are outlined in the DED [www.emich.edu/ahr/] created by each academic department. In addition to the Far, probationary-faculty members prepare statements outlining how they have met the qualifications outlined in their DED and documentation to support their statements.



the probationary-faculty member receives feedback each year from the department personnel commit-tee and department head, and in the third and fifth years from the dean and assistant vice president for academic human resources and budget as well. the evaluation process leads to recommendations regard-ing reappointment in the third and fifth years, and a recommendation regarding tenure and promotion in the sixth year.

after tenure is awarded, the department personnel committee and department head conduct a PPE every four years to assess performance. the PPE involves review of the Fars submitted since the last PPE and review of student course-evaluation data covering the same time period. If performance deficiencies are identified that can be remedied within a year, the faculty member is advised of these concerns, but no prescriptive action is taken. If performance deficiencies are identified that cannot be remedied within a year, the department head and personnel committee work with the faculty member (and, often, a union representative) to develop a performance-improvement plan and establish a timeline for a follow-up PPE.

4P7 - recognition, reward, and compensation systems

the University, as well as individual divisions and departments, offers a wide range of recognition and award programs for faculty and

staff (Figure 4.3). recipients for all these awards are selected through competitive processes, typically involving a peer review of nominees’ accomplishments vis á vis selection criteria.

the University sponsors an annual celebration of Excellence week. Many awards are presented, includ-ing the recognition of employee service anniversaries; faculty awards for outstanding teaching, scholarly, and service accomplishments; and academic college ceremonies honoring outstanding students. EMU also recognizes outstanding student work through the Undergraduate Symposium and the graduate research Fair.

In determining compensation for employees, aHr and Hr Departments conduct salary surveys within the local market as well as with peer institutions. Salary studies from specific professional associations are also reviewed if available. broadbanding has been implemented for several classifications; in this approach, jobs with similar skill requirements and responsibilities are grouped into job families and pay is linked to market.

Salary increases for the bargained-for employee groups are dictated by contract language. non-bargained-for administrators and athletic coaches can receive merit awards during the annual review process. these awards are determined by the respec-tive divisional vice presidents, typically based on employees’ completion of annual goals and objectives and contributions during the previous year.

Figure 4.3: Illustrative EMU Employee recognition Programs

Program Sponsoring Unit Description

ronald collins awards for Faculty accomplishments (teaching, Scholarship, Service)

Provost’s Office

Five faculty members are honored each year (early career faculty – teaching; senior faculty – teaching; scholarship; service) with a monetary award and recognition at a campus ceremony.

teaching Excellence award EMU alumni associationFaculty members are honored for outstand-ing teaching, based on nominations from EMU alumni.

gold Medallion awards Division of Student affairsFaculty and staff members of the campus com-munity are honored for their contributions to campus life and student success.

Mentors and role ModelsLesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-gender resource center

Faculty and staff members of the campus com-munity are honored for their contributions to making EMU a welcoming community for Lgbt students.



EMU offers its employees a comprehensive benefit package that includes health care, retirement, tuition waivers, prescription-drug coverage, etc. Employees can participate in flexible-spending programs.

4P8 - Determining key motivational issues

the collective-bargaining process is a tool for identify-ing key employee motivations. additional data will be identified and analyzed in future portfolios.

4P9 - Evaluating employee satisfaction, health and safety, and well-being

EMU recently administered a survey addressing these areas. additional data will be identified and analyzed in future portfolios.

4P10 - Measures collected and analyzed

the affirmative action Plan is reviewed each year and updated as needed. records of employee turnover and years of service by employee classification and University division are updated annually.

Student evaluations, as well as the narratives and nominations for faculty- and staff-recognition awards and annual faculty reports, provide regular accounts of faculty, staff, and administrators’ work and students’ perceptions of that work. the Provost’s office tracks annual numbers of applications and awards for faculty sabbaticals and FrF leaves; the Office of research Development tracks the numbers of proposals and awards for external funding.

4r1 – results

Employee turnover at the institution averages 7.5% annually, a rate that compares favorably with other institutions. this rate is essentially constant across employee groups. average length of service for all employee job classifications is 11.3 years. the average ranges from 4.2 years for athletic coaches to 13.6 years for faculty. In 2008, one employee was recognized for 45 years, one for 43 years, 6 for 40 years and 5 for 35 years.

Since May 2007, EMU has increased the breadth and frequency of campus-safety training. a new campus emergency-response plan and notification system has been implemented. additional campus policies, proce-dures, and security measures have been established.

Figure 4.4 presents the number of applications and awards for faculty sabbaticals, faculty research fellowships, spring/summer research awards, and new-faculty research awards for the past three years. cell entries are the number of awards (and the number of applications) in each category.

Figure 4.5 presents the number of faculty members awarded tenure or promotion in each of the past three years.

4r2 - results in processes associated with valuing people

EMU continues to systematize its process for measuring employee satisfaction. a national employee survey was administered in March 2008 to obtain a baseline for developing improvement targets. a separate instrument (HErI) is being used for faculty in april 2008.

Figure 4.4: Faculty awards granted and applied For

YearOne Semester Sabbatical

Full Year Sabbatical

Faculty research Fellowship

Spring/Summer research awards

new-Faculty research awards

2007-2008 15 (17) 6 (10) 17 (26) Pending 17 (18)

2006-2007 15 (20) 14 (16) 21 (28) 6 (14) 24 (34)

2005-2006 10 (15) 10 (11) 13 (24) 12 (21) 18 (33)



aHr/Hr has drafted a new manual for searches and other personnel policies to provide more uniform processes throughout the institution. Student affairs, Human resources, and the President’s Office tested a new staff-evaluation tool in the 2006-07 year. based upon results of this pilot testing, EMU will continue to revise and evaluate this tool.

4r3 - Employee productivity and effectiveness

EMU faculty, staff, and administrators regularly are recognized by their respective professional organizations for outstanding accomplishments. For example, in 2007 the director of the EMU School of nursing was elected to the national academies of Practice as a Distinguished Practitioner; in 2008 a School of Social Work professor was selected as Social Worker of the Year by the Michigan chapter of the national association of Social Workers. EMU has many similar examples each year.

though EMU is not a research 1 institution, the faculty are successful in garnering external support for research, including teaching-related research and contract work. Figure 4.6 provides the values of external awards by sponsor type and activity for the past two years.

4r4 - benchmarking comparisons

these will be addressed in future portfolios.

4I1 - Improving processes for valuing people

EMU has instituted a professional management-training program for mid- and upper-level administrators and hired a training director. Employee satisfaction surveys are currently underway.

Funding for faculty-development programs (e.g., sabbatical leave awards; Faculty research Fellowships) has been allocated.

4I2 - Setting targets for improvement

targets will be addressed after baseline data are analyzed.

Figure 4.5: Faculty tenure and Promotion, 2005-2007

Year awarded tenure awarded Promotion

Effective Fall 2007 30 48



Figure 4.6: Sources and amounts of External awards

YearFederal govt.

State govt. Foundations business

Local govt. & Other

research & Develop- ment Service training

Instr. Support /Other

2007 $6,240,433 $545,386 $292,550 $2,381,796 $654,540 $4,592,160 $3,090, 194 $2,364,663 $127,688

2006 $8,621,846 $686,705 $258,244 $3,210,424 $995,898 $6,069,500 $4,012,468 $3,222,359 $468,790

Category 5: Leading and Communicating


catEgOrY 5 : LEaDIng anD cOMMUnIcatIng| 36

category 5 Leading and communicating

5c1 - Leadership and communication systems

EMU was established pursuant to article vIII, Section 6, of the Michigan constitution and is one of Michigan’s 15 state-supported four-year universities. EMU is governed by an eight-member board of regents, which is appointed by the governor of the State of Michigan, with the advice and consent of the Michigan Senate. regents are appointed for staggered eight-year terms. Pursuant to the Michigan constitution and Michigan statutory law, the board, with limited exceptions (e.g., health, safety, and public policy), has been provided with the autonomy and authority to operate and manage the University.

the University’s leadership system consists of the board of regents, the executive leadership team, and governance bodies for the faculty and students. the board of regents, with input from its standing committees (board members, administrative staff, faculty, and students actively participate in standing-committee meetings), is responsible for establishing the University’s mission through the adoption/amendment of the University’s mission statement, and for setting general policies, fiscal oversight, and strategic direction for the University.

the President reports directly to the board of regents. to communicate and implement the board’s strategic-planning directions and policies, the President chairs the Strategic Operations council (SOc) that consists of the Provost and Executive vice President; vice President for advancement and Executive Director, EMU Foundation; University attorney; vice President, business and Finance; Director of Diversity; vice President for Enrollment Management; chief government relations and Special Projects Officer; Interim chief Information Officer; Director of Intercollegiate athletics; associate Provost; associate vice President, University Marketing and communications; Interim vice President for Student affairs; and the five academic deans.

a large part of EMU’s leadership and communica-tion environment is defined by the seven collective-bargaining agreements that it has with the Profession-al/technical staff (UaW Local 1976); clerical/Secretarial staff (UaW Local 1975); Food Service and Maintenance workers (aFScME Local 3866); campus police officers (Police Officers Labor council--Patrol Officers); police sergeants (Police Officers Labor council--Sergeants); full-time lecturers (EMU Federation of teachers); and tenured and tenure-track faculty (the american asso-ciation of University Professors).

the primary faculty governance bodies are the Faculty council and the graduate council. the responsibilities of these councils are defined in the collective-bargaining agreement. the councils are advisory to the President and the Provost and Executive vice President.

the primary student governance body is the EMU Student government. Its responsibilities are defined in its constitution and University policy. the EMU Student government is advisory to the President and other University executive officers.

the University also utilizes a specialized and integrated committee framework that encompasses all segments of the University. vice presidents have established input and committee structures within their divisions. academic deans and department heads have commit-tee structures within their academic units that provide faculty, staff, and, at times, students with opportunity to participate on committees that have decision-making or relevant policy-input powers.

a variety of communication methods are utilized throughout the University. the University’s Market-ing and communications Department has primary responsibility for the University’s formal communi-cation structure, internally and externally. However, the President, Secretary to the board of regents, vice Presidents, other executive officers, deans, depart-ment heads, directors, managers, etc., regularly


catEgOrY 5 : LEaDIng anD cOMMUnIcatIng | 37

communicate within their areas and/or with the campus community through reports, memorandums, web-sites, e-mails, meetings, retreats, newsletters, the student newspaper, etc.

5c2 - Leadership alignment with board

the EMU board of regents meets according to a published schedule (seven times this calendar year). the board’s standing committees are: athletic affairs; Faculty affairs; Student affairs; Educational Policies; Finance, audit and Investment; and Personnel and compensation. Except for the Personnel and compen-sation committee, the committee meetings are open forums that address a variety of matters. the regents use the committee meetings to help set direction and align administrative practices with board policy. See 5P6 for information on the University’s newly devel-oped strategic-planning process, which is based on a process-focused continuous-improvement model that emphasizes teamwork and communication.

5c3 - Institutional values and expectations

among Eastern Michigan’s shared values are:

• Excellence– the promotion of personal and academic excellence provides a foundation for institutional quality. EMU is committed to achieving the highest standards through ongoing assessment and continuous quality improvement.

• HumanDignityandRespect– Wisdom, sound judgment, acceptance, and respect for other persons, cultures, and ideas are characteristics of an educated person.

• Diversity– cultural diversity enriches learning experiences and promotes respect and understanding.

• PublicEngagement– EMU aspires to develop regional, national, and international partnerships that enable serving its stakeholders more effectively, while providing increased learning opportunities for students, faculty, and staff.

• LeadershipandParticipatoryDecision-Making– EMU is committed to creating and supporting an environment that fosters open communication and innovative approaches to change.

• Integrity– the EMU community believes that integrity is critical to continued success and institutional effectiveness. the University expects and supports the highest level of personal, intellectual, academic, financial, and operational integrity within the University community.

5P1 - Directions aligned with mission, vision, and values

the University’s mission and strategic direction have been established through the governance and committee structure described in Section 5c1, which ensures that faculty, staff, students, and other key stakeholders are considered and have appropriate input. Implementation involves the adoption of policies and procedures that are consistent with the University’s mission and strategic directions. the process provides the continuing opportunity for learning, innovation, and improvement.

One recent example was the approval by the board in March 2007 to include gender identity or expression in the University’s nondiscrimination clauses, including the preamble of the bylaws of the EMU board of regents, the EMU civil rights policy, and the EMU Equal Employment Opportunity/affirmative action policy. this policy revision was developed by the Student Leader group, which shepherded it through the Student affairs committee and then to adoption by the board.

the President meets weekly with the Strategic Opera-tions council and also meets independently with the vice presidents and other senior administrators to discuss strategic directions. after each board of regents meeting, the President schedules meetings with senior administrative staff to discuss the board meeting and critical challenges and opportunities. Information provided during these meetings may be shared with faculty and other staff members.

Eastern Michigan University has always endeavored to foster an ethical environment. In January 2007, the board of regents authorized the establishment of “the EMU Ethics and compliance reporting System.” this allows any member of the faculty or staff to bring compliance and ethics issues directly to the attention of the board of regents.



5P2 - Future opportunities and the learning environment

Leaders guide the University in seeking future opportunities by active participation in international, national, regional, state, and local activities. administrative leaders collaborate with faculty and communities to identify opportunities that are aligned with the EMU mission and vision. a key component is the utilization of advisory boards across colleges, schools, departments, and programs (appendix a). these are composed of community experts who provide guidance and counsel related to current academic programs, possible future programs, and evaluative feedback on the success of EMU graduates.

Faculty, staff, and students participate in “EMU Day at the capitol” to advocate for resources from the State Legislature and to provide information about EMU to Legislators.

Opportunities to sustain the current learning environment and stimulate future opportunities have been provided by the Faculty Development center, memberships/ subscriptions to professional organizations, attendance at professional conferences (37 attended the Higher Learning commission’s annual Meeting in 2007), and subscriptions to online grant notices.

5P3 - Decision-making processes

EMU’s decision-making model for institutional continuous-improvement teams is known as the IDEa (Identify - Develop - Evaluate - act) model as depicted in Figure 5.1.

Ultimate responsibility for University operations is held by the appointed board of regents; University administrators (appendix b) ultimately report to this board and make higher-level decisions.

Figure 5.1: EMU IDEa Model

IDEntIFY Identify issues and areas

of opportunity for improvement.

DEvELOP Develop and assess potential

solutions and implement best alternative.

EvaLUatE Evaluate the solution post

implementation. Measure and evaluate results against the

initial objects or goals.

act act to standardize the practice

if solution has the desired results. continue to identify areas of

ongoing improvement.

EMU Mission and vision



Prior to making decisions, information and input are collected from interested stakeholders through the use of teams, task forces, or committees; these indi-viduals then make recommendations to the admin-istration. Membership in these groups reflects all stakeholders and is often made up of cross-divisional members as appropriate. For example, aQIP Project teams include administrators from different levels, faculty, support staff, and student representatives. the teams report their findings at the Senior administra-tors’ meetings as part of their project closeout.

contract language in seven collective-bargaining agreements provides guidelines for collecting input.

Decisions are made by the appointed board of regents and University administrators for topics related to strategy, policy, and procedures. Operational mid-level decisions are made by various administrators, such as Deans, School Directors, and Department Heads. they often seek input from faculty and staff to ensure that all relevant information is known prior to making decisions. Faculty council and the college councils provide guidance on issues that require faculty input; their members are elected from the faculty in each department. Faculty council also appoints faculty members to various campus committees and task-force groups. For student issues, input is sought from student government officers who are elected annually from the student body.

5P4 - Use of information in decision-making

Several key results are widely monitored. Enrollment reports showing applicants, number accepted, and number enrolled by various criteria are widely disseminated. various reports from noel-Levitz provide input into student recruitment and retention strategies. a number of reports are consolidated in the “board books” that are distributed to the board of regents and senior leadership prior to every board meeting. an aQIP action project is underway to establish a balanced Scorecard Management Process, which will define EMU’s formal tracking and review of key performance indicators.

5P5 - communication among institutional levels

Demonstrating its strong commitment to shared governance, EMU uses a multifaceted approach to

improving communication between all levels of the University. Such communication is promoted through regular senior administrative meetings, verbal, written, and electronic communications from unit leaders, and broader communication among external stakehold-ers (Figure 5.2). Formal meetings between and among various constituencies and levels also foster commu-nication (Figure 5.3). Mechanisms for communication and input are embedded in the collective-bargaining agreements with faculty and staff, which require a variety of standing and ad hoc committees.

board of regents decisions and significant updates are shared at the President’s meeting with all senior-level administrators, at the weekly Strategic Operating council, and at Provost’s council, Divisional, college, Departmental, and Student government meetings. Many board decisions are publicized by press releases that are sent to various media and posted on the University’s web site. It is commonplace for senior administrators to hold open campus forums for students, faculty, and staff on various topics to provide updates and to solicit input from various constituencies.

5P6 - communication of shared mission, vision, values, and institutional directions

the University is in the first iteration of a newly developed biennial strategic-planning process (Figure 8.2), which is based on a process-focused continuous-improvement model that emphasizes teamwork and communication (the IDEa model). the Institutional Strategic Planning council (ISPc) is charged with implementing the process, which is designed to allow the University’s leadership to develop strategic priori-ties and develop a set of University strategic directions congruent with EMU’s mission, vision, and values. there is growing awareness of the need to relate the plan-ning process with the budget-development process at the University. the Institutional Strategic budget council (ISbc) is to provide guidance and recom-mendations to the Strategic Operations council (SOc) on the process, procedures, and development of the University budget, including reviewing historic budget and actual revenue and expenditure information, incorporating strategic planning priorities in context with the budget process, and assisting in developing the annual budget consistent with long-range financial projections based on program, enrollment, market, compensation, and other relevant trends.



communication Modes Frequency Purpose

ExAmpLES OF pRINT pUBLICATIONS

Echo 3 per week Student newspaper

Exemplar 3 per year the University Magazine of EMU

casenotes 2 per year college of arts & Sciences publication

Eastern Educator 1 per year college of Education publication

the Edge 3 per year the alumni Magazine

academic newsletters as needed Provide news and updates

student brochures as needed Provide information

press releases as needed Provide updates and information

Emeritus Faculty newsletter two per Year Provide updates, requests for input

ExAmpLES OF ELECTRONIC COmmUNICATIONS

EMU today Daily general interest news & notes

Focus EMU Weekly Faculty and staff newspaper

EMU homepage Ongoing general EMU information

my.emich Ongoing

EMU’s personal portal. this is an official form of communication, a secure site that provides students, faculty, and staff with intranet and Internet services.

OrD Digest & web site OngoingOffice of research Development newsletter and web pages

Presidential updates as needed news and updates

Emails as needed news and updates

Provost’s Office Updates biweekly Information on administrative meetings, as well as key activities and announcements in academic affairs

Enrollment reports Weekly Status reports

Figure 5.2: EMU communication Modes

Meeting Frequency

INSTITUTIONAL LEvEL

board of regents committees:athletic affairs Educational Policies Faculty affairs Finance, audit, and Investment Student affairs Personnel and compensation

bimonthly Open to the public

Senior administrators Monthly Senior administrators

Diversity council Monthly

continuous Improvement Operating council Monthly

Institutional Strategic Planning council biweekly

ACADEmIC AFFAIRS DIvISION

Provost’s council Monthly

Faculty council Monthly Elected by faculty by unit

Figure 5.3: EMU Formal Meetings

(continued on next page)



5P7 - Encouragement and development of leadership abilities

Eastern Michigan University offers diverse profes-sional-development programs through a variety of activities both on and off campus. In addition, the campus unions provide specific programs for their memberships.

the University offers professional-development semi-nars using on-campus and outside experts. Examples include Office Professionals Day and an administra-tive breakfast featuring nationally known speakers. EMU has contracted with an external consulting firm to develop and lead an ongoing Organizational transformation plan for institutional leaders. the process started in December 2007 with the Executive vice President and select members of the Strategic Operations council. the process will continue through the ranks in a systematic fashion, working with each division’s leadership team. EMU is focused on leader-ship development that will affect, in specific mea-surable ways, enrollment, increases in fund raising/

capital-campaign effectiveness, employee satisfaction, stakeholder satisfaction, and student learning.

traditional professional-development programs include travel and conference support; seminars on grant-writing; support from the Office of research and Development for identifying funding sources and writing grant proposals; providing books on leader-ship topics; tuition reimbursement for employees; and mentoring by senior faculty and administrators.

the Faculty Development center, sponsored by academic affairs, provides comprehensive seminars and training sessions for faculty to improve teaching effectiveness. the University often promotes faculty to department heads and deans, a practice that helps them gain leadership experience. University communications hosts media-relations training sessions twice a semester for faculty and staff, designed to prepare them for interviews by the media. the EMU-aaUP offers fall professional-development workshops for faculty that cover details on achieving promotion and tenure.

Meeting Frequency

ACADEmIC AFFAIRS DIvISION, CONTINUEDgraduate council Monthly Elected by faculty

Directors, Deans, Department Heads Monthly

academic affairs Educational Environment and Facili-ties Planning committee

Monthly

Formal committees and task forces

More than 300 college, department, and program advisory groups

ENROLLmENT mANAGEmENT DIvISION

Enrollment Management Operations committee

biweeklyShare information and strategies regarding recruitment, retention, and re-enrollment

Strategic Enrollment Management council

MonthlyShare information regarding enrollments and challenges

STUDENT AFFAIRS DIvISION

Strategy council3 times per month

Includes directors of the largest departments

Division council Monthly Includes all directors and associates

administrative council Monthly Includes select technical/professional staff

clerical staff 2 per semester

all staff annual

Student Leader group biweekly Includes leaders from all student groups

BUSINESS AND FINANCE DIvISION

Institutional Strategic budget council Monthly

Figure 5.3: EMU Formal Meetings (continued)



Professional and technical staff, as members of the UaW, can attend various professional-development seminars for officer and steward training. the clerical and Secretarial union has a memorandum of understanding to establish a clerical-training pilot fund to make training and professional-development opportunities available to as many University clerical employees as possible.

EMU has sponsored numerous emerging leaders as american council on Education (acE) Fellows for an academic year of professional development at other institutions.

Faculty and staff have been nominated to participate in Leadership Ypsilanti, a training series run by the Ypsilanti area chamber of commerce that introduces in detail various facets of the community (education, government, economic development, health care, etc.) and prepares the participants to become leaders within the Ypsilanti community.

5P8 - Leadership succession to ensure mission, vision, and values

the University’s mission, vision, and values appear in many University documents and are reinforced by leaders in major communications. Planning for leadership succession is widely recognized as a significant challenge.

5P9 - Measurement of leading and communicating

annual performance evaluations that reflect strengths and opportunities are gathered for all employees, but, in general, are not systematically analyzed (4P6).

an important component of the nascent strategic-planning process is to collect and analyze key performance measures associated with the implementation of each strategic initiative within each plan. related to this are the aQIP action projects to initiate and implement a balanced Scorecard process that will define EMU’s formal tracking and review of key performance indicators. these are likely to include students/stakeholders, faculty, satisfaction, internal processes, and financial data.

5r1 - results for leading and communicating processes and systems

as noted in 5P9, aQIP action projects exist to initiate and implement a balanced Scorecard process, which will define EMU’s first formal tracking and review of key performance indicators. the results will be included in future iterations of the systems portfolio.

5r2 - comparative results

comparative results are not available at this time.

5I1 and 5I2 - Improvements and targets

Improvements and targets will be addressed after data are available.

Category 6: Supporting Institutional Operations


catEgOrY 6: SUPPOrtIng InStItUtIOnaL OPEratIOnS | 43

category 6 Supporting Institutional Operations

6c1 - Key student and administrative support service processes

Eastern Michigan University is committed to a University-wide focus on learning as its core mission. EMU maximizes educational opportunities and personal and professional growth for students from diverse backgrounds through its array of programs in a student-focused learning environment that extends beyond the University boundaries. EMU’s dedication to excellence in academics requires a commitment to high-quality support service processes. Six key pro-cesses support student learning, student achievement, and student and stakeholder success. these process areas are defined as:• Teaching and Learning, which embraces learning com-

munities and emphasizes learning outcomes, commit-ment to retention, and higher graduation rates.

• StudentExperiences, which encourages engage-ment of on- and off-campus students through

programs and services, emphasizing EMU’s hall-mark of human diversity.

• InformationTechnologyandUniversityInfrastructure, which focuses on improving teaching and learning through information technology, emphasizing high-quality support systems and processes.

• Enrollment, which focuses on increasing enroll-ments, emphasizing institution-wide retention.

• CommunityEngagementandPublicService, which focuses on public service through regional part-nerships and alliances, emphasizing integration of service-learning into institution-wide curricula.

• FacilitiesandGrounds, which emphasizes function-ality, maintenance, and aesthetics that enhance the commitment to teaching and learning.

Within each process area are operations that support the needs of EMU’s students and other stakeholders. a representative list follows (Figure 6.1).

Figure 6.1: Key Processes and Operations

Key Process area Operations

teaching and Learning

academic advising, academic Projects center, career Services, center for adaptive technology and Education, computer Labs, continuing Education, counseling Services, Faculty Development center, First Year center, Halle Library, Health Services, Holman Learning center, Math Lab, Satellite centers, Student academic Support Services, Student Success Office, Writing center

Student Experiences

arts and Entertainment Program, child care Services (children’s Institute), commuter Student Services/commuter central, Dining Services, Diversity Programs, greek Life, Health Education Program, Housing, Intercollegiate athletics, Leadership and Student Involvement, Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender Office, new Student and transition Programs, Office of International Students, Ombudsman’s Office, Public Safety, recreation/Intramurals, Student Disability Services (access Office), Student government, Student Judicial Services, Student Media, Student Organizations, Student Success Office

Information technology and University Infrastructure

accounting, bookstore, budget Office, cashier’s Office, computer refresh Program, computer Store, continuous Improvement and Planning Office, Electronic classroom Support, Human resources, Institutional research and Information Management, Legal affairs, Mailroom, Office of Diversity and affirmative action, Office of research Development, Parking, Payroll, Purchasing and receiving, resnet, risk Management, Service EMU, Student business Services, technology Help Desk, telecommunications, University communications

Enrollment admissions, Financial aid, records and registration, retention Office, University Marketing

community Engagement and Public Service

alumni relations, charter Schools Office, community Involvement, convocation center, Development Office, Eaglecrest golf and conference center, government relations, center for corporate training

Facilities and grounds Health and Safety Office; Physical Plant Operations (Planning, custodial, grounds, Maintenance)



In order to achieve EMU’s mission and afford each student the optimal opportunity for success, students and other stakeholders must be provided with the appropriate support services that enhance the learn-ing environment and reduce barriers to learning.

6c2 - reinforcing EMU’s key student and administrative support services processes and systems in category 1 and category 2

EMU’s key student and administrative support services processes and systems identified in 6c1 are tied to the EMU Mission Statement and continuous-improvement initiatives. these support services are central to category 1 and category 2 through their link to the provision of a student-focused learning environment and their contribution to EMU’s economic well-being. they are designed to support faculty and staff performance in ways that enhance the quality, depth, and vibrancy of student learning. Every division’s support services are aligned with the primary mission of the University.

6P1 - Identifying student support service needs

Support service needs of students are identified through multiple venues using both formal and informal paths. EMU uses such national standardized assessments as the nSSE and cIrP to contribute to the identification of student support service needs. Departments and units across the University use a variety of methods ranging from surveys and focus groups to suggestion boxes and informal feedback. Most offices rely on more than one method and analyze all of the information collected to add, change, or eliminate support services. In addition, some offices have multiple years of data showing trends to inform their decisions.

through an aQIP Project focused on high-quality service delivery, the Office of Financial aid identified support service needs not only through surveys of students served but also through surveys of office per-sonnel. Using this information, the Office of Financial aid Process Improvement team Identified problems, Developed potential solutions, Evaluated these solu-tions, and in appropriate cases Acted to change exist-ing procedures or policies (IDEa Model, Figure 5.1).

another approach includes placing students on key University committees and councils to allow them to express their support service needs directly. For example, the EMU Student Leader group, which is composed of student representatives from twelve major student organizations, serves on the Student affairs committee of the board of regents. this group works to define a common student agenda and serves as an advisory group to both the vice President for Student affairs and the President. group members present position papers to reflect their priorities and support needs. EMU has also included student representatives on such committees as the search for EMU’s next president and the search for the Executive Director of Public Safety, providing a voice for students to share their needs. Including students on multiple, high-level University committees, task forces, and advisory boards (appendix a) has provided the University with a direct conduit for obtaining compelling information on student support needs.

Informal feedback is also a means of identifying student needs in various offices and departments throughout the University. this typically occurs when a student is engaged for a purpose other than to identify student support needs, yet the interaction results in the presentation of a need that gets passed along to the appropriate source.

6P2 - Identifying key stakeholder administrative support service needs

administrative support service needs of faculty, staff, and administrators, along with other key stakeholder groups, are identified by proactive, reactive, and comparative methods. Proactively, departments and units use advisory councils, committees, collaboration, and faculty/staff/student feedback. collaboration among departments and administrative offices serves as a key method for not only identifying needs, but also incorporating the changes that address those needs. complaints and complaint-driven surveys are reactive methods that are often used to identify administrative support service needs. benchmarking and national standards are also used to compare the institution to other entities as a means of identifying, revising, and defining needs.

asking multiple constituencies to define their administrative support service needs and listening



to their ideas, concerns, and recommendations have been critical to successfully providing what is required. Examples of key constituencies that provide information on an ongoing basis are such groups as the board of regents, President’s Strategic Operations council, Provost’s council, Faculty council, Senior administrators’ Meetings, alumni association board, aaUP, aFScME, UaW 1975, UaW 1976, Student affairs Strategy council, Student Leader group, retention council, and aQIP Project teams.

In addition, EMU has used town hall meetings and open forums on a variety of issues to better understand the public’s needs. For example, town hall meetings are scheduled each semester to address safety and security needs and concerns.

the Faculty Development center, a key support service for faculty and staff, uses a multi-faceted approach to identifying needs. Every three years the center conducts a web-based survey of all faculty, lecturers, administrators, and adjunct faculty regard-ing faculty development needs in teaching, research, and technology categories. the Faculty Development center advisory committee solicits input from its colleagues just prior to the annual planning retreat. at the end of each of the center-sponsored work-shops, seminars, and semester-long programs, the participants also complete an evaluation that asks for other programs they would like offered. In addition, the center staff tracks the general nature of all the individual consultations held with faculty to deter-mine patterns among those as well. Finally, the center receives emails weekly from faculty with suggestions and questions, which are evaluated for feasibility.

Several new methods of gathering information from EMU employees about their work-life quality and needs have been implemented by Human resources within the past six months. they include the following:

1. bringing in PMP Leadership consultants to work with the executive and administrative levels of the institution. Part of that process is that each participant must complete a self-evaluation, must request that others evaluate him/her on leadership qualities, and must identify needs by evaluating the EMU work environment through a “Perception Survey” of the institution.

2. Participating, for the first time, in the national Employee attitudes Survey (nEaS) administered yearly by business and Labor reports (bLr). this

survey allowed employees to assess EMU on four major categories (i.e., teamwork, communication, the Organization, and the Employee’s Personal Development). the survey was completed in april, 2008, by 660 non-academic staff, and the results will be utilized to identify training needs and other necessary changes.

3. Formalizing exit interviews with departing employ-ees. these are now being conducted by the Office of Diversity and affirmative action. the results will be examined regularly to identify trends in depar-tures and make recommendations for changes/improvements in those areas.

Figure 6.2 shows key methods used by several departments and offices across the University. these departments and offices are representative of the six key process areas identified in 6c1. as indicated in Figure 6.2, it is typical for an operation to use more than one method to determine support service needs. For example, Human resources Department managers collaborate with the bargaining units to identify support needs of specific employee groups. Moreover, they utilize such other methods as web surveys, exit interviews, and an advisory committee.

6P3 – Managing student and administrative support service processes

EMU routinely collects data on students through benchmark studies, satisfaction surveys, and focus groups. In reviewing the data gathered during inter-views with some representative departments, trends were identified that spanned the key process areas and operations (6c1). nationally recognized surveys, such as cIrP and nSSE, as well as the University’s Student Learning Evaluation (SLE), support EMU in understanding students and developing services and programs to address their needs. For example, the Department of Public Safety reviews data from surveys, focus groups, and open forums to determine trends in how safe EMU students feel on campus and uses input from student organizations in developing and refining those programs and services. Satisfaction and utilization data are most commonly employed to determine whether the needs of students and key stakeholders continue to be met.

as part of EMU’s aQIP academic advising Project, students and advisors were surveyed separately to determine the support service needs of both students



and advisors. the results are being used by the EMU retention council to implement improvements in the delivery of academic advising from the time students enter the University through their graduation and to determine effective processes to integrate career advising. analysis of data from the Housing and Dining Services resident Survey (conducted annually for the past 18 years) is used to make informed decisions regarding program changes. Student satisfaction information is systematically gathered and assessed in records/registration, Financial aid, Student accounting, Freshmen academic advising, academic administrative units, and the academic support services in the Holman Learning center.

Feedback from students and key stakeholders is often used to determine needs and to develop or refine processes. For example, Human resources consultants currently rely on informal feedback from hiring authorities who use the online application system to identify their needs and concerns. Plans exist within Hr to add a suggestion/comment message to the hiring authority web page, similar to that which exists on the applicant web page.

review of best practices and adherence to national professional standards, for example, the national council for accreditation of teacher Education

(ncatE), the council for the advancement of Stan-dards in Higher Education (caS), and the american college Health association (acHa), also help to ensure that the needs of students and key constituents are being met. Many administrative departments have advisory committees that include students and faculty to provide another venue for feedback (appendix a).

Processes are documented on the macro level in the board of regents Policy Manual and the University’s Procedures Manual. a comprehensive review and revision of the board Policy Manual has been ongoing since 2002. Processes and policies are also documented for students in such publications as the EMU Student Handbook and the guide to Student Involvement. In general, most departments maintain policy manuals, procedures manuals, and/or handbooks although no system exists either to require that processes be documented or to ensure that regular review and updates occur.

Innovation, knowledge-sharing, and empowerment are encouraged through regular staff meetings, a degree of autonomy in decision making, involvement in the development and revision of processes, professional development, and networking opportunities within individual units and divisions. For example, each month a different group of

Figure 6.2: Sample of Methods to Identify needs

Department/ Office Key Process area Methods to Identify needs

reactive

needs Survey

complaints

bench-marking, national

Standards

collaborationInternal

Staff Feedback

advisory council/

committee

computer Lab and Help Desk

teaching and Learning x x

Faculty Development center

teaching and Learning x x x x x

Halle Library teaching and Learning x x x x

Human resourcesInformation technology and University Infrastructure

x x x x x

Physical Plant/ Facilities

Facilities and grounds x x

Public Safety Student Experience x x x

PurchasingInformation technology and University Infrastructure

x x x



Halle Library employees prepares the agenda and conducts the staff meeting. In the Physical Plant, information sharing is enhanced by the inclusion of representatives from Public Safety and University Housing in biweekly staff meetings. a formal rotation process in the Human resources department enables staff to attend professional-development activities on a routine basis. Such University divisions as Student affairs and Enrollment Management utilize divisional committees at each level of their organizations (administrative, professional/technical, and clerical) to focus on information sharing and encourage new ideas. academic affairs holds monthly meeting of deans and department heads. rewards and recognitions, such as the Faculty and tutor appreciation awards, annual “Innovagency” grants from Student affairs to implement innovative ideas, and the Distinguished Faculty awards, also serve to encourage innovation.

Leadership teams at each level of the University man-age key processes on a day-to-day basis, but with minimal standardization across the University. contin-uous-improvement initiatives at EMU will continue to promote standardization and University-wide support service processes.

6P4 - Using information and results to improve support services

an example of the collection of utilization data and using them to support campus community needs is found in the Halle Library. When a book, journal, or monograph is requested by faculty and purchased by the library, the library tracks the usage of that resource. When the time for renewal of a journal approaches, library staff can determine whether it should be renewed or not, based upon its utilization. Processes used by the help desk include collecting data on client satisfaction, which are then used to modify help-desk-employee procedures and training.

While large quantities of data are collected, the timing of such collection is not always consistent from year to year at either an institutional level or a department level, and the data are not regularly shared with constituencies across the University. this limitation has been identified, and measures will be implemented to place more focus on retaining and trending data over time to enhance the ability to use these data more effectively for continuous improvement.

6P5 - Measures of student and administrative support services

the University analyzes a number of measures related to student and administrative support processes. benchmarking is performed against such national surveys as nSSE and the cIrP new Freshman Study. this allows EMU to compare results with peer institutions.

the most common measures currently collected and analyzed are satisfaction and utilization data. Satisfac-tion data are most often collected in annual surveys of students in order to find areas of concern in services offered. Utilization data are collected annually as part of annual-review activities, and in smaller increments, such as statistics of participation in a specific program. the analysis of these data is most often performed as part of the annual-review process and is used to plan changes in services for the next year.

Most support services utilize more than one measure and collect data from several instruments. Figure 6.3 provides a sample of departments/offices from 6c1 and shows the various methods used by each to collect data. For such operations as Physical Plant and Department of Public Safety, data collected are typically in the form of responses to immediate problems rather than through a formal process conducted along a given timeframe.

6r1 - results of student support services processes

While formal University processes for sharing and applying results have been limited, several departments, colleges, and divisions have used the data collected to review and improve student support services. as a result of the Housing and Dining resident Survey, meal plans were changed so that students are allocated a specific number of meals depending on the plan they select. these meals can be obtained at any time during the day instead of only at specific times as in the past. Housing and Dining also conducted an analysis to determine the price points for certain services and amenities, along with the value students placed on accommodations in the residence halls. the results of this analysis were used to determine the housing-rates schedule for 2008-09, reflecting the development of several new price packages that include different amenities within each plan. the Holman Learning center has incorporated



utilization data, i.e., how many students request which academic support services, to guide their decisions for recruiting and hiring tutors and supplemental-instruction leaders.

an aQIP project completed in Fall 2007 focused on collecting and analyzing data from students to determine the problems they felt were inherent in the current academic-advising system. Faculty and staff who serve as academic advisors were also surveyed. these data have been utilized by the retention committee to recommend implementation of major processes and systems including:

• Creationofacoordinatedadvisingcenterwithrepresentatives from career Services, Financial aid, and general Education.

• FormationofanAdvisingCoordinationTeam.

• Implementationofmeasurestoincreasetheuseofthe curriculum advising and Program Plans.

• ImplementationofaUniversity-wideAcademic-advisor training Plan.

In a second aQIP project, the Financial aid Office used the results of a student survey on the quality of customer service to determine points of service that students rated as less than satisfactory. Finding a major concern on the response to phone inquiries,

the Financial aid Office worked with their third-party vendor to train staff to improve the quality of their phone responses.

numerous other student support services processes have been addressed and improved based on the results of data that have been collected and analyzed from such internal and external sources as the Depart-ment of Education. a few additional process results to note include:

• Implementedwirelesstechnologyinallclassroombuildings and major facilities on campus.

• Securedadditionalfundingtohire1.5FTEnewmental-health counselor positions.

• Addednewsecuritycamerastovariouslocationson campus.

• Implementedatext-messageemergency-alertsystem campus-wide.

• EnhancedtheUniversitySEEUSsafety-escortser-vice, expanding hours of coverage.

• Developedafinancial-leveragingsystemthroughnoel-Levitz for Financial aid.

• CreatedtheAcademicProjectsCenter.

• Implementedanonlinegraduationaudit.

• AddedServiceEMU,aone-stopservicecenterforstudent business-services needs housed in the Student center.

Figure 6.3: Sample of Measures

Department/Office Data-collection Method

customer Surveys

customer comments

Focus groups

Utilization Data

budget Data

accounts receivables

benchmarking

academic advising x x x x x x

computer Labs x x

Faculty Development center x x x x x

Financial aid x x x x

Halle Library x x x x x

Help Desk x

Holman Learning center x x x x x

Housing x x x x x x

Human resources x x

Physical Plant x

Public Safety x x x

Purchasing x x x x

Student business Services x x x



• RevisedFastTrackearlyorientationprogramfroma two-a-day to a one-a-day program with added program features.

6r2 - results of administrative support processes

EMU has utilized data to determine opportunities to create efficiencies in administrative support services. the Faculty Development Survey conducted every three years by the Faculty Development center is one example. the 2005 survey represented all subdivisions of faculty, lecturers, and administrators. they identi-fied the need for programs on teaching as the highest priority with an emphasis on making learning more meaningful and significant through actively engaging students. research interests were strong, but among a smaller group of responders. these results will be compared with the results of the survey just conduct-ed in april 2008.

the Faculty Development advisory committee, with input from students, department heads, and faculty/lecturers, developed the strategic plan for the Faculty Development center. a sample of some of the Strate-gic Initiatives and the results are shown in Figure 6.4.

a sample of other results for improving support services includes:

• Implementedweb-timeentryforpayroll processing.

• Implementedpurchasing-cardreconciliationprocess and card-use auditing process.

• Implementedonlinework-ordersystem.

• UseofInterest-BasedBargainingforsomeoftheunion-contract negotiations.

• Replacedkeylockswithkey-cardsystemforafter-hours entry to all major University buildings.

• ReorganizedHumanResourcesintoadministrativeteams of generalists and specialists assigned to specific University divisions and units.

• DevelopedaUniversitybrandingcampaigntodefine and market EMU to its public.

• Enhancedtechnologytoachievehighlevelsofservice to all stakeholders.

• UsedaComputerRefreshProgramforcomputerreplacements for faculty and staff.

6r3 - comparison of results with other higher-education institutions

comparison with other higher-education institutions takes place through standardized surveys (3r5). One example is the benchmarking by the Halle Library for

Figure 6.4: FDc-Planned Initiatives and Progress report

Initiative Progress (as of april 2008)

continue to enhance and strengthen faculty teaching pro-grams (according to survey and national trends).

new beginnings had 115 participants; new Faculty Orienta-tion-27 faculty;13 year-long Fellows; SOtL symposium- 5 seminars totaling 65 people.

On course in august: 25 EMU participants; On course in May - 25 EMU participants. aQIP project written and accepted. consultations and mid-term assessments increased.

Develop an overall approach and multiple forms of programs to orient and retain new faculty.

Still in discussion with academic Hr, but progress being made.

Develop and implement a plan for long-term fiscal solvency and growth.

Plan developed; aQIP project accepted—funded at $47,000. additional grants currently being written; $3 million endowment request placed in capital campaign.

recruit and train four additional Faculty Development Fellows who will serve with the program for an additional two years.

three new Fellows now participating. areas of interest: adjuncts, On-course, and Interdisciplinarity.

conduct a faculty/instructor/administrator survey and create a new strategic plan.

Survey completed. Strategic Plan to be completed by July 1, 2008.

continue to create opportunities to provide collaborative events with other universities in the area.

collaborated with Wcc to co-sponsor On-course workshops—one in 2007 and another in 2008. Invited faculty from 10 other universities.



total library expenditures per FtE student (Figure 6.5).

EMU is in the process of reviewing and updating its list of peer institutions in conjunction with the University’s strategic-planning process. the peer data will be used to benchmark and build comparative data for support service priorities that can complement the data collected by individual operations to establish need for and effectiveness of key process areas (Figure 6.1).

6I1 - Methods of improvement of current processes and systems

During the 2007-2008 academic year, the University implemented a new strategic-planning process framed in continuous improvement that is intended to support ongoing review of processes, systems, services, and policies at the unit, department, divisional, and institutional levels (8P1; Figure 8.2).

In an effort to align key University processes, five new councils have been created, which have an underlying goal of identifying and implementing changes in systems and processes to enhance student and administrative support services. these include the Institutional Strategic budget council, continuous Improvement Operating council, Enrollment Management council, Institutional Strategic Planning council, and retention council.

6I2 - Identification and communication of improvement priorities

based on processes and results identified above, these will be addressed in future portfolios.

Figure 6.5: total Library Expenditures Per FtE Student 2005/2006

$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1000

University of nevada-Las vegas

Western Michigan University

Kent State University-Main campus

Florida atlantic University

Eastern Michigan University

Middle tennessee State University

University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee

Category 7: Measuring Effectiveness


catEgOrY 7 : MEaSUrIng EFFEctIvEnESS | 51

category 7 Measuring Effectiveness

7c1 – Data collection and availability

Prior to the development of the Office of Institutional research and Information Management, Eastern Michigan University utilized a mostly decentralized approach to information management. Figure 7.1 depicts current sources and availability of information.

recent efforts at EMU have addressed many of the previous data shortcomings. a key development involves the Office of Institutional research and Information Management (IrIM), where collected data are entered or scanned and stored in a centralized online transaction database. For reporting and analysis purposes, data are extracted from

Figure 7.1: Sources and availability of Information

Focus resource Location

Strategic-Planning Operations

University Master Plan State & Federal reports University Organization chart University archives

Web site IrIM web site President’s web site Library

academic & research Operations

course-Scheduling reports Faculty course assignment Faculty Profile college annual reports cIrP, YFcY, nSSE Enrollment reports OrD annual reports academic Program review Student credit-Hour Production Library Usage tracking

banner IrIM web site IrIM web site college web sites IrIM web site IrIM my.emich reports tab OrD web site aa web site My.emich reports tab Library web site

Student Operations

Student Information reports Housing & Dining Survey Student Progress & retention admissions Financial aid reports athletic affairs annual reports SLE Summaries Student Judicial actions Student Profile

banner IrIM web site banner Student banner Student Financial aid annual Publication IrIM web site Office of Student Judicial Services IrIM web site

Engagement & advancement Operations

Foundation reports alumni association reports Market-research reports graduate Employment

Web site Web site University Marketing career Services

business Operations

Finance reports E-Print reports Operating budget Work-Order status Employee Survey Pay & benefits time reporting DPS campus Safety reports collective-bargaining contracts

My.emich reports page banner banner Finance tMa web site IrIM web site banner my.emich banner finance DPS Web site Hr web site

catEgOrY 7: MEaSUrIng EFFEctIvEnESS | 52

their primary source, integrated, and stored in a centralized data-warehouse system managed by IrIM. the Office of IrIM initiates and conducts studies and analyses in support of strategic planning and continuous improvement; academic program review; accreditation/reaccreditations; student-support services; enrollment management; budgeting and financial control; and other academic and academic-support initiatives.

a second effort is associated with the aQIP balanced Scorecard action projects. the first balanced Score-card Initiation action project team identified 81 key performance indicators that were collected and used in various units at EMU. these indicators were catego-rized under the following headings: financial, internal processes, students and stakeholders, and staff. the balanced Scorecard Implementation team will be dis-tilling these 81 into a manageable vital few indicators.

7c2 – Key institutional measures for tracking effectiveness

Key institutional measures are student credit-hour (ScH) generation, headcount, retention data, grant productivity, gifts, housing-occupancy rates, student satisfaction, and employee satisfaction. the second balanced Scorecard Implementation action Project aims to improve EMU’s capacity to determine the overall health of the institution at any given time. this project has an anticipated implementation date of December 2008.

7P1 – Selection, management, and use of information

the mission of EMU, which includes maximizing edu-cational opportunities for students, requires that infor-mation about its most important stakeholder group, its students, be collected, managed, and accessible. the Provost’s office and other administrators work with DoIt, IrIM, and the academic departments to develop reports needed by academic units.

the University has established a system that allows the campus community to access and use information from University records, and from such standardized surveys as the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), the national Student Survey of Engagement (nSSE),

and the cooperative Institutional research Program’s Freshman Survey (cIrP). the measures currently being used at EMU are shown in Figure 7.2.

7P2 – Determining information needs

various external entities and groups determine the need for information and data collection, storage, and accessibility. these include program, departmental and college accrediting bodies, advisory committees, statutes, governmental agencies, regulatory bodies, and prospective students. Internal demands include the needs of departments, other units, and students.

these needs are met by departments creating data-collection storage and access capability, obtaining information from such internal data repositories as the data warehouse and from such external repositories as the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Figure 7.2: Identified Measures

category current Measures

Student Learning

SSI Licensure rates Faculty/Student ratio nSSE grade Distribution graduate School Placement Job Placement various Program-review Data various accreditation Data Dean’s List retention rates Peer reviews of teaching admission/recruitment analysis graduation rates cIrP

Other Institutional Objectives

Fundraising Efforts Outreach Faculty-Student Partnerships

continuous Improvement

Process Participation training Impacts and Outcomes

Institutional Operations

Facilities Planning Information Scheduling Information communication and technology Man-agement Intercollegiate athletics budget Performance Space Utilization


7P3 – Determining needs for comparative data

Sources of such comparative information as national survey data, specialized accreditation criteria, and peer institution data are utilized according to need. needs may include collective bargaining, academic program improvement, personnel actions, and strategic planning.

7P4 – analyzing and sharing data at institutional level

State and federal reports and assessments are completed as required. Institutional performance assessment is done by divisional work centers in support of internal processes, i.e., budget development and justification. the balanced Scorecard Implementation action Project will help the University to better maintain and use measures of overall performance.

Institutional-level assessments and analyses are typically posted on the IrIM or other work-center web pages. Significant outside-contractor reports are presented to senior administrators at centrally scheduled meetings. Enrollment reports are regularly distributed to multiple campus staff members. a wide range of reports and data are available to employees through EMU’s intranet.

7P5 – alignment of data with institutional goals

the general Education assessment action Project promises to align the goals of general education with assessments. the academic Program review Process (8P5) requires the alignment of departmental goals with the HLc criteria and overall institutional directions.

7P6 –Ensuring effectiveness of information systems and processes

the Department of Information technology (DoIt)uses an integrated Enterprise-wide resource and Planning (ErP) system called banner to support the administrative departments, including finance, human resources, accounts receivable, student records, financial aid, and advancement. access to banner data is provided through application forms and Web

pages. Internet access is controlled with a banner user ID and password. Form access is granted via a leastinformationneededprotocol. the banner Functional Security team (FSt) establishes and maintains security models using best practices. the FSt consists of members from each administrative department. the Data Standards committee regularly meets to create and update standards for entering and processing data to facilitate the integration of departmental data sets within banner.

all modifications (including vendor upgrades) are evaluated to determine the best implementation timeframe based on the business Operations team recommendations and the operation schedules of the University. testing of system modifications includes unit, system, and quality-assurance testing by both technical and end users of the system.

Processes, such as scheduling jobs, entering control values, and output distribution, are distributed across the responsible departments. Each department’s specific domain allows it to best ensure the integrity of its data and to establish its own policies for running the system and performing checks and balances within system operations.

retrieving data from the system is accomplished by: 1) direct access to the ErP data (upon approval of the FSt) with an ODbc-compliant report-writing tool such as access or crystal reports, 2) filing a request for Service with the DoIt, and 3) requesting an “Official report” from the University Data Warehouse, which is maintained by IrIM. reports maintained by the DoIt and IrIM are available as hardcopy and on-line via user ID and password.

System infrastructure and operating systems are maintained on a three-year replacement cycle. EMU’s network security is protected by firewalls, virtual Private networks (vPn), network-analysis software, intrusion-detection measures, configuration monitoring, anti-virus, and Spam filtering. Mirrored data storage is implemented to prevent corruption or loss of data. an Incident response team responds to reported information incidents.

all production hardware is housed in a secure facility. Production data is routinely backed up, and those tapes are rotated to an off-site location. the DoIt’s disaster-recovery teams meet regularly to maintain


and update procedures and perform table-top exercises to validate its processes.

7P7 – Measures of the effectiveness

Measures of effectiveness may take at least six dimensions: timeliness, usefulness, accuracy, reliability, meaningfulness, and accessibility. the cIO along with the technology advisory committee reviews the impacts of DoIt measures that address several of these dimensions. the annual student and faculty surveys are reviewed and modifications in processes and procedures are made based on the analyses and comparisons with previous survey results. the help-desk satisfaction data are reviewed, and the data collection mechanism and help-desk capacity are modified based on these results. the results from such measures as the nSSE and Educause surveys are reviewed annually to help identify appropriate interventions and process modifications. response rates and the quality of the information provided from each of the measures are frequent topics at advisory and leadership meetings. the vital few measures being identified by the balanced Scorecard Implementation action Project team will help address at least a portion of this need.

7r1 – results of systems for measuring effectiveness

the University has established a successful record for meeting the needs of governmental and non-governmental regulatory and accrediting agencies. Data reports to state and federal oversight agencies are timely and accurate. Similarly, the University has successfully maintained institutional accreditation with the north central association’s Higher Learning commission since 1917. the University also successfully maintains academic- and service-program accreditation and compliance. Following the nca accreditation in 2001, EMU decided to move to the aQIP institutional-accreditation process. the University leadership felt that the aQIP emphasis on evidence-based decision-making and continuous improvement would facilitate a campus cultural shift to a broader and stronger array of process-effectiveness measures. a macro array of KPIs is being actively pursued in the University’s balanced Scorecard Implementation project.

7r2 – results comparison

additional data must be collected before comparisons can be made.

7I1 – Improvement of current systems and processes

various means are used to improve existing processes, including process-improvement teams, aQIP action Projects, strategic planning, and academic-program review. the balanced Scorecard Implementation action Project will promote comparisons in each of the major groups of KPIs. the comparisons will help identify areas for improvement.

7I2 – Setting targets for improvement

targets will be set in each of the four categories of KPIs including students and stakeholders, financial, internal processes, and staff, based on benchmarking. the final result will be a balanced Scorecard driven by internal and external comparisons. Future systems-portfolio updates will provide more details.

Category 8: Planning Continuous Improvement


catEgOrY 8: PLannIng cOntInUOUS IMPrOvEMEnt| 55

category 8 Planning continuous Improvement

8c1 – Institutional vision

In January 2008, the Executive vice President and Provost, working with the Strategic Operations council, agreed upon a new vision and revised the strategic directions. the vision and four new directions currently guide the University.

Vision: EMU will be the institution of choice for its stakehold-ers, embracing traditional and non-traditional learners.

Strategic Directions:

1. LearningandOpportunity: EMU will employ creative and innovative methods to ensure the success of each student, faculty member, and staff person. In addition, students and faculty will engage in their disciplines through practical, innovative, and sup-portive learning experiences, research, scholarly, and creative experiences. the results will be that:

• EasternMichiganUniversitywillberecognizedfor its strong undergraduate programs and will provide research opportunities, excellent co-curricular programs, and support systems that enhance the success of a talented and diverse student population; and

• EasternMichiganUniversitywillberecognizedfor the synergy of theory and practice in its graduate programs.

2. ServiceandEngagement: EMU will become a model for public engagement by linking students, faculty, staff, and alumni with opportunities to produce real-world value and practical experience that enhance learning and help address community needs.

3. DiversityandMulticulturalPerspective: EMU will provide a collaborative, welcoming, and supportive culture where differing ideas, behaviors, and back-grounds contribute to the educational experience that includes a global and multicultural perspective, enhancing the individual, society, and the world.

4. BuildingfortheFuture: EMU will develop and enhance teaching and research support, technology, and facilities, as the institution strives to anticipate stakeholder needs.

8c2 - Short-term and long-term strategies aligned with mission/vision

EMU’s long-term strategic priorities are being deter-mined by the strategic-planning process. See 8P2.

EMU’s objectives for the next 12-24 months were established simultaneously with the vision and four directions (8c1) and are reflected in Figure 8.1.

8P1 - Institutional planning process

Periodically, the mission of EMU is examined and revised by the leaders with input from the University’s students, employees, and constituents.

two new councils were formed in January 2008: Institutional Strategic Planning and the Institutional budget councils. these councils are charged with implementing a strategic-planning process, which is appropriately linked with an emerging budgetary process. the planning process is shown in Figure 8.2.

8P2 - Selecting short-term and long-term strategies

all strategies are derived from an analysis of exter-nal and internal scans coupled with organizational strengths and capabilities. the scans address social, technological, economic, educational, and political (StEEP) current and emerging conditions and factors.

the recently initiated strategic-planning process (Figure 8.2) will yield revised strategic directions, criteria, and strategies. these revised directions and


catEgOrY 8: PLannIng cOntInUOUS IMPrOvEMEnt 56

Figure 8.1: Short-term Strategies

areas of Focus goals

academic Programming and Scholarly/creative activity

1 High Priority - Increase funding for academic programs and Scholarly and creative activities

2 Implement a refined program-review process

3 High Priority – complete a process for evaluating program sustainability

Students

4 High Priority - Increase enrollment headcount

5 High Priority - Increase Student credit-Hour (ScH) production

6 High Priority - Improve student-retention and degree-completion rates

7 High Priority – Increase occupancy in student housing

8 Improve advising services

Faculty, Staff, and administrators9 refine human-resources processes

10 Develop, retain, and reward a professional workforce

community Engagement and Service

11 Strengthen community relationships

12 Establish external community-advisory committees

13 High Priority - Maintain Division Ia status in athletics and Mac league membership

Safety and Security14 High Priority - Improve campus safety, security, and rapid-response

processes and capacities to become exemplary in safety and security

continuous Improvement, Planning Pro-cesses, and accreditation

15 Integrate continuous-improvement processes campus-wide

16 Launch an ongoing biennial strategic-planning process

Public Perception, Image, and Organizational climate

17 Launch and sustain an integrated marketing campaign

18 Improve communications with constituents

revenues, budget Processes, Facilities, technology-Support

19 High Priority - Increase institutional net revenues

20 create an effective budgeting process

21 High Priority - Enhance physical facilities

22 Improve Eagle crest conference center

23 Improve Ict systems

Sustainability 24 reduce the University’s carbon footprint

criteria will be used to guide decisions and implement a long-term strategic plan for the institution.

8P3 - Developing key action plans to support institutional strategies

Divisional and unit work plans are developed annually. Divisional leaders develop reports that are catego-rized by the strategic directions. the balanced Score-card Implementation action Project team is currently identifying macro measures to be used and communi-cated to students, faculty, staff, administrators, and key stakeholder groups.

the short-term strategies in Figure 8.1 currently serve as a basis for action plans. as the new strate-gic-planning process is implemented, annual macro

and micro plans based on new strategic directions will serve as a framework for developing key action plans.

8P4 - coordinating and aligning planning processes

based on a review and analysis of the previous strate-gic-planning processes, a new planning process has been developed, which is coordinated with budgeting and aligns with continuous improvement (Figure 8.2).

Within academic affairs, each program and depart-ment submits annual plans aligned with the HLc five criteria for accreditation. these plans are aggregated and reviewed, and used in developing college and divisional plans. currently, similar processes are being initiated for all other divisions. a schematic depiction



Figure 8.2: Stategic-Planning Process

IDEntIFY IntErnaL anD ExtErnaL FactOrS

Environmental-Scan Process

DEvELOP StratEgIc-PLannIng

PrOcESS & aSSESSMEnt StratEgIES

Strategic-Planning Process

PErIODIc EvaLUatIOn

OF PLan

Outcomes

StanDarDIzE

PractIcES

continuous

Improvement

External

Factors

Peer Institutions common Data Set Mandates

Monitoring Forecasts

trends, Events,

Opportunities, threats

Strategic Issues

(Institutional Leadership team)

Feb. 2009

report, Initiatives, new Opportunties & challenges

april 2010

Identify areas for Ongoing Improvement

May 2010

build the next- cycle Strategic Plan

June 2010

adjustments and alignments

July-august 2010

Outcomes Measures

Strategic Directions


Mar. 2009

Draft of MACRO PLAN

april 2009

Final MACRO PLAN


May 2009

STEEP

Social

Technological

Economic

Environmental

Political

Dec. 2008

SCOT

Summary

analysis

Identification

of Opportunities

& challenges

Jan. 2009

Internal

FactorsMissionvisionPlans

Social and Economic

Impact Self-Study

trailblazer Statndard Insti-

tutional Data Sets Program

Status

Oct. 2008

Figure 8.3: Integrated Program review and continuous-Improvement cycle

PrOgraM-rEvIEW MODULE

Dept/School & Program review from orientation

through submission, focus on reviewing the plan-

ning-process results & identifying new

priorities

annUaL PLannIng MODULE

Uses the annual Plan to set and track progress

towards attaining dept./school & program goals

over 3 years

caMPUS-cOMMEnt MODULE

Evaluate the review results & affirm the revised priori-

ties to ensure evidence-based decision-making & continuous-improvement

planning



of the Integrated Program-review Process can be found in Figure 8.3.

8P5 - Selecting measures and setting perfor-mance projections

In the case of the short-term strategies listed in Figure 8.1, the measures and performance projections are generated by the board of regents and the SOc. regarding long-term measures and performance projections, it is anticipated that a procedure for determining these measures will be implemented through the biennial strategic-planning process.

8P6 - accounting for resource needs

Discussions at the Strategic Operations council (SOc) result in recommendations to the President regarding resource allocations. the strategic-planning process calls for a Strategic budget council to prepare a budget process and guidelines consistent with strategic directions and initiatives for implementation.

8P7 - Ensuring faculty, staff, and administrator development

all divisions design specific training programs in response to changing institutional strategies and action plans (4c4, 4P5). During the Fall of 2007, the Executive vice-President engaged the services of an outside consultant group to help develop the capabilities of those reporting directly to the President’s office to respond effectively to change. the consultant group uses instruments and techniques that help identify problems within an organization, and armed with this information, interventions aimed at improving organization performance are implemented. a second group of administrators will be undergoing similar training during the spring of 2008.

8P8 - Measuring planning effectiveness

the continuous Improvement and Planning Office (cIPO) evaluates continuous-improvement training programs and modifies these programs based on evaluation results. aQIP team leaders meet and propose modifications to existing and future team training and operating practices. the continuous Improvement Operating council and Institutional Strategic Planning council, in conjunction with the balanced Scorecard aQIP team, are developing measures of the effectiveness of these systems for planning continuous improvement.

8r1 – results• Thenumberofgrantapplicationsforresearchand

development are up 15% over last year, and the dollar requests for those applications are up 106% or $5.4 million.

• Anewcampus-wideparadigmforadvisingisunderdevelopment by the advising sub-committee of the retention council.

• DuringFall2007,EMU’sDepartmentofPublicSafety conducted clery act training for more than 160 campus-security authorities. EMU has implemented a timely Warning, Daily crime Summary Log, and clery act crime Statistics reporting policies. a 16-point safety and security plan has been implemented.

• EMU’sactionprojectonQualityServiceDeliveryhas led to process improvements within the Office of Financial aid, and process-improvement teams have been implemented in other divisions and units on campus. this project was presented at the HLc annual conference in april.

8r2 - Projections of performance

a number of projections are included in the goals for the current academic year. Examples include: increase federal grant and contract applications by 10-15 percent, implement recommendations from aQIP action project on academic advising, and improve campus safety, security, and rapid-response processes.



EMU’s action project on Quality Service Delivery has led to quality standards for the service-delivery areas of the institution, a generic survey tool to help assess satisfaction, and a toolkit that can be used to improve customer satisfaction in higher education.

8r3 – comparisons of performance this area has not been investigated yet.

8r4 - Evidence of effectiveness

there are a number of new process-improvement teams on campus. the aQIP academic advising action Project has been expanded to a retention team and the balanced Scorecard project has moved from initiation to the implementation stage.

results from the Quality Service and academic advising aQIP project teams have led to changes in the delivery of services to constituents and advising processes. training in the use of the IDEa model and principles of continuous-improvement have been requested by additional departments not previously involved in continuous-improvement efforts, e.g., Physical Plant, career Services, and Leadership and Student Involvement.

based on institutional assessment of previous strategic-planning processes a new planning process has been developed that is coordinated with budgeting and aligns with continuous improvement. Within academic affairs each program and department electronically submits annual plans aligned with the HLc five criteria for accreditation. these plans are aggregated and reviewed, and used in the development of college and divisional plans. currently, similar processes are being initiated for all other divisions.

8I1 – Improvement of current processes

In January 2008, EMU formed a continuous Improvement Operating council that will review continuous-improvement initiatives and seeks to improve these efforts.

8I2 – Setting and communicating targets

EMU is still in the process of setting and communicating targets and is not yet ready to report process improvements in this area.

Category 9: Building Collaborative Relationships


catEgOrY 9: bUILDIng cOLLabOratIvE rELatIOnSHIPS | 60

category 9 building collaborative relationships

9c1 – Key collaborative relationships

a list of collaborative relationships can be found in appendix a, which reflects the breadth and scope of Eastern Michigan University’s connection to, and posi-tive impact upon, its immediate locale, the region, the nation, and the global community. the categories of relationships listed below in Figure 9.1 were identified using the following criteria:• Acollaborativerelationshipmusthavemutual

benefit for both parties.

• Therelationshipmusthavesustainability (be long-term in nature).

• Therelationshipmusthavesignificant impact on the University, the students, and/or the community.

9c2 – relationships support institutional mission

the EMU Mission Statement states, “We extend our commitment beyond the campus boundaries to the wider community through service initiatives and partnerships of mutual interest addressing local, regional, national, and international opportunities and challenges.” EMU continues to maintain and develop new collaborative relationships with key constituents to achieve this goal. While “Helping Students Learn”

Figure 9.1: collaborative relationships

Michigan and Ohio

communities

non-Profit Partners

business collborations

centers and Institutes

K-12

community colleges

advisory boards

Higher Education accreditation & Other

Education associations (HLc-aQIP)

State of Michigan

Discipline/Programmatic accreditations

Eastern Michigan University

city of Ypsilanti



is the core of EMU’s Mission, EMU enhances the quality, depth, and vibrancy of student learning through its fundamental commitments to two other closely related distinctive objectives: enhancing the economic well-being and cultural vitality of its regional community and placing faculty-student partnerships at the center of its engagements with the regional community and its scholarly/creative activity. EMU will continue to embark on a path driven by continuous improvement and to engage various constituent groups in conversations that will help support and identify institutional directions based on changes in the environment of the state and particularly southeastern Michigan.

9P1 – creating, prioritizing, and building external relationships

EMU develops relationships using both formal and informal techniques. Some relationships are of a cooperative nature, building on synergies that exist within the community. Other relationships are established using articulation agreements, written memorandums of understanding, internship and practicum arrangements, and advisory boards and committees. EMU receives many of its students through relationships with feeder community colleges and high schools throughout Michigan, but primarily from the southeastern sector of the state. the Office of community college relations works to enhance the educational transition to EMU for community college students by sharing curricular information and various data to promote a smooth transfer process. the progress of these students is tracked using grades,

gPa, and yearly progress reports, from acceptance to EMU through graduation.

EMU is a national leader in academic Service-Learning, and the aSL office has nurtured many important projects in the community. In aSL projects, a need is assessed, a program designed/implemented, an evaluation/reflection done, and a celebration follows. aSL is part of the University’s general-education requirement – learning beyond the classroom, and aSL fellowships help faculty develop courses that include working with the community.

the key stakeholders with whom EMU has built collaborative relationships are varied. they range from local area chamber of commerce agencies, Washtenaw county’s SParK committee (a Washtenaw workforce-development board), to the Early college alliance, an early college program through which EMU joins with Washtenaw community college and the Washtenaw county Intermediate School District. this alliance serves high school students by providing a mechanism through which they can simultaneously complete high school while earning college credits on the EMU campus. Eastern Michigan University builds and maintains relationships with prospective students both traditional and non-traditional through the interactions shown in Figure 9.2.

advisory boards and committees exist across the University, in academic as well as non-academic units (appendix a). these externally focused groups are utilized for advice and recommendations regarding best practices and program support for the University units. advisory boards serve a wide variety of

Current High School Students

recruiting visits

Explore Eastern

Eastern Fridays

Fast track

SummerQuest

Washtenaw consortium grant

Upward bound

International compact

Transfer Students

•TransferinaDay

•AdvisingatCommunityColleges

•Transfer-StudentsOrientation

•RecruitingVisits

Adult Learners

•ReturntoLearn

•AdultBachelor’sCompletionProgram

Figure 9.2: Student/EMU relationship-building Interactions



purposes, including curricular advice; strengthening collaborative relationships with school districts, community colleges, surrounding cities, non-profit agencies, employers, local and state governments; and fund-raising activities. Each collaborative relationship is cultivated by some unit of the University, and the primary coordination responsibility rests within that unit. colleges, programs, and/or units follow their own guidelines for advisory groups, which are determined by their individual needs and accrediting bodies.

the Office of alumni relations is the coordinating body for all alumni activity and the means by which personal relationships established while attending EMU can be maintained and renewed (http://www.emich.edu/alumni/relations/ ). the alumni Legisla-tive network engages alumni as advocates for the University to communicate with the executive and legislative branches of state government on behalf of the University. Such programs as career connections are networking resources that bring Eastern Michigan University students and alumni together to explore the world of work. the Office of alumni relations conducts a survey annually among more than 7,500 alumni.

Some of EMU’s longest-standing local community activities that have been mutually beneficial and sustainable and have a significant impact for both parties are:

• WashtenawUnitedWayactivitiesandcampaign

• YpsilantiMealsonWheels

• YpsilantiHeritageFestival

• YpsilantiRelayforLife(StudentandStaffTeams)

• InternshipsandPractica

9P2 – Ensuring needs are met

to ensure that the varying needs of those involved in relationships are met, regular communication between University decision-makers, liaisons, and advisory boards is critical. accredited programs are subject to regular reviews by teams or accrediting bodies who review the curriculum and program stan-dards, as well as the outcomes identified for students. EMU has not formally imposed structured feedback cycles; however, these do exist in pockets across the institution. the community college relations office

has college counselor Day and also has an advisory committee that provides input on industry needs, environmental changes, and program and transfer issues of feeder schools. Several colleges and depart-ments at EMU have internal and external specialized accrediting bodies that provide guidelines and help to determine the individual needs of their programs.

9P3 – building and integrating internal relationships

Student representation on key University committees and councils allows students a formalized structure to build relationships with key decision-making groups within the University. For example, the EMU Student Leader group, which is comprised of student repre-sentatives from twelve major student organizations, serves as the Student affairs committee of the board of regents. this group works to define a common stu-dent agenda and serves as an advisory group to the vice President for Student affairs and to the President. this participation by students on University commit-tees, task forces, and advisory boards has provided the University with a means to obtain valuable informa-tion from students on collaborative relationships criti-cal to their educational experience.

another area at Eastern that provides a strong bridge for the academic aspect is continuing Education (cE). the cE department works with every college and with most of the support structures at the institution to provide a cohesive network of services and collabora-tions for both the internal and external communities. Program coordinators and administrators within cE are aware of the capacity, services, and talent at the University and help to bridge those areas to create better synergy.

at EMU, there have also been an increasing number of cross-college and cross-disciplinary programs, all represented and advised by integrated steering committees. these interdisciplinary collaborations, such as Integrated Marketing Strategies, Language and International business, and bioinformatics, to name a few, provide a mechanism for fostering collaborative relationships across campus. additionally, whenever task forces or ad hoc work groups are established (e.g., budget council; aQIP project teams; continuous Improvement Operating



council; Institutional Strategic Planning council), EMU takes deliberate steps to ensure that all key sectors of the University community are represented.

9P4 – Measures of collaborative relationships

the Office of admissions on campus maintains a system of measures for collecting and analyzing data. Some of their key collaborative, external relationships are with community college counselors, high school guidance counselors, embassies, vendors, and overseas advisers. the community college relations office produces a yearly report, “transfer Student Success,” that provides feeder institutions with data on students who transferred and enrolled at EMU. they also have an advisory board that provides input on how to improve processes and systems that affect students transferring to EMU from community colleges and to keep the University abreast of current issues that are of importance to community colleges. the transfer Student Success report is used by the five colleges to inform program and grant development. the five colleges and Halle Library have advisory boards as well, which provide opportunities for insight and advice on what is important to EMU’s constituents. the Office of alumni relations collects such measures as number of gifts, and percentage of giving (Figure 9.3). this data is analyzed and provides valuable information to colleges and departments.

9r1 – results from building collaborative relationships

Some measurable results indicative of key collaborative relationships that exist between EMU and its collaborators are: • ThenumberofHighSchoolCounselorworkshops

increased from 2 in 2006-07 to 5 in 2007-08.

• AlumniAdmissionsRecruitmentTeamvolunteersincreased from 18 in 2006 to 33 in 2007.

• EMUhasreceivedcontinualfundingfrom1999-2011 in federal grants to continue its Upward bound Program.

• TheEarlyCollegeAllianceprogram,apartnershipbetween EMU and the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, has enrolled 139 high school students for free college credit in 2007-08.

• CommunityCollegeArticulationAgreementsincreased from 45 (2004-05) to 74 (2007-08).

• Thenumberofstudentteachersplacedinschoolsincreased from 1,294 in 2003-04 to 1,347 in 2005-06.

• AsaresultofEMU’snewEagleCarddiscountprogram, more than 50 local businesses now collaborate with EMU to offer discounts to students, faculty, and staff.

• EMU’sstudentchapterofRelayforLife(2007)raised$33,315 through 400 participants and 35 teams, a 12 percent increase.

• TheEasternLeaders,comprisedofEMU,business,and education leaders, meets quarterly to plan collaborative projects.

9r2 – results comparisons

EMU has not defined a process for this and is not yet ready to report process improvements in this area.

9I1 - Improving processes for building collaborative relationships

EMU is still in the process of defining its processes in building collaborative relationships and is not yet ready to report process improvements in this area.

9I2 Setting targets for improvement

EMU is not yet ready to report in this area.

Figure 9.3: alumni gifts

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Y.t.D.

number of gifts 5,551 6,005 5,563 5,721 5,861 4,296

average gift in Dollars $167 $301 $315 $343 $191 $234

Percentage of alumni giving 4.3 4.5 4 4.07 4.07 2.96

AppendicesList of Abbreviations


aPPEnDIx a | 64

acc

red

itin

g a

gen

cies

acc

red

itin

g a

gen

cies

(co

nt.)

K-1

2 Pa

rtn

ers

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e Pa

rtn

ers

aa

cSb

: ass

oci

atio

n to

ad

van

ce c

olle

gia

te

Sch

oo

ls o

f bu

sin

ess

acc

red

itat

ion

bo

ard

for E

ng

inee

rin

g a

nd

te

chn

olo

gy

acc

red

itat

ion

co

mm

issi

on

for P

rog

ram

s in

H

osp

ital

ity

ad

min

istr

atio

n

acc

red

itat

ion

co

un

cil f

or O

ccu

pat

ion

al t

her

apy

Edu

cati

on

acc

red

itat

ion

of a

thle

tic

trai

nin

g E

du

cati

on

am

eric

an b

ar a

sso

ciat

ion

am

eric

an c

hem

ical

So

ciet

y

am

eric

an c

ou

nci

l of c

on

stru

ctio

n E

du

cati

on

am

eric

an M

usi

c th

erap

y a

sso

ciat

ion

am

eric

an P

sych

olo

gic

al a

sso

ciat

ion

(aPa

)

am

eric

an S

pee

ch a

nd

Hea

rin

g a

sso

ciat

ion

co

mm

issi

on

on

acc

red

itat

ion

of a

llied

Hea

lth

Ed

uca

tio

n P

rog

ram

s

co

mm

issi

on

on

acc

red

itat

ion

for D

iete

tics

Ed

uca

tio

n o

f th

e a

mer

ican

Die

teti

c a

sso

ciat

ion

co

mm

issi

on

on

co

lleg

iate

nu

rsin

g E

du

cati

on

(c

cn

E)

co

un

cil f

or a

ccre

dit

atio

n o

f co

un

selin

g a

nd

r

elat

ed E

du

cati

on

Pro

gra

ms

co

un

cil o

n E

du

cati

on

for t

he

Dea

f

co

un

cil f

or E

xcep

tio

nal

ch

ildre

n

co

un

cil f

or I

nte

rio

r Des

ign

acc

red

itat

ion

co

un

cil o

n In

teri

or D

esig

n

co

un

cil o

n S

oci

al W

ork

Ed

uca

tio

n

Mic

hig

an a

sso

ciat

ion

of c

olle

ges

of n

urs

ing

Mic

hig

an D

epar

tmen

t o

f Ed

uca

tio

n

nat

ion

al a

ccre

dit

atio

n a

gen

cy fo

r clin

ical

La

bo

rato

ry S

cien

ces

nat

ion

al a

sso

ciat

ion

of I

nd

ust

rial

tec

hn

olo

gy

nat

ion

al a

sso

ciat

ion

of S

cho

ols

of M

usi

c

nat

ion

al a

sso

ciat

ion

of S

cho

ols

of P

ub

lic a

ffai

rs &

a

dm

inis

trat

ion

nat

ion

al a

sso

ciat

ion

of S

cho

ols

of D

ance

nat

ion

al a

sso

ciat

ion

of S

po

rt a

nd

Ph

ysic

al

Edu

cati

on

nat

ion

al b

usi

nes

s Ed

uca

tio

n a

sso

ciat

ion

nat

ion

al c

om

mis

sio

n o

n O

rth

oti

cs a

nd

Pr

ost

het

ics

Edu

cati

on

nat

ion

al c

ou

nci

l fo

r acc

red

itat

ion

of t

each

er

Edu

cati

on

nat

ion

al c

ou

nci

l fo

r Pre

serv

atio

n E

du

cati

on

nat

ion

al S

ecu

rity

ag

ency

the

text

ile In

stit

ute

Inc.

by

roy

al c

har

ter 1

925

Un

ited

Kin

gd

om

aca

dem

y fo

r bu

sin

ess

and

tec

hn

olo

gy

an

n a

rbo

r Lea

rnin

g c

om

mu

nit

y c

har

ter

Sch

oo

l

an

n a

rbo

r Pu

blic

Sch

oo

ls

Edis

on

Oak

lan

d a

cad

emy

ch

arte

r Sch

oo

l

gau

dio

r aca

dem

y c

har

ter S

cho

ol

gen

esee

Inte

rmed

iate

Sch

oo

l Dis

tric

t

gra

nd

bla

nc

aca

dem

y

ch

arte

r Sch

oo

l

gre

at L

akes

aca

dem

y c

har

ter S

cho

ol

Ho

pe

aca

dem

y c

har

ter S

cho

ol

Was

hte

naw

Inte

rmed

iate

Sch

oo

l Dis

tric

t

Yp

sila

nti

Pu

blic

Sch

oo

ls

Will

ow

ru

n H

igh

Sch

oo

l (D

cI)

Livo

nia

Pu

blic

Sch

oo

ls (

Wc

)

Un

iver

sity

of M

ich

igan

(W

c)

Yp

sila

nti

Hig

h S

cho

ol (

Dc

I) (c

Ma

) (v

ISIO

n)

Eric

kso

n E

lem

enta

ry (

vIS

IOn

) (a

r)

Sch

oo

l fo

r th

e D

eaf a

nd

blin

d –

Sp

arta

nb

urg

, Sc

(v

ISIO

n)

Was

hte

naw

co

un

ty H

ead

Sta

rt –

Y

psi

lan

ti (

vIS

IOn

)

Perr

y n

urs

ery

– Y

psi

lan

ti (

vIS

IOn

)

Del

ta c

olle

ge

gra

nd

rap

ids

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e

Hen

ry F

ord

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e

Jack

son

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e

Kel

log

g c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Lan

sin

g c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Mac

om

b c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Mo

nro

e c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Mo

tt c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Oak

lan

d c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Sch

oo

lcra

ft c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

Was

hte

naw

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e

Way

ne

co

un

ty c

om

mu

nit

y c

olle

ge

ap

pen

dix

a: a

ccre

dit

ing

ag

enci

es, a

dvi

sory

bo

ard

s, an

d c

olla

bo

rati

ve P

artn

ers


aPPEnDIx a | 65

EMU

cen

ters

an

d In

stit

ute

sn

on

-Pro

fit P

artn

ers

ad

viso

ry b

oar

ds

bu

sin

ess

co

llab

ora

tio

ns

the

Pro

fess

ion

al E

du

cati

on

cen

ter

cen

ter f

or a

cad

emic

Ser

vice

-Lea

rnin

g

cen

ter f

or c

om

mu

nit

y b

uild

ing

an

d c

ivic

En

gag

emen

t

cen

ter f

or E

ntr

epre

neu

rsh

ip

cen

ter f

or O

rgan

izat

ion

al r

isk

red

uct

ion

- H

ealt

h, a

nd

Saf

ety

cen

ter f

or P

rod

uct

res

earc

h a

nd

Dev

elo

pm

ent

cen

ter f

or Q

ual

ity

cen

ter f

or r

egio

nal

an

d n

atio

nal

Sec

uri

ty

co

atin

gs

res

earc

h In

stit

ute

Inst

itu

te fo

r geo

spat

ial r

esea

rch

an

d E

du

cati

on

Inst

itu

te fo

r th

e St

ud

y o

f ch

ildre

n, F

amili

es &

c

om

mu

nit

ies

Inst

itu

te fo

r Lan

gu

age

Info

rmat

ion

an

d

tech

no

log

y (IL

It)

Smal

l bu

sin

ess

and

tec

hn

olo

gy

Dev

elo

pm

ent

cen

ter

text

iles

res

earc

h a

nd

tra

inin

g In

stit

ute

cen

ter f

or t

ech

no

log

y an

d a

dap

tive

Ed

uca

tio

n

Hel

p-S

ou

rce

Yp

sila

nti

are

a c

om

mu

nit

y Fo

un

dat

ion

Mic

hig

an a

EYc

Un

ited

au

to W

ork

ers

(Ua

W)

Lead

ersh

ip Y

psi

lan

ti

ara

b c

om

mu

nit

y c

ente

r fo

r Eco

no

mic

&

Soci

al S

ervi

ces

Was

hte

naw

co

un

ty U

nit

ed W

ay

Was

hte

naw

Eco

no

mic

clu

b

Yp

sila

nti

Mea

ls o

n W

hee

ls

Yp

sila

nti

ch

amb

er o

f co

mm

erce

Envi

ron

men

tal r

esea

rch

Inst

itu

te o

f M

ich

igan

East

ern

Sch

ola

rs P

rog

ram

tran

siti

on

to t

each

ing

gra

nt

wit

h F

lint

Pub

lic S

cho

ols

St. J

ose

ph

Mer

cy H

osp

ital

Foo

te H

osp

ital

am

eric

orp

s Pr

og

ram

am

eric

an r

ed c

ross

KIa

r K

eep

ing

Imag

inat

ion

aliv

e th

ru

rea

din

g

Foo

d g

ath

erer

s

HIv

/aID

S r

eso

urc

e c

ente

r (H

ar

c)

East

ern

Ech

o

n.a

.a.c

.P.

MIS

ca

Urb

an t

each

ers

ad

viso

ry b

oar

d

Pars

on

s c

ente

r ad

viso

ry b

oar

d

no

rth

wes

t a

ctiv

ity

cen

ter a

dvi

sory

co

un

cil

clin

ical

res

earc

h a

dm

in. P

rog

ram

ad

viso

ry

bo

ard

co

nti

nu

ing

Ed

uca

tio

n a

dvi

sory

co

un

cil

co

mm

un

ity

co

lleg

e r

elat

ion

s a

dvi

sory

c

om

mit

tee

cen

ter f

or I

nte

rnet

tec

hn

olo

gy

in E

du

cati

on

(c

ItE)

ad

viso

ry b

oar

d

Eld

er Q

ues

t St

eeri

ng

co

mm

itte

e

Sum

mer

Qu

est

Stee

rin

g c

om

mit

tee

Frie

nd

s o

f th

e EM

U L

ibra

ry

Lib

rary

ad

viso

ry c

ou

nci

l

afr

ican

am

eric

an S

tud

ies

Dep

t.

art

Dep

t.

bio

log

y D

ept.

ch

emis

try

Dep

t.

co

mm

un

icat

ion

Dep

t.

co

mp

ute

r Sci

ence

Dep

t.

Eco

no

mic

s D

ept.

Eng

lish

Dep

t.

Fore

ign

Lan

gu

ages

Dep

t.

geo

gra

ph

y an

d g

eolo

gy

Dep

t.

His

tory

an

d P

hilo

sop

hy

Dep

t.

Mat

hem

atic

s D

ept.

Mu

sic

and

Dan

ce D

ept.

Phys

ics

and

ast

ron

om

y D

ept.

Polit

ical

Sci

ence

Dep

t.

Psyc

ho

log

y D

ept.

Soci

olo

gy,

an

thro

po

log

y an

d c

rim

ino

log

y D

ept.

Wo

men

’s St

ud

ies

am

eric

an a

xle

& M

anu

fact

uri

ng

bo

rgW

arn

er a

uto

mo

tive

ch

rysl

er c

orp

ora

tio

n

co

ca-c

ola

Del

l

Det

roit

Die

sel

Det

roit

Med

ical

cen

ter

Envi

ron

men

tal S

yste

ms

res

earc

h

Inst

itu

te, I

nc.

Ford

Mo

tor c

om

pan

y

gen

eral

Mo

tors

gFS

(go

rdo

n F

oo

d S

ervi

ce)

Inte

rnat

ion

al t

ruck

& E

ng

ine

co

rpo

rati

on

Lear

co

rpo

rati

on

Pap

ercl

ip c

om

mu

nic

atio

ns

Pfize

r

Syn

ko a

nd

ass

oci

ates

tcF

ban

k

trib

un

e M

edia

Ser

vice

s (M

ct

new

s W

ire)

trW

au

tom

oti

ve

vis

teo

n c

orp

ora

tio

n

Yaza

ki n

ort

h a

mer

ica

ap

pen

dix

a: a

ccre

dit

ing

ag

enci

es, a

dvi

sory

bo

ard

s, an

d c

olla

bo

rati

ve P

artn

ers

(co

nti

nu

ed)


aPPEnDIx b | 66

ap

pen

dix

b: O

rgan

izat

ion

al c

har

t

CIOC


abbrEvIatIOnS | 67

List of abbreviations

aa academic affairsaaUP american association of University ProfessorsacE american council on EducationacHa american college Health associationact american college testingaFScME american Federation of State, county, and Municipal EmployeesaHr academic Human resources (Faculty, Full-time Lecturers, academic administrative Positions)aPa academic Programs abroadaQIP academic Quality Improvement ProgramaSL academic Service-LearningbLr business and Labor reportscaS council for the advancement of Standards in Higher EducationcE continuing EducationcHHS college of Health and Human ServicescI continuous ImprovementcIO chief Information OfficercIOc continuous Improvement Operating councilcIPO continuous Improvement and Planning OfficecIrP cooperative Institutional research ProgramcOE college of EducationDED Departmental Evaluation DocumentDoIt Division of Information technologyDPS Department of Public SafetyEbI Educational benchmarking, Inc.EMU Eastern Michigan UniversityEMU-aaUP Eastern Michigan University - association of american University Professors EMU-Ft Eastern Michigan University - Federation of teachersErP Enterprise-Wide resource and PlanningESL English as a Second LanguageFar Faculty activity reportFDc Faculty Development centerFrF Faculty research FellowsFSt Functional Security teamFtE Full-time EquivalentgE general EducationgPa grade-Point averageHa Hiring authorityHErI Higher Education research InstituteHLc Higher Learning commissionHr Human resources (all staff positions and all administrative positions outside academic affairs)IDEa Identify, Develop, Evaluate, act: continuous Improvement Model at EMUIPEDS Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data SystemIPr Integrated Program review (and continuous Improvement cycle)IrIM Institutional research and Information Management


abbrEvIatIOnS | 68

ISbc Institutional Strategic budget councilISPc Institutional Strategic Planning councilKPI Key Performance IndicatorLgbt Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgenderMac Mid-american conferencenca north central associationncaa national collegiate athletic associationncatE national council for accreditation of teacher EducationnEaS national Employee attitudes SurveynSSE national Survey of Student EngagementODbc Open Data base connectivityOrD Office of research and DevelopmentPaSS Promote academic Survival SuccessPMP Personal Mastery ProgramPPE Periodic Performance EvaluationPrQ Position-review QuestionnaireSat Scholastic aptitude testScH Student credit HourScOt Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, threatsSEEUS Student Eyes and Ears for University SafetySIP Summer Incentive ProgramSLE Student Learning Evaluation (in Student affairs Program)SOc Strategic Operations councilSOtL Scholarship of teaching and LearningSSaS Student Satisfaction with administrative ServicesSSI Student Satisfaction Inventory (noel-Levitz)StEEP Social, technological, Economic, Environmental, PoliticalUaW United auto WorkersUbc University budget councilvISIOn volunteers Incorporating Service Into Our neighborhoodsvPn virtual Private networksWcc Washtenaw community collegeYFcY Your First college Year (Survey)

Eastern Michigan University Office of the Provost

106 Welch Hall Ypsilanti, MI 48197

734.487.3200www.emich.edu

2008 Eastern Michigan University Systems Portfolio for ... · EaStErn MIcHIgan UnIvErSItY aQIP...

Documents

Transcript of 2008 Eastern Michigan University Systems Portfolio for ... · EaStErn MIcHIgan UnIvErSItY aQIP...