Appendices

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Theme 1 -- Advancing Liberal Education in the 21st Century

Appendix 1A -- Definition of the Four Core Competencies

Appendix 1B -- 10-Year Enrollment Management Plan

Appendix 1C -- Charges to the Dean’s Taskforce on Assessing the Core Curriculum

Appendix 2: Theme 2 -- Becoming a Nationally Recognized Research Institution

Appendix 2A -- Evaluative Agencies and Tools

Appendix 2B -- A&S STEM Departments: Five-Year Plan to Increase Research Expenditures in the College of Arts & Sciences

Appendix 2C -- Proposed Guidelines for Tenure

Appendix 2D -- Determining Resources Needed for New Faculty in the Sciences

Appendix 2E -- Masters Programs Independent of Doctoral Programs

Appendix 2F -- Assessing Masters Programs

Appendix 3: Theme 3 -- Strengthening Community Engagement

Appendix 3A -- Considerations for the Council on Informed Engagement

Appendix 3B -- Study Abroad and Related Experiences

Appendix 3C -- Principles for Service Learning Courses

Appendix 3D -- Global Coursework on the Baylor Campus

Appendix 3E -- Council for Informed Engagement: Possible Activities Related to Global Education

Appendix 4: Theme 4 -- Investing in the Health Sciences

Appendix 4 -- Creating a Faculty Structure for Clinical, Research, and Joint Appointments

--------------------------------------------------

Appendix 1

Theme 1 -- Advancing Liberal Education in the 21st Century

--------------------

Appendix 1A

Definition of the Four Core Competencies

(These descriptions are taken from the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education’s page, “General Educational Outcomes.")

COMMUNICATION

Communication means not only speaking and listening, but also writing, persuading, and knowing how to adapt communication to a specific audience. Success in life is greatly influenced by one’s ability to speak and write persuasively. All students at Baylor are required to complete courses in writing and speaking, and are expected to use these courses to strengthen their ability to communicate with elegance and power.

CRITICAL REASONING

Critical reasoning is the ability to calculate accurately, evaluate evidence for truth and validity, justify conclusions with data, and reason through problems to arrive at solutions that are rooted in fact and truth. Science and mathematics requirements are designed to strengthen one’s ability to calculate, reason, and think critically. Many other courses, however, also nurture the ability to reason in both theoretic and practical ways. As significant as it is, the ability to reason must also be viewed within the context of community. At Baylor, we want students to learn to reason not just for themselves, but for the communities they serve.

CIVIC LEADERSHIP

Baylor graduates should become civic leaders in whatever field they enter. Civic leaders are the kind of people who can build consensus among diverse populations and then lead communities toward the ideals they uphold. Whether the profession is medicine, engineering, business, law, or teaching, communities need professionals who can provide civic leadership by placing the needs of communities above their own. The ideal of civic leadership is woven throughout Baylor’s curriculum, but it is particularly evident within social science and humanities courses. Baylor students are taught that they are acquiring knowledge not just for themselves, but also for the broader goal of building communities that flourish.

CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE

Baylor students have the opportunity to explore the subject of faith throughout their undergraduate experience, but one way in which Baylor promotes Christian perspective is through our core requirements. Chapel and two required religion courses have been part of Baylor's curriculum since the University's founding more than one hundred sixty-five years ago. Courses in Christian heritage and scripture provide students with the knowledge necessary to understand the Christian narrative, reflect on how this narrative has shaped human history, and consider how Christ’s message relates to each of us personally. These core requirements offer students the opportunity to grow in their faith and reflect on God’s calling for their lives.

--------------------

Appendix 1B

10-Year Enrollment Management Plan

Vision Statement

By 2022,

Baylor University’s College of Arts & Sciences

intends to

enroll, retain, and graduate

its undergraduate students

at levels comparable to National Universities

ranked 45-50

in US News & World Report1.

Introduction

The College of Arts & Sciences, the oldest and largest academic unit of Baylor University, retains central responsibility and leadership for the institution’s mission "to educate men and women for worldwide leadership and service by integrating academic excellence and Christian commitment within a caring community."

This commitment is realized primarily through two obligations. First, the College provides general education and electives for more than 12,000 undergraduates in eight of the University’s schools and colleges. Over one-fourth of the courses taken by undergraduates pursuing degrees outside of the College are taken within the College. Second, the College provides baccalaureate programs for over 6,500 undergraduate majors in the College of Arts and Sciences. Currently, the College offers over 75 undergraduate programs of study in 27 academic departments which house over 460 full-time faculty members and 144 staff members. The College awards over 1,300 baccalaureate degrees annually, approximately one-half of all undergraduate degrees.

By offering classes and degrees in the sciences, social sciences, humanities, and selected professional areas, the College fulfills its principal obligation to provide liberal education to future leaders in America and the world. Students who are awarded degrees from the College meet the following competencies: knowledge of human culture and the natural world, intellectual and practical skills, individual and social responsibility, and integrative learning. Baylor was one of only 16 universities nationwide to receive an "A" from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni in a report that gauges an institution’s commitment to liberal education. During the 2011 Strategic Planning Process of Baylor, one of the principle themes that emerged was liberal education and the core curriculum: "[t]he group documents voiced strong support for Baylor’s continued excellence in liberal education and enhancement of the Core Curriculum" with “the consensus opinion . . . that Baylor’s mission should not merely be to train but to educate the whole person."2 The engendering of liberally educated graduates who integrate faith-based commitments with civic engagement and community service, provide, perhaps, the nation’s best hope for the preservation and transformation of society, for the continuation of democratic processes which contribute to peace and justice, and for environmental preservation and sustainability in the 21st century. The stakes could not be higher for our nation and for our world.

The undergraduate enrollment goals and strategies of the College for the next 10 years are based on multiple vision proposals submitted in the spring of 2011, including those of by the Dean, academic departments, programs, and administrative offices. Strategic details rely on the experience and results of plans, programs, and best practices initiated and tested by the Retention Taskforce of the College of Arts & Sciences (2008-2012) in the areas of recruiting, freshmen engagement, sophomore engagement, transfer engagement, and suspensions.

The Retention Taskforce has met two of its three primary goals -- a four-year graduation rate of 54% (now at 59.5%) and a freshman retention rate of 86% (now at 85.5%). The committee has concluded that the College has now maximized its current resources and refined its best practices to full strategic advantage for undergraduate retention. Further improvement will only occur through major resource allocation and strategic internal restructuring.

_________________________________________________

A&S 2022 Enrollment Goals

1. Enroll a freshman population that includes 50% high-ability students.3

2. Retain 90% of freshmen.

3. Achieve an 82% six-year graduation rate.

A Statement on Goals and Baylor’s Strategic Vision

The three goals support Aspirational Statement One of Baylor’s new strategic vision: Baylor will be a place where academic excellence and transformational educational experiences ignite leadership potential. "Over the course of our history, Baylor’s graduates have held leadership positions across a broad spectrum of fields including law, business, industry, the arts, education, religion, medicine, and public service."4 Baylor’s impact on the state and the world can be enhanced if the College of Arts & Sciences’ goals are met.

While the University fell short of its Vision 2012 objective to become a Top 50 institution by 2012, the goals which were achieved from 2002 to 2012 have provided a platform to propel the University into top tier status. A Top 50 ranking (based on U.S. News and World Report metrics) is achievable if the University is able to move forward on multiple fronts, but we cannot meet this goal without extending our achievements in what is often perceived as a major strength -- undergraduate education, particularly in the University’s largest academic unit -- the College of Arts & Sciences. More than 40 percent of the USNWR ranking is determined by measures of undergraduate education: freshman retention rate (4%), graduation rate (16%), graduation rate performance (7.5%) and student selectivity (15%).

USNWR chart (resized)

________________________________________________

Initiatives to Achieve Goals

While each strategic initiative moves us in measureable ways towards our goals, three initiatives are foundational to success:

(1) In concert with Admissions Services, shape the size and profile of the incoming A&S freshman class;

(2) Reorganize academic advisement in the College of Arts & Sciences; and

(3) Appoint a Director of Enrollment Management for A&S.

These three foundational initiatives support Aspirational Statement 5 of Baylor’s New Strategic Plan: Baylor will be a place where value generated by and derived from a Baylor experience is supported through a diversity of revenues and judicious stewardship of our resources. Specifically, we note the call to: "increase the degree to which the cost of a Baylor education is met by endowed scholarships, discover new sources of program support, and identify improvements in operational efficiencies."5

Without implementation and execution of these three initiatives, the College’s student quality, freshman retention rate, and graduation rates should still improve incrementally but our enrollment goals for 2022 will not be reached. If A&S enrollment goals are not met, it will not be possible for the University to reach Top 50 status as defined by US News and World Report by 2022.

Three Foundational Initiatives:

Shape the size and profile of the incoming A&S freshman class.

By 2014, the College, in concert with Admissions Services, will shape the size and profile of the A&S freshman class.

Size. While the College’s 2011 undergraduate population, currently at 6,5146 is near capacity,7, some departments have limited ability to increase their undergraduate populations. Some, particularly the larger departments, are oversubscribed. For faculty to offer outstanding teaching and mentoring to undergraduates while engaged in research and creative productions, manageable course loads, class sizes, and advising loads must be maintained.8 Unplanned growth is just as detrimental to the College’s educational enterprise as abrupt declines in student population.

Profile. Guided by the unique needs and aspirations of each of its departments and programs, the College will advise and assist Admission Services in recruiting students who have the appropriate interests, compatibilities, and aptitudes for success in the College’s departments and programs. This effort will be leveraged as the College intensifies collaborative projects with Student Financial Services, Development, and the Provost Office to develop "boutique" scholarships (e.g., Baylor Squared Dual Admission Program, Baylor to Baylor Law Dual Admissions Program, Huebler Scholarship for Ministry Students in Religion, etc.) for targeted student populations for A&S departments and programs.

Distribution of Largest Majors--Freshman chart (resized)

Distribution of Largest Majors--Undergraduates chart (resized)

1. Reorganize academic advisement in the College of Arts & Sciences by 2014.

Present. The College reaffirms its current policy to determine the advisor of record for all A&S majors. The College also reaffirms its requirement for mandated advisement for all freshmen and sophomores.9

New Policy. Beginning in summer of 2014, A&S students will be assigned one professional advisor for their freshman and sophomore years and one faculty advisor for their junior and senior years.10

Exemptions. A&S Chairs or program directors may request an exemption to this policy. Exemptions may be granted by the Dean for up to three years at a time for departments or programs which wish to appoint their faculty advisors as advisors of record for their freshman and/or sophomores. It is the responsibility of the Dean’s Office to coordinate training, approve compensation, and monitor the quality of service of the faculty advisors who receive stipends.

Secondary Advisement. Many students have secondary advisement from ancillary programs (e.g., PreHealth Sciences, PreLaw Program, BIC, Honors, Student-Athlete Services, Academic Support, OALA). Where conflicting choices arise over course selection or sequencing, the advisor of record’s guidance should always be consulted and entered into UAS "Advise Notes."

Advisor of Record Assignments chart (resized)

2. Appoint a Director of Enrollment Management for A&S

By summer of 2013, appoint a director to coordinate recruitment, enrollment, retention, academic advisement, degree planning, and assessment. The director will coordinate all effort towards the achievement of the enrollment goals for 2022. A job description is included as an addendum.

Some of Baylor’s schools (e.g., School of Education and School of Computer Science and Engineering) already have professional staff positions dedicated to enrollment management. The size alone of the College would indicate a need for a full-time professional manager of this complex task.

______________________________________________________________________________

Other Initiatives

Other Initiatives for Goal One (Size & Profile of Freshman Class):

1. Impose policies to manage enrollments in BIO and PSY/NSC beginning in fall 2013. Since one-third to one-half of freshmen declare a Pre-Health care intention, the departments of BIO and PSY/NSC are oversubscribed with majors.11 Nearly one-half of freshmen in A&S begin in BIO, CHE, and PSY/NSC. Data indicate that freshmen in these departments retain at a slightly lower rate than other students in A&S.12 Limiting enrollment in these majors to students who have a higher probability of success will have the following positive results: (1) students lacking the academic background for medical school and/or sciences will become aware of their academic aptitudes early in their academic careers, (2) less qualified pre-health care students may choose to attend other Universities, and (3) these departments will be better able to provide advising and mentoring services to those majors who remain.

  • (1) Beginning in fall 2011, stricter prerequisites were imposed for introductory BIO and CHE courses.13

  • (2) Also beginning in fall 2011, students declaring PSY/NSC as a major may not continue as a major if they fail to pass two courses in PSY or NSC, or if they fail to pass a course in PSY/NSC for a second time. All majors who fail one class now meet with the undergraduate program director, and continued progress is monitored closely.

  • (3) By fall of 2012, students will not be able to declare BIO as a major until completing either BIO 1305 or BIO 1306 with at least a C.

  • (4) By fall of 2013, students will not be able to declare a BA major in PSY until they earn a grade of C or better in some combination of PSY 1305, NSC 1306/1106, PSY 2402, and PSY 2405, with a mean GPA in those classes of 2.25; Students will not be able to declare a BS in PSY or NSC until: (1) they earn a Math score of =>550 SAT (=>24 ACT) or a grade of B in MTH 1304; (2) they earn a grade of C or better in some combination of NSC 1306/1106, BIO 1305/1306 and CHE 1301/1302, with a mean GPA in those classes of 2.25.14

  • (5) Monitor closely the enrollment shifts to other departments (e.g., CHE, Medical Humanities) as a result of the limits on BIO and PSC/NSC.

2. Impose limits on enrollments in Medical Humanities by 2014.

3. Continue current policies of limited enrollment in THEA, ART, and MUS.

<4. By 2013, in concert with Admissions Services, determine the number of Summer Study students (formerly called provisional students) admitted to A&S.

5. Expand Baylor Squared Dual Admission Program: Currently, Baylor College of Medicine accepts four students a year into this early admissions option which allows students to advance to the Baylor College of Medicine upon graduation from Baylor University. Expand admissions to 15 by 2014. Host 150 HS seniors on campus each year to compete for these 15 scholarships. The enrollment yield on this event is currently 30%.

6. Begin Baylor to Baylor Law Dual Admissions Program. Establish an early admissions option with the Baylor Law School similar to the Baylor Squared Dual Admission Program. Initially, three scholarships would be offered beginning in fall 2012. By 2017 offer 10. Host 150 HS seniors on campus each year to compete for these scholarships. A 50% enrollment yield of students who compete would be a realistic goal; this would produce a net of 50 high-ability students.

7. Participating A&S departments, in concert with Spiritual Life, International Education, Development, and Admissions Services, will develop academic scholarships for rising sophomores participating in summer mission programs. Award scholarships to 100 high-ability high school seniors accepted to Baylor. The scholarship would be applied during summer following the successful completion of the freshman year. Scholarship includes full Baylor tuition for three hours of summer school, plus a $1,000 stipend for a Baylor-sponsored mission trip. Need approximately $2 million endowed monies to cover this.15 Not only would this program aid in recruiting high-ability students but should further freshmen retention.

8. Begin Baylor to Truett Dual Admissions Program. Establish scholarships and early seminary admissions program for high-ability ministry students by 2013.

9. Support and help facilitate the "secondary major" initiative of the Provost. Offering a catalogue of "secondary majors" is an important recruiting tool for high-ability students who have broad academic and vocational interests.

Other Initiatives for Goal Two (Retention):

1. By 2013, review and revise A&S departmental job search strategies in order to promote the recruitment of underutilized minorities and women faculty and staff into hiring pools. Review and revise A&S departmental strategies to promote the retention of underrepresented minority and women faculty and staff. The fall 2011 minority undergraduate freshmen population in A&S is 37.86%, yet our full-time faculty minority population in A&S is 12.79% and our full-time minority staff population is 16.27%. Studies have shown that minority students retain at higher levels on campuses where there are comparable minority faculty and staff populations.[i] While it is unlawful to use "race" as a factor in hiring, a goal of increasing the number of minority candidates in applicant pools is legitimate and desirable.

2. In concert with New Student Programs, expand Summer Orientation with an emphasis on academic transition: (1) Offer Program-specific Line Camps (e.g., Pre-Med, Pre-Law, Ministry, BIOS [Biology Intensive Orientation for Students], Ministry) by 2014. (2) Offer STEM Bridge program for first generation and minority students in the sciences to introduce them to the rigor of college academics.16 (3) Offer scholarships for underrepresented students to attend Line Camp.

3. Maximize New Student Experience (NSE) courses by

  • (a) offering a 1-hour NSE course by 2015 to replace one of the four required HP courses all A&S majors must take. This 1-hour course will replace U 1000.

  • (b) providing peer mentors for most FASs; FYSs; ELGs; LLCs courses by 2015. Students taking these courses will be exempt from the 1-hour NSE course. NSEs include: U1000; FASs; FYSs; ELGs; LLCs; Special sections of general education classes for majors (e.g., REL 1310 for REL majors, ENG 1302 for ENG majors); Special sections of general education classes for pre-law students (e.g., PSC 2302, PHI 1305); Special sections of BIO or CHE for pre-med students (e.g., BIO 1305).
  • (c) requiring all students at Baylor interested in having a Pre-Health care designation to participate in either the Pre-Health Care Line Camp or an expanded-version of the 1-hour NSE course by 2014. Once a student has completed either of these, he or she may "declare" Pre-Med, Pre-Dent, etc. and receive full benefits from PreHealth Sciences Office.

4. Offering at least one FAS in all A&S departments by 2016. Some FASs (e.g., subs for REL 1350, ENG 1304 would be offered in the spring of the freshmen year).

5. Offering GESMOs (General Education section for Majors-only): ENG 1302, HIS 1305, JOU 1303, SPA 1401, PSC 1305, PSY 1305, and REL 1310. Course size would be capped at 30. Students would meet one extra hour per week with a student mentor to cover U1000 materials. (Note: these courses would need two student mentors to cover the 30 students.) Faculty would devote part of one class period to introduce students to the professional student organization for majors.

6. Offer bridge course in BIO similar to CHE 1300. Offer a pilot in 2014 and, if successful, expand by 2016.

Other Initiatives for Goal Three (Graduation)

1. By 2015, pre-register all A&S freshmen in 10 hours of core 1000-level courses required for any degree at the University before students arrive for summer orientation. Freshmen will be required to register for the following courses during their first semester: ENG 1302, REL 1310, a mathematics course (3 hr), an HP (1 hr), University 1000, and Chapel.17 Furthermore, there will be a recommendation that foreign language be started in the freshman year. Exceptions may be granted by the advisor of record with guidance from the Dean and Department Chairs.

Pre-registration may:

  • (1) improve the "yield" on the class since students would be given their schedule in April (before HS graduation),
  • (2) allow for greater efficiency in scheduling general education classes for students for the freshman and sophomore years
  • (3) re-emphasize the importance of general education -- particularly writing, mathematics, Christian education, health, and spiritual formation -- as the foundation of the Baylor University degree,
  • (4) enable the Success Center to better coordinate SI sessions and tutoring to meet targeted needs during the freshman year, and
  • (5) enable departments to better coordinate tutoring for "gateway" courses.

2. Create a Degree Plan division of the A&S Advising office. A&S’s 1,700 juniors will be required to have one meeting with a planner during their junior year (fall or spring) by 2014-15 school year.18

3. Establish a Pre-Law Center by 2016.

  • (1) Change Pre-Law Coordinator position from quarter-time to half-time appointment by 2013.
  • (2) Hire a full-time Pre-Law director and administrative assistant by 2016.
  • (3) Establish a Pre-Law LLC by 2018.

4. Upgrade service provided by faculty advisors.

  • (1) Upgrade training for faculty advisors. Training should focus on advising, mentoring, internship, and placement issues.
  • (2) The Dean’s Office will evaluate and monitor the quality of advisement by faculty advisors who receive stipends.
  • (3) By 2015, require that all juniors and seniors have an advising appointment before registering. In some large departments (BIO, CHE, PSY-NSC), it will be necessary to hire lecturers who devote one half to three-quarter time to advising.
  • (4) By 2015, conduct a study to explore the possibility of imbedding specialist professional advisors in large departments in order to better coordinate departmental advising needs.

Addendum: Draft Job Description for Director of Enrollment Management, College of Arts and Sciences, March 28, 2012

Ad hoc Committee for Enrollment Management, College of Arts & Sciences members: Blake Burleson, Carrolle Kamperman, Viola Osborn, Frank Mathis, Rich Sanker, David Schlueter, Frank Shannon (ex officio), Sinda Vanderpool(ex officio), Dianna Vitanza, Chuck Weaver.

Supporting Documents:

An Initiative for Second Majors

Baylor University Retention Study, Summer 2010

Biology Intensive Orientation for Students (BIOS)

College of Arts and Science Retention Plan, 2008-2012

Health Sciences in the College of Arts and Sciences

New Student Experience Components

Prehealth Sciences Program Assessment Report

Proposal for Pre-Law Living-Learning Center

Recommendations, Retention of Underrepresented Student Group Ad Hoc Committee

Strategic Input Report, 2011 Baylor University Strategic Planning Process

Strategic Plan Proposal, Office of Prehealth Studies

Summary of A&S Departments Assessments of capacity

University Advising Proposal, College of Arts and Sciences (CASA)

"Vision Statement: College of Arts and Sciences" (includes appendices with Humanities, Sciences, and Social Sciences proposals)

--------------------

Endnotes:

1In 2011, Baylor is ranked 75.

2Synopsis of Group Documents Input, 2011 Strategic Planning Process, p. 9.

3High Ability students have an SAT comprehensive score >=1300 or an ACT comprehensive score >= 30. Based on the distribution of SAT total scores for first-time freshmen in Arts & Sciences for the fall of 2011, we estimate that if we can increase the percentage of high ability students to 50%, then the mean SAT score for the entire group will reach 1300.

4"Our New Strategic Plan: Draft," p. 2.

5"Our New Strategic Plan: Draft," p. 8.

6Fall 2011 figures.

7Summary of 2009 Survey of A&S Department Capacity. A&S enrollment (number of majors) in 2009 was 6,451. Departments estimated capacity at 6,607.

8Address enrollment in highly enrolled departments through targeted hiring, particularly permanent lecturers. In addition to limiting enrollment in these majors, the hiring of new faculty is essential. This is especially necessary given the large number of classes taught by senior tenured faculty. As they begin to retire, replacement tenure-track faculty will likely have teaching loads half that of the current faculty members, exacerbating problems over over-enrollment. Full-time lecturers would partially address current problems of class size while allowing new tenure-track faculty to establish and develop successful programs of research.

9These policies were established in 2006 by the A&S Dean: A&S departments determine the "advisor of record" for their majors; (2) Advising flags must be lifted by an authorized advisor before A&S freshmen and sophomores are allowed to register.

10This recommendation was from PreHealth Consulting Report and University Advising Proposal, College of Arts and Sciences (CASA).

11“Summary of A&S Assessment of Capacity

12The freshman retention rate in BIO, CHE/BIOCHEM, & PSY/NSC is 80% compared to the A&S average of 83%.

13Prerequisite change for CHE 1301, BIO 1305 and BIO 1306: "satisfactory performance on the ACT or SAT or completion of CHE 1300 and MTH 1304 with grade of B."

14Although the faculties of PSY/NSC have initiated their review of the precise criteria, these have not been finalized as of February, 2012.

15Assumes a 5% yield.

[i]See for example: Easton, J, & Guskey, T. (1983). Estimating the effects of college, department, course, and teacher on course completion rates. Research in Higher Education, 19, 153-158; Gudeman, R. H. (2000). College missions, faculty teaching, and student outcomes in a context of low diversity. In Does diversity make a difference? Three research studies on diversity in college classrooms. Washington, DC: American Council on Education and American Association of University Professors; Marin, P. (2000). The educational possibility of multi-racial/multi-ethnic college classrooms. In Does diversity make a difference? Three research studies on diversity in college classrooms. Washington, DC: American Council on Education and American Association of University Professors; Maruyma, G. and Moreno, J. F. (2000). University faculty views about the value of diversity on campus and in the classroom. In Does diversity make a difference? Three research studies on diversity in college classrooms. Washington, DC: American Council on Education and American Association of University professors; Milem, J. F. (1999, January). The importance of faculty diversity to student learning and the mission of higher education. Paper presented at A Symposium and Working Research Meeting on Diversity and Affirmative Action, American Council on Education, Washington, DC; Milem, J. F., & Hakuta, K. (2000). The Benefits of racial and ethnic diversity in higher education. In D. J. Wilds (Ed.), Minorities in higher education, 1999-2000 (pp. 39-67). Washington, DC: American Council on Education; Milem, J. F. (20030. The educational benefits of diversity: Evidence from multiple sectors. In M. J. Chang, D. Wit, J. Jones, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Compelling interest: Examining the evidence on racial dynamics in higher education (pp. 126-169). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

16Recommendations, Ad Hoc Committee on Retention of Underrepresented Student Group.

17Note: advisors will schedule U1000 or NSE equivalent during the advising session during Orientation.

18The name of the current Degree Plan Office in A&S would change to the Graduation Office, reflecting its purview.

--------------------

Appendix 1C

Charges to the Dean’s Taskforce on Assessing the Core Curriculum

1. Compile comparison data on core curricula from the following institutions:

  • Private secular research universities that are comparable to Baylor: Rice, Vanderbilt, Emory, Duke, Northwestern, Tulane, and/or others
  • Private Christian/religious research universities that are comparable to Baylor: Brigham Young, Boston College, Georgetown University, Notre Dame, Catholic University, and/or others
  • Private Christian liberal arts colleges known for excellence in liberal education: Elon University, Samford University, St. John’s University, and/or others
  • Private secular liberal arts colleges known for excellence in liberal education: Amherst College, Carleton College, Middlebury College, Swarthmore College, Williams College, and/or others

2. Answer the following questions:

  • To what extent does the core curriculum meet liberal education outcomes?
  • To what extent is Christian perspective a part of the core curriculum?
  • To what extent does the curriculum of each major meet liberal education outcomes?
  • To what extent do co-curricular activities, academic societies, and pre-professional programs meet liberal education outcomes?
  • What guidelines, if any, are available to faculty, to departments, and to Arts & Sciences in developing and approving a curriculum that promotes liberal education outcomes?
  • What measures are used to gauge liberal education outcomes in classes, in departments, and in Arts & Sciences?
  • What instruments (e.g., e-portfolio) or programs (e.g., MapWorks) are available to students to record and gauge their own development in the core competencies of the general education?
  • What is the maximum core hours required for the University versus those of other schools, and what are the maximum hours required for a degree?

--------------------------------------------------

Appendix 2

Theme 2 -- Becoming a Nationally Recognized Research Institution

--------------------

Appendix 2A

Evaluative Agencies and Tools

Carnegie Foundation

The Carnegie Foundation’s analysis of research activity in doctoral granting institutions points to three key components: grant expenditures, doctoral production, and research staff support. In May of 2006, Carnegie classified Baylor University as a Research University with "high research activity" (RU/H). Baylor’s Vision 2012 Strategic Plan supported research in specific areas of the Humanities and Social Sciences. In addition, this vision led to investment in the construction of the Baylor Sciences Building (BSB) where the facility served as a "magnet" for attracting new faculty and students.

In the STEM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) within the College of Arts & Sciences, research output in terms of number of publications, grant funding, and Ph.D. graduation rate has more than doubled during the Vision 2012 time period (2002 to 2012). However, Baylor’s institutional ranking has not significantly improved and progress in several critical areas in the sciences remains slow. Without substantial improvements in research productivity within the STEM areas no institution can achieve the Carnegie Research University with "very high research activity" (RU/VH) status.

Assessments in terms of publications and doctoral production indicate that Baylor’s Humanities and Social Science departments are much closer to reaching the Carnegie RU/VH benchmarks than the STEM departments (refer to Table 2.1). While the College of Arts & Sciences must emphasize gains in STEM research output, the strength of the Humanities and Social Sciences programs provides a foundation for the University’s future progress. In this context, Arts & Sciences will assess the strategies for the sustainability of masters programs and move forward with new initiatives for doctoral programs.

Academic Analytics

Academic Analytics (AA) is a database for comparing faculty research productivity in doctoral programs to research institutions across the country. Metrics include publications, citations, presentations, honors and awards, and research expenditures from Federal sources. Most of the science and mathematics doctoral programs at Baylor rank below the median, as measured by AA, and most Baylor STEM faculty fall within the 2nd to 5th quintile for faculty productivity. Though the AA data is limited in several ways, such as by a lack of accounting for the contributions of co-Principal Investigators on grant expenditures and an exclusive focus on Federal sources for grants, the College of Arts & Sciences aims for all programs to improve in the AA ranking over the next 10-year period. In addition, Arts & Sciences strongly encourages faculty who receive release time for research to seek Federal funding, whenever possible, and improve to the upper quintiles for the AA metrics applicable in each faculty member’s discipline.

National Research Council

In the past the National Research Council (NRC) has issued rankings for doctoral programs each decade. Those doctoral programs at Baylor ranked by the NRC in the 1990s improved somewhat in the NRC assessment between 1990 and 2000. Unfortunately, a number of our more recent doctoral programs in the sciences (Biology; Geology; and Ecological, Earth, and Environmental Sciences) have not been assessed in the NRC ranking. It is only in the last few years that these programs have graduated the minimum number of doctoral students to be considered by the NRC. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the NRC will continue to rank doctoral programs. In the absence of an NRC ranking, the academy will place greater emphasis on services, such as AA, and on the data provided by the National Science Foundation’s Higher Education Survey of Research and Development Survey to assess institutions in terms of research activity.

--------------------

Appendix 2B

A&S STEM Departments: Five-Year Plan to Increase Research Expenditures in the College of Arts & Sciences

Stacy Atchley -- Chair, Department of Geology

Gregory Benesh -- Chair, Department of Physics

George Cobb -- Chair, Department of Environmental Science

Jaime Diaz-Granados -- Chair, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience

Robert Doyle -- Chair, Department of Biology

Patrick Farmer -- Chair, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry

Lance Littlejohn -- Chair, Department of Mathematics

Jack Tubbs -- Chair, Department of Statistical Science

Lee Nordt -- Dean, College of Arts & Sciences

Kenneth Wilkins -- Divisional Dean of Sciences, College of Arts & Sciences

Viola Osborn -- Director for Informational Analysis and Planning, College of Arts & Sciences

March 2014

Five-Year Plan to Increase Research Expenditures in the College of Arts & Sciences

Departments of Biology, Chemistry and Biochemistry, Environmental Science, Geology, Mathematics, Physics, Psychology and Neuroscience, and Statistical Science

Pro Futuris articulates a bold vision that if successful will significantly elevate the academic standing of Baylor University among its peers both nationally and internationally. A key aspect of this vision is that Baylor will become a Carnegie "Very High Research" institution, an aspiration requiring a substantial increase in external granting, doctoral productivity and research staffing. These indicators place the primary burden of success or failure on the shoulders of the STEM departments in the College of Arts & Sciences (Arts & Sciences). Success will depend on maximizing productivity with current faculty and resources, but also on a significant increase in the number of new faculty lines and affiliated costs.

The Plan

As a first step to the implementation of Pro Futuris the University is establishing five-year goals, along with specific metrics intended to document progress toward these goals. In order to advance toward the goal of becoming a very high research institution, the University aims to increase external grant expenditures by $5 million per year within the next five years. In response, the strategic plan for Arts & Sciences directly addresses the Carnegie research goal by proposing that the faculty produce approximately $10 million annually in grant expenditures by 2024. Such a proposal assumes that at least 40 new faculty lines are in place in the eight STEM departments.

To what extent should the STEM departments in Arts & Sciences contribute to the University’s five-year goal of increasing grant expenditures by $5 M per year? The Dean and STEM departments recently convened to discuss the possible annual increase in grant expenditures within the next five years with current faculty and resources. Table 1 below displays the past five-years of external research proposals (i.e. grant submissions) in the aggregate for the eight STEM departments, for which 90 to 95 percent are annually submitted by STEM faculty. The drop in proposals during the past two years can be explained in part by the cycle in granting for faculty currently holding grants, an increase in collaborations among colleagues internally as co-Principal Investigators, and a decrease in grant funding opportunities from Federal agencies. However, the eight STEM departments propose that they will increase the annual number of grant proposals during the next five years by 85 to 99 (Table 2). Added to the 2013 total (126) this will increase the annual output to between 211 and 225.

The trend for external research expenditures during the past five years is flat according to the data presented in Table 1 (Note: 90 to 95 percent of research expenditures also originate from the eight STEM departments). As with submissions there are a number of reasons why this may be the case. Whereas the STEM departments bear responsibility to increase grant expenditures, it is also true that the number of tenure plus tenure-track faculty in the eight STEM departments has increased by only three since 2010 (3 percent increase). Compounding the slow growth in net faculty is that since 2010 student credit hours among these eight STEM departments has increased by 8 percent and the number of undergraduate majors by 6 percent. The increase in number of majors and student credit hours, if tracked since the opening of the science building in 2004, would be even higher. Also, there are a number of unfilled faculty lines, particularly in the Department of Biology, that have hindered scholarly productivity. Nonetheless, the aggregate projected increase in annual research expenditures within the next five years from these eight STEM departments range from $2.5 to $4.25 M (Table 2). Projecting granting success in the future is a complex issue with many contingencies, but the lofty goal is to achieve the $4 M mark on behalf of the University’s five-year goal. This would raise annual research expenditures for Arts & Sciences to between $7 and $8 M per year, more than doubling the amount generated in 2013 ($3.127 M). It should be noted that these dollar figures do not include research expenditures provided by the University that also count toward our Carnegie goals (i.e. start-up and facilities).

There are two other possibilities that may improve research proposals and expenditures during the next five years. It is expected that during this time approximately four new STEM faculty lines per year will be provided to the eight STEM departments. At least a few are expected to be mid-level to senior faculty hires that would afford a rapid infusion of additional grant funding within the five-year window. Faculty hired at the entry level during the next couple of years are less likely to contribute significantly to annual grant expenditures in this five-year time frame, because several years might be required for these faculty members to become established and successful securing grant awards. However, we would still expect these individuals to demonstrate success obtaining external grants as part of a successful tenure or promotion bid. Another possible factor in achieving our goal of increased grant expenditures is the potential contribution from faculty in the social sciences and humanities. During the past few years these departments have provided an average of 10 percent of the total research expenditures from Arts & Sciences. Strategies will be developed over the next five years to maximize the contributions from the humanities and social sciences.

The Process

During the next five years, the College of Arts & Sciences will initiate the following measures of accountability across the eight STEM departments to ensure success of the stated research goals:

  • (1) On the annual performance evaluations for research faculty the department chairs will emphasize the importance of submitting research proposals and will consistently measure progress in this area;
  • (2) On the annual performance evaluations for research faculty the department chairs will emphasize the importance of being awarded external grants and will measure progress in this area;
  • (3) Each quarter the department chairs will receive a report of research proposals and awards for the STEM departments in aggregate and by department to assist with managerial and strategic oversight;
  • (4) The eight STEM department chairs will form a committee as directed by the Arts & Sciences strategic plan (refer to Theme 2 -- AOD 4) to meet monthly to discuss these stated goals and to ensure that appropriate resources are being distributed to the departments for scholarly success (i.e. teaching loads, start-up funds, facilities, and support staff); and
  • (5) The Dean, in consultation with the STEM chairs, will produce an annual report that will be submitted to the Provost.

Conclusion

The STEM departments in the College of Arts & Sciences take very seriously the goals articulated in Pro Futuris during its first five-year phase of implementation, and wish to provide leadership for the University regarding research expenditures, doctoral productivity, and research staffing. We are confident that the Arts & Sciences departments can attain the specific target figures mentioned in this report and, with new faculty lines during the coming decade, that research expenditures will increase significantly. This will greatly enhance the reputation of the entire University as we make significant strides towards becoming the premier Christian research institution.

Table 1-Table 2 chart (resized)

--------------------

Appendix 2C

Proposed Guidelines for Tenure

Successful candidates for tenure will:

  • Provide evidence of high-quality teaching:

    • Solid faculty peer evaluations, with evidence of proactive measures taken for improvement in response to feedback;

    • Student evaluations that are positive at time of tenure and promotion evaluation, and that generally show progressive improvement in response to feedback over pre-tenure period;

    • Successful recruitment and supervision of one or more graduate students (MS, MA, MFA, and Ph.D.) in thesis and dissertation research; and

    • Successful supervision and engagement of undergraduate students in thesis writing, independent research, or creative activity, as appropriate.

  • Present a portfolio of outstanding scholarship benchmarked by publication, and successful mentoring of doctoral students, and leading to a national reputation:

    • Receive strong external peer evaluations (from five or more individuals), with evidence of emerging national reputation and increasing peer citation of research by a community of scholars;

    • Aim beyond the department’s minimum criteria for peer reviewed scholarship at time of tenure and promotion evaluation and show consistent publication output through pre-tenure. Publications should appear in high-quality, peer reviewed journals, whereby tenure-track faculty are highly ranked nationally in scholarly productivity. Annual publication norms for assistant professors in STEM fields are used to project five-year benchmarks (refer to Table 2.3), suggesting that a total of 7-10 publications during the pre-tenure period is a reasonable minimum target for most disciplines. Tenure-track faculty with a publication total near the low end of the range for a given discipline would be expected to have a higher percentage of papers in truly top-tier journals. Research findings should be presented regularly at professional meetings;

    • In departments with graduate programs, show evidence of effective supervision and mentoring toward graduation of graduate students in thesis and dissertation research; and

    • Show evidence that the faculty member has developed solo research theme(s) that are independent of his or her doctoral advisor’s and post-doctoral advisor’s research programs, unless equipment/infrastructure costs or best practices in the sub-discipline dictate that the faculty member continue to work in a specific research area; and

    • If there are several or many authors on peer reviewed publications, it is fair to expect a developing scholar to be the primary (i.e., lead and/or corresponding) author on at least some of her or his papers, demonstrating primary intellectual input for the research.

  • Specifically in the STEM areas, secure external funding from competitive sources to sustain a research program. External funding is an important measure of the quality and sustainability of a research program. To increase the likelihood of successful grant awards, many grant proposals must be submitted early during the pre-tenure period. Prior to the tenure and promotion evaluation, it is expected that faculty in a STEM department will have received external funding that, in total, equals or exceeds national benchmarks for their discipline (refer to Table 2.3).

    • As an example, using the benchmarks provided in Table 2.3 for Chemistry, a tenure-track faculty member in review year four or five should strive to meet the annual benchmark of $62,800 in research expenditures from all external funding sources for the current review year, with one to three publications for that year. Looking forward to the next four years, the tenure-track faculty member should provide evidence, based on current grant awards and proposals, that he or she will meet the five-year projection of approximately $314,000 total research expenditures over that period, with a total of nine to thirteen publications;

    • While Federal agency grants are considered the "gold" standard, the Carnegie Foundation counts other sources of research funding, including state and local governments, business, and nonprofit organizations, as long as the funds are classified as research dollars submitted through the Office of Sponsored Programs and generate F&A revenues in most cases. Thus, faculty will be able to achieve national benchmarks with a broad source of support;

    • We also recognize that the funding benchmarks in Table 2.3 may be too general for some sub-disciplines. External funding should minimally be predictive of continued, long-term granting success and commensurate with a sustainable research program (i.e., support a stipend[s] for one or more graduate students, a portion of the faculty member’s summer salary, and requisite incidentals for conducting research in the relevant area of expertise).

  • Provide service to the University, profession, and community:

    • Modest service on committees is expected for the home department, including standing committees that serve the home department, student thesis or dissertation committees, social events, colloquia, etc.;

    • The College and the department expect the faculty member to perform service assignments competently;

    • Modest service is expected for the candidate’s profession, evidenced by providing peer reviews for journals or by acting as an evaluator for grant agencies; and

    • Evidence of active engagement in a faith community.

  • Demonstrate collegiality:

    • Evidence of collegial interpersonal relationships with faculty colleagues, as well as with graduate and undergraduate students; and

    • Evidence of integration within the life of the home department and University through regular attendance and participation in scheduled events.

The department and institution have the following responsibilities to facilitate the efforts of the pre-tenure faculty member in achieving tenure:

  • Provide responsible mentorship by the department through the entire pre-tenure period through an early introduction to the Baylor teaching and research culture and through honest feedback if problems exist/persist;

  • Provide constructive and honest information from tenured faculty, chair, and divisional dean during annual pre-tenure reviews regarding candidate’s progress during the pre-tenure evaluation period;

  • Encourage candidates to collaborate with experienced scholars, either within the department or with other institutions, on articles and grant proposals. Particularly in the STEM areas, acting as a co-PI collaborator may enable the candidate to secure his or her first major competitive external grant;

  • Provide opportunities for summer sabbaticals and research leaves, especially in year three or four; and

  • Render difficult decisions within the departments in year three or four if the candidate is not progressing sufficiently in all evaluative areas and if the pre-tenure trajectory seems unlikely to lead to successful tenure application in year six.

Departmental promotion guidelines should be an extension of the standards set by the tenure guidelines. In other words, scholarship accomplishment upon tenure must continue to the point that the faculty member will attain a national and international reputation in their respective field (e.g., publications, reviewer panels, national professional organization, and editorships). Faculty in STEM departments who seek promotion to Professor should have flourishing publishing and granting records that at a minimum are consistent with benchmarks provided in Table 2.3 for quintile 3 with progress toward granting expenditures in quintile 2. Teaching assignments and lab space allocation will depend upon scholarly productivity for recently tenured professors or mid-career members at the associate or full professor level.

Table 2.3 (resized)

--------------------

Appendix 2D

Determining Resources Needed for New Faculty in the Sciences

Within the constraints of the University operational budget model and our fundraising potential, we project the need for a minimum of 40 faculty lines in the sciences during the coming decade. The faculty lines will include a combination of (a) new and replacement faculty lines funded by the University and (b) new faculty lines funded from endowments. These faculty lines will require substantial start-up and facilities costs. Funding for the salary costs for approximately two-thirds of these lines would come from existing positions and approximately one-third of the lines would free up existing research space, but all of the positions would require new start-up money.

These faculty are projected to facilitate an increase in annual external research expenditures of approximately $6 million. If the remaining 100 or so tenured faculty in the sciences increase their annual grant expenditures collectively by $6 million, then total external grant expenditures for the next 10 years would increase to $12 million annually. In the coming decade this increase, along with projected increases from Engineering and Computer Science, will place Baylor on a trajectory that leads to the RU/VH research classification.

Research space available in the Baylor Sciences Building is inadequate to meet the laboratory needs of these 40 faculty lines in the sciences. With replacements over the next 10 years, research space will become available for approximately 20 of the 40 faculty lines needed. The remaining 20 will need an estimated 80 research laboratory modules. Planning during the coming months will determine how much of this need can be offset by potential expansion space in the BSB.

--------------------

Appendix 2E

Masters Programs Independent of Doctoral Programs

Masters programs described below should remain independent of Ph.D. tracks, based on student need and employment demand for the degrees:

  • The MSCP in Clinical Psychology, which grants degrees as prerequisites to doctoral programs and which must be completed at Baylor University before the student can be accepted into the doctoral program;

  • Masters programs where a terminal degree in the field is signified, such as the MFA; and

  • Masters programs that provide significant professional credentials and employment opportunities, including the fields of Environmental Science, Geology, and Nutrition Sciences.

The masters programs not associated with doctoral programs are American Studies, Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD), Communication Studies, Directing (in Theatre Arts, terminal), Environmental Science, Journalism and International Journalism, Museum Studies, Nutrition Sciences (in Family and Consumer Sciences), and Spanish.

Those departments with both doctoral and masters programs are Biology, Chemistry and Biochemistry, English, Geology, History, Mathematics, Philosophy, Physics, Political Science, Psychology, Religion, Sociology, and Statistical Science.

--------------------

Appendix 2F

Assessing Masters Programs

All departments with masters programs will provide a self-assessment to include the following criteria:

  • Current number of students enrolled;

  • Five-year average of number of students enrolled;

  • Degrees awarded per year for the past five years;

  • Funding (i.e., whether students receive a University stipend);

  • Type of degree: professional or research; and

  • Graduation requirements (i.e., thesis or project, publications, or grant proposals).

--------------------------------------------------

Appendix 3

Theme 3 -- Strengthening Community Engagement

--------------------

Appendix 3A

Considerations for the Council on Informed Engagement

  1. Lead initiatives in which we offer our distinctive knowledge, resources, and capabilities to address systemic problems in our community and throughout the world;

  2. Pursue academic partnerships with local, national, and global constituents that are focused on meeting human needs;

  3. Form stronger, more strategic community partnerships that improve the quality of life for Central Texans;

  4. Support local research that provides a foundation for effective solutions to community concerns;

  5. Integrate service into the fabric of campus life, grounded in a Christian understanding of hospitality that motivates humble service to all even as we remain faithful to our distinctive commitments;

  6. Build a robust and coordinated set of activities and programs that help all students navigate the path from matriculation to their initial and future vocations;

  7. Provide additional opportunities for students to explore and discern beliefs, convictions, and vocations;

  8. Provide greater opportunities for students to learn from the rich cultural diversity of the student body and surrounding community;

  9. Continue to graduate students who are prepared and committed to influence the world through intercultural understanding and ethical and compassionate service to others;

  10. Enhance curriculum and initiatives to help students develop as ethical leaders informed by biblical perspectives;

  11. Strengthen experiential learning programs that develop leadership and provide opportunities for practice and reflection (e.g., internships, research opportunities, service-learning courses, discipline-specific mission trips, and student organization involvement);

  12. Expand opportunities for our students to engage with community, state, national, and international leaders;

  13. Showcase Arts & Sciences Community Engagement and Service-Learning;

  14. Show what we are doing and why. Describe need for community leaders and partners;

  15. Have a one-page digital form for all Community Engagement and Service-Learning projects to turn in;

  16. Provide community service awards for research, education, and service for faculty, staff, and students;

  17. Encourage students to develop a Community Engagement and Service-Learning transcript and/or reflection journal; and

  18. Establish stronger relationships with the community for cultural events, such as Visual and Performing Arts (Hooper-Schaefer Fine Arts Center, Mayborn Museum Complex, and Martin Museum of Art) and Clinical Health Care (Piper Child Development Center, Communication Sciences and Disorders, and Psychology).

--------------------

Appendix 3B

Study Abroad and Related Experiences

  1. Summer programs, taught in foreign countries by Baylor professors: Argentina, Austria (Political Science faculty), China, Germany, Great Britain (three programs), France, Spain (two programs), Turkey, Italy (two programs), Maastricht, Thailand (minimester during Christmas holidays), Turkey, Kenya (when safe), Senegal (proposed), Family and Consumer Sciences trip to Paris and London, Theatre Arts trip to Prague (every fourth year), and Brazil (Biology faculty).

  2. Semester-long programs coordinated and/or taught by Baylor professors: Maastricht, Netherlands; St Andrews, Scotland.

  3. International Exchange programs (IEX): courses taught at foreign universities with which Baylor has agreements. The student pays Baylor tuition; the International Studies Office coordinates the determining of course equivalencies, administers registration, and submits the grades after the participating universities return the transcript. BU has exchange programs all over the world: Argentina; Hong Kong Baptist; Hosei & Seinan Gakuin in Japan; China (three universities); Scotland (two universities); Cantabria, Spain; Saint Louis University in Madrid; Korea; Caen, France; South Africa; and Mexico (currently suspended because of safety issues).

    On campus, Arts & Sciences offers a significant number of programs that have global components.

  4. Academic programs:

    • Majors and minors in foreign languages: SPA, FRE, GER, RUS, AME (Arabic & Middle East Studies), LAT, GKC, BRL (majors), ARB, CHI, ITA (additional minors);

    • Majors and minors in area studies: AFS, *AST, *LAS, MES, *SEES (*majors);

    • Majors with international focus: most significant is International Studies, housed in the Department of Political Science. The intensive version of the IST major requires that students study abroad, and we offer an MA in International Journalism. World Affairs minor: 18 hours of coursework with an international focus plus foreign language study. Although the Department of Economics is housed in the School of Business, it offers a BA in Economics through the College. Many Economics courses have an international focus; and

    • Courses throughout the curricula of different departments in the College have an international focus. Please see Appendix 3D for a listing of courses, programs, and foreign languages.

  5. Global Community Living Learning Center: During the 2012-13 academic year, 52 students were living in the GLLC, and many more would have joined the GLLC had space in Brooks Flats been available. Currently, the faculty director is a Spanish lecturer, and the one-hour course on intercultural communication (MFL 1101/3101) that students living in the GLLC must take is taught by another Spanish lecturer. There is a staff director who is shared with the Fine Arts LLC.

--------------------

Appendix 3C

Principles for Service Learning Courses

Howard, J., and McKeachie, W. (1993). Praxis I: A faculty casebook on community service learning. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Office of Community Service Learning (OCSL) Press.

Principle 1: Academic credit is for learning, not for service

Credit in academic courses is assigned to students for the demonstration of academic learning. It should be no different in community service learning courses. Academic credit is for academic learning, and community service is not academic in nature. Therefore, the credit must not be for the performance of the service. However, when community service is integrated into an academic course, the course credit is assigned for both the customary academic learning as well as for the utilization of the community learning in the service of the course learning. Similarly, the student’s grade is for the quality of learning and not for the quality (or quantity) of the service.

Principle 2: Do not compromise academic rigor

Academic standards in a course are based on the challenge that readings, presentations, and assignments present to students. These standards ought to be sustained when adding a community service learning component. Though experience-based learning is frequently perceived to be less rigorous than academic learning, especially in scholarly circles, we advise against compromising the level of instructor expectation for student learning. The additional workload imposed by a community service assignment may be compensated by an additional credit, but not by lowering academic learning expectations. Adding a service component, in fact, may enhance the rigor of a course because in addition to having to master the academic material, students must also learn how to learn from community experience and merge that learning with academic learning, and these are challenging intellectual activities that are commensurate with rigorous academic standards.

Principle 3: Set learning goals for students

Establishing learning goals for students is a standard to which all courses ought to be held accountable. Not only should it be no different with community service learning courses, but in fact it is especially necessary and advantageous to do so with these kinds of courses. With the addition of the community as a learning context, there occurs a multiplication of learning paradigms (e.g., inductive learning, synthesis of theory and practice) and learning topics (e.g., service of the course goals), and fully taking advantage of the rich bounty of learning opportunity offered by the community requires deliberate planning of the course learning goals.

Principle 4: Establish criteria for the selection of community service placements

To utilize community service optimally on behalf of course learning requires more than merely directing students to find a service placement. Faculty who are deliberate about establishing criteria for selecting community service placements will find that the learning that students extract from their respective service experiences will be of better use on behalf of course learning than if placement criteria are not established.

We offer three criteria as essential in all community service learning courses. First, the range of service placements ought to be circumscribed by the content of the courses; homeless shelters and soup kitchens are learning-appropriate placements for a course on homelessness, but placements in schools are not. Second, the duration of the service must be sufficient to enable the fulfillment of learning goals; a one-time two-hour shift at a hospital will do little for the learning in a course on institutional health care. And third, the specific service activities and service contexts must have the potential to stimulate course-relevant learning; filing records in a warehouse may be of service to a school district, but it would offer little to stimulate learning in a course on elementary school education.

We also offer three guidelines regarding the setting of placement criteria. First, responsibility for insuring that placement criteria are established that will enable the best student learning rests with the faculty. Second, the learning goals established for the course will be helpful in informing the placement criteria. And third, faculty who utilize the volunteer services office on campus or in the community to assist with identifying criteria-satisfying community agencies will reduce their start-up labor costs.

Principle 5: Provide educationally sound learning strategies to harvest community learning and realize course learning objectives

Learning in any course is realized by the proper mix and level of learning formats and assignments. To maximize students’ service experiences on behalf of course learning in a community service learning course requires more than sound service placements. Course assignments and learning formats must be carefully developed both to facilitate the students’ learning from their community service experiences and to enable use on behalf of course learning. Assigning students to serve at a community agency, even a faculty-approved one, without any mechanisms in place to harvest the learning therefrom, is insufficient to contribute to course learning. Experience as a learning format in and of itself does not consummate learning, nor does mere written description of one’s service activities.

Learning interventions that instigate critical reflection on and analysis of service experiences are necessary to enable community learning to be harvested and to serve as an academic learning enhancer. Therefore, discussions, presentations, and journal and paper assignments that provoke analysis of service experiences in the context of the course learning and that encourage the blending of experiential and academic learning are necessary to help ensure that the service does not underachieve in its role as an instrument of learning. Here too, the learning goals set for the course will be helpful in informing the course learning formats and assignments.

Principle 6: Provide supports for students to learn how to harvest the community learning

Harvesting the learning from the community and utilizing it on behalf of course learning are learning paradigms for which most students are underprepared. Faculty can help students realize the potential of community learning by either assisting students with the acquisition of skills necessary for gleaning the learning from the community, or by providing examples of how to do so successfully. An example of the former would be to provide instruction on participant-observation skills; an example of the latter would be to make accessible a file containing past outstanding student papers and journals to current students in the course.

Principle 7: Minimize the distinction between the students’ community learning role and the classroom learning role

Classrooms and communities are very different learning contexts, each requiring the student to assume a different learning role. Generally, classrooms provide a high level of learning direction, with students expected to assume largely a learning-follower role. In contrast, communities provide a low level of learning direction, with students expected to assume largely a learning-leader role. Though there is compatibility between the level of learning direction and the expected student role within each learning context, there is incompatibility across them.

Alternating between the learning-follower role in the classroom and the learning-leader role in the community not only places yet another learning challenge on students but also is inconsistent with good pedagogical principles. Just as we do not mix required lectures (high learning-follower role) with a student-determined reading list (high learning-leader role) in a traditional course, so too we must not impose conflicting learner role expectations on students in community service learning courses.

Therefore, if students are expected to assume a learning-follower role in the classroom, then a mechanism is needed that will provide learning direction for the students in the community (e.g., community agency staff serving in an adjunct instructor role); otherwise, students will enter the community wearing the inappropriate learning-follower hat. Correspondingly, if the students are expected to assume a learning-leader role in the community, then room must be made in the classroom for students to assume a learning-leader role; otherwise, students will enter the classroom wearing the inappropriate learning-leader hat. The more we can make consistent each student’s learning role in the classroom with her or his learning role in the community, the better the chances that the learning potential within each context will be realized.

Principle 8: Rethink the faculty instructional role

Regardless of whether they assume learning-leader or learning-follower roles in the community, community service learning students are acquiring course-relevant information and knowledge from their service experiences. At the same time, as we previously acknowledged, students also are being challenged by the many new and unfamiliar ways of learning inherent in community service learning. Because students carry this new information and these learning challenges back to the classroom, it behooves service learning faculty to reconsider their interpretation of the classroom instructional role. A shift in instructor role that would be most compatible with these new learning phenomena would be a move away from information dissemination and a move toward learning facilitation and guidance. Exclusive or even primary use of the traditional instructional model interferes with the promise of learning fulfillment available in community service learning courses.

Principle 9: Be prepared for uncertainty and variation in student learning outcomes

In college courses, the learning stimuli and class assignments largely determine student outcomes. This is true in community service learning courses too. However, in traditional courses, the learning stimuli (i.e., lectures and readings) are constant for all enrolled students; this leads to predictability and homogeneity in student learning outcomes. In community service learning courses, the variability in community service placements necessarily leads to less certainty and homogeneity in student learning outcomes. Even when community service learning students are exposed to the same presentations and the same readings, instructors can expect that the content of class discussions will be less predictable and the content of student papers will be less homogenous than in courses without a community assignment.

Principle 10: Maximize the community responsibility orientation of the course

If one of the objectives of a community service learning course is to cultivate students’ sense of community and social responsibility, then designing course learning formats and assignments that encourage a communal rather than an individual learning orientation will contribute to this objective. If learning in a course is privatized and tacitly understood as for the advancement of the individual, then we are implicitly encouraging a private responsibility mindset; an example would be to assign papers that students write individually and that are read only by the instructor. On the other hand, if learning is shared among the learners for the benefit of corporate learning, then we are implicitly encouraging a group responsibility mentality; an example would be for students to share those same papers with other students in the class. This conveys to the students that they are resources for one another, and this message contributes to the building of commitment to community and civic duty.

Howard notes that by subscribing to this set of 10 pedagogical principles, faculty will find that students’ learning from their service will be optimally utilized on behalf of academic learning, corporate learning, developing a commitment to civic responsibility, and providing learning-informed service in the community.

--------------------

Appendix 3D

Global Coursework on the Baylor Campus

Anthropology:

ANT 1310, Cultural Geography; ANT 2305, Anthropology in the Global Context; ANT 3318, African Civilization; ANT 3340, Societies and Cultures of Mexico and Central America; ANT 3352, Latin American Interface; ANT 4310, Societies and Cultures of East Asia; ANT 4312, Societies and Cultures of Africa

Archaeology:

ARC 3303, Archaeology and the Bible; ARC 3351, Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica

Classics:

CLA 3301, Roman Civilization; CLA 3302, Greek Civilization

Geography:

GEOG 1300, World Geography

History:

HIS 3305, Traditional China; HIS 3307, Japan; HIS 3310, The Middle East; HIS 3311, Middle East History 600-1798; HIS 3315, History of West Africa; HIS 3353, Pre-Colombian and Colonial Latin America; HIS 3355, Modern Latin America; HIS 4305, Modern China; HIS 4312, Modern Middle East History; HIS 4313, War and Peace in the Middle East; HIS 4350, The History of Gender in Latin America

Political Science:

International Relations and Comparative Politics courses: PSC 3315, Fundamentals of International Politics; PSC 3325, Ethnopolitical Conflicts; PSC 3304, Comparative Politics; PSC 3314, Politics and Problems of Developing Countries; PSC 3324, World Political Systems; PSC 4304, Governments and Politics of Latin America; PSC 4314, Government and Politics of Mexico; PSC 4334, Governments and Politics of the Middle East; PSC 4364, The Governments and Politics of the Asia-Pacific Region; PSC 4374, Governments and Politics of East Asia

Religion:

REL 3345, World Religions

--------------------

Appendix 3E

Council for Informed Engagement: Possible Activities Related to Global Education

Examples of activities for the Council for Informed Engagement to consider are:

  1. Expand the percentage of Arts & Sciences students who gain global experiences during their time at Baylor, including exchange and study abroad offerings, international internships, and mission projects. Because Baylor teaches many different modern languages (11 currently), we need to ensure that students of those languages have study abroad opportunities.

  2. Increase scholarships for study abroad and other global opportunities, including missions. Many Baylor students cannot afford to attend summer or semester study abroad programs because of the high cost of tuition combined with rising prices of airfare, housing, and in-country transportation.

  3. Create and sustain degree programs that enhance students’ understanding of the global community; for example, the recently approved major in Arabic and Middle East Studies and minor in International Studies. The new secondary majors in Spanish, French, German, and Russian should enable more students to combine a foreign language major with a major outside of Arts & Sciences.

  4. Create and sustain extra-curricular programs that enhance students’ understanding of the global community. A primary example is the Global Community Living Learning Center, which should be expanded, but which has not been able to secure a full-time staff position for the key leadership role.

  5. Encourage more exchanges that would bring increasing numbers of international faculty and students to the Baylor campus.

--------------------------------------------------

Appendix 4

Theme 4 -- Investing in the Health Sciences

--------------------

Appendix 4

Creating a Faculty Structure for Clinical, Research, and Joint Appointments

By January 2015 the Dean’s Office, working with the Provost’s Office and Human Resources, will assess the possibility of approving one or more of the following job descriptions:

  • Clinical [Assistant, Associate, Full] Professor: Clinical professors will be involved in clinical teaching and clinical supervision with an emphasis on clinical skill development. They will have the responsibilities of teaching, research, and/or service. [In August 2013, President Starr approved BU-PP 719, the policy on clinical faculty. This policy recognizes clinical faculty at the ranks of instructor and assistant professor, associate professor, and professor, all as non-tenurable positions. This policy also describes the expectations, process, and timetable for promotion.]

  • Clinical [Senior] Instructor: This designation will be comparable to Baylor’s typical lecturer lines. Faculty members will have responsibilities of teaching, research, and service similar to lecturer lines, with higher expectations for teaching area and reduced expectations for research. Clinical instructors will be involved in clinical teaching and clinical supervision with an emphasis on clinical skill development. [In August 2013, President Starr approved BU-PP 719, the policy on clinical faculty. This policy recognizes clinical faculty at the ranks of instructor and assistant professor, associate professor, and professor, all as non-tenurable positions. This policy also describes the expectations, process, and timetable for promotion.]

  • Research [Assistant, Associate, Full] Professor (Non-tenured or Tenure-track/Tenured): This designation will be comparable to Baylor’s typical tenure-track lines. Faculty members will have responsibilities that primarily revolve around research and scholarly activities and will have reduced teaching responsibilities. These positions may be designated as tenure-track lines or non-tenured lines. Baylor’s policies and procedures for tenure-track candidates will apply, and the faculty will be full-time Baylor employees.

  • Adjunct Faculty: This designation will allow Baylor to create joint appointments with the healthcare community. A range of joint appointments should be available. For example, an adjunct clinical professor could receive all of his or her salary from his or her primary position (i.e., no salary from Baylor), but would have significant interactions with Baylor. Similarly, Baylor could work out a designated percent payment system that would reflect the amount of work performed for each institution.

  • Clinical Associate Faculty: This designation would be used for faculty who are employed by another institution and are involved in teaching activities at Baylor.

  • Post-doctoral Fellow: This unique designation would be created for this position rather than the current designation as a staff line.

University policy has not yet been established for several of the above categories: research professors, adjunct faculty, clinical associate faculty, and post-doctoral fellows. Establishing such policy would enhance the instructional and research capabilities of Baylor University.