Appendices Fifth-Year Maintenance of Accreditation … Maintenance of Accreditation Report Fall 2012...

Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A1

Appendices

Fifth-Year

Maintenance of Accreditation Report

Fall 2012


Table of Contents

Faculty Sufficiency and Qualifications Tables .................................................... A3

2-1 ................................................................................................................ A4

9-1 .............................................................................................................. A10

10-1 ............................................................................................................ A14

10-2 ............................................................................................................ A21

Assurance of Learning ............................................................................... A25 Program Overviews

BADM............................................................................................ A26

BSIS ............................................................................................... A28

MBA .............................................................................................. A30

Narratives: Process and Outcomes

BADM............................................................................................ A34

BSIS ............................................................................................... A47

MBA .............................................................................................. A53

Areas of Goodness ..................................................................................... A57


Faculty Sufficiency and Qualifications Tables


TABLE 2-1 FIVE YEAR SUMMARY OF INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AY 2011-2012 (sum of semesters)

Expectations regarding the production of Intellectual Contributions are communicated to faculty starting with the recruitment

process, and continue through the retention, tenure, and promotion system (RTP). The type of contributions favored by the

College is stated in our Mission: "...We emphasize applied research..." The expected amount and quality of production, as well

as the relationship between AQ status and RTP decision, is stated in each Department's personnel policy document.

Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs

NAME

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Jo

urn

als

Res

earc

h

Mo

nog

rap

hs

Bo

ok

s

Ch

ap

ters

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pro

ceed

ing

s

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pa

per

Pre

sen

tati

on

s

Fa

cult

y R

esea

rch

Sem

ina

r

No

n-P

eer

Rev

iew

ed J

ou

rna

ls

Oth

er

Lea

rnin

g &

Ped

ago

gic

al

Res

earc

h

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

to

Pra

ctic

e

Dis

cip

lin

e-B

ase

d

Res

earc

h

Notes

ACCOUNTING

Bruder, Joshua

Chiang, RuFang 1 3 4

Deberg, Curtis 3 3 2 1 5 2 2 Sabbatical

Estes, Crystal

Ficklin, Kenneth

Griffin, Amy

Guy, Paul 4 1 2 3 4 FERP

Irvine, Thomas

Jones, Joseph

Kizirian, Tim 7 2 1 4 Dept. Chair

Leese, Wallace 1 1

Milliron, Valerie 2 3 5

Murdoch, Brock 7 2 9 FERP

Nissan, Samir 1 4 5

Pladson, Holly

Pobloske, Paule


TABLE 2-1 Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs

NAME

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Jo

urn

als

Res

earc

h

Mo

nog

rap

hs

Bo

ok

s

Ch

ap

ters

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pro

ceed

ing

s

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pa

per

Pre

sen

tati

on

s

Fa

cult

y R

esea

rch

Sem

ina

r

No

n-P

eer

Rev

iew

ed J

ou

rna

ls

Oth

er

Lea

rnin

g &

Ped

ago

gic

al

Res

earc

h

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

to

Pra

ctic

e

Dis

cip

lin

e-B

ase

d

Res

earc

h

Notes

BUS INFO SYSTEMS

Bahl, Harish 2 2 4

Boykin, Raymond 2 1 5 6 1 1 FERP

Chiang, Dalen 3 3 1 2 5 Sabbatical

Connolly, James 1 1

Gardiner, Lorraine 2 1 5 7 1

Gardiner, Stan 2 1 1

Jones, Nancy 2 1 1 1 1 5 1

Lauck, Marsha

Lees, John 2 1 1 2 FERP

Mensching, James 2 1 1 4 8 FERP

Pike, Ronald 1 1 1 3 1 1 4

Sager, James 3 3 3 2 1 Dept. Chair

Sandoe, Kent 2 1 2 1

Wilder, Thomas 1 1

FINANCE

Ahern, Daniel

Anderson, Clayton

Bordenave, Neal

Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen 3 1 2

Huang, Jian 1 1

Moosa, Suleman 4 1 3 FERP

Ponarul, Richard 2 1 1 2 1 1

Treanor, Stephen 2 7 9

Weigand, Douglas



NAME

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Jo

urn

als

Res

earc

h

Mo

nog

rap

hs

Bo

ok

s

Ch

ap

ters

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pro

ceed

ing

s

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pa

per

Pre

sen

tati

on

s

Fa

cult

y R

esea

rch

Sem

ina

r

No

n-P

eer

Rev

iew

ed J

ou

rna

ls

Oth

er

Lea

rnin

g &

Ped

ago

gic

al

Res

earc

h

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

to

Pra

ctic

e

Dis

cip

lin

e-B

ase

d

Res

earc

h

Notes

MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2)

Ariely, Gil 4 3 5 1 11

Bettencourt, Randall

Special justification for

Qualification (see below)

Cagle, Rebecca

Cambridge, Charles FERP

Casler, Angela 1 1

Gundlach, Michael 5 1 1 1 3 1 4

Halford, Jennifer

Halimi, David

Hames, John

Hinrichs, Kim 9 1 5 15

Hubbard, Richard

Indvik, Julie 3 5 1 9 Interim Assoc. Dean

Jones, Dana

Jones, Ryan

Keller, Pamela

Kim, Hyunjung 2 5 1 2 1 6 3

Kodai, Scott

Kromer, Ted

Levine, Helen 1 2 3

Levine, Mark 2 2 2 5 1 FERP

Lewis, Kathryn 2 1 1 2 FERP

McDonald, L. Tracy 1 1 2 3 1 FERP



NAME

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Jo

urn

als

Res

earc

h

Mo

nog

rap

hs

Bo

ok

s

Ch

ap

ters

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pro

ceed

ing

s

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pa

per

Pre

sen

tati

on

s

Fa

cult

y R

esea

rch

Sem

ina

r

No

n-P

eer

Rev

iew

ed J

ou

rna

ls

Oth

er

Lea

rnin

g &

Ped

ago

gic

al

Res

earc

h

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

to

Pra

ctic

e

Dis

cip

lin

e-B

ase

d

Res

earc

h

Notes

MANAGEMENT (2 OF 2)

Mclaughlin, Matthew

Morgan, James 3 2 1 2 4

Morgan, Sean

Persons, Bonnie 1 1 1 2 1

Credit for Validating

Experience

Pizarro, Nelson 1 1 2

Polsan, Michael

Potter, Dirk



Rahn, David 1 1 2

Rehg, Michael 6 1 6 1 12

Siegall, Marc 3 1 1 3 Interim Assoc. Dean

Straus, Peter 1 1 2



Trailer, Jeff Dept. Chair

York, Matthew



Zivnuska, Suzanne 13 1 3 1 3 1 14

Barton, Mary BusComm

Cohen, Marsha 1 1 2 BusComm

Sprague, Robert BusComm



NAME P

eer

Rev

iew

ed

Jo

urn

als

Res

earc

h

Mo

nog

rap

hs

Bo

ok

s

Ch

ap

ters

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pro

ceed

ing

s

Pee

r R

evie

wed

Pa

per

Pre

sen

tati

on

s

Fa

cult

y R

esea

rch

Sem

ina

r

No

n-P

eer

Rev

iew

ed J

ou

rna

ls

Oth

er

Lea

rnin

g &

Ped

ago

gic

al

Res

earc

h

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

to

Pra

ctic

e

Dis

cip

lin

e-B

ase

d

Res

earc

h

Note

MARKETING

Andrews, Vernon 1 2 1 2

Post-Doctoral Bridge Program

Grad

Blanshei, Lance

Chan, Kenny 5 3 1 2 5 2 Dept. Chair

Chapman, Kenneth 6 1 1 1 5 4

Donoho, Casey 4 2 5 7 3 1

Heinze, Timothy 11 2 3 7 3 6

Maligie, William Qualified for MKTG and SCMS;

teaches more MKTG

McGowan, William 2 2

Meda, Edward

Meuter, Matthew 6 5 5 6

Misra, Shekhar 4 1 1 1 3 4 FERP

Nelsen, Jennifer

Schifferle, Kathryn

Toy, Daniel 3 2 3 3 FERP

Wright, Lauren 3 1 2 4 2 FERP


Special Justifications for Qualification

Bettencourt, Randall Per our policy, qualified as PQ by being a JD teaching the Introductory Business Law course

Potter, Dirk Per our policy, qualified as PQ by being a JD teaching the Introductory Business Law course

Straus, Peter While he only has a BA, earns PQ status through significant work experience and scholarship.

York, Matthew While he only has a BA. Earns PQ status by being President of two firms, at least one of which is long standing and top in its

field (Videomaker Magazine.)


TABLE 9-1

SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY BY DISCIPLINE,

DEPARTMENT, AND COLLEGE

AY 2011-2012 (sum of semesters) Policy: Tenure/Tenure-Track faculty have, as part of their normal job duties, significant Service requirements. Therefore, these faculty are deemed to be

“Participating” if the Department/Unit Chair is satisfied that the faculty member’s documented level of Service activity normally would be associated with

an evaluation of at least Adequate in the RTP process. Temporary Faculty whose appointments include service activities are deemed to be “Participating” if

the Department/Unit Chair is satisfied that the faculty member’s documented level of Service activity normally would be evaluated as appropriate in time

and significance for his/her work assignment. “Appropriate in time” will be determined on a pro-rata basis considering the faculty member’s appointment

time-base.

Some faculty are hired only to teach; therefore, they cannot be considered to be “Participating” unless they perform an appropriate amount and level of

Service activities. For additional details, please see the College Policy and Procedures Manual.

FERP faculty work one semester a year (or half-time over both semesters). They are considered normal Tenure/Tenure-Track faculty during their "on"

semesters, and retired (not university employees) the rest of the year.

Faculty on sabbatical do not teach; however, the nature of a sabbatical requires them to be working 100% in support of the College's mission.

NAME

Participating

or Supporting

(P or S)

Amount

of

Teaching

(Student

Credit

Hours) if

P

(blank if

S)

Amount

of

Teaching

(Student

Credit

Hours) if

S

(blank if

P)

Percent Participating

Must be > 60%

ACCOUNTING

Bruder, Joshua P 168

Chiang, RuFang S 1134

Deberg, Curtis P 471 Sabbatical

Estes, Crystal P 423

Ficklin, Kenneth P 168

Griffin, Amy S 1377

Guy, Paul P 165 FERP

Irvine, Thomas P 279

Jones, Joseph S 303

Kizirian, Tim P 57 Dept. Chair

Leese, Wallace P 687

Milliron, Valerie P 534

Murdoch, Brock P 372 FERP

Nissan, Samir P 699

Pladson, Holly P 384

Pobloske, Paule P 1236

TOTAL ACCOUNTING 5643 2814 67%


TABLE 9-1

BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Name P/S SCH if P SCH if S Notes

Bahl, Harish P 825

Boykin, Raymond P 456 FERP

Chiang, Dalen P 312 Sabbatical

Connolly, James P 852

Gardiner, Lorraine P 437

Gardiner, Stan P 523

Jones, Nancy P 1356

Lauck, Marsha S 45

Lees, John P 306 FERP

Mensching, James P 174 FERP

Pike, Ronald P 864

Sager, James P 423 Dept. Chair

Sandoe, Kent P 1086

Wilder, Thomas P 771

TOTAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SYS. 8385 45 99%

FINANCE


Ahern, Daniel P 1185

Anderson, Clayton S 153

Bordenave, Neal P 237

Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen P 612

Huang, Jian P 648

Moosa, Suleman P 231 FERP

Ponarul, Richard P 699

Treanor, Stephen P 567

Weigand, Douglas S 42

TOTAL FINANCE 4179 195 96%


MANAGEMENT TABLE 9-1


Ariely, Gil S 126

Bettencourt, Randall S 909 Special justification for Qualification

Cagle, Rebecca S 123

Cambridge, Charles P 297 FERP

Casler, Angela P 987

Gundlach, Michael P 729

Halford, Jennifer S 306

Halimi, David S 540

Hames, John P 885

Hinrichs, Kim P 810

Hubbard, Richard P 393

Indvik, Julie P 0 Interim Assoc. Dean

Jones, Dana S 132

Jones, Ryan S 252

Keller, Pamela S 456

Kim, Hyunjung P 588

Kodai, Scott S 273

Kromer, Ted P 768

Levine, Helen S 504

Levine, Mark P 477 FERP

Lewis, Kathryn P 375 FERP

McDonald, L. Tracy P 273 FERP

Mclaughlin, Matthew S 765

Morgan, James P 600

Morgan, Sean P 1107

Persons, Bonnie P 762 Credit for Validating Experience

Pizarro, Nelson P 447

Polsan, Michael S 1011

Potter, Dirk S 744 Special justification for Qualification

Rahn, David P 945

Rehg, Michael P 504

Siegall, Marc P 0 Interim Assoc. Dean

Straus, Peter P 894 Special justification for Qualification

Trailer, Jeff P 159 Dept. Chair

York, Matthew S 60 Special justification for Qualification

Zivnuska, Suzanne P 513 SCH

Barton, Mary Not Included

BusComm 654

Cohen, Marsha Not Included

BusComm 558

Sprague, Robert Not Included

BusComm 744

TOTAL MANAGEMENT 12513 6201 67%


TABLE 9-1

MARKETING


Andrews, Vernon P 144 Post-Doctoral Bridge Program Grad

Blanshei, Lance S 171

Chan, Kenny P 192 Dept. Chair

Chapman, Kenneth P 360

Donoho, Casey P 645

Heinze, Timothy P 720

Maligie, William P 1260 Qualified for MKTG and SCMS; teaches more

MKTG

McGowan, William P 900

Meda, Edward P 1161

Meuter, Matthew P 624

Misra, Shekhar P 369 FERP

Nelsen, Jennifer P 372

Schifferle, Kathryn P 1230

Toy, Daniel P 315 FERP

Wright, Lauren P 357 FERP

TOTAL MARKETING 8649 171 98%

Must be > 75%

TOTAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS 39369 9426 81%


TABLE 10-1

SUMMARY OF FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS, DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES

(RE: STANDARD 10)

AY 2011-2012

Academic Qualification normally is earned through the publication of at least two refereed journal (blind review by two or more peers) articles, plus at least one “Other

Intellectual Contribution” (Other IC), over the most recent five year period. Further, these activities should be spread out over the five years and relevant to the faculty

member’s field of teaching. Faculty who do not hold full-time appointments for the whole academic year (e.g., FERP) need one refereed journal publication plus an

“other IC.”

Faculty who hold an administrative position (e.g., Department Chair, Associate Dean) might be able to qualify as AQ with fewer ICs than required for full-time faculty. It

is possible that a faculty member’s extraordinary activities can be argued as demonstrating the maintenance of AQ without the production of traditional ICs (e.g.,

significant editorial involvement with a reputable journal). The Dean may allow such special cases for AQ, as long as they apply to no more than one quarter of the

faculty in the discipline.

Professional Qualification (at time of hire): The candidate normally will have at least an MBA or other Masters level degree appropriate to the courses to which he/she

will be assigned. Exceptions to “normally” include recent employment of exceptional responsibility and duration, relevant to the teaching assignment.

The highest full-time professional position held by the candidate must have been significantly beyond an entry-level professional job. The candidate should have been

employed full-time in such position for at least the past three years. (For the purposes herein, running one’s own small business counts as full-time employment beyond

the entry level.) Professional certifications and other objective evidence strengthen the case for determining that the candidate is PQ.

Academic Year: We run on a semester system. Fall is late August through mid-December; Spring is late January through mid-May.

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed

an

d Y

ear

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to t

he

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to t

he

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sion

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er

Five-Year Summary of

Development Activities Supporting

AQ or PQ Status

No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

tes

NAME In

tell

ectu

al

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

ACCOUNTING (1 OF 2)

Bruder, Joshua BS 2008 Fall 2010 13% YES 2 1 UG

Chiang, RuFang PhD 1973 Spring 2005 100% YES 4 1 10 UG

Deberg, Curtis PhD 1985 Fall 1990 100% YES 9 3 UG RES SER Sabbatical

Estes, Crystal BA 2008 Fall 2010 55% YES 2 1 UG SER

Ficklin, Kenneth BA 1973 Spring 2012 13% YES 1 1 UG

Griffin, Amy MS 1995 Fall 2006 90% YES 2 1 UG


TABLE

10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed a

nd

Yea

r

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to

the

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to

the

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sio

n

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er


Development Activities

Supporting AQ or PQ Status

No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

tes

NAME

Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

ACCOUNTING (2 OF 2)

Guy, Paul PhD 1979 Fall 1979 50% YES 7 UG RES SER FERP

Irvine, Thomas BA 2003 Fall 2010 25% YES 1 1 UG

Jones, Joseph MS 2006 Fall 2011 30% YES 1 1 UG

Kizirian, Tim PhD 2001 Fall 2001 100% YES 7 1 UG ADM RES

SER Dept. Chair

Leese, Wallace PhD 1978 Fall 1978 100% YES 1 UG RES SER

Milliron, Valerie PhD 1984 Fall 1990 100% YES 5 1 UG RES SER

Murdoch, Brock PhD 1984 Fall 1985 50% YES 9 UG RES SER FERP

Nissan, Samir PhD 1971 Fall 1980 50% YES 5 UG RES

Pladson, Holly BS 1989 Fall 2011 33% YES 2 1 UG SER

Pobloske, Paule MBA

2001 Fall 2010 100% YES

2 1 UG SER


TABLE

10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed a

nd

Yea

r

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to

the

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to

the

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sio

n

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er




No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

tes

NAME

Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

BUSINESS INFO SYSTEMS

Bahl, Harish PhD 1980 Fall 1990 100% YES 4 4 1 UG GR RES SER

Boykin, Raymond PhD 1986 Fall 1986 50% YES 8 11 3 UG GR RES SER FERP

Chiang, Dalen PhD 1976 Fall 2001 100% YES 7 1 7 UG GR RES SER Sabbatical

Connolly, James PhD 1996 Fall 1996 100% YES 1 1 UG GR RES SER

Gardiner,

Lorraine PhD 1989 Fall 2002 100% YES 8 9 UG GR RES SER

Gardiner, Stan PhD 1987 Fall 2002 100% YES 2 1 UG RES SER

Jones, Nancy MBA

1997 Fall 2000 100% YES 6 3 5 UG SER

Lauck, Marsha MBA

2003 Fall 2011 10% YES UG

Lees, John PhD 1973 Fall 1981 50% YES 3 UG RES SER FERP

Mensching,

James PhD 1976 Fall 1991 50% YES 8 3

UG RES SER FERP

Pike, Ronald PhD 2009 Spring 2001 100% YES 6 UG RES SER

Sager, James PhD 2002 Fall 2002 100% YES 6 5 UG ADM RES

SER Dept. Chair

Sandoe, Kent PhD 1994 Fall 1998 100% YES 3 UG RES SER

Wilder, Thomas MBA

1996 Spring 1997 100% YES 1 4 2 UG SER


TABLE

10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed a

nd

Yea

r

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to

the

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to

the

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sio

n

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er




No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

tes

NAME

Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

FINANCE

Ahern, Daniel MBA 1976 Fall 2005 100% YES 1 UG

Anderson,

Clayton JD 1999

Spring

2002 20% YES 1 1 UG

Bordenave, Neal JD 2002 Fall 2006 20% YES 1 1 UG

Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen PhD 1987 Fall 1985 100% YES 3 1 UG RES SER

Huang, Jian PhD 2010 Fall 2011 100% YES 1 UG RES SER

Moosa, Suleman PhD 1972 Fall 1980 50% YES 4 UG RES SER FERP

Ponarul, Richard PhD 1985 Fall 1984 100% YES 4 UG RES SER

Treanor, Stephen PhD 2008 Fall 2008 100% YES 9 UG GR RES SER

Weigand, Doug MBA 1990 Spring

2011 10% YES 2 UG


TABLE

10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed

an

d Y

ear

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to t

he

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to t

he

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sion

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er

Five-Year Summary of Development

Activities Supporting AQ or PQ Status

No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

te

NAME

Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2)

Ariely, Gil PhD 2006 Spring 2012 10% YES 12 UG


JD 1993 Spring 2005 70% YES 1 1 UG Special justification for Qualification

Cagle, Rebecca MPA 2010 Spring 2012 10% YES 2 UG

Cambridge, Charles PhD 1981 Fall 1978 50% YES 8 UG RES SER FERP

Casler, Angela MBA 2000 Spring 2006 100% YES 1 3 1 UG SER

Gundlach, Michael PhD 2003 Fall 2006 100% YES 8 UG RES SER

Halford, Jennifer JD 2003 Fall 2008 23% YES 3 1 1 UG

Halimi, David MS 1977 Fall 2009 40% YES 7 UG

Hames, John JD 1982 Fall 2004 70% YES 1 1 UG SER

Hinrichs, Kim PhD 2003 Fall 2011 100% YES 15 UG RES SER

Hubbard, Richard PhD 1999 Fall 2010 40% YES 2 UG

Indvik, Julie PhD 1985 Fall 1983 100% YES 9 3 ADM RES SER Interim Assoc. Dean

Jones, Dana MBA 1986 Spring 2012 10% YES 3 1 UG

Jones, Ryan MBA 2010 Spring 2011 20% YES 3 1 UG

Keller, Pamela MBA 2009 Spring 2010 40% YES 3 UG

Kim, Hyunjung PhD 2009 Fall 2009 100% YES 10 3 UG GR RES

SER

Kodai, Scott MBA 2006 Fall 2007 20% YES 2 UG

Kromer, Ted MBA 1965 Spring 2003 90% YES 1 UG SER

Levine, Helen MS 1993 Spring 2007 40% YES 3 1 1 UG

Levine, Mark PhD 1978 Fall 1978 50% YES 6 UG RES SER FERP

Lewis, Kathryn PhD 1983 Fall 1978 50% YES 3 UG RES SER FERP


TABLE 10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed

an

d Y

ear

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to t

he

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to

th

e

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sion

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y

Qu

ali

fied

Oth

er

Five-Year Summary of Development

Activities Supporting AQ or PQ Status

No

rma

l P

rofe

ssio

na

l

Res

po

nsi

bil

itie

s

No

tes

NAME

MANAGEMENT

(2 OF 2) Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

McDonald, L. Tracy PhD 1983 Fall 1983 40% YES 4 UG RES SER FERP

Mclaughlin, Matt MBA 2007 Fall 2007 50% YES 3 1 UG

Morgan, James JD 1980 Spring 1981 100% YES 6 1 1 UG RES SER

Morgan, Sean MBA 2005 Fall 2005 100% YES 3 5 UG SER

Persons, Bonnie JD 1992 Spring 2008 100% YES 3 2 1 1 UG GR RES SER

Validating Experience

Pizarro, Nelson PhD 2011 Fall 2011 100% YES 2 UG RES SER

Polsan, Michael JD 1990 Fall 2005 60% YES 1 2 UG

Potter, Dirk JD 1982 Spring 1983 60% YES 1 1 UG Special justification for Qualification

Rahn, David MS 1991 Fall 2000 92% YES 2 UG SER

Rehg, Michael PhD 1998 Fall 2008 100% YES 13 1 2 UG GR RES SER

Siegall, Marc PhD 1987 Fall 1986 100% YES 4 UG ADM RES SER

Interim Assoc. Dean

Straus, Peter BA 1972 Fall 2002 100% YES 2 2 UG SER Special justification for Qualification

Trailer, Jeff PhD 1995 Fall 2001 100% YES 1 3 UG GR ADM RES SER

Dept. Chair

York, Matthew BA 1978 Spring 2012 10% YES 2 1 UG Special justification for Qualification

Zivnuska, Suzanne PhD 2003 Fall 2006 100% YES 18 2 1 UG GR RES SER

Barton, Mary MS 1994 Fall 2006 90% Yes 1 UG SER BusComm

Cohen, Marsha MA 2007 Spring 2002 70% Yes 2 1 UG BusComm

Sprague, Robert MDiv 1983 Fall 2008 90% Yes 2 1 3 UG BusComm


TABLE

10-1

Hig

hes

t D

egre

e E

arn

ed a

nd

Yea

r

Da

te o

f F

irst

Ap

po

intm

ent

to t

he

Sch

oo

l

Per

cen

t o

f T

ime

Ded

ica

ted

to t

he

Sch

oo

l's

Mis

sion

Aca

dem

ica

lly

Qu

ali

fied

Pro

fess

ion

all

y Q

ua

lifi

ed

Oth

er




No

rma

l

Pro

fess

ion

al

Res

po

nsi

bil

i

ties

No

tes

NAME

Inte

llec

tua

l

Co

ntr

ibu

tio

ns

Pro

fess

ion

al

Ex

per

ien

ce

Co

nsu

ltin

g

Pro

fess

ion

al

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Oth

er

Pro

fess

ion

al

Act

ivit

ies

MARKETING

Andrews, Vernon PhD 1996 Fall 2010 20% YES 3 2 1 1 UG RES SER

Post-Doctoral

Bridge Program

Blanshei, Lance MBA 1985 Spring 2005 20% YES 2 UG

Chan, Kenny PhD 1988 Fall 1985 100% YES 9 2 UG ADM RES SER Dept. Chair

Chapman, Ken PhD 1996 Fall 2001 100% YES 9 2 UG GR RES SER

Donoho, Casey PhD 1990 Fall 2008 100% YES 11 1 UG RES SER

Heinze, Timothy PhD 2007 Fall 2007 100% YES 16 UG RES SER

Maligie, William MBA 1984 Spring 2008 100% YES 2 UG SER Qualified for MKTG

and SCMS; teaches

more MKTG

McGowan, Wm. MBA 1981 Spring 1999 100% YES 2 1 UG SER

Meda, Edward MBA 1994 Spring 2011 100% YES 1 UG

Meuter, MatT PhD 1999 Fall 2000 100% YES 11 2 UG RES SER

Misra, Shekhar PhD 1986 Fall 1985 50% YES 7 5 UG RES SER FERP

Nelsen, Jennifer MA 2004 Fall 2005 40% YES 4 UG

Schifferle, Kathryn MBA 2008 Spring 2007 70% YES 3 UG

Toy, Daniel PhD 1979 Fall 1989 50% YES 5 UG RES SER FERP

Wright, Lauren PhD 1990 Fall 1989 50% YES 6 UG RES SER FERP


TABLE 10-2

CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED

FACULTY

RE: Standard 10

AY 2011-2012 (annualized) FERP faculty work one semester a year (or half-time over both semesters). They are considered normal Tenure/Tenure-Track

(T/TT) D6faculty during their "on" semesters, and retired (not university employees) the rest of the year. The requirements for

maintaining AQ status are half that for full-time T/TT faculty.

Faculty on sabbatical do not teach; however, the nature of a sabbatical requires them to be working 100% in support of the

College's mission.

NAME

QUALIFICATION

(ACADEMIC-AQ,

PROFESSIONAL-

PQ OTHER-O)

(FROM TABLE

10-1)

AQ

FACULTY-

%OF TIME

DEVOTED

TO

MISSION

(FROM

TABLE 10-

1)

PQ

FACULTY-

% OF TIME

DEVOTED

TO

MISSION

(FROM

TABLE 10-1)

OTHER

FACULTY-

% OF

TIME

DEVOTED

TO

MISSION

(FROM

TABLE 10-

1)

QUALIFICATION RATIOS PER

STANDARD 10

<NOTES>

ACCOUNTING

Bruder, Joshua O 13%

Chiang, RuFang PQ

100%

Deberg, Curtis AQ 100% Sabbatical

Estes, Crystal O 55%

Ficklin, Kenneth O 13%

Griffin, Amy PQ 90%

Guy, Paul AQ 50% FERP

Irvine, Thomas O 25%

Jones, Joseph PQ 30%

Kizirian, Tim AQ 100% Dept. Chair

Leese, Wallace O 100%

Milliron, Valerie AQ 100%

Murdoch, Brock AQ 50% FERP

Nissan, Samir O 50%

Pladson, Holly O 33%

Pobloske, Paule O

100%

TOTAL ACCOUNTING 400% 233% 375%

% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 40%

% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 62%


TABLE 10-2

BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS % Mission % Mission % Mission

NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES

Bahl, Harish AQ 100%

Boykin, Raymond AQ 50% FERP

Chiang, Dalen AQ 100% Sabbatical

Connolly, James O 100%

Gardiner, Lorraine AQ 100%

Gardiner, Stan AQ 100%

Jones, Nancy PQ 100%

Lauck, Marsha O 10%

Lees, John AQ 50% FERP

Mensching, James AQ 50% FERP

Pike, Ronald AQ 100%

Sager, James AQ 100% Dept. Chair

Sandoe, Kent AQ 100%

Wilder, Thomas PQ 100%

TOTAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SYS. 850% 200% 110%



FINANCE

% Mission % Mission % Mission NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES

Ahern, Daniel PQ 100%

Anderson, Clayton PQ 20%

Bordenave, Neal PQ 20%

Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen AQ 100%

Huang, Jian AQ 100%

Moosa, Suleman AQ 50% FERP

Ponarul, Richard AQ 100%

Treanor, Stephen AQ 100%

Weigand, Douglas PQ 10%

TOTAL FINANCE 450% 150% 0%




TABLE 10-2 MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2) % Mission % Mission % Mission


Ariely, Gil AQ 10%


AQ 70% Special justification for Qualification

Cagle, Rebecca PQ 10%

Cambridge, Charles O 50% FERP

Casler, Angela PQ 100%

Gundlach, Michael AQ 100%

Halford, Jennifer PQ 23%

Halimi, David PQ 40%

Hames, John PQ 70%

Hinrichs, Kim AQ 100%

Hubbard, Richard PQ 40%

Indvik, Julie AQ 100% Interim Assoc. Dean

Jones, Dana PQ 10%

Jones, Ryan PQ 20%

Keller, Pamela PQ 40%

Kim, Hyunjung AQ 100%

Kodai, Scott PQ 20%

Kromer, Ted PQ 90%

Levine, Helen PQ 40%

Levine, Mark AQ 50% FERP

Lewis, Kathryn AQ 50% FERP

McDonald, L. Tracy AQ 40% FERP

Mclaughlin, Matthew

PQ 50%

Morgan, James AQ 100%

Morgan, Sean PQ 100%

Persons, Bonnie AQ 100% Credit for Validating Experience

Pizarro, Nelson AQ 100%

Polsan, Michael PQ 60%

Potter, Dirk AQ 60% Special justification for Qualification

Rahn, David PQ 92%

Rehg, Michael AQ 100%

Siegall, Marc AQ 100% Interim Assoc. Dean

Straus, Peter PQ 100% Special justification for Qualification

Trailer, Jeff O 100% Dept. Chair

York, Matthew PQ 10% Special justification for Qualification

Zivnuska, Suzanne AQ 100%


TABLE 10-2

MANAGEMENT (2 OF 2) % Mission % Mission % Mission


Barton, Mary PQ

NOT INCLUDED

BusComm

Cohen, Marsha PQ

NOT INCLUDED

BusComm

Sprague, Robert PQ

NOT INCLUDED

BusComm

TOTAL MANAGEMENT 1280% 915% 150%



MARKETING

% Mission % Mission % Mission NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES

Andrews, Vernon AQ 20% Post-Doctoral Bridge Program Grad

Blanshei, Lance PQ 20%

Chan, Kenny AQ 100% Dept. Chair

Chapman, Kenneth AQ 100%

Donoho, Casey AQ 100%

Heinze, Timothy AQ 100%

Maligie, William PQ 100% Qualified for MKTG and SCMS; teaches more MKTG

McGowan, William PQ 100%

Meda, Edward PQ 100%

Meuter, Matthew AQ 100%

Misra, Shekhar AQ 50% FERP

Nelsen, Jennifer PQ 40%

Schifferle, Kathryn PQ 70%

Toy, Daniel AQ 50% FERP

Wright, Lauren AQ 50% FERP

TOTAL MARKETING 670% 430% 0%



TOTAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS 3650% 1927% 635%




Assurance of Learning Program Overviews

The following Tables include, for each degree program, the full set of:

Learning goals and objectives

Measures used for assessing achievement on each goal/objective

o Including frequency, outcome thresholds, and plans for improving the

measures

Recent findings

Actions taken as a result of each finding (“Loop Closing”)


Business Administration -- Overview -- Page 1 of 2

Learning Goal Learning Outcome Measure Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance

Frequency of Measurement

Communication

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to effectively present information orally

Presentations in Capstone Class; using rubric developed in April 2005 by COB committee

At least 80% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior

2x in 5 years

Communication

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to effectively present information in writing

Rubric developed by ALAB in Spring 2005.


2x in 5 years

Information Technology

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to demonstrate proficiency in the use of information technology

Modified MINS 300 Excel exercise

To be determined 2x in 5 years

Analytical Thinking & Problem-solving

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to evaluate, analyze and interpret information to make reasoned business decisions.

Critical Thinking Rubric - dev. 2006-2007

At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Developing” or “Mastering.” At least 20% of the ratings are evaluated as “Mastering.”

2x in 5 years

Ethics

Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate proficiency in evaluating ethical issues and situations.

Rubric developed by Ethics ALAB Spring 2009.

At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”

2x in 5 years

Teamwork

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to work effectively in teams.

Team Peer evaluations from BADM 495 group projects


Globalization & Diversity

Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate an awareness of how organizations are affected by globalization and diversity.

UCC 30-item MC test (Spr 2010)


Business Functional Areas (CBKT)

Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to apply business concepts in evaluating business issues.

71 MC questions To be determined 2x in 5 years


Business Administration -- Overview -- Page 2 of 2

Most Recent Loop Closing

Learning Goal

Last Two Times Measured Most Recent Results

Is the measurement process/instrument slated for improvement? Curricular Innovation Improvement Target

Communication (Learning Goal: Oral)

Spring 2010 Spring 2012

All traits met the goal of 80% or more of the students being rated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”

No

Nov 2011: Provided oral presentation rubric to COB faculty for use in courses, since several new faculty have been hired recently. Survey of faculty teaching in core found 58% use the rubric (16/26 respondents).

To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.

Communication (Learning Goal: Written)


Six of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”

Being examined; may be refined for Spring 2013

Spring 2007: Writing handbook English Simplified being systematically adopted across core classes. Advisors and major academic plans (MAPs) putting the Business Communications course earlier in students degree plan. COB writing tutor hired as resource for students, 10 hours/week. Chairs sending messages to faculty regarding writing (e.g., to use rubric and writing handout, use English

Simplified, include written assignments where appropriate, grade quality of writing). More

writing being incorporated into classes (e.g.,

MKT 305, ACCT 202, ACCT 321)


Information Technology


Overall 55.7% on Excel practical test.

Yes. Developed measure based on MINS 301 test, focused on Excel. Need to improve and include other IT areas

2007: Core course coordinators agreed to find ways to better integrate use of Excel in classes


Analytical Thinking & Problem-solving


Two of six traits above the 80% goal of Developing and Mastering combined; 21.6% of ratings were above Mastering; these are both decreases from 2007.

No, but closer fit needed between assignment and rubric.

Spring 2007: Recommended use of critical thinking rubric in class; recommended greater use of cases, simulations and real world projects


Ethics


Spring 2009: 34.6% of the responses were rated as unacceptable, 51.6% were acceptable, and 13.8% were superior.

No

Oct 2010: Sent email to COB faculty recommending use of the ethics rubric; March 2011: sent ethics rubric and PowerPoint slide show to faculty as a result of faculty core course survey from Fall 2010; 2012 survey found 19% of faculty teaching in core use ethics rubric, although 58% include an ethics related assignment


Teamwork


Overall peer evaluation average of 4.82 on a 6 point scale (n=1745).

Will need to change, since BADM 495 no longer uses Glo-bus simulation; new peer evaluation form to be developed

2012: UCC has recommended development of Teamwork module by management faculty, similar to what was done with Ethics. Teamwork module could be used by faculty to emphasize teamwork knowledge dissemination across core.


Globalization & Diversity

Fall 2009 69.6% mean test score; 70.9% met or exceeded UCC expectations

Yes; Fall 2013

March 2010: Recommended to department chairs, core course coordinators, and involved faculty to continue to emphasize consistency within multisection courses, and continue to have material (e.g., chapters, readings, cases) focused on the globalization of business and weave globalization into multiple aspects of each core course.


Business Functional Areas (CBKT)

Fall 2010 Fall 2011

Fall 2011: 57.9% overall average

Yes, Fall 2012



Business Information Systems -- Overview -- Page 1 of 2

Learning Goal Learning Objective Measure Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance


Communicate Effectively

Effectively present business information orally.

Presentations in capstone course (BSIS 496); COB Oral Presentation Rubric


2x in 5 years

Communicate Effectively

Effectively present business information in writing.

Position paper in capstone class (BSIS 496); COB Written Communication Rubric


2x in 5 years

IT Proficiency

Demonstrate an operating knowledge of integrated business information systems implementation in a diverse, global business environment.

Executive summary with appendices; instructor rubric based on BIS Industry Council input

This was a new measure so no initial thresholds were established.

2x in 5 years

Problem Solving

Critically evaluate, analyze and interpret information to identify and solve business problems related to business information systems.

Position paper in capstone class (BSIS 496); COB Critical Thinking/Problem-Solving Rubric


2x in 5 years

Ethics Understand and evaluate ethical issues and situations.

Ethics scenario assignment in capstone course (BSIS 496); COB Ethics Rubric


2x in 5 years

Project Mgt. & Teamwork

Demonstrate an operating knowledge of project management.

BSIS 444 final exam questions bundled into major concept areas


Project Mgt. & Teamwork

Demonstrate an understanding of issues involved in working effectively in teams.

Team peer evaluations from capstone class (BSIS 496); Teamwork KSA test also used in 2008 but not feasible afterward due to its expense


Core Business Knowledge

Demonstrate knowledge of core business areas

COB Core Business Knowledge Test (62 of 71 MC questions; HR questions removed)



BSIS – Overview – Page 2 of 2 Most Recent Loop Closing

Learning Goal Last Two Dates Measured Most Recent Results


Communicate Effectively (Learning Goal: Oral)


Spring 2009: All thresholds met except body language

No.

Spring 2010: In addition to using the COB Oral Presentation rubric for grading, faculty teaching BSIS 496 will emphasize body language (and other characteristics) of good oral presentation using the rubric as a reference.

Meet current threshold level for all traits

Communicate Effectively (Learning Goal: Written)


Spring 2012: Not in yet

No.

Spring 2010: In addition to continuing the use of the COB rubric and English Simplified, faculty teaching BSIS 496 will incorporate more formally the opportunity to rewrite assignments after faculty and peer feedback

To be determined after analysis of Spring 2012 data

IT Proficiency Fall 2010

Fall 2010: Students demonstrated weakness in consideration of database issues, data communications issues, risks and the five-year TCO.

Yes. AY 2012-2013

Spring 2012: The BIS faculty are in the process of devising a new curriculum that reduces the total number of units and emphasizes enterprise information systems more fully. They intend for this learning goal and objective to be measured in a course, BSIS 420, that includes hands-on configuration of an enterprise system and will be required in the new proposed curriculum.

To be determined after the first administration of the new measure

Problem Solving Spring 2010 Spring 2012


Yes, align it more closely with the goal and objective. AY 2012-2013

Spring 2007: Discuss the COB Critical Thinking/Problem Solving rubric traits with students and use it when grading relevant student work.


Ethics Spring 2009 Spring 2012


No.

Fall 2009 - Spring 2010: An accounting faculty member developed scenario-based ethical decision model materials that gave practical examples to help students better understand the concepts measured by all the rubric traits. BIS faculty provided input for the materials and approved their distribution for use in all courses with an ethics component.


Project Mgt. & Teamwork (Proj Mgmt)

Spring 2012 Spring 2012: Not in yet

No.


Project Mgt. & Teamwork (Teams)

Spring 2008 Fall 2010

Fall 2010: Peer evaluation instrument was not sufficiently refined to produce useful results

Yes. We will discuss the use of CATME in Fall 2012.

Spring 2008: The Management Department would enhance teamwork coverage, group activities and consistency across MGMT 303 sections. Fall 2010: Finding an acceptable measurement instrument.

To be determined

Core Business Knowledge


Spring 2012: 55.6% overall average

Yes. The results were difficult to interpret due to a possible mismatch in questions with the most important functional concepts. Spring/Summer 2012

Spring 2012: A biproduct of the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee's reviwion of the CBKT is a list of the most important functional area concepts that can be distributed to students and reinforced in their core courses.

To be determined


MBA – Overview – Page 1 of 4

(MBA Only) Capacities As Per Standard 10 Learning Goal Learning Outcome

2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments

Data-Driven Decision-Making

Students receiving the MBA degree will integrate business data and concepts with core business knowledge to make tactical and strategic business decisions using appropriate information technology

1. Capacity to lead in organizational situations 2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments 4. Capacity to understand management issues from a global perspective

Teamwork Students receiving the MBA degree will be able to manage group dynamics in a multicultural team environment.

1. Capacity to lead in organizational situations 2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments

Ethics Students receiving an MBA degree will recognize and respond to ethical issues related to business practice.

2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments

Communication Skill (a) Students receiving the MBA degree will demonstrate effective oral communication skills.

2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines

Communication Skill (b) Students receiving the MBA degree will produce professional written communications.

2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 4. Capacity to understand management issues from a global perspective

Globalization Students earning the MBA degree will recognize and be able to respond to international issues that impact business.


MBA – Overview – Page 2 of 4

Learning Goal Measure

Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance


Last Two Times Measured


BADM 693 Assignment 3

To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee

Two years: Even

Spring 2012

Teamwork 1. Teamwork Evaluation Form 2. Leadership Test ? 3. Peer eval scores (catme?)


Two years: Even


Ethics Ethics Rubric To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee

Two years: Odd

Spring 2009 Spring 2011 Spring 2012

Communication Skill (a)

Oral Communication Rubric


Two years: Odd

Spring 2007 Spring 2010 Spring 2011

Communication Skill (b)

Written Communication Rubric


Two years: Odd

Spring 2005 Spring 2007 Spring 2011 Spring 2012

Globalization Globalization Rubric


Two years: Odd



MBA -- Overview -- Page 3 of 4 First Three Goals

Most Recent Loop Closing

Learning Goal Most Recent Results



Spring 2012 (new) No. Measure developed Fall 2011, used for first time Spring 2012.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Knowedge tests in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 Other: Discussions at each class mtg ACCT623; financial data analysis & sytem dynamics modeling BADM693; written team project requires decision making based on provided data MKTG673; Excel PivotTables, Data Analysis Solver, XLMiner, GoldSim, SAP queries, SAP data mining BADM610

To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"

Teamwork Spring 2008 1. Planning & Task Coordination dimension, 3 items, range of mean ratings 3.17-3.26 (4-point scale) 2. Percent correct for Self-Mgmt Dimension of Teamwork KSA Test 83.2. Spring 2012 TBA

Yes. Would like to move to CATME as peer eval system. Need to discuss with Bonnie & GPC.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Knowedge tests in: ACCT623 Teamwork required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Peer evals in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: hands-on exercise ACCT623; class discussions on importance of teamwork & support students in resolving issues MKTG673


Ethics Spring 2011 19% Unacceptable, 24% Acceptable, 57% Superior Spring 2012 TBA

No, unless Bonnie requests revisions to better fit with her course.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 AoL slides/handouts used in: MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 Assignments in: MKTG673 Rubric used in: MGMT635 BADM693 Knowedge tests in: MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: Discussions & examples ACCT623



MBA – Overview – Page 4 of 4 Last Three Goals

Most Recent Loop Closings

Results


Communication Skill (a)

Spring 2011 Trait 1: 48% Acceptable, 52% Superior Trait 2: 19% Unacceptable, 29% Acceptable, 52% Superior Trait 3: 48% Acceptable, 52% Superior

No. Revised rubric Fall 2011.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Required readings in: ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Rubric used in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 BADM693 Knowedge tests in: ACCT623 Oral presentations required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: students present cases ACCT623 BADM693; indiv & team presentations play an important role in this course MKTG673


Communication Skill (b)

Spring 2011 19% Unacceptable, 24% Acceptable, 43% Superior Spring 24012 TBA

No. Revised the rubric Fall 2011.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 BADM610 Required readings in: ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Rubric used in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Knowedge tests in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Individual written work required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 English Simplified req'd/recmded: SCMS60 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 English Simplified used in: ACCT623 BADM610 Other: Professional written cases required ACCT623; essay quizzes, final exam, & case studies BADM693; professional mktg plan req'd MKTG673; executive summaries reqd for each case, extensive feedback & industry examples BADM610


Globalization Spring 2011 50% Not Proficient, 40% Ltd Proficiency, 10% Proficient Spring 2012 TBA

No, unless Bonnie requests revisions to better fit with her course. Revised the rubric Spring 2012.

Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 AoL slides/handouts used in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Assignments in: SCMS607 ACCT623 MKTG673 Rubric used in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Knowedge tests in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 Other: classroom discussions ACCT623; cultural intelligence surveys BADM693; major case is global MKTG673; sometimes part of case studies BADM610



Assurance of Learning Program Narratives: Processes and Outcomes

Business Administration


AoL summary – Fall 2011-Spring 2012

In spring 2012 data were collected to assess learning goals in Oral Communication, Written

Communication, Critical Thinking, and Ethics. In addition, the Core Business Knowledge Test

(CBKT) was updated and administered in fall 2011, and data that was collected on Teamwork in

three previous years was analyzed in spring 2012. The only goal not measured in AY 2011-2012

was globalization/diversity. Senior exit surveys were administered in fall 2011 and spring 2012,

and an alignment matrix faculty survey was completed in spring 2012, along with a syllabus

analysis of all core course syllabi. The results of all of these efforts will be presented to the

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) in the fall for discussion / action, with the

exception of the CBKT results which have already been discussed and acted upon by the UCC.


The Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT)

Business Functional Areas Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be

able to apply business concepts in evaluating business issues.

Student Learning Objective Students will be able to apply basic business concepts of

accounting, finance, human resource management, management, marketing, supply chain

management, and management information systems in evaluating business issues.

Proposed Standard: Varies by subject area

Our Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT) was developed with inputs from faculty in all areas

of our core curriculum. A total of 71 test questions were developed for that first administration in

Fall 2010. This test was also administered in Spring and Summer 2011. All three of these

administrations resulted in very similar results – overall average for the test was between 55 –

59%. Discussions with Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) members in Spring 2012

noted the following about the test and the process:

- The results reflect students’ knowledge with no preparation – they are not given any

indication of what will be on the test, only that it covers knowledge from their core

classes; no study guide was provided (although some other schools do provide one)

- Students may have taken some of their core classes two or more years past, and may

have forgotten much of the material by the time they take BADM 495

- The students may not be motivated to do well, since the test is administered in

BADM 495 for extra credit; thus good students may not take it at all or not try as hard

- It was unclear what to expect the students to score, given the conditions; was 60% a

bad score, necessarily?

- Test fatigue may be an issue; students scored poorest on the finance questions, which

were at the end of the test

- The questions may or may not represent the core concepts in each area being tested

During the first three administrations of the test, some procedures were done differently to

determine whether test scores were being adversely affected. This included administering both

on-line and in-class, modifying the make-up of the test, as well as making the test worth 5% of

the student’s grade, to increase their motivation. Results were not statistically different regardless

of these changes.

The test was revised in Fall 2011 to add supply chain management questions, eliminate questions

that showed low reliability, and improve wording in some questions that could have been

confusing to students. In addition, some questions were eliminated to fit the supply chain

questions into the test without making it longer. When the revised test did not produce a

significantly different overall average, the UCC decided to take a closer look at the test.

Although the test was originally developed by faculty from each specialty area, no attempt was

made to identify specific concepts from each subject area which our faculty felt were the most

important for our graduates to remember. Rather, faculty members were left to decide what

questions to include, with no guidance on this task.


Based on this realization, the UCC embarked on a three – phased process of refining the CBKT.

First, they enlisted faculty from each subject area to identify the 5 – 10 key concepts in their

area, concepts that they would absolutely want students to know when they “walked across the

stage.” These concepts would be expected knowledge of all graduates, not just students in a

particular option. Thus, these concepts should be emphasized in the core classes. For each area,

the original list of concepts was refined by the respective faculty members from that area until

they came up with their final list.

The second step in refining the test was to map the current CBKT questions onto the list of

concepts that had just been developed. Faculty in a couple of areas found that several of the core

concepts had not been represented in the test, while other concepts had been overrepresented on

the test. New questions were developed so that a wider coverage of the core concepts would be

on the test. This new test will be deployed in Summer and Fall 2012.

A related outcome to this process is the development of the list of core concepts that all students

should know when they graduate. This is an extremely useful tool in a couple of ways. First, it

can be provided to faculty teaching in the core, so that they understand what the core concepts

are, not only from their own course, but in other core courses as well. This gives faculty a better

understanding of what students should be learning along the way, so they can reinforce or relate

those concepts to the concepts they are teaching. It can be as simple as the capstone instructors

understanding that Time Value of Money is the most important concept in finance, so they can

re-emphasize it in their class. Another example is the standardization of finance and accounting

terms across sections, so that students get the same terminology for key concepts.

A second benefit of this list is to the students themselves. Instructors teaching the capstone

BADM 495 class will be able to share the list of concepts to the students, so they understand that

the areas are interrelated, and they will be held accountable for the knowledge across all their

core classes. This will help establish a clearer picture of their education being an integrated

whole, rather than knowledge that is stove-piped in functional areas that don’t relate to each

other. This is one of the latest efforts by the COB to improve the integration and coordination

across faculty teaching in the BADM core, and the benefits are expected to build as the culture of

the college changes to be more integrative in its instruction.


BADM Assessment of: Analytical Thinking and Problem-Solving

Analytical Thinking and Problem-Solving Learning Goal: Students graduating with a

BADM degree will be able to evaluate, analyze and interpret information to make reasoned

business decisions.

Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate the ability to evaluate, analyze and

interpret information to make reasoned business decisions.

Standard:

At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Developing” or

“Mastering.”

At least 20% of the ratings are evaluated as “Mastering.”

An Assurance of Learning Advisory Board (ALAB) was formed in fall 2006 to research critical

thinking assessment and develop a rubric. The critical thinking rubric chosen was based on a

well used and tested rubric developed at Washington State University. In spring 2007, 60 papers

based on a case analysis that were a graded component of the BADM 495 course were assessed

for this goal. Problems noted with the process included inter-rater reliability, which was quite

low. Percent agreement was only 49%, while the average Cohen’s kappa was .27. A total of five

out of six traits met the goal of 80% of each trait being rated at the Developing or Mastering

level. Averaging across the six traits, 16.7% of the critical thinking ratings were “Emerging,”

53.4% “Developing,” and 29.9% “Mastering”. Thus the secondary goal was met – 29.9% of the

ratings were evaluated as Mastering, beating the goal by about 10%. The main weaknesses were

business analysis and evaluation of the quality of evidence.

In 2012 the process unfolded somewhat differently. The same rubric was used for the

assessment, which was used to grade all of the papers in six sections of BADM 495. Since the

instructors were using the rubric for grading purposes, multiple raters were not used. Prior to the

evaluations, the instructors did discuss the rubric and how to apply it to the case. The six

questions that the students were given to answer about the case were evaluated as to where they

would fit into the rubric. It was not always clear how some of the traits could be applied, since it

was not modified to fit the case study developed for the assignment. In the future it would be

easier to apply the rubric if it was shaped to fit the assignment. The instructors did differ in their

ratings across traits. Although the average percent of Mastering ratings given by both instructors

was very consistent, with less than a 1% difference, there was a 9% difference across the

Emerging and Developing traits. A total of 167 papers were evaluated.

The overall results were somewhat lower in 2012 than in 2007. Only two of the six traits were

above the 80% mark for Developing and Mastering ratings combined. Similar to 2007, this task

was very difficult to execute. An attempt was made in 2012 to avoid the problems with

interpretation of case analyses, which have been known to differ by instructors, so that validity

of conclusions in a typical case study approach to learning is problematic. Forrester (1991) and

Sterman (2006) have both noted the fuzzy nature of qualitative case analysis in management

courses. One recommendation from the 2007 assessment was to use a case with more data

analysis opportunities and instructions. For the 2012 case, an attempt was made to base it more

closely on use and analysis of numerical data, which is more reliable than qualitative data


interpretation. Unfortunately, the standardized rubric, inherent differences between raters and

slight differences in instructions supplied to the students for the case made for difficulties in

executing the assessment.

Actions recommended in 2007 included use of the rubric in courses. Based on the 2012 survey of

faculty teaching BADM core classes, 24% (6/25) indicated they did use the rubric, representing 3

out of 12 classes (1 core class was not represented in the responses). This is not a surprising

finding, given the need to adapt the rubric to the assignment or the assignment to the rubric to

use it most effectively. However, 92% of instructors (23/25) indicated they had an assignment

related to analytical thinking in their core course. Thus there is a lot of potential to increase the

use of the rubric in more core courses.


BADM Assessment of Ethics

Ethics Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate

proficiency in evaluating ethical issues and situations.

Student Learning Objective: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to

identify an ethical dilemma and make an appropriate recommendation to address it.

Standard:

At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or

“Superior.”

Background

In fall 2009, the ethics assurance of learning advisory board (ALAB) consulted the literature on

ethics and the COB faculty in order to develop an ethics rubric. Several ethics scenarios were

adopted from Fritzsche and Becker, 1984, Academy of Management Journal, v. 27(1), 166-175.

The rubric and scenarios were pilot-tested and refined. One scenario was selected for use. In

addition, data was collected on how well ethics is integrated into the BADM core curriculum, in

both 2009 and 2012.

Graduating student’s ethics were first assessed in 2009, and data has been collected from 86

students in BADM 495 in Spring 2012, using the same scenario selected for the 2009

assessment. Additional data collection is planned for summer 2012. This data will be analyzed in

fall 2012. The 2009 results showed only two of six traits to be meeting the goal of 80%

acceptable or superior ratings. Two traits were particularly low – understanding the need for

additional information and the influence of corporate culture – which showed between 30-40%

of ratings at the acceptable or superior level. As a result, the ethics rubric was disseminated to

COB faculty, and an ethics PowerPoint module was developed for faculty to use in classes in

which ethics was covered. Depending on what the 2012 data show, other actions may be

necessary to improve student scores on this learning goal. BADM Assessment Summary –

Ethics learning goal


BADM Assessment of Globalization and Diversity

Globalization and Diversity Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree

will demonstrate an awareness of how organizations are affected by globalization and

diversity.

Student Learning Objective Students will demonstrate knowledge of how organizations are

affected by globalization and diversity.

Standard:

At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Met Expectations” and

“Above Expectations (64% or higher on the globalization test: Above=84%+, Met=64-

83%, Below: 63% or less)

In general, globalization is anything to do with the international aspects of business and the

increasing connectivity and interdependence of the world's markets and businesses. The first

step in this process was to see where globalization issues are addressed in our BADM core

curriculum. The second stage of the globalization assessment effort was to test students’

knowledge. A 30 question multiple-choice test was developed.

This goal was first assessed in spring 2010, and is scheduled to be assessed in AY 2012-2013.

The results from the spring 2010 assessment showed an average score of 70%, but some

questions may need to be refined for clarity. The alignment matrix and globalization test from

2010 suggested that most students were leaving the BADM program with a reasonable degree of

exposure to, and knowledge of, the globalization of business.

The alignment survey administered in spring 2012 showed fairly good coverage of globalization

and diversity in the BADM core, reinforcing the results from the 2010 survey. A total of 68% of

instructors teaching core classes (17/25) indicated their class included required readings on the

topic, while 52% had assignments related to the learning goal. This represented seven of the 12

classes in the core addressing globalization and diversity in these two areas.

Recommendations in 2007 from the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) included the

need to emphasize consistency across multi-section courses. Consistency was found in the 2012

survey across five courses that obtained responses from more than one faculty (BADM 101,

BADM 300, MGMT 303, MGMT 304 and BADM 495). A majority of faculty (from 52 – 84%)

responded with Yes answers to the five question survey on the globalization learning goal. This

translates into an average of 3.36 yes answers out of five possible on the survey, or 67%. Only

two faculty members had zero yes answers in their responses. Thus it appears the BADM core is

still providing a solid level of coverage of this learning goal.


BADM Assessment of Information Technology

Information Technology Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be

able to demonstrate proficiency in the use of information technology.

Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective use of IT skills in the areas

of information search, word processing, use of spreadsheets, and presentation software.

Standard: TBD

Measure: Modified MINS 301 test – 25 point Excel test

The COB initially assessed IT skills in spring 2006 using the Prentice-Hall Train and Assess IT

software. This tested students’ abilities in Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. The tests

were timed and students were given two tries at each task. In addition, a 30 question multiple-

choice test was designed to assess students’ knowledge of IT concepts and vocabulary. BADM

students overall averaged 64.7 on the software tests, and had the most difficulty with Excel and

Word. Recommendations from the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) included an IT

proficiency exam for all students, additional Excel and Word assignments in core classes, and

Microsoft Office certification at the “specialist” level for all students.

In Spring 2012, the IT goal was evaluated both directly and indirectly. A direct measure of

student’s ability to obtain data from the internet and manipulate it in Excel (25 separate tasks)

was developed and administered to six sections of BADM 495 (126 students total). Results were

somewhat lower than in 2006, but differences in test administration and content may have

affected the results. The indirect measure was included on the BADM 495 final exam in the

same sections that administered the Excel test. Three (no credit) questions were included on the

exam which asked how proficient the students considered themselves to be in Microsoft Word,

Excel and PowerPoint. Response choices were a = Poor to d = Excellent. The results (n = 156)

showed that on average students rated themselves lowest in Excel skills (mean = 2.95), followed

by PowerPoint (mean = 3.46) and Word (mean = 3.63). The survey results are supported by the

results of the Excel test. Students who indicated they possessed “Excellent” Excel skills averaged

66% on the Excel test; students who indicated they possessed “good” Excel skills averaged 54%

on the Excel test; students who indicated they possessed “fair” or “poor” Excel skills averaged

48% on the Excel test.

The overall conclusion on Excel skills is that the students need more training and practice in

Excel during the course of their education. The means for improving student’s IT skills will be

discussed with the UCC in fall 2012.


BADM Assessment of Communication (Oral)

Communication Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to

effectively present information orally and in writing.

Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective oral presentation skills.

Standard:


“Superior.”

Oral Presentation Assessment Summary

Oral presentations have been assessed in the senior capstone course three times since 2004 using

the same rubric. Overall the results have been very similar. The difficulty in duplicating methods

across sections, understanding of the rubric and inherent differences across evaluators lead to

differences in some of the ratings. Overall though, there is remarkable consistency in the

evaluations across years, demonstrated by the results in Table 1 for the last two assessments.

This rubric has been widely accepted across the COB, and may be one reason for the students

doing well on their presentations.

Table 1. Results of Oral Presentation assessment in 2010 and 2012.

In spring 2012 two BADM 495 instructors rated the presentations that students were required to

perform for their final case analysis. The presentations were evaluated using the COB

presentation rubric and were worth 5% of the overall course grade. Each instructor individually

rated their own students.

During the semester students were graded using the rubric for article presentations they were

required to give. This helped the students become familiar with expectations, and helped the

instructors gain skill in applying the rubric.

In 2012, all areas met the goal of 80% or more of the students being rated at acceptable or

superior for each trait. While this is good, it is possible that the instructors were not as strict in

Traits

% Unacceptable % Acceptable % Superior

2010 2012 2010 2012 2010 2012

Body Language 11.8 4.0 57.8 36.2 30.4 59.8

Eye Contact 21.7 10.3 46.0 37.9 32.3 51.7

Vocal Presentation

and Tone

9.3 4.0 70.2 54.6 20.5 41.4

Attire 4.4 2.3 95.7 97.7 N/A

Word Choice 1.3 0.6 90.0 15.5 8.8 79.9

Use of Visual Aids 2.5 8.0 72.7 69.5 24.8 22.4

Organization 2.5 10.3 79.3 51.7 18.2 37.9

Support/ Evidence ---- 5.7 96.3 57.5 3.7 36.8


applying the rubric as evaluators were in the past. For instance, in 2012 the percent of

presentations rated as unacceptable increased for three traits – Use of Visual Aids, Organization

and Support/Evidence. However, in the other five traits the percent unacceptable all decreased.

This could be just a difference in what the evaluators particular biases were in making their

judgments.

At this time the results do not warrant any changes to what is occurring in the curriculum in

regards to oral presentation skills. The emphasis on practicing presentation skills and the use of

the rubric across the core classes seems to be having a positive effect on students. If a subsequent

assessment produces similar success, the COB may consider revising the goal upwards from its

current 80% level, which was established in 2004 as an initial goal.


BADM Assessment of Communication (Written)

Communication Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to

effectively present information orally and in writing.

Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective business writing skills.

Standard:


“Superior.”

In spring 2007, a total of 60 papers randomly selected from BADM 495 were evaluated by two

raters using the written communication rubric. After their evaluations the raters met to discuss

their ratings and resolve differences. Agreement between raters was excellent – 96.8%. The

papers were based on a case analysis and were a graded component of the course.

In this assessment, three of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at

“Acceptable” or “Superior,” with one trait paragraph structure, coming in at 65% or just under

the goal. The main weaknesses were writing mechanics (grammar, punctuation, spelling),

followed by professionalism, and then sentence structure.

As a result of this assessment, faculty were encouraged to (1) incorporate more written

assignments and provide quality feedback and require/use English Simplified. Also, the

Corporate Reality Writing in the Workplace event was developed..

In spring 2012, a total of 164 papers from BADM 495 were using the written rubric developed

previously. The papers were again based on a case analysis and were a graded component of the

course. A total of six sections taught by two instructors were involved.

In this latest assessment, six of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at

“Acceptable” or “Superior.” The Professional Format and Use of Conventions trait did not meet

the goal. Overall, the number of “Acceptable” ratings was vastly improved, with a resultant

decrease in “Unacceptable” and “Superior” ratings. Validation of the results will occur in fall

2012, to ensure that the rubric was applied in a similar manner.

The 2012 faculty survey showed that overall it appears that the use of written assignments and

the writing rubric is rebounding in core classes. Feedback and discussion with the Undergraduate

Curriculum Committee will occur in Fall 2012.


BADM Assessment of Teamwork

Teamwork Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to work

effectively in teams.

Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate the ability to collaborate as a team to

achieve a common objective.

Standard: TBD

Spring 2008

Student performance on this goal was measured in spring 2008 through the Teamwork

Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA) test developed by Stevens and Campion (1994, Journal

of Management, v 20(2), 503-530). This is a proprietary test that is widely used for pre-

employment screening and professional development. The overall average test score for BADM

students was approximately 67%, and somewhat higher for Redding students (71%).

A second (though indirect) measure of teamwork, based on as survey by Senior and Swailes,

(2007) was used. No differences were found based on gender, whether or not students were

transfer students, or if students were in the Redding program. Overall, students in each program

rated their teams as functioning rather well on the traits measured.

Based on these findings, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) recommended some

changes in classes that use teams (especially MGMT 303, MKTG 305 and BADM 495). One of

these recommendations was the consistent use of peer evaluation forms, which was done in

BADM 495 (see analysis below).

Spring 2012

Over much of the last 5 years, the BADM 495 senior capstone class used an on-line simulation

called Glo-bus as the major, team-based project in the course. Part of the on-line simulation

included a peer evaluation process, the results of which only the instructor could see. Students

were told that their grades could change depending on the evaluations they received from their A

total of 1745 student evaluations were included in the analysis. The evaluations took place

between fall 2008 and spring 2011.

Overall, the scores are very good, demonstrating that most of the students know how to be good

teammates. Nevertheless, the UCC has requested that a teamwork module be developed by the

Management department for use by instructors who use student teams. This would help increase

the actual instruction of team theory and practice

The UCC also began discussion about a replacement assessment tool, as the Glo-bus simulation

is no longer used in BADM 495. This discussion will continue in Fall 2012.

Formatted for two-sided printing.



Business Information Systems


Business Information Systems Program (BS-BSIS)

Assurance of Learning Summary

June 2012

Continuous Improvement Overview

The BIS faculty maintains regular, open communication among its members, students and

industry partners that contributes to continuous improvement of the program. BIS faculty

members typically meet weekly or bi-weekly to discuss program matters and upcoming events.

The BIS Society (http://chicobis.org/index.php) invites faculty to its weekly meetings and targets

one or two meetings a year to discuss courses and program issues with faculty. Finally, the BIS

program meets semiannually with the BIS Industry Council. The purpose of these meetings is to

facilitate dialog with industry partners concerning the BIS curriculum vis-à-vis a quickly

changing information technology landscape and its impact on the program direction, course

content and pedagogy.

Assessments and Improvements

The current learning goals and objectives are the result of discussion and approval by the BIS

faculty with input from industry partners. Where appropriate (e.g., communication goal), they

are similar to BS-BADM goals since the two programs overlap in a number of their business

core courses. Where this is the case, the BIS program typically uses the same measurement

instruments as BADM.

Recent assessments and improvements for each learning objective are summarized below. The

entire BIS faculty serves as the program curriculum committee. Assessment results are presented

to them and, when performance is not acceptable, faculty members brainstorm improvement

ideas in a meeting. The potential improvements are discussed further with one or more ideas

typically being approved by the group to be incorporated into the curriculum and its pedagogy.

In some instances, ideas may be vetted with the BIS Industry Council.

BSIS Goal 1: Communicate Effectively

1.1 Effectively present business information orally

The oral presentation objective is measured using a course-embedded individual presentation in

the capstone course (BSIS 496). Students select an organization and present an overview of the

organization's strategy and how IT contributes to its success. This assignment is based on the

BIS Industry Council's encouragement to challenge students to make brief presentations that

force a prioritization of content and emphasize effective delivery. The instructor discusses the

COB oral presentation rubric traits with students as part of the preparation for the presentation.

The last assessment of oral presentation occurred in Spring 2009. We recorded the student

presentations and assigned two faculty members (one outside BIS) to evaluate the student work

http://chicobis.org/index.php


using the COB oral presentation rubric. After a check of inter-rater reliability, the assessment

facilitator brought the evaluators together to review videos where their scores differed

significantly. Evaluators adjusted scores when they felt that they were misaligned with the rubric

scoring definitions.

The students' performance was, in general, acceptable but did not meet the threshold for body

language. The BIS faculty discussed the results and decided to supplement the past practice of

discussing the rubric with students and using it for grading purposes. The suggested

improvement was that the course instructor provide additional emphasis on body language and

provide specific examples of both good and bad practice using sample presentation videos as a

source.

1.2 Effectively present business information in writing

The capstone course is designated as a writing proficiency course for the BIS program. The

writing learning objective is typically assessed in this course using a position paper in which

students take a controversial position relevant to IT and defend it. The resulting paper can be

submitted to the Fredrick A. and Corinne E. Schwartz Award paper competition. The instructor

includes the COB writing rubric with the position paper instructions and discusses traits as they

relate to the assignment.

A faculty member who has taught BSIS 496 previously has been assigned the assessment of

Spring 2012 papers but the results are not yet available. Previous assessments indicated general

weakness across most of the traits, especially those related to mechanics. Instructors have used

the COB writing rubric for discussion with students and grading for at least five years and

included English Simplified as a reference textbook. Where budget allowed, students have also

had access to a COB writing tutor. Achieving significant improvements in writing quality has, as

yet, been difficult.

We added an improvement, based on assessment results and research on improving writing,

which incorporates more formally the opportunity to rewrite assignments based on feedback

from either the instructor or peers. Some writing assignments in the course have designated draft

and final versions. Others have mandatory rewrites if the quality is deemed unacceptable by the

instructor. All writing assignments also have an open rewrite policy to improve the writing

component of the grade.

BS-BSIS Goal 2: IT Proficiency

2. Demonstrate an operating knowledge of integrated business information systems

implementation in a diverse, global business environment

At its Spring 2010 meeting with faculty, the BIS Industry Council provided input on both the

type of case study and rubric traits they felt would be appropriate for measuring this learning

objective. The industry partners suggested either the construction of an RFP or the

recommendation of an IT solution from a set of alternative choices. They also emphasized the


importance of the quality of a student's analysis process and support for a recommendation rather

than the recommendation itself.

We assessed this learning objective in Fall 2010 using a case study based on cloud versus on-site

implementations of an ERP system. The instructor evaluated the students' performance on the

case study relative to writing quality and traits that included consideration of fit with user

requirements, database issues, data communications issues, training and change management,

relative benefits and risks as well as five-year total cost of ownership (TCO) estimates. Students

were especially weak in their consideration of database issues, data communications issues, risks

and the five year TCO.

Faculty discussions eventually led to a recommendation to require a hands-on enterprise system

implementation course (BSIS 420) that has previously been an elective. The BIS faculty is

currently in the process of devising a new curriculum that reduces the total number of units and

emphasizes enterprise information systems more fully. BSIS 420 will be part of the upper

division core in the proposed curriculum with this learning objective being measured in it in the

future.

BS-BSIS Goal 3: Problem Solving

3. Critically evaluate, analyze and interpret information to identify and solve business

problems related to business information systems

The critical thinking and problem solving objective is typically assessed in the capstone course

simultaneously with the writing objective using the same position paper assignment described

above. Evaluators score the papers with the COB critical thinking/problem solving rubric which

has also been included with the position paper instructions and discussed in class in preparation

for the assignment.

A faculty member who has taught BSIS 496 previously has been assigned the assessment of

Spring 2012 papers in conjunction with the writing assessment but the results are not yet

available. In previous assessments, student performance has generally exceeded the threshold on

all traits. The BIS faculty has expressed some concern that the COB critical thinking/problem

solving rubric may not be aligned closely enough with the BIS objective and will consider

alterations to the rubric after the Spring 2012 results are presented at an early Fall 2012 meeting.

BS-BSIS Goal 4: Ethics

4. Understand and evaluate ethical issues and situations

The capstone course contains an ethics scenario analysis which is used for course-embedded

assessment of the ethics objective. Recently, the scenario analysis has focused on one of the

ethical dilemmas described in the required book, The Adventures of an IT Leader. The course

instructor discusses the COB ethics rubric with students and uses it for grading the assignment.

The course instructor is providing Spring 2012 assessment data based on the COB ethics rubric

but the results are not yet available for analysis. The last assessment (Spring 2009) revealed

weak performance on two traits: the need for additional information and the impact of corporate


culture. The BIS faculty decided that an ethical decision making handout would be helpful for

use in BIS courses that have an ethics-related component. An accounting faculty member

developed a summary of ethical decision making steps and approaches that are consistent with

common practice, MGMT 303 concepts and the COB ethics rubric. The handout included a

practical example of following the steps for a realistic ethical dilemma. The draft module was

revised based on BIS faculty input and distributed to faculty in Spring 2010.

BS-BSIS Goal 5: Project Mgt. & Teamwork

5.1 Demonstrate an operating knowledge of project management

The BIS faculty began planning the assessment of project management in Fall 2009 with the

gathering of the most important concepts from faculty teaching project management. After

analysis of the curriculum matrix, however, the group concluded that project management

knowledge was not sufficiently covered in the curriculum to justify assessing students'

knowledge. The BIS faculty recommended emphasizing project management concepts in the

Systems Analysis course (MINS 350).

The initial measure of students' performance in key project management areas will be Spring

2012 final exam questions from BSIS 444 (Systems Project Management). BSIS 444 is a course

added to the curriculum in the 2009-2010 academic year, required for the MINS and SCMS

options and elective for AIS (an option currently under administrative suspension). The data are

not yet available but will be analyzed over the summer with results being presented to the BIS

faculty for discussion in Fall 2012. Whether this will continue to be the course-embedded

measurement of choice will depend on the usefulness of the results as well as the fate of the AIS

option since the course is only an elective in this option.

5.2 Demonstrate an understanding of issues involved in working effectively in teams

The first assessment of this objective occurred in Spring 2008 and consisted of a standardized

teamwork knowledge and skills test (Teamwork KSA) developed by Stevens and Campion

(Journal of Management, 1994, v 20(2), 503-530). The instructor administered the test to

students in the capstone course. The results indicated that students struggled with collaborative

problem solving and team communication concepts. The improvement initiative (developed at

the college level) included an enhancement of MGMT 303 to increase coverage of teamwork

concepts, group activities and consistency across sections. The proprietary Teamwork KSA test,

unfortunately, became infeasible due to its industry-based cost and lack of academic discount for

use with students.

In Fall 2010, open-ended peer evaluations from a capstone class team project that described task

allocations and contributions were used to assess teamwork. The assessment was not sufficiently

structured to produce clear results for assessment purposes. This academic year (2011-2012), the

BIS faculty discussed the possible use of the Comprehensive Assessment for Team-Member

Effectiveness (CATME) survey (see https://engineering.purdue.edu/CATME) to capture

assessments for this objective. Final discussions and trial use of CATME are planned for 2012-

2013.

https://engineering.purdue.edu/CATME


BS-BSIS Goal 6: Core Business Knowledge

6. Demonstrate knowledge of core business areas

The initial assessment of this objective occurred in Spring 2009 with the administration of the

CSU Business Assessment Test (BAT). At that point, the COB had not developed its own core

business knowledge test, and the BIS faculty wanted to get an initial measurement of how our

students might perform on a test covering broad business concepts. The BIS students'

performance compared favorably to other business students in CSU business schools who

administered the test. The BIS faculty, however, felt that the results were not particularly

actionable due to the relatively small sample and potential lack of alignment with our core

courses.

Subsequent to the use of the CSU BAT for BIS program assessment, the COB developed its

Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT). The capstone course instructor administered the CBKT

in Spring 2012. BIS students scored similarly to BADM students and, as expected, better on the

MIS questions. As discussed above, there were difficulties in interpreting the CBKT results and

using them for meaningful improvements. There are two positive outcomes from the faculty

discussions regarding the CBKT analysis. Each area in the COB has developed a list of key

concepts that can now be distributed to students and the CBKT will now contain questions

driven by the key concepts.



MBA


MBA Assurance of Learning

2008 – 2012

Suzanne Zivnuska, PhD

Five years of dynamic change and growth in our MBA Assurance of Learning (AOL) efforts

leave us well positioned to move forward into the next review period with a clear strategic goal

and sound methodologies to track our students’ learning and continuously improve our

programmatic offerings.

Pivotal moments from the past five years are highlighted below:

Spring 2008 · Assessment: MBA Teamwork

Fall 2008 · Loop Closing (Teamwork): Assessment results reviewed, no

improvements indicated

Spring 2009 · Assessment: MBA Ethics & Exit Survey; PMBA Ethics, Oral, &

Written Communication, Exit Survey, & Alignment Matrix

Fall 2009 · Leadership of the MBA AOL effort passed from Ken Chapman to

Suzanne Zivnuska

· Loop Closing (Learning Goals): Learning goals reviewed and revised by

the Graduate Program Committee (GPC)

· Loop closing (Ethics): development of standardized ethics slides and

handouts

· PMBA program discontinued

Spring 2010 · Assessment: Oral Communication

· Loop Closing (Exit Survey): Graduate Programs Executive Speaker &

Reception

Fall 2010 · Assessment: Alignment Matrix

· Loop Closing (Exit Survey & Teamwork): Graduate Business

Association (GBA) reinstated, Suzanne Zivnuska Faculty Advisor

Spring 2011 · Assessment: Ethics, Written Communication, & Globalization

Fall 2011 · Loop Closing (MBA AOL Program): streamlining and organization of

the AOL effort, areas for improvement identified

Spring 2012 · Loop Closing (Learning Goals): Revision and ratification of Learning

Goals

· Loop Closing (Measurement): Revision and ratification of rubrics for

Oral and · Written Communication, Ethics, & Globalization

· Loop Closing (Globalization): development of standardized

globalization slides & handouts

· Assessment: Written Communication, Ethics, Globalization, &

Teamwork

As shown, the major efforts have been threefold: gaining increased traction regarding regular

assessment, loop closing, and making programmatic improvements to the AOL process itself. In

addition, there has been extensive commitment to loop closing efforts at the course level, with

every instructor regularly working to improve their course and better align it to our

programmatic learning goals. These course-level loop closings are reported in the MBA AOL

Summary Matrix.


Several points of pride emerge as I reflect on the timeline above. In particular, in the last five

years we have developed two new measures (globalization and data driven decision making),

focused heavily on loop closing at both the curricular and the assessment system levels. Each of

these will be discussed in turn.

At the time of our last assessment, we had never measured data-driven decision making. In fact,

although the faculty has generally felt quite passionately that it teaching data-driven decision

making is a clear priority for our program, it has also been one of the most difficult for the

faculty to define. Therefore, quite a bit of time and effort has gone into facilitating discussions

clarifying the goal and the learning objective to clearly reflect the intent and strength of our

program. Having clarified the goal, the measurement piece still did not fall easily into place.

Creating a global measure that could be used in any course became quite difficult, as faculty had

discipline specific ideas about what kind of data students should be proficient and in the tools

that they should be using in making their decisions.

The first attempt to create a measure was therefore focused on the creation of a very broad, all

inclusive case study. Eventually it became clear that this sort of case would be equivalent to a

30-50 page Harvard Business School Case Study, and was well beyond the scope of the

assessment effort, in terms of time developing the case, student time analyzing the case, and rater

time assessing student work.

Therefore, I redirected my efforts, focusing on finding course embedded assignments that we

could leverage for the assessment of this goal. I am very pleased with the measure that we now

have in place. Data-driven decision-making is now assessed in the capstone course using a series

of three course-embedded assignments. With some minor adjustments to the assignments, we

are now able to tap into student ability to “integrate business data and concepts with core

business knowledge to make tactical and strategic business decisions using appropriate

information technology” in a smooth, well-integrated way that complements and supports our

curriculum.

Additionally, at the time of our last assessment, globalization was not targeted as a particular

learning goal. Over a series of discussions with the graduate faculty, it was agreed upon that a

goal for globalization did in fact need to be added to our list. This decision meant that there was

yet another goal that had yet to be measured.

Developing an adequate tool for assessing globalization proved to be more difficult than

expected. The first attempt focused only on assessing student knowledge of facts and figures.

Trying to keep the tool easy to use meant that we focused on trying to create a multiple choice

test of what students knew about global business. It was quickly apparent that this approach was

not at all suited to our expectations of graduate student achievement. Thus, we switched gears

and developed a case study. The case we developed was too short to provide much analytical

framework and was also created outside of the course. Therefore, it should come as no surprise

that the first time we piloted the case was somewhat disappointing. Because the case was not

embedded as a graded class assignment, it was difficult to get adequate compliance in terms of

assignment completion or attention to quality. Revisions were clearly in order.


I focused my revisions in three areas: 1. finding a more compelling, detailed, real-world case; 2.

revising the rubric with an eye towards more curricular integration, and 3. packaging the entire

assessment in a course-embedded assignment. Our new course, BADM 647 (Leadership, Ethics,

and Corporate Social Responsibility) provided me with the perfect vehicle to assess this goal.

The case is based on a current event reported in the Wall Street Journal. The article provides

enough context and depth to allow students to grapple with the issues, but is written in an

accessible, direct style so that it is not too cumbersome. The rubric was refined to better fit with

best practices and current thinking in globalization. And best of all, this new case also allowed

us to vastly streamline our assessment process by lending itself to the measurement of two other

learning goals, ethics and written communication. As a result, we can now assess three learning

goals with one, course-embedded, graded case study and three rubrics.

In addition to the substantial effort that was dedicated towards measurement and assessment in

the past five year cycle, we have also increased our attention and commitment to loop closing.

At the curricular level, we have begun to use a yearly survey that asks faculty members to report

on all the loop closing activities that they engage in to support student achievement of our

learning goals. This survey helps to remind faculty members of the small improvements that

they can make in their courses through a series of “yes/no” loop closing suggestions (e.g., do you

include learning goals in your syllabi) as well as encourages them to think outside of the box

with open ended questions about new readings, assignments, and other innovations that they

have integrated into their coursework.

I have also dedicated myself to several loop closing activities at the more macro level. This last

year in particular, my main focus was on taking all of the incremental pieces of the graduate

program assessment and integrating them into one comprehensive, integrated, streamlined

system of assessment. To that end, I focused with the faculty on reviewing and revising our

learning goals and objectives. We went from a complex, overwhelming structure of 6 learning

goals with 24 associated learning objectives, to a more straightforward system including a far

more manageable 6 learning objectives. We have developed a calendar that will support a more

regular periodic assessment of each learning goal. We are working to develop agreements

around the minimum level of achievement that we expect from students for each learning goal,

as well as defining some improvement targets for each goal. Our assessment tools have all been

reviewed and revised for increased practicality.

In sum, what was once a cumbersome, overwhelming process of program assessment is now a

very useable, actionable system. It lends itself to the true goal of any assessment activity:

identifying areas for improvement, tracking efforts to improve our learning community, and

committing ourselves to continuously improve student outcomes.


We don’t just have a few Centers of Excellence; we have many…

Areas of Goodness


Areas of Goodness

The Goodness of SAP

THE PROGRAM

In June of 1996, SAP America, Inc., the world leader in enterprise business software systems,

selected California State University, Chico, as its first partner in the SAP America University

Alliances (UA) Program. In 2002, due to rapid growth in the UA program, SAP asked Chico to

provide application hosting services for outside educational institutions that could not afford the

in-house staff required to self-host. In 2006, Chico was chosen to become one of five

universities worldwide to provide academic hosting services and was designated an SAP

University Competence Center (UCC). Presently, the Chico UCC serves the SAP hosting needs

of more than 120 universities in North and South America.

As a pioneer in bringing enterprise-class software to the classroom, Chico’s SAP program

provides more depth across more disciplines than any other university in North America. The

Chico program has grown from a single class integrating SAP in 1996 to about 20 courses that

actively integrate the use of SAP software in the classroom. Since the beginning of the program,

Chico faculty have attended more than five hundred days of formal training at SAP training

centers, workshops, and conferences.

AWARD WINNING FACULTY

In 2012, Dr. Ray Boykin was given the Majdi Najm Outstanding Service Award, for providing

outstanding service to the SAP University Alliances program. This award recognizes those who

have advanced, and continue to advance the use of SAP in the classroom. The winners are

notable for their collaboration with faculty members from other SAP University Alliances

campuses. Since the inception of this award, the honorees chosen have demonstrated a history of

leadership in the program, through participation at the SAP Curriculum Congress and workshop

events, development of curriculum content, mentoring of other faculty, and promotion of the

SAP University Alliances program both on and off their home campus.

UNIQUE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS

The TERP 10 (Training Enterprise Resource Planning) Academy is a two week SAP certification

course that students can get through the SAP University Alliance. The students become

"Certified Business Associates in SAP ERP 6.0" upon passing the test. There are only a handful

of these Academies across the US. Two Chico faculty member teach TERP 10 at Chico, and

there are only 14 TERP instructors in the whole United States. Approximately 45 students will

be attending the academy this year.


The Goodness of Innovative Faculty

Dr. Hyunjung Kim, Assistant Professor of Management, writes:

The Department of Management at CSU Chico is one of the few programs in the United States

where students can get a system dynamics education at the undergraduate level.

System dynamics recognizes that decision tasks are often embedded in a system that is composed

of many interrelated parts. Delayed causal responses and the complexities of the system often

counteract, amplify, or dynamically change the intended outcomes of managerial decisions. The

results often leave managers confused and frustrated. With the help of computer simulation

models, system dynamics allows decision makers to broaden their perception of the system to

incorporate diverse perspectives, communicate with more clarity how systems are structured,

understand the complexity of the systems that they manage, understand potential side effects of

policies with good intentions, and ultimately make better decisions.

As mentioned in the report, we have the largest MIT trained Systems Dynamics group outside of

Massachusetts. We have been integrating system dynamics into different courses, to meet the

growing demand for managers who are able make decisions with the whole system in mind.

In the Department of Management, we offer an online system dynamics course, MGMT 470

Business Dynamics. This is a “hard-core” modeling course for those who want to build

mathematically rigorous simulation models to support decision making. For more general

business applications of system dynamics, the undergraduate and graduate capstone courses

(BADM 495, Applied Strategic Decision-Making; BADM 693, Seminar in Strategic

Management and Administrative Policy) have adopted a system dynamics approach. In addition,

the qualitative aspect of system dynamics has been introduced in our sustainability and

introductory management courses.

By equipping our students with system dynamics tools and perspectives, we believe that we are

enhancing their career prospects as managers or entrepreneurs. Our graduates will see the big

picture of how a system’s behavior is explained by its structure. Being able to find effective

leverage points for change, they will bring long-term success to their organizations.


The Goodness of the Business Advising Office

PEER ADVISING

Since the Fall of 2006, our Business Advising Office has used peer advisors to work with

Business students and those enrolled in our Minors. Typically, we have three to six advisors

working up to 20 hours per week. Peer Advisors go through the same extensive training as the

full-time advisors. Beginning by seeing freshmen and sophomores, and as their knowledge level

grows peer advisors begin seeing juniors and seniors. Their duties include working every Fall

semester to help our freshmen and sophomores select courses and register.

AWARD WINNING DIRECTOR

Amy Lance (Director of Advising) won the 2010 Maggie Award. The Maggie Awards

originated in 1994 as a way for the AS Women's Center and women's council to recognize

Maggie Pattison, an office manager for the Associated Students. After her retirement in 1994,

Pattison's legacy lives on through women in the community. The Maggie Award ceremony

is held to honor women's achievements through their advocacy and ability to create change on a

local, national and global level.

BEING GREEN

Creating a sustainable learning and working environment is a priority for Business Advising.

Towards that end, we have or will be moving paper processes to paperless in an effort to lessen

our impact on the environment, while strengthening our impact with the students we serve.

Milestones in this effort include:

Moved from paper advising to paperless with our Electronic Advising System.

o Includes “exceptions” records, multiple forms for evaluations and clearance

processes, including Major/Minor Clearances

Electronic COB Advisor Manual

Implemented the use of VISTA/Blackboard as a tool for communicating with our

students and a resource for them to find important documents (advising sheets, etc.).

The Chico State Institute for Sustainable Practices recognized the Advising Office as one of the

most sustainable offices on campus for its entire set of “green” practices.

A PROFESSIONALLY ACTIVE STAFF

Every semester, team members from Business Advising have presented at the National and

Regional conferences of the National Academic Advising Association. Our staff are considered

experts in “best practices” within the country. Our Director has been awarded scholarships,

asked to be an editor and author for various monographs, journals, and other publications

published by the association.


The Goodness of Sustainability

NET IMPACT

Net Impact is an international, nonprofit organization determined to change the world through

sustainable business. Our program focuses on social responsibility, nonprofit management, and

environmental sustainability. Our members include undergraduate students, graduate students,

and professionals worldwide. Through our network, this organization strives to educate, equip,

and inspire others to magnify their impact. We offer a variety of internship and leadership

opportunities designed to improve our campus and community.

Net Impact (NI) advisor Bonnie Persons writes: NI students received the top

honor in sustainability for a campus group in 2012! The nominations are open system wide (UC

and CSU) and the award is presented at the This Way to Sustainability Conference opening

banquet. I could not be more proud of these students! NI is a relatively small group of dedicated

students who are all passionate about the NI mission, “changing the world through sustainable

business”. These students have worked very hard on projects including bike sharing, solar

assessment, and Free-recycle (a monthly fund raiser originally started to support fire victims).

SUPPORTING STUDENTS AND LOCAL BUSINESSES

Angela Casler was the recipient of the 2012 Paul Maslin Award. The award looks to celebrate

and honor individuals who are passionate about environmental health, personal environmental

impact, and promoting social awareness of humanity’s relationship with the natural environment.

Angela has dedicated herself to class projects that increase sustainable practices with small

business in Chico. These projects are designed to identify small cost-effective solutions to

increase the sustainable practices of small businesses Angela was recognized for her efforts to

bringing students together with the local community to increase sustainability on campus and

within the community.

PERMEATING THE COLLEGE

Many of the Areas of Goodness collected here have an additional theme of sustainability. More

on the College’s activities in sustainability are described here

http://www.csuchico.edu/cob/theCollege/leadership/sust-research.shtml and here

http://www.csuchico.edu/sustainablefuture/academicPrograms/documents/7-22-

09%20minor_mgmt_%20brochure.pdf

http://www.csuchico.edu/cob/theCollege/leadership/sust-research.shtml

http://www.csuchico.edu/sustainablefuture/academicPrograms/documents/7-22-09%20minor_mgmt_%20brochure.pdf

http://www.csuchico.edu/sustainablefuture/academicPrograms/documents/7-22-09%20minor_mgmt_%20brochure.pdf


The Goodness of Being Entrepreneurial

COME FOR A WEEKEND, STAY FOR A WEEK

The Center for Entrepreneurship hosts an annual weeklong celebration of entrepreneurship called

eWeek. The week of events (which includes business competitions, entrepreneurial videos, and

guest speakers) is designed to promote the entrepreneurial spirit at Chico State and provide a

platform for students to apply their entrepreneurial skills.

The 2012 event included the first annual Jumpstart Weekend; a 36 hour intense event bringing

together Chico State students and recent graduates who are united in their passion to launch a

business in one and a half days. All are welcome but especially entrepreneurs, graphic designers,

engineers, coders and dreamers.

Similar to the well-known Startup Weekend events which occur worldwide, the concept of

JumpStart Weekend comes from a simple idea: If people with different skills and ideas are

brought together and locked in a room, provided with food and copious amounts of coffee,

spectacular results are bound to happen.


The Goodness of Faculty and Students as World Citizens

AN AMAZING ALUMNUS

Recent accounting graduate Koala Koudougou is Founder and President of Feeding Nations

Through Education (FNTE). FNTE works to relieve famine and raise literacy by equipping

African villagers with bulls, plows, and training in sustainable agriculture so they can grow

enough food to sell a surplus to fund their children’s education. Koudougou was an international

student who was born, raised and educated in a village outside of Thyou, Burkina Faso.

STUDYING ABROAD

The College of Business has more students who participate in the campus’ Study Abroad

Program than any other major in the University. In 2011-2012, 75 business students headed

overseas, equaling about 20% of all CSUC students. The next highest majors were

Communication (31) and International Relations (20).

BUILDING HOPE, HALF A WORLD AWAY

In 2002 a young man named Saah Joseph met a group of missionaries in a refugee camp in

Senegal (West Africa). Saah had ended up at this camp after years of running from the civil

wars in West Africa beginning at the age of 12 (when his father was executed by rebel soldiers)

in his home country of Liberia. At the time of the meeting Saah had just heard that his mother

had been shot by rebels in the civil war going on in Sierra Leone (country from the movie

“Blood Diamonds”) and needed surgery. The missionaries provided Saah the funds to return to

Sierra Leone and paid for his mother’s surgery.

Fast forward to the fall of 2007, Raymond Boykin (Professor Emeritus, Supply Chain

Management) joins a group of people traveling to Sierra Leone to help with building schools,

churches, and clinics in a country only a couple of years removed from civil war. The

organization that Ray is now a part of (and on the board) is West Africa Partners. Through the

efforts of the organizations affiliated with West Africa Partners there are now more than 30

churches with over 5000 member and over 30 schools educating more than 10,000 children. In

addition, other projects include 40+ fresh water wells, fishing businesses, agricultural projects,

work training projects for adults, and several clinic and medical facilities.

Ray is currently working with a team from Grace Community Church in Chico on several

projects in a village called Tissana. Tissana is about 30 miles from the capital of Sierra Leone,

Freetown. Projects in this village include a school (K-6 and Middle School), a church and

community center, clinic, agriculture research (growing West African dry land rice and corn) and

several new water wells. In addition, Ray provides teacher training and leadership training to

other teachers and pastors in Sierra Leone when he is in country.

http://www.feedingnations.org/Welcome.html

http://www.feedingnations.org/Welcome.html


FIT FOR A KING

Dateline Abuja, Nigeria, 1 December 2011: Traditional chieftaincies are exclusive titles given to

members of a community or a few outsiders who must have distinguished themselves in the

service of the land.

Visiting leaders like the former United States president, Mr. Bill Clinton were honoured with a

chieftaincy titles: the “Danmasanin Ushaffa” by the Gbagyi community of the FCT, etc.

The honour list continues when last week, the president of the Students for the Advancement of

Global Entrepreneurship [SAGE], Prof. Curt De-Berg came visiting in Abuja. De-Berg,

himself, an American like Clinton was honoured with the title of “Buzanga of Jikwoyi” by the

chief of Jikwoyi, Rev. [Dr] Jetta Bawa.

Prof. De-Berg, according to the Jikwoyi community, has done them proud as the American did

impacted positively on the entrepreneurship skill of students of the Junior Secondary School, JSS

Jikwoyi located within his domain.

Rev.[Dr] Bawa said that the new Buzanga Jikwoyi [De-Berg] has brought innovation to his

community, the community’s college as well as Nigeria as a whole, through the entrepreneurship

option to young Nigerians from primary to secondary education level.

“From today your title will now be called Buzanga of Jikwoyi kingdom. Buzanga in Gbagyi

language means light and we are giving you this title because entrepreneurship is all about

sending light to the world and you have brought light to Jikwoyi community therefore, I call you

the light of Jikwoyi”

The FCT Administration would also honour the Buzanga with another award by naming a youth

resource centre after Prof. De-Berg as a way of immortalizing him and his good works in Nigeria

through SAGE. According to him, an initiative devoted to discovering children is a cause

deserving of commendation and support.

Senator Mohammed commended the United States professor for helping to discover the

potentials in Nigeria and other youths worldwide. He assured him that the FCT Administration

would boost its support of the SAGE initiative by setting up relevant institutional frameworks to

take its lofty ideals higher. The FCT Administration wants to transform not only in infrastructure

but also in micro economic and human resource development, he stressed.

Prof. De-Berg said that SAGE is now operating in 20 countries across the world with a plan to

extend its services to 60 others within the next 10 years. He described Nigeria as a wonderful

country due to the hospitality and potentials of her citizens.

http://nationalaccordnewspaper.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3460:bu

zanga-de-berg-gbagyi-title-of-appreciation&catid=61:metro-news&Itemid=91

http://nationalaccordnewspaper.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3460:buzanga-de-berg-gbagyi-title-of-appreciation&catid=61:metro-news&Itemid=91

http://nationalaccordnewspaper.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3460:buzanga-de-berg-gbagyi-title-of-appreciation&catid=61:metro-news&Itemid=91


The Goodness of Learning and Serving

COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECTS IN OUR COURSES

In Ryan Jones’ Management 303 course, students teams were required to plan and implement

a community service project. The goals of this assignment were to give the students an

opportunity to connect with the community of Chico while gaining hands on management

experience. Students projects touched many areas of the Chico community such as: the Butte

Human Society, Bidwell Park, Jesus Center, Chico Unified School District, Caring Choices,

Little Chico Creek, and clean up in Chico neighborhoods. Highlights of their efforts include:

donating 873 cans of food, 125 donated items of school supplies, planting 17 trees, and raising

direct donations of cash.

In BSIS 444 (Systems Project Management), students create websites for local small

businesses. Look at http://myweb.csuchico.edu/~twilder/sites to see the sites that the students

have built. As of the end of Spring 2012, students will have built almost 70 sites.

STUDENTS FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP—SAGE

Approximately 30 Chico State students, primarily from the business discipline, served as SAGE

mentors and leaders for teenagers from across the USA during 2010-2011. In this co-curricular

role, students worked with Professor Curt DeBerg to become entrepreneurship consultants to

approximately 200 teens from 20 high schools throughout the country. In May 2011, the SAGE

USA tournament took place in Chicago, and in July 2011, the SAGE World Cup took place in

Buffalo, New York.

SAGE’s mission is to help create the next generation of entrepreneurial leaders whose

innovations and social enterprises address the major unmet needs of our global community.

There are currently more than 6,000 high school students participating in SAGE programs at

more than 600 high schools around the world.

SAGE is driven by three primary outcomes: (1) greater awareness among youth of the power of

socially-responsible business and entrepreneurship to improve their lives; (2) greater social

capital contributed by the participants and greater social assets enjoyed by the community; and

(3) stronger links among local education and business activists to effect meaningful changes in

their communities by being linked to the global SAGE network.

http://myweb.csuchico.edu/~twilder/sites


The Goodness of Doing, Learning, and Winning

Instructor Sean Morgan reports on Fall 2011’s activities of the Chico State Project

Management Group:

1) Works every semester with Keifer Consulting and Microsoft in MS Sharepoint

Competition. After Chico teams compete winner competes with Sac State. All teams

gain working knowledge of MS Sharepoint and certifications from Keifer Consulting.

Winning team members get scholarships from Keifer. This program was started here and

is expanding from here.

2) Spring 2011 every graduating member of PMG was hired. 20+ students. 100%

placement was always our goal and I never thought we’d actually hit it but we did, and in

a horrible economy.

3) Every semester the PMG sponsors the Project Forum. Professional Project Managers are

brought in (including alumni) to promote the discipline and inform students about where

they’re potentially headed. Working in partnership with the Sacramento Valley Chapter

of the Project Management Institute this forum has introduced students to internships and

jobs at Accenture, KPMG, Sutter Health Information Systems, Blue Shield, DBS

Solutions, and PG&E.

a. This semester is an attempt to help their group the PMG partnered with Net Impact

and brought them alongside to run the forum. We brought in sustainability project

managers and students in both disciplines benefited.

4) Recently a Project Management class worked together with university resources, city

resources, and private enterprise to produce a Public Service Announcement about the

negative effects of drinking. The University has asked to use it for incoming freshman,

Brown’s towing has asked to use it for advertising (they donated a car), and the City of

Chico Fire Department has asked to use it for training purposes (they were on sight to

remove a student from a car using the “Jaws of Life”, the scene was done so well people

started calling 911 thinking a real accident had taken place). This was a terrific example

(which I can expand on) of our students bringing together state, city, and private

resources for the betterment (is that a word?) of everyone.

SWEET 16 SALES CHALLENGE

The “Sweet 16 Sales Challenge” (SW16SC) on December 3, 2011 was designed as a method by

which to

provide sales students practical role-playing experience

offer corporate interactions and project experience

showcase student talent to recruiters

select a Chico State team for the Western States Collegiate Sales Competition

The SW16SC was initiated during the fall semester of 2011 and will be held every fall semester.

The first SW16SC was sponsored by Ferguson Corporation. Ferguson provided seed money of

$2,000 which was used to run the competition and provide the following student prizes: 1st Place:

$400; 2nd

Place: $300; 3rd

Place $200 & 4th

Place: $100. The “Top 4” winners were offered a

spot on Chico State’s WSCSC team.


Event Overview

The SW16SC is a component of Bill McGowan’s Marketing 473 course (Strategic Personal

Selling). During the course of the semester, sixteen students are selected after being evaluated in

20 different skill areas. The “Sweet 16” then visit Ferguson’s Sacramento location for a day of

training. The grand finale is a full-day role play competition in which students perform sales role

plays in front of corporate judges.

Results

The SW16SC attracted 11 companies that provided 20 judges for the event. Attending companies

included ADP, Pepsico/Frito-Lay, Southern Wines and Spirits, TEKsystems, Victaulic, Graybar,

Fort Dearborn, Ranstad, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, Sherwin Williams and Stanley Security

Solutions. The competition was followed by corporate interviews. Company representatives

passed along glowing praise for the competitors, the Professional Sales Program, and the COB

for providing another forum for students to excel in relating to” real world” scenarios.

AND MORE WINNING SELLING

The Chico State selected via the Sweet 16 Sales Challenge took first place in this year’s Western

States Collegiate Sales Competition. This even provides a venue for students in the College of

Business' Professional Sales Program to compete against students from both Western and

Midwestern university sales programs. The all-day event drew approximately 80 participants and

10 corporations. Not only did the team collectively take the overall 1st place spot, but individual

Chico students also garnered all top three individual prizes (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place)

STUDENTS IN FREE ENTERPRISE (SIFE)

SIFE is a non-profit educational organization that works in partnership with businesses and

higher education, which provides college students the leadership experience of establishing free

enterprise community outreach programs that teach others how market economies and business

operate.

SIFE has been an official student organization at CSU, Chico since the Fall of 1993. Since SIFE

has been here at Chico State, our team has won numerous awards and recognition in the business

community, winning awards from: The GE Foundation, Business Week, The Federation of

Independent Business, Kraft Foods, The Kaufmann Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, as

well as winning regional, national, and international recognition presenting our works at SIFE

team competitions.

Chico State SIFE believes that we can make a difference in the lives of our community, our

nation, and our world.

The 2011-2012 presentation team won the Regional Championship and took home the

Environmental Sustainability award.


STUDENTS HELPING STUDENTS: ISIFE

Mission: Our mission is to assist the incoming Under Represented Business Students by

providing the tools, resources and support needed to build the foundation of a successful collage

experience and to provide an encouraging learning environment where diverse students can learn

and grow freely.

iSIFE is a Mentorship Program designed to ensure student’s success by providing assistance in

the enrollment process, orientation and experience at Chico State University.

What we do:

Support incoming students through their transition from High School, Junior College

Inform students about existing on and off campus resources to ensure student success

Facilitate access to resources by helping student set up meeting and tutors if needed

Educate students through workshops and hands on training

How it works

SIFE students will become mentors to incoming students

Mentors will be student’s first connection

Mentors will create a Support System for freshman SIFE members

Mentors will create reachable goals

STUDENTS PARTICIPATE IN A BIOPHARMACEUTICAL START-UP IN REDDING

Management instructor Ted Kromer is the HR consultant for Linnet Biopharmaceuticals. Linnet

is a family run business, founded in 2010, that is using science research from the University of

Pacific, Thomas J. Long School of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, and the resulting patent

portfolio, to develop therapies in the fields of sleep aids, heart health, and transplant rejection.

Ted is coordinating the ramp-up of several start-up elements that support the Business Plan,

including identification of a licensing lawyer, administrative policy, job structure, and selection

of student interns from the Chico State College of Business to help conduct direct sales, SEO,

and Online Social Media and Marketing. In the process, the students will gain valuable start-up

experience in a life-science environment.

We are proud to assist this start-up venture, and to offer the resources of the College of Business.

And indeed we are most proud that our coalitions and expertise will contribute to the future of

Redding.


The Goodness of Building a Solid Classroom Experience Through Technology

Historically noted for our small class sizes, having to teach a class of 290 students requires some

adaptation by the instructor. Kathryn Schifferle writes about using technology to maintain

quality in the introductory Marketing course.

I designed a strategy to use technology to engage students at all levels: before class, in class, and

following class. This course was delivered two days a week, Tuesday and Thursday .

Each week one chapter in the textbook was covered. This was designed to focus the student on

the material and concepts in that chapter. To engage 290 students deeply in chapter content, I felt

it was critical to make the students responsible for reading the chapter in the textbook in advance

of each week’s Tuesday lecture. To that end, I set up a quiz on Blackboard for each chapter.

There were 20 critical questions taken from each chapter, and those 20 questions were delivered

in randomized sets of 10 questions each time the student took the online quiz. Students could

take that quiz as many times as they wished to earn up to 10 points. Answers were not revealed

until after the end date, which was at the start of class on Tuesday at 11am.

At the Tuesday lecture, students’ knowledge of core concepts was tested at the beginning of class

through polls using ‘Top Hat Monocle’, a texting version of the clicker. Students were asked one

or more relevant concept questions to see if they remembered/had read the material. Of course,

this in-class response system also acted as a check on whether the student was in class. Students

were required to create a Top Hat account, and either registered their phone for the texting

service, or logged in through their online account to answer the questions – the questions were

only open during random periods in class - to confirm their attendance. They earned participation

points when they attended. Attendance average was 88%.

Tuesday’s lecture was ‘advertised’ as, and intended to be, a review of the most important

concepts presented in the chapter, with real-world examples and an interactive session that

provided an opportunity for the class to ask questions. I was surprised that, even in the large

auditorium, I was able to engage students in some lively discussions and they did respond to my

general questions.

As a follow up to the Tuesday lecture, students then had one week to engage in one more online

‘exercise’ or practice. This online exercise was typically three separate questions like case

studies in that they presented a situation and then required that the student apply their

knowledge. They could do the exercise as many times as they wanted before the deadline.

Students liked the exercises as they included videos, drag and drops, and other kinesthetic

activities.

Because of these online activities I was able to track, and manage, individual engagement. We

sent emails to students who were not participating, to ask if they were having problems, or

needed to meet. As a result there were a number of students who came to office hours to work

through issues or questions, and we saw improvement in their performance.

The course still maintained a “high touch” component. Our Survey of Marketing course requires

that the students do two team projects. I organized students into teams of five. To facilitate team

work, I structured the class to incorporate team activities in class on Thursdays. Teams turned in


their work in class either online or physically, and the team members that participate were

tracked.

Participation rates in the on-line activities exceeded 90%. In-class attendance was 88%. Students

seemed to have enjoyed this class, describing it as “their favorite,” or “fun,” and commenting “I

thought I wasn’t going to like this class, but I do.”

IN OTHER “TECHNOLOGY” NEWS:

The Information Assurance Courseware Evaluation (IACE) Program has recertified California

State University, Chico courseware as meeting all of the elements of the Committee on National

Security Systems (CNSS) National Training Standards for Information Systems Security

(INFOSEC) Professionals, NSTISSI No. 4011

LIVING AMONG THE CLOUDS

We were mentioned in a Forbes blog on cloud computing: http://onforb.es/zm1dzz. We

implemented a new cloud based system with a retail price tag of about $3M. Part of this came in

the $1.2M donation from NetApp last year and we completed the acquisition and construction of

the full system over the past couple months. This system replaced the decade old system with

which we’ve been performing similar activities. We support courses and research at about 150

schools outside of Chico (including a number of other CSU campuses) and we conduct the same

activities at Chico. For instance, students in MINS 301 play a simulation game in which they

work in teams and compete against the other teams in the room to run a retail business. Each

team has limited financial resources, though they can borrow more, and they must manage their

money, their acquisition processes, marketing expenses and pricing to maximize net profit. For

example, Ron Pike has a current research project that examines the ability of cloud-based

business analytics to detect fraudulent activities within a procurement system in real time. We

have more than 50,000 faculty and students from across the Americas (from Canada to Chile and

most countries between) using the system.

http://t.co/LBEgyAYN


The Goodness of Students Sought After as Employees

A word from the Chico State Career Center about the 2011-2012 academic year:

We had 114 companies come on campus to interview students for internships and full time

positions and 261 employers attended business-related career fairs. Recruiters who hired the

most business students during the recent academic year were Workday, Insight Global,

Fireman’s Fund Insurance, Kohl’s Department Stores, Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Blackhawk

Networks.

Joe Kessing, Regional Claims Manager for Federated Insurance said, “My favorite part about the

teaching philosophy at Chico State is the effort to create work-like scenarios through the various

group projects. I just hired two of my best candidates yet from Chico State this year!”

The reported average starting salary for students graduating from the College of Business was

$49,992, which is 4.7% higher than the national average for Business students, (according to the

National Association of Colleges and Employers April 2012 Salary Survey). The reported

average starting salary for students in the Business Administration program was $44,992 and

from the Business Information Systems program was $64,136.

Megan Odom, Associate Director of the Career Center said, “I continue to hear high praise from

employers about our business students’ communication skills, ability to collaborate and work

with others and their problem solving skills. They graduate ready to work and join a team!”

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lythuan
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Appendices Fifth-Year Maintenance of Accreditation … Maintenance of Accreditation Report Fall 2012...

Documents