TRUSTEES OF THE METROPOLITAN STATE COLLEGE OF DENVER ...€¦ · F. Faculty Senate Report – Dr. Hal Nees G. Council of Chairs Report – Dr. John Schmidt, Chair H. Foundation, Diana

1

TRUSTEES OF THEMETROPOLITAN STATE COLLEGE OF DENVER

Wednesday, October 6, 20048 a.m. – 12 noon

Tivoli Student Union, Room 320Auraria Campus

AGENDA

I. CALL TO ORDER

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. Approval of September 8, 2004, Board Meeting Minutes

III. REPORTS

A. Chair’s Report – Mr. Bruce BensonB. AHEC Board Report – Ms. Ann RiceC. Interim President’s Report – Dr. Ray KieftD. Student Report – Mr. Stephen HayE. Finance Committee Report – Mr. Alex CranbergF. Faculty Senate Report – Dr. Hal NeesG. Council of Chairs Report – Dr. John Schmidt, ChairH. Foundation, Diana Whye, Interim Executive DirectorI. Presidential Search Advisory Committee, Dr. John Buechner

IV. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION

A. Personnel Items

V. INFORMATION ITEMS(Requires no approval by the Board of Trustees)

A. Academic Program Review Report for AY 2003-04B. Follow-up Report for the Programs Reviewed in 2002-03C. Academic Program Review Schedule for AY 2004-05D. Report on Cash-Funded Out-of-State and Out-of-Country InstructionE. Personnel Actions Delegated to the President

2

VI. PRESENTATIONS

A. An Adventure of the American Mind – Colorado (Dr. Peggy O’Neill-Jones,Professor of Technical Communications)

B. Teacher Quality Enhancement Program Grant (Dr. Sandra Haynes, Interim Dean,School of Professional Studies)

VII. PUBLIC COMMENT

VIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION

The Board may convene into Executive Session for the purpose of discussingpersonnel matters in accordance with 24-6-402(3)(b)(I), C.R.S., or to possibly conferwith the Board’s attorney to receive specific advice on legal questions in accordancewith 24-6-402(3)(a)(II), C.R.S.

IX. ADJOURNMENT

1

TRUSTEES OF THEMETROPOLITAN STATE COLLEGE OF DENVER

Wednesday, September 8, 20048 a.m. – 12 noon

Tivoli Student Union, Room 320Auraria Campus

MINUTES

I. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at approximately 8:10 a.m. by Chair Benson.

Board of Trustees Present:

Trustee Bruce Benson; Trustee Gin Butler; Trustee (EXCUSED) Alex Cranberg;Trustee Maria Garcia Berry (EXCUSED); Trustee Mark Martinez; Trustee JohnOsborn; Trustee Adele Phelan; Trustee Ann Rice; Trustee Sean Tonner (EXCUSED);Faculty Trustee Gene Saxe (ABSENT); Student Trustee Stephen Hay

Metro State Personnel Present:

Ray Kieft, Interim President; Teri Bokn, Executive Assistant to the President; LeeCombs, General Counsel; Joan Foster, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs;Natalie Lutes, Interim Vice President for Administration and Finance; PercyMorehouse, Executive Director of Equal Opportunity; Karen Raforth, Interim VicePresident for Student Services/Dean of Student Life; John Cochran, Interim Dean,School of Business; Kenneth Keller, Interim Dean, School of Letters, Arts &Sciences; Sandra Haynes, Interim Dean, School of Professional Studies; KimberlyClark, Council of Administrators Chair; Hal Nees, Faculty Senate President; VondaKnox, Classified Staff Council President; John Schmidt, Chair, Council of Chairs;Diana Whye, Interim Executive Director, Foundation; and others

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. June 9, 2004, Board Meeting Minutes: It was moved and seconded to approve theminutes from the June 9, 2004, Board meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

III. REPORTS

A. Board Chair: Chair Benson reported that meetings with the Alumni andFoundation Boards have been very positive. He expressed his concerns regardingfunding for higher education in the coming year and concluded by encouragingcontinued work on funding from grants.

2

B. AHEC Board: Vice Chair Rice reported on the classroom space concerns; theparking garage; and that the Tivoli renovation is progressing and nearingcompletion. No funding for capital construction and controlled maintenanceprojects.

C. Interim President: Dr. Kieft reported on the record fall semester enrollment ofapproximately 21,000 students which is an increase of about 3% from last yearand discussed what factors contribute to enrollment increase. He applauded thestaff for their diligent work with the increase in students. This summer he wascontacted by the staff of the congressional house committee on Educational andWorkforce to discuss institutional accreditation and has been invited to testifybefore the house committee when they hold the hearings in Washington DC thisfall. He then reported that the departments of Computer Science, EngineeringTechnology, and Surveying and Mapping received professional accreditations fortheir programs.

Dr. Kieft will be joining presidents Kay Norton, Betsy Hoffman, and LarryPenley on September 9 to testify at a joint meeting of the house and senateeducation committees on the implementation of the resolution related to theAcademic Bill of Rights that they all signed last fall. The resolution guaranteesthat there is no harassment or intimidation of students based on their political orideological view points. He reported that Metro State does have a process inplace for each complaint. He also expressed concerns regarding “reverse”intimidation of faculty from students and that is not acceptable at Metro and willnot be tolerated.

He continued by reporting on the College Opportunity Fund bill and that eachinstitution is required to establish a performance contract and Metro will beworking on that with CCHE. He appointed a task force to begin the process. Inaddition, he will be appointing two other task forces: 1) Student Success and LowAdmission Index and 2) Assessment of Student Learning, which will be ameasure of the performance Contract.

He highlighted the Program Fees formalization agenda item; the Personnel agendaitem and noted that this past year has been a successful one for improvingdiversity within the faculty; there is continued support from the community forscholarship commitments; Altitude TV will be televising some of Metro’s athleticevents which will also include Metro promotional spots; the handout for theAlumni Association fundraiser and the Metro State general information bookwere brought to the Trustees’ attention as well as Student Trustee Hay’s picture inthe book and acknowledgement of his President’s Honor Role achievement.

He concluded by announcing that Metro State had been awarded a $9.4 milliongrant for the Teacher Quality Enhancement Program over a 5 year period from theU.S. Department of Education and thanked all those involved.

3

D. Student Government: Student Trustee Hay reported that the June StudentServices/Admissions Open House was one of the most successful with over 950in attendance. He also reported that the student newspaper received a GeneralExcellence Award by the National Newspaper Association Better Newspapercontest; a student representative will be attending the NCAA leadershipconference on behalf of Metro; and the Earth Science Club was sponsoring arecycling program for toner and cell phones.

E. Finance Committee: Trustee Cranberg reported that the finance committeediscussed the 05 budget and urged continued caution on the budgeting. TheCollege met its goal of offsetting the $4 million reduction from last year;additional information regarding grading patterns, if available, will be included infaculty hiring profiles. There is still discussion of an internal auditor shared withAHED; and Dr. Sandra Haynes, Interim Dean, School of Professional Studies,answered questions regarding the Accelerated Nursing Program.

F. Faculty Senate: Dr. Nees, President, began by thanking the Trustees forcontinuing the Presidential Search until the fall semester. He continued bydistributing a list of the Faculty Senate’s priorities for the next year along with asurvey he requested the Trustees to complete. He concluded by asking forsuggestions on how the Faculty Senate could work more closely with theTrustees.

G. Council of Chairs: Dr. Schmidt, Chair, discussed the faculty senate elections,processes of the Council of Chairs, and how they could reduce paperwork.

H. MSCD Foundation: Ms. Diana Whye, Interim Executive Director, discussedfundraising for the past and current year and the effects of the staff reduction andthe restructuring of the development and foundation departments. She said theFoundation was excited about working with the Development office and alsomore closely with the Trustees.

I. Presidential Search Advisory Committee: Dr. John Buechner, Chair, reported thatthe Committee had met and screened the applicants submitted since the searchwas extended. He requested to continue his discussion in Executive Session withthe Board

IV. CONSENT ITEMS (No Discussion)

A. Change to Program Fee from Specific Course Fees (Ms. Natalie Lutes, InterimVice President for Administration and Finance)

It was moved and seconded to approve the consent item as presented. The motionpassed unanimously.

4

V. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION

A. Oath of Office for Board of Trustees: This item was postponed.

B. FY 2005 Revised Operating Budget: Ms. Natalie Lutes, Interim Vice Presidentfor Administration and Finance, gave an overview and answered questions. Itwas moved and seconded to approve the FY2005 Revised Operating Budget. Themotion passed unanimously.

C. Personnel Items: It was moved and seconded to approve the personnel items aspresented. The motion passed unanimously.

VI. PERSONNEL/INFORMATION ITEMS

A. Student Success and Admission Index: Mr. Bill Hathaway-Clark, InterimAssociate Dean, Student Services/Director, Admissions, gave a presentation onStudent Success and Admission Index. He also answered questions and discussedwhat the task force would hope to accomplish.

B. MSCD FY2004 Unaudited Financial Information: There was no presentation ordiscussion as this is an information item only.

C. CCHE FY2004 Reporting Formats: There was no presentation or discussion asthis is an information item only.

D. Personnel Actions Delegated to the President: There was no presentation ordiscussion as this is an information item only.

VII. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no comment from the public.

VIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION

At approximately 10:05 a.m., it was moved and seconded that the Board convene intoExecutive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel matters in accordance with24-6-402(3)(b)(I), C.R.S.

IX. ADJOURNMENT

At approximately 11:45 a.m., it was moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting.The motion passed unanimously.

AGENDA ITEM: Personnel

ISSUE: Reporting of personnel actions which have occurred since the lastBoard meeting of September 8, 2004.

BACKGROUND: Appointments which require approval by the Board.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by Metropolitan State College ofDenver that the Board of Trustees approve the following appointments in addition to theaward of TENURE to the Dr. Nancy Case Appointment.

APPOINTMENTS

Dr. Nancy Case, Chair, Department of Nursing and Director of the Accelerated NursingProgram, $87,850 – November 1 through June 30, 2005 (TENURED FACULTY)(see attached for further information)

Dr. Mollie Hill, Staff Psychologist, $41,250.00 – August 1 through June 30, 2005(ADMINISTRATIVE)

Ms. Lee Pruett, Assistant to the Vice President for Administration and Finance,$33,333.00 – September 1 through June 30, 2005 (ADMINISTRATIVE)

Mr. Russell Reynolds, Coordinator for Assessment and Testing, $28,638.00 – September20 through June 30, 2005 (ADMINISTRATIVE)

1

AGENDA ITEM: Academic Program Review Report for AY 2003-04

ISSUE:

Annually MSCD submits to the Trustees the results of the reviews of those programsevaluated during the academic year. CCHE requires that the program review results bepresented to the Trustees.

BACKGROUND:

According to State statute [23-1-107 (3)]: Each governing board of the state-supported institutions of higher educationshall submit to the commission a plan describing the procedures and schedulefor periodic program reviews and evaluation of each academic program ateach institution consistent with the statewide expectations and goals specifiedin section 23-13-104 Statewide expectations and goals for higher educationand the role and mission of each institution. The information to be providedto the commission shall include, but shall not be limited to, the procedures forusing internal and external evaluators, the sequence of such reviews, and theanticipated use of the evaluations.

MSCD’s policy and procedures for program review are currently approved by CCHE.

Metropolitan State College of Denver completed the reviews of the seven programs listedbelow in May of 2004. The college followed the same process that it has used for manyyears. This year four of the programs are in the School of Letters, Arts and Sciences, andthree are in the School of Professional Studies.

School of Letters, Arts and Sciences School of Professional StudiesAnthropology Civil Engineering TechnologyEnvironmental Science Human ServicesPolitical Science Mechanical Engineering TechnologySociology

Overview of the Program Review Process

Program Review Packet

Program faculty and external consultants were provided a program review packet thatcontained data gathered by the Office of Institutional Research and other administrativeunits, a narrative written by program faculty in response to a series of questions, resultsof the assessment of student academic achievement, faculty resumes, and otherinformation deemed helpful for the review. The data provided by OIR includes, inaddition to the data similar to that provided to the Trustees, information on how ofteneach course in the program was taught during the previous five years; how often the

2

course was taught in the fall, spring, and summer; and the number of students who tookit. Information about the number of times the course was taught by part-time faculty,full-time faculty and others is also provided as are the grade distributions for each course.

Survey Results

Survey results were also available to the reviewers. Graduates who had received theirdegrees two-to-five years prior to the review were sent two surveys, a standardizedsurvey used for all programs (used for General Studies assessment) and a survey specificto the program with part designed by program faculty. Graduates were also given asurvey to give to their supervisors. Seniors were sent two surveys: one asking questionsabout their major, the other asking about their experiences at MSCD (used for GeneralStudies assessment). Survey results from the Recent Graduates Survey are also usedduring the review.

Analysis of the Difference Between the Survey Results for the Program Being Reviewedand the Results from Other Programs

As part of the program review process, the Office of Institutional Research analyzes thesurvey results to determine if there are significant differences in the way the graduates,employers, and seniors of the program being reviewed responded compared to the waythe graduates, employers, and seniors of other programs responded. This analysiscounteracts the consistently high or consistently low responses given to certainquestions. During the review process, careful scrutiny is given to items where theresponses are significantly different. All results mentioned that are not attributed to aconsultant are considered statistically significant.

Evaluation by Consultants

Outside consultants or teams from accrediting organizations were involved in each review.The consultants were persons selected by the dean from among persons recommended bythe programs' professional societies, accrediting agencies, or by program faculty. TheAssociate Vice President for Academic Affairs for Curriculum and Programs approved allchoices. This year the Civil and Mechanical Engineering Technology Programs werereviewed by ABET. All other reviews had outside consultants. Human Services hadtwo consultants: one for the Nonprofit Organization Administration concentration andone for the rest of the program.

The consultants spent at least a day on campus; most spent two. They met withstudents, faculty, the dean, the Provost, the College Program Review Committee, and, ifpossible, alumni and external advisory committee members. Some consultants attendedclasses and, after the instructor left, talked with the students. That way the studentswith whom the consultants spoke were not preselected and were free to speak.

3

The College Program Review Committee (CPRC)

Members of the College Program Review Committee studied the program review packets,the graduate, employer, and senior survey results, and the reports of the consultants oraccreditation teams. The committee formulated a list of formal interview questions forprogram faculty based on the information it was provided and other information suppliedby the Associate Vice President. Program faculty were interviewed in a formal meetingthat lasted at least two hours.

In 2003-04 the College Program Review Committee consisted of the following persons,recommended by the group they represented. All except the chair were faculty members;their discipline is indicated in parentheses. The group they represented is stated on theright.

Frieda Holley (Mathematics) Associate Vice President of AcademicAffairs for Curriculum and ProgramsChair of the Committee

Alain Ranwez (French) School of Letters, Arts, and SciencesNishat Abbasi (Accounting) School of BusinessAntonio Ledesma (Human Services) Vice President for Academic AffairsJennifer Caine (Aerospace Science) School of Professional StudiesHal Nees (Criminal Justice & Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee

Criminology)Richard Wagner (Meteorology) Incoming Program Review Chair

Reports of the Consultant and the Committee

Both the consultant and the College Program Review Committee were asked to describethe strengths and weaknesses of the program's role and mission or goals, curriculum,students, faculty, and institutional support. The Associate Vice President summarizedtheir reports.

Actions Taken

The concerns and recommendations of the consultant and the review committee werediscussed at a meeting attended by the chair or director of the program, the dean of theschool, the associate dean of the school, the Associate Vice President, and the VicePresident of Academic Affairs.

Subsequent to that meeting, the dean and department chair made a recommendation orreply.

ANALYSIS:

4

The results of the reviews are summarized on the following pages.

METROPOLITAN STATE COLLEGE OF DENVER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE PROGRAM REVIEW OF THE

10/2/04

ANTHROPOLOGY PROGRAM

October 2004Program Goals

MSCD’s Anthropology Program fits MSCD’s role and mission, contributing to students’understanding of cultural diversity. The program:• provides comprehensive coursework leading to a B.A. in anthropology. A minor in anthropology

is also offered.• focuses on applied aspects of anthropology, particularly archaeology and cultural anthropology.• offers General Studies courses and courses needed by other majors.• contributes to the documentation and preservation of the cultural past of the Denver area.

The consultant stated that MSCD has the “opportunity to develop a stellar and a much neededundergraduate program in Applied/Urban Cultural Anthropology and Applied Archaeology.”

Program Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

An examination is used to determine students’ achievement of the educational goals. The program’sassessment reports revealed that seniors’ recognition of the major components of linguistics is not asstrong as their recognition of the other three anthropology fields. The consultant found the goals toogeneral to be measured in a systematic fashion.Recommendation: The consultant suggested that faculty revise their goals and learning objectives anddevelop an evaluation tool and methodology to assess the revised goals and objectives. Plan: Thedean is encouraging this.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their desire to be involved in

community or cultural affairs, their respect for diverse cultures and the rights of others, theirwillingness to examine their own values, and their awareness of international issues and our globalsociety.

• Employers’ rating of graduates’ preparation for the job, breadth of knowledge, initiative, sense ofresponsibility, potential for advancement, and leadership skills.

• Employers’ rating of graduates’ ability to listen and work effectively with others.• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their ability to think and listen

critically, to recognize faulty reasoning, and to organize and synthesize ideas.• Graduates’ and seniors’ satisfaction with instruction by part-time faculty.• Seniors’ satisfaction with the availability of full-time faculty.• Seniors’ satisfaction with faculty advising on course selection and major degree program.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• Applied anthropology, which is using anthropological methods to address a community need, is

emphasized. The consultant wrote that MSCD’s location made it “a natural for applied culturalanthropology.”

• ANT 1310 Introduction to Cultural Anthropology has been approved as a state-guaranteed generaleducation transfer course according to the committee.

• The committee praised the program’s field experiences in archaeology; field research is conductedin Peru and Denver.

• The committee was pleased that the program contributes to the cultural needs of the Denvercommunity through outreach programs such as the College Assistance Migrant Program and theFamily Literacy Program.

• According to the committee, the number of majors increased from 130 to 154 during the reviewperiod, an 18% increase; and the number of minors increased from 43 to 58, a 35% increase.Credit hour production increased 39%.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Anthropology Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• The anthropology laboratory impressed the committee. It has a valuable collection of Indianartifacts, a comparative bone collection on long-term loan from the Colorado ArchaeologicalSociety, a comparative seed collection, a comparative hominid fossil cast collection, as well asfaculty and student field study artifacts and documents.

Weaknesses Identified By The Process, Recommendations, Actions Taken, and Plans

The committee noted that no anthropology courses are approved to meet MSCD’s SeniorExperience requirement. Anthropology faculty have identified two courses for which they mightrequest the senior experience designation. Recommendation: The committee urged anthropology faculty to submit the request to have thecourses designated as senior experiences. Plan: The dean is encouraging this.

The structure of the major requirements was of concern to the reviewers, partially because of thelimited existing resources. Recommendation: Both reviewers urged that the following recommendations be considered. Eachalso made other suggestions. Make the linguistic course (ANT 2330) an elective for anthropology majors. Require a course that focuses on a particular geographic area. Require a (research) methods course that covers skills used by practicing anthropologists. Make the human evolution course (ANT 2100) an elective for majors.

The committee reported that the official course syllabi for most courses have not been updatedsince 1997 and may no longer accurately reflect classroom instruction. Recommendation: The committee advised that if a comprehensive revision of the entirecurriculum is not possible, faculty should set a goal of updating a few courses each year.

The committee observed that because of increased demand for anthropology courses, the total FullTime Equivalent Faculty (FTEF) increased from approximately six to about seven during thereview period. During that period, over 64% of anthropology classes offered were taught by part-time faculty. Although three tenured faculty are assigned to the program, two of them haveresponsibilities outside the program, leaving the equivalent of 1_ faculty for over 150 majors. Recommendation: MSCD should hire a full-time tenure-track faculty member in anthropology.Plan: When tenure-track positions are allocated, serious consideration will be given to allocatinga position to anthropology.

The committee noted that two of the five courses required of majors are in physical anthropology,and yet there is no physical anthropologist. The physical anthropology courses are taught mostlyby part-time faculty. Recommendation: The reviewers were split on whether or not to hire a physical anthropologist.The consultant advised against it to be sure the program had depth in cultural anthropology. Thecommittee argued that since physical anthropology is a significant field in anthropology and aphysical anthropology course is and will probably remain a course in the core, a physicalanthropologist should be hired. Plan: The position, if available, will be for a physicalanthropologist.

ANTHROPOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02

1. Program Majors a. New Majors 55 60 55 68 b. Retained Majors (Still enrolled with same major the following year) 86 71 67 82 c. Total Majors 130 146 126 135

d. New Majors as Percent of Total Majors 42.3% 41.1% 43.7% 50.4% e. Continuing Majors as Percent of Total Majors 66.2% 48.6% 53.2% 60.7%

f. Majors by Class RankFreshmen 31 34 24 34Sophomores 21 23 27 36Juniors 34 31 28 25Seniors 44 58 47 40

2. Program Graduates (Double Majors Counted in Both Programs) a. Number of Native Graduates 4 8 4 4 b. Number of Non-native Graduates 6 17 15 14 c. Total Number of Graduates 10 25 19 18

d. Program Graduates as a Percent of Total Majors 7.7% 17.1% 15.1% 13.3%

3. Credits to Graduation (Excludes Double Majors and Students Seeking a Second Degree) a. Mean total credits to degree for all program graduates 130.88 134.95 132.80 129.38 b. Mean total credits to degree for native program graduates 127.00 125.33 130.67 129.00

4. Program Minors a. Declared Minors 43 44 45 59 b. Graduating Minors 14 13 13 13

Productivity Measures

Academic Program Review Data

10/2/04 Final 1

ANTHROPOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02

5. Credit Hour Production (State-Funded) a. Summer Semester

Lower Division 135 231 270 273 Upper Division 42 117 120 102 Total - Summer 177 348 390 375

b. Fall Semester Lower Division 1,467 1,305 1,371 1,656 Upper Division 575 767 641 594 Total - Fall 2,042 2,072 2,012 2,250

c. Spring Semester Lower Division 1,152 1,188 1,308 1,710 Upper Division 960 823 665 771 Total - Spring 2,112 2,011 1,973 2,481

d. Total Lower Division 2,754 2,724 2,949 3,639 Upper Division 1,577 1,707 1,426 1,467 All Semesters 4,331 4,431 4,375 5,106

6. Credit Hour Production (Cash-Funded) Lower Division 141 159 231 363 Upper Division 78 24 0 0 All Semesters 219 183 231 363

7. Full-Year FTE Students a. State-funded 144.37 147.70 145.83 170.20 b. Cash-funded 7.30 6.10 7.70 12.10 c. Total 151.67 153.80 153.53 182.30

8. Number of Classes Offered (Fall and Spring Semesters) a. Lower Division 27 26 30 33 b. Upper Division 21 23 21 21 c. Total 48 49 51 54

9. Average Class Size (Fall and Spring Semesters) a. Lower Division 32.3 32.0 29.8 34.0 b. Upper Division 24.2 22.5 20.6 21.6 c. Total 28.8 27.5 26.0 29.2

Productivity Measures (Continued)

10/2/04 Final 2

ANTHROPOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02

10. Faculty FTE (State-Funded) a. Instructional

Full-time tenured or tenure track 2.16 1.73 1.85 1.85 Other full-time 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Part time 3.20 3.70 4.10 4.10

b. Non-instructional 0.27 0.28 0.27 0.30 c. Total 5.63 5.70 6.22 6.25 d. Percent of Instructional FTE Tenured or Tenure-Track 38% 30% 30% 30%

11. Support Staff FTE 0.79 0.31 0.38 0.40

12. Faculty Load for Full-Time Faculty – Fall & Spring Semesters (State-Funded) a. Average Credit Hours (Type A Courses) 14.00 14.00 15.30 12.00 b. Average Contact Hours (Type A Courses) 16.70 16.70 18.80 14.90 c. Total Headcount Enrollment in Type B Courses

i. Online 0 0 0 0ii. Other 18 6 4 1

13. Student FTE/Faculty FTE (State-Funded) 25.6 25.9 23.4 27.2

14. Percent of Fall and Spring CHP by faculty type a. Tenured or Tenure Track Faculty 30% 22% 25% 18% b. Full-time Temporary 0% 0% 0% 0% c. Temporary Lecturers 0% 0% 0% 0% d. Part-Time Faculty 70% 78% 75% 82%

15. Program Costs (State-Funded) a. Total Cost 146,654$ 231,298$ 223,475$ 240,215$ b. Cost per Credit Hour 33.86$ 52.20$ 51.08$ 47.05$

Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3

ANTHROPOLOGY

2002-03

72---

154

46.8%---

34353847

99

18

11.7%

137.14133.00

5819

10/2/04 Final 4

ANTHROPOLOGY

2002-03

345141486

1,968774

2,742

1,899906

2,805

4,2121,8216,033

3810

381

201.1012.70

213.80

332356

39.124.132.9

10/2/04 Final 5

ANTHROPOLOGY

2002-03

1.300.004.860.336.4920%

0.51

14.0016.80

04

31.0

22%0%0%

78%

276,568$ 45.84$

10/2/04 Final 6

Explanation of Academic Program Review Worksheet

Program Productivity Measures

1. Majors in Program a. Total number of students who first declared this program as their major in the summer, fall or spring term of the given year, whether they continued in the major or not during that year. b. Total number of majors who were in this major in any of the five previous years and who are still in the program in the summer, fall or spring term (i.e., "old" majors). c. Total majors in the program for the summer, fall and spring terms (=1a. + 1b.). d. Percent of total majors who are new majors. e. Percent of total majors who are continuing. f. Total majors in the program by class rank (freshmen, sophomore, etc.) at the end of the last term of the reported year in which they were enrolled.

2. Program Graduates a. Number of native graduates from the program for the fiscal year. b. Number of non-native graduates from the program for the fiscal year. c. Total number of graduates within the program for the fiscal year. d. The total program graduates (2.c. above) divided by the total majors in the program (1.c. above).

Native =students who began and completed their degree at the same institution, and earned the majority of their credits from that institution (i.e., NOT transfer students). "Fiscal" Year =summer, fall, and spring terms. (Double majors count as a whole graduate in each degree program. They count only once if they are getting a degree in two or more areas of emphasis within the same major.)

3. Credits to Graduation (Excludes Double Majors and Students Seeking a Second Degree) a. Mean number of total credits to degree for all program graduates for the fiscal year (based on graduates counted in 2.c.). b. Mean number of total credits to degree for native program graduates for the fiscal year (based on graduates counted in 2.a.).

4. Program Minors a. Total number of students who declared this minor in the summer, fall or spring term of the reported year. b. Total number of students who graduated with this minor in the summer, fall or spring term.

5. Credit Hours (State-Funded) Upper and lower division and total state-funded credit hours produced by the program during the summer, fall and spring terms.

6. Credit Hours (Cash Funded) Upper and lower division and total cash-funded credit hours produced by the program during the summer, fall and spring terms.

7. Full-Year FTE Students State-funded, cash-funded, and total student credit hours produced by a program during the fiscal year, divided by 30.

10/2/04 1

8. Number of Classes Offered Fall and Spring Semesters Includes courses by prefix and/or faculty associated with the program. Excludes summer terms. Excludes field experiences, internships, practica, independent studies, cooperative education, study abroad, readings, self-paced instruction, private instruction, and correspondence courses.

9. Number (Headcount) of Students Enrolled The total number of students in the classes counted in 8.

10. Average Class Size The number of students, 9., divided by the number of classes, 8.

Program Efficiency Measures

11. Faculty FTE Number of FTE faculty (includes full time, part time, both tenure/tenure track and temporary) allocated to the program by function. This includes instructional and non-instructional (e.g., faculty dept. chairs with release time for admin. duties). This number should reflect all faculty contributing directly to the program. d. Percent tenured (item d.) is the percent of the instructional FTE Faculty (item a. total) that are tenured.

12. Support Staff FTE The FTE staff (i.e. clerical, laboratory technician) supporting the program.

13. Faculty Load – Fall Semester The average faculty load per FTE faculty in Type A courses in the program for the fall semesters, as measured by: a. Average credit hours for full-time faculty in Type A courses. b. Average contact hours (weekly teaching courses) for full-time faculty in Type A courses.The faculty load in type B courses for the fall semester as measured by: c. Total enrollment in Type B instruction taught by full-time faculty divided into online and other.

14. Student FTE/Faculty FTE The annualized Student FTE (from item 7. above) divided by the total faculty FTE (from item 11. c. above).

15. Percent of Credit Hour Production by Type of Faculty (Fall and Spring Only) The percent of the fall and spring credit hour production produced by tenured or tenure-track faculty, other full-time faculty (temporary faculty or lecturers), and part-time faculty.

16. Program Costs a. The program cost=annual program personnel expenditures + annual operating expenditures + 5 year average of capital expenditures. These numbers include tuition and general fund dollars only. b. Item 16.a. divided by 5. c. Provided only if available.

10/2/04 2



10/2/04

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PROGRAM


MSCD’s Environmental Science Program• offers a B.S. in environmental science and a minor in environmental studies. Majors can choose a

multidisciplinary concentration or they can concentrate on water quality, environmental chemistry,ecological restoration, or hazardous materials.

• is multidisciplinary, requiring students to take a mixture of environmental science, biology,chemistry, geography, geology, and meteorology courses.

CCHE approved the program in 1998. The consultant wrote that it “is still young and continues todefine itself. . . . the program has yet to define a clear niche or niches that it wishes to occupy.” Theconsultant urged faculty to identify the niche or niches they wish the program to fill.


Student learning outcomes were stated when the major was proposed, but the committee found thatstudents’ achievement of the outcomes is not being assessed. Students’ achievement of someoutcomes is partially assessed in a course taken by other majors, but no attempt is being made todifferentiate the performances of the two groups or to assess all the environmental science learningoutcomes. The course in which assessment takes place is not required of all environmental sciencemajors; consequently some majors’ achievements are not assessed. Recommendation: The committee made some suggestions on how faculty might assess environmentalscience majors’ achievement of the environmental science learning outcomes.

Selected Survey Results

Only 18 environmental science graduates had completed their degree in the time frame used to selectprogram review survey recipients. Only four or 22% responded to the graduate survey. Despite thesmall number, the statistical analyses by the Office of Institutional Research indicated that someresults were significant. In addition, the consultant reported “the concerns expressed by the smallsurvey sample were also expressed by the students with whom I met . . .”Results of Concern• Only two of the four graduate survey respondents would recommend the major to others. None

would highly recommend the program. The committee stated that this might reflect the fact thatthe program is new. The consultant opined that graduates’ reluctance might stem from inadequatecareer counseling or a heavy reliance on part-time faculty.

• Graduates were asked to rate the usefulness of 15 courses, and eight of the courses were rated“somewhat useful” or “not useful” by at least half of the graduates.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The consultant wrote: “. . .[G]iven that the MSCD environmental program is so young, it has done

a remarkable job of attracting students and placing them into jobs related to the environment. Theadministration and faculty of the College is congratulated for its foresight in establishing theprogram and its dedication to implementing it.”

• The major has met the projections for its growth.• CCHE has approved the major for students seeking to teach science in high school.• The committee reported that the multidisciplinary concentration, which is the most popular,

prepares students for a variety of environmental science careers and graduate school. Theconsultant wrote: “Most graduate programs would be happy to admit, without condition,environmental students from the multidisciplinary concentration.”

• According to the consultant, MSCD’s program is one of only two B.S. programs in environmentalscience in Colorado. Three bachelor’s degrees in environmental studies are offered in the state.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Environmental Science Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• Students told the consultant that environmental policy and planning is an exceptional course.• Students are required to do an internship according to the committee, and the Denver metropolitan

area is an excellent environmental laboratory. It has several environmental organizations andagencies that can provide internships and jobs.

• The committee mentioned that faculty take time from the Land Use and Meteorology Programs tocontribute to the environmental science major by advising for it.

• According to the committee, part-time instructors are often from government organizations andindustries that are actively involved with environmental issues.


The committee noted that the program was established to address some specific needs in theDenver metropolitan area, but since the inception of the program, the needs have changed. At thepresent time MSCD does not have in place elements that are crucial to the continued developmentof the program. The program does not have a faculty member with a degree or extensivebackground in environmental science. Neither does it have an external advisory committee thatcan provide MSCD with guidance as to what is currently needed to address environmental issuesin Colorado. The consultant declared: “The program needs a champion who knows the breadthand depth of the environmental profession, [and] is aware of its potentialities, . . ..” Thecommittee expressed concern that there is no faculty member who is adequately prepared toorganize the selection of external and internal advisory committees, who can focus on determiningthe needs of the community, and who can provide extensive career advice to students. Recommendation: High priority should be given to hiring a faculty member who either has adegree in environmental science and/or who has experience in the environmental science field andwho is dedicated solely to the program. The committee made recommendations about thecurriculum, but it advised that some decisions should wait until a person with an environmentalscience background is hired. Plans: MSCD intends to hire an environmental scientist.

The consultant reported that students take courses from a variety of disciplines, but there are fewopportunities for students to integrate the disciplinary concepts, terminology, and methodologies. Recommendation: He urged the creation of some courses that integrate disciplinary knowledge.

The committee noted that faculty from disciplines required of environmental sciences majors havenot discussed the environmental science curriculum since the approval of the program. Recommendation: A faculty advisory committee consisting of MSCD faculty from disciplinesthat are required for environmental sciences majors should be created.

The consultant found that the program was not sufficiently focused on Colorado problems. Fewcourse offerings cover waste management, site remediation, and pollution prevention, topics heconsidered important to Colorado and which were listed as goals in the original program proposal. Recommendation: He urged that course offerings be expanded in the above areas.

The consultant noticed that the percent of students who dropped out of the program continued torise every year as the enrollment increased. He speculated that the cause was the increasinginability of faculty to mentor and advise students. Students told him they wanted better careercounseling. He pointed out that environmental science students needed significant mentoringbecause of the variety of career options available and the lack of clear professional boundaries. Recommendation: This problem can be addressed by hiring an environmental scientist.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03

1. Program Majors a. New Majors 44 40 60 78 87 b. Retained Majors (Still enrolled with same major the following year) 39 49 63 85 --- c. Total Majors 61 79 109 141 172

d. New Majors as Percent of Total Majors 72.1% 50.6% 55.0% 55.3% 50.6% e. Continuing Majors as Percent of Total Majors 63.9% 62.0% 57.8% 60.3% ---

f. Majors by Class RankFreshmen 4 10 24 39 49Sophomores 10 14 18 22 38Juniors 19 21 24 33 32Seniors 28 34 43 47 53

2. Program Graduates (Double Majors Counted in Both Programs) a. Number of Native Graduates 3 3 4 4 5 b. Number of Non-native Graduates 12 6 9 8 11 c. Total Number of Graduates 15 9 13 12 16

d. Program Graduates as a Percent of Total Majors 24.6% 11.4% 11.9% 8.5% 9.3%

3. Credits to Graduation (Excludes Double Majors and Students Seeking a Second Degree) a. Mean total credits to degree for all program graduates 140.85 149.44 138.46 154.42 142.80 b. Mean total credits to degree for native program graduates 147.00 145.67 147.75 153.25 134.40

4. Program Minors a. Declared Minors 3 5 19 22 22 b. Graduating Minors 0 0 0 9 6



10/2/04 Final 1


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03


Lower Division 0 0 0 0 0 Upper Division 0 0 0 0 0 Total - Summer 0 0 0 0 0

b. Fall Semester Lower Division 0 0 0 0 0 Upper Division 0 0 0 0 0 Total - Fall 0 0 0 0 0

c. Spring Semester Lower Division 0 0 0 0 789 Upper Division 0 0 0 0 132 Total - Spring 0 0 0 0 921

d. Total Lower Division 0 0 0 0 789 Upper Division 0 0 0 0 132 All Semesters 0 0 0 0 921

6. Credit Hour Production (Cash-Funded) Lower Division 0 0 0 0 0 Upper Division 0 0 0 0 0 All Semesters 0 0 0 0 0

7. Full-Year FTE Students a. State-funded 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.70 b. Cash-funded 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 c. Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.70

8. Number of Classes Offered (Fall and Spring Semesters) a. Lower Division 0 0 0 0 6 b. Upper Division 0 0 0 0 2 c. Total 0 0 0 0 8

9. Average Class Size (Fall and Spring Semesters) a. Lower Division 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.8 b. Upper Division 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.0 c. Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.4


10/2/04 Final 2


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03


Full-time tenured or tenure track 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Other full-time 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.31 Part time (NOTE: courses labelled with other prefixes (e.g.GEG, GEL) charged to ENV) 0.20 1.30 1.30 1.64 1.77

b. Non-instructional 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 c. Total 0.20 1.30 1.30 1.64 4.08 d. Percent of Instructional FTE Tenured or Tenure-Track 0% 0% 0% 0% 25%

11. Support Staff FTE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

12. Faculty Load for Full-Time Faculty – Fall & Spring Semesters (State-Funded) a. Average Credit Hours (Type A Courses) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 b. Average Contact Hours (Type A Courses) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.40 c. Total Headcount Enrollment in Type B Courses

i. Online 0 0 0 0 0ii. Other 0 0 0 0 0

13. Student FTE/Faculty FTE (State-Funded) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5

14. Percent of Fall and Spring CHP by faculty type a. Tenured or Tenure Track Faculty 0% 0% 0% 0% 29% b. Full-time Temporary 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% c. Temporary Lecturers 0% 0% 0% 0% 36% d. Part-Time Faculty 0% 0% 0% 0% 36%

15. Program Costs (State-Funded) a. Total Cost 4,138$ 25,302$ 20,462$ 88,176$ 99,167$ b. Cost per Credit Hour -$ -$ -$ -$ 107.67$

Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2



10/2/04

POLITICAL SCIENCE PROGRAM


MSCD’s Political Science Program• offers a B.A. in political science. Students focus on either American (United States) politics or

international/comparative politics.• offers minors in political science, public administration, and Native American studies. A

certificate in public administration is also offered.• provides General Studies courses for all MSCD students and courses needed by other majors.• prepares graduates for post-baccalaureate study in political science or in a profession, e.g., law.• offers courses for teacher licensure programs.


Political science faculty use Educational Testing Services’ Major Field Achievement Test to assessstudents’ learning. Forty students took the test in 2002-03, and the results were favorable, with theMSCD mean being above the national mean in most measures except United States Government andPolitics. The mean percent correct scores in the area of methodology were not strong, but the MSCDmean was slightly higher than the national mean.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their awareness of the principal

achievements in history and in the social sciences, their awareness of international issues and ourglobal society, and their knowledge of diverse cultures.

• Seniors’ satisfaction with their opportunities to participate in the classroom, with the availability ofrequired courses in the daytime, and with the availability of elective courses.

• The number of papers written by seniors.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The consultant stated “MSCD offers a quality political science program with untapped creative

potential.” He found a balance between academic and experiential approaches.• Students have the opportunity to participate in Model United Nations and Arab League student

competitions. The competitions enhance students’ understanding of international politics.• The committee noted that MSCD’s location makes it easy for MSCD students to have internships

at the state capitol and other government offices. The consultant found the internships at thecapitol and the program in Washington “the most original and creative programs of their type” thathe had encountered in a college or university setting.

• A faculty member takes a group of students to Washington, D.C. for a month in the summer,providing students the opportunity to observe aspects of the national political system.

• The Golda Meir Center, operated by the department, is a major asset. The Center hosts speakerswho, according to the consultant, offer “a tremendous diversity of thought,” providing, accordingto the committee, excellent opportunities for students to enrich their education. The Center alsoprovides source material for individuals researching the life of Golda Meir, bringing additionalpositive exposure to MSCD.

• The consultant reported that the majors and minors with whom he spoke were proud of the overallquality of political science instruction they received at MSCD.

• The committee noted the number of majors doubled during the review period.• The committee mentioned that Native American Politics, Latin American Politics, and Politics and

Black People are offered and provide students with unique perspectives on politics. All three areGeneral Studies Level II Social Sciences courses; two are Multicultural courses.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Political Science Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• The committee reported that four political science courses are taught online, noting that three ofthe four are General Studies courses. The availability of online General Studies courses facilitatesstudents of all majors completing their degree online.

• Full-time political science faculty believe it is important that they teach the introductory politicalscience courses and not leave the teaching of the introductory courses totally to part-time facultyaccording to the committee.

• The consultant stated that faculty “demonstrated they are first-rate teachers.” He stated that theirattitude is a tremendous asset for the college; they remain enthusiastic about their teaching.

• The committee reported that two female faculty had been hired under the Faculty RecruitmentIncentive Program (FRIP) for 2003-04.

• Several faculty are frequently interviewed by local radio and television stations to provide analysesof political events.


The committee mentioned that the faculty member who had responsibility for the publicadministration minor and certificate retired and has not been replaced. MSCD is in an idealposition to offer undergraduate public administration coursework. Recommendation: The committee urged that a faculty member with a public administrationbackground be hired.

Several variable topics courses are offered annually even though the designation of “variabletopics” is for courses that are not offered on a regular basis. The committee was concernedbecause the courses are not in the Catalog, and so students may not be aware of them.Recommendation: The committee recommended that five variable topics courses be made regularcourses. Plans: The faculty plan to make some of the variable topics courses regular courses.

The selection of courses in international politics that are offered on a regular basis is meageraccording to the committee. Most catalog courses are broad in scope and do not examine thepolitics of a particular region. Courses that cover a particular region are offered infrequently.Faculty told the committee that they do not have the faculty resources to offer courses in Asianpolitics, European politics, or politics of other regions on a regular basis. Thus the curriculumoffered to MSCD majors in international politics is limited. Recommendation: The committee noted that the curriculum would be strengthened by routinelyoffering more courses of specific regions.

The committee found that PSC 2020 Conducting Political Analysis is not taught exactly asdescribed in the syllabus because of students’ anxiety about mathematics. Although students areprovided the opportunity to use the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), not allstudents do. Also, PSC 2020 does not have a mathematics course prerequisite, which limits whatcan be done in the course. Recommendation: The committee urged faculty to review the syllabus for PSC 2020 and revise itto describe what is actually occurring in the course. Committee members suggested adding“Completion of the Level I mathematics requirement” as a prerequisite, and recommending MTH1210 Introduction to Statistics as that mathematics course. Plans: The faculty plan to revise thecourse, but do not plan to require mathematics as a prerequisite.

POLITICAL SCIENCE

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03










10/2/04 Final 1

POLITICAL SCIENCE

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03



b. Fall Semester Lower Division 2,862 2,988 3,084 3,474 4,038 Upper Division 1,128 1,089 1,248 1,140 1,162 Total - Fall 3,990 4,077 4,332 4,614 5,200

c. Spring Semester Lower Division 2,658 2,955 2,817 3,420 3,821 Upper Division 1,296 1,111 1,085 1,317 1,693 Total - Spring 3,954 4,066 3,902 4,737 5,514

d. Total Lower Division 5,709 6,207 6,225 7,254 8,447 Upper Division 2,613 2,444 2,534 2,661 3,115 All Semesters 8,322 8,651 8,759 9,915 11,562






10/2/04 Final 2

POLITICAL SCIENCE

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03


Full-time tenured or tenure track 6.63 4.46 5.28 4.95 2.88 Other full-time 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.40 5.00 Part time 2.90 2.70 3.90 4.30 4.80




i. Online 102 71 89 62 23ii. Other 34 21 19 20 19



15. Program Costs (State-Funded) a. Total Cost 574,118$ 590,509$ 523,812$ 537,118$ 613,219$ b. Cost per Credit Hour 68.99$ 68.26$ 59.80$ 54.17$ 53.04$

Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2



10/2/04

SOCIOLOGY PROGRAM

October 2004

Program Goals

MSCD’s Sociology Program• provides coursework leading to a B.A. in sociology and enables students to obtain a minor in

sociology.• emphasizes the applied aspects of sociology. The program also offers a concentration in

gerontology.• offers General Studies courses for all MSCD students and offers courses needed by other majors.• prepares students for post-baccalaureate study in sociology and related disciplines.

The consultant found the program’s role and mission consistent with the College’s mission statement,demonstrating a strong commitment to serving a diverse urban population. He noted that the appliedfocus of the program prepares students for many types of employment opportunities.


The consultant found the educational goals appropriate for an undergraduate program in sociology andconsidered the assessment methods well conceived. To assess the sociology program, faculty evaluatestudents’ performance on a comprehensive essay exam. The consultant was pleased that majorsregularly demonstrated a strong awareness of diversity issues. Students consistently score lowest atdemonstrating an ability to apply knowledge and skills to facilitate social change.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• Seniors’ self-evaluation of the number of times they spent five hours or more writing a paper,

usually of two or more pages in length, during their last 18-24 credits.• Employer rating of graduates’

ability to plan, openness towards different approaches to problems.

Results of Concern• Graduates’ satisfaction with faculty or department information about careers.• Seniors’ satisfaction with the availability of clubs related to the major.• Seniors’ satisfaction with the availability of required courses in the evening. Recommendation: The committee suggested sociology faculty set up a link from their web site toInternet sources that have information on careers in sociology.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The consultant noted that the program offers a wide variety of courses in the discipline.• The committee indicated that graduates obtain broad-based knowledge and skills suitable for work

in diverse settings.• The committee recognized the emphasis on quantitative research methods as a strength of the

program.• Both reviewers noted that applied sociology courses offer students the opportunity to apply

sociological theory and knowledge to projects in the community.• The committee noted that courses in The Chicana/o Community, The Black Community, and Race,

Gender and Ethnic Groups are offered, which provide students unique perspectives on socialstructures in the region. All three are General Studies Level II Social Sciences courses and are alsoMulticultural courses.

• Introduction to Sociology has been approved as a state-guaranteed general education course.• The consultant stated that grade inflation does not appear to be a problem in the program.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Sociology Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• The consultant reported that students were very happy with the program and the faculty. Thestudents “view the course offerings as being relevant to their lives and future careers.”

• The committee listed some of the awards won by faculty during the review period: MSCD Outstanding Woman Award MSCD Outstanding Service to Students Award Letters, Arts and Sciences Advising Award

• Credit hour production increased by 7% during the review period.• The consultant was pleased with the professional activity of faculty. He cited faculty publications,

presentations and grants. “Given the high teaching load at Metro, the above represents aphenomenal rate of professional activity.”


Both reviewers were concerned that the official syllabi of most courses have not been updated formany years. According to the consultant, in some cases the course titles and course descriptionsare dated. Recommendation: The consultant recommended updating course titles, updating course learninggoals and objectives, and providing release time for faculty to complete the curriculum revision.The committee suggested that if a comprehensive revision of the entire curriculum is not possibleimmediately, faculty should set a goal of updating a few courses per year.

Both reviewers were concerned that faculty spend significant time and energy advising behavioralscience majors. Some reassigned time is devoted to this activity, but that decreases theinstructional time for full-time faculty. This also detracts from professional development andservice activities related to program enhancement. Recommendation: The committee recommended that serious consideration be given to hiring atenure-track faculty member with broad expertise in behavioral science to coordinate theBehavioral Sciences Program. This should be a prioritized concern for the review of theBehavioral Sciences Program, scheduled for 2005-2006.

The committee reported that the program offers several criminology courses, complementary toofferings of the Criminal Justice and Criminology Department. These sociology courses, however,are taught entirely by part-time faculty. Recommendation: The committee urged that a faculty member with expertise in criminology behired.

Both reviewers found the description of the program in the MSCD Catalog to be confusing. Theconsultant noted that the focus on applied sociology is not adequately highlighted by the catalogdescription of the program or by the course descriptions. Recommendation: The catalog description should be revised. In particular, more prominenceshould be given to the “general” sociology major and, in particular, applied sociology.

Both reviewers were concerned about oversight for courses taught by part-time faculty,particularly from the standpoint of consistency of instruction for introductory courses. Recommendation: The committee advised that full-time faculty work with part-time faculty toensure that all sections of the same course address the same learning objectives.

SOCIOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03










10/2/04 Final 1

SOCIOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






6. Credit Hour Production (Cash-Funded) Lower Division 204 279 243 264 375 Upper Division 429 78 198 483 684 All Semesters 633 357 441 747 1,059





10/2/04 Final 2

SOCIOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






i. Online 0 0 0 0 0ii. Other 8 9 9 4 5




Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2



10/2/04

CIVIL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM


MSCD’s Civil Engineering Technology (CET) Program prepares graduates to apply engineeringprinciples in the planning and construction of large structures. Graduates receive a B.S. in CivilEngineering Technology and may be involved in preparing specifications, drafting, designing,surveying, and estimating costs. The program has two concentrations: structures and construction.


The ABET team noted that although the engineering technology programs had started to gatherassessment data, the results were not being used or analyzed. Faculty have not establishedperformance criteria to determine students’ level of competence on desired student outcomes. Thecommittee stated that more information about graduates’ abilities was needed since some surveyresults were inconsistent.Recommendation and Action Taken: ABET requires that the program implement a continuousimprovement plan, being sure that the results obtained can be used for improvement and that students’competencies are evaluated. The committee advised that if faculty could not assess all studentlearning outcomes with one instrument, they might consider using students’ work in selected upper-division courses to supplement the assessment instrument. Faculty discussed several approaches, butproposed an examination. ABET emphasized that a variety of methods must be used.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• Graduates’ satisfaction with their preparation for work in their field. All respondents replied that

their degree had helped them gain employment.• The likelihood graduates held a job that was closely related to their major.Results of Concern• Employers’ rating of graduates’ ability to

apply job related knowledge and skills, write clearly, speak effectively, and listen.

• The number of times seniors spent five+ hours writing a paper during their last 18-24 credits.• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their ability to organize and

synthesize ideas.• Seniors’ self-evaluation of their ability to organize ideas.

An ABET criterion specifies that “students develop the ability to plan, organize, prepare, and delivereffective technical reports in written, oral, and other formats appropriate to the discipline” whichmakes some of the above a concern. The team found no indication that written presentations weregraded on anything other than technical content and noted that students were required to make onlythree oral presentations during the four years. There was no indication the presentations were graded.Recommendation and Response: The reviewers encouraged faculty to require more written and oralreports and to grade the reports on more than the technical content. Response: In Spring 2004 CETfaculty started requiring oral reports in more courses, and they are grading oral and written reportson both technical and non-technical aspects.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The program is accredited by the Technology Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation

Board of Engineering and Technology. (TAC of ABET)• The committee mentioned that the curriculum had been revised since the last review.• The committee reported that eight civil engineering courses are now crosslisted with mechanical

engineering courses so that coursework can be delivered more efficiently.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Civil Engineering Technology Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• Both reviewers praised the Industrial Advisory Committee. The ABET team was pleased that IACmembers were “truly interested” in the program.

• The committee noted the number of majors grew from 107 in Fall 2000 to 152 in Fall of 2003.• The team wrote “The students are intelligent, very responsive, and appear to be eager to learn.”• The committee noted that the faculty program coordinator is female and serves as a role model.• The ABET team wrote that the faculty are “very proficient, experienced, and, above all else,

appeared to have a true passion for the program and the welfare of their students” and that they“work to ensure that their students receive the best education possible.”

• The ABET team was impressed by the computer laboratories, which team members stated“exceeded the capabilities needed to deliver program objectives.” The team found MSCD’sinvestment in modern information technology infrastructure “notable.”


An ABET criterion specifies that students must have an integrating experience. CET 4130 SoilMechanics has been identified as that course. The team found several problems with it; mostproblems have been addressed. The concerns that remain are that the course does not provide anappropriate integrating experience and that some students may receive transfer credit for it andthus not take it at MSCD. Recommendation: ABET requires engineering technology programs to include an “integratingexperience” in the curriculum and it must be shown that CET 4130 provides that.

An ABET criterion specifies that graduates must be able to apply basic technical concepts to thesolution of civil problems involving transportation systems, but that is not taught in MSCD’sprogram. CET faculty told ABET that MSCD students could take a course in TransportationEngineering at the University of Colorado at Denver, but they would not require the course. Recommendation: ABET did not accept this response. The committee stated that faculty shouldconsider requiring UCD’s course or developing an MSCD course that would meet therequirement. The CPRC noted that the three hours of electives in the curriculum could be used forthe transportation course. Plan: Faculty plan to either revive CET 4150 Highway Engineering,which has not been taught for years, or develop a new course.

An ABET criterion is that graduates must have the opportunity to develop their ability to perform“standard analysis and design in at least three of the recognized specialties within CivilEngineering Technology that are appropriate to the program.” The ABET team found that thecurriculum did not sufficiently cover the design aspects of different technical specialties. Almostall instruction in design was applied to one specialty, structures. CET faculty note that twocourses cover design as applied to hydraulics and one course covers design related to materialbehavior. Hydraulics and material behavior are technical specialties. This response did notreach ABET. Recommendation: ABET requires that the criterion be met.

According to ABET, graduates must have the ability to function effectively on teams. The ABETteam found that only one course emphasized teamwork. Recommendation, Response and Plan: The ABET team stated graduates must possess the abilityto function effectively on teams. MSCD faculty reported that teamwork is required in three civilengineering courses and one surveying course. They planned to include teamwork in morecourses in the future. Specific courses were included in their response.

CIVIL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03










10/2/04 Final 1


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03





d. Total Lower Division 400 320 359 461 559 Upper Division 749 921 595 630 652 All Semesters 1,149 1,241 954 1,091 1,211






10/2/04 Final 2


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






i. Online 0 0 0 0 0ii. Other 0 2 0 3 2




Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2



10/2/04

HUMAN SERVICES PROGRAM


MSCD’s Human Services Program primarily produces graduates who provide services to individualsand families in need of assistance. Graduates receive a B.S. in Human Services with an emphasis inone of six concentrations: counseling and mental health services, addictions studies, domestic violencecounseling, high risk youth studies, paramedic, and nonprofit organization administration (NOA). Theaddictions studies and the domestic violence counseling concentrations prepare graduates for statecertification as a counselor. A human services minor and certificates of completion in high risk youthstudies and nonprofit organization administration are also available.


To assess the program, faculty ask supervisors of students’ required internships to evaluate aspects ofthe intern’s performance. The committee noted that the faculty analyze the results extensively, butthey do not analyze the results by concentration so they are not able to evaluate students’ achievementsin the different concentrations. Also, the committee was not certain that the same assessmentmethodology was appropriate for the NOA concentration. Plans: Faculty intend to analyze the assessment results by concentration and to devise a differentassessment methodology for the NOA concentration.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• The likelihood graduates would recommend MSCD to others interested in human services.• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their ability to listen critically and

think creatively, lead others, and communicate with and learn from specialists in other fields.• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their willingness to examine their

values, their respect for the rights of others, and their desire to be involved in community affairs.• The degree to which graduates’ (and seniors’) experiences at MSCD increased their knowledge of

and respect for diverse cultures and their commitment to helping others.Seniors responded positively to almost every survey question.Result of Concern• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their ability to use and interpret

numerical data and their ability to work in a technology-based society. Recommendation: The committee urged faculty to analyze statistical data in more classes.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The program is approved by the Council for Standards in Human Services Education. The

addictions studies concentration has been awarded an Unconditional Program Approval by theInternational Coalition for Addiction Studies Education.

• A consultant stated: “This department has an established track record as a leading HumanServices program in the U.S. There is every reason to believe that it will continue to provide thissort of leadership for our field in the future given adequate institutional support and resources.”

• A consultant stated that graduates fill a definite need in the community.• The committee noted that MSCD offers the only state-supported B.S. in Human Services.• Three advisory councils are active, providing advice on the curriculum and community needs.• Faculty told the committee that they have increased their efforts to develop students’ writing skills.• The committee reported that MSCD is the only college program in Colorado that provides all the

required education for certification by the state as an addictions counselor.• The committee noted that the Nonprofit Organization Administration concentration was

thoroughly updated during the review period. Members of the NOA Advisory Committee told the

Executive Summary of the Review of the Human Services Program

10/2/04 Page 2

consultant that the program is relevant and current, and that NOA graduates bring the latest trendsand thinking with them to their jobs. The consultant rated the program’s potential above average.

• Human services majors are required to complete practica and internships. The committee reportedthat survey results revealed that 46.6% of the respondents were subsequently employed by theorganization where they completed an internship or practicum.

• The committee noted that the number of majors grew more than 10% during the last five years.• All three reviewers considered the flexibility in course scheduling and the variety in course

delivery options a strength. Courses are offered day, evening, weekends, and online.• The consultants praised the diversity of the population of majors. It is more diverse than the

student population of the college as a whole.• Students told the consultant that the faculty “go above and beyond the call of duty.” As advisors,

they are open and supportive.• The committee mentioned that several faculty had received college awards: the MSCD

Distinguished Service Award, the Golden Key Excellence in Teaching Award, and the GoldenKey Outstanding Adjunct Faculty Award (two faculty).


The consultants noted that some curricular areas needed strengthening. Recommendation: The HSP Advisory Council recommended that faculty add additional contenton severe-persistent mental illness, funding sources, program budgeting, and clinical supervision.The NOA consultant urged including information on marketing and public relations,accountability (as part of financial management), program evaluation, change and transitionmanagement, ethics, leadership, advocacy, and accessing and using research.

Additional content needs to be added on research methods. Recommendation: Reviewers urged increasing research and writing assignments in most courses.

Almost as many students seek an Individualized Degree Program (IDP) major based on NOAcourses as seek a human services major with the NOA concentration. The committee interpretedthe large number of IDPs as an indication that MSCD is not meeting students’ needs. Recommendation: The committee suggested human services faculty revise the requirements forstudents seeking the NOA concentration in the human services major.

According to the committee the high risk youth concentration is one of the more popularconcentrations, but there has been constant turnover in faculty who oversee the concentration. Recommendation: Because of the need for and interest in this concentration, the committeeadvocated that a tenure-track faculty member be hired to oversee it.

The NOA concentration has been flourishing through the efforts of a temporary faculty member,but the consultant cautioned that the lack of a tenured faculty member causes students, alumni andothers to be unsure of the college’s long-term commitment to the program. Recommendation: A tenured or tenure-track faculty should be in charge of the NOAconcentration.

The committee noted that the program has only a 0.80 Office Manager position and student help. Recommendation: The committee recommended that a previously cut position be replaced, iffeasible, to ensure that the office is adequately covered and supported.

HUMAN SERVICES

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03










10/2/04 Final 1

HUMAN SERVICES

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03


Lower Division 280 304 248 276 463 Upper Division 268 505 418 513 573 Total - Summer 548 809 666 789 1,036









10/2/04 Final 2

HUMAN SERVICES

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






i. Online 90 149 96 107 137ii. Other 124 115 116 108 94




Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2



10/2/04

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM


MSCD’s Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) Program prepares graduates to participate in thedesign, production, application, and use of machines and tools. Students are exposed to topics incomputer aided design and manufacturing, and graduates are prepared for work in mechanical designand testing in either engineering or manufacturing departments. The program has two concentrations:mechanical and computer-aided manufacturing. Students receive a B.S. degree in MechanicalEngineering Technology. A minor is also offered.


The ABET team noted that although the engineering technology programs had started to gatherassessment data, the results were not being used or analyzed. Faculty have not establishedperformance criteria to determine students’ level of competence on desired student learning outcomes.The committee observed that employers’ responses to the program review survey indicated a need foran assessment instrument that can determine students’ ability to apply job-related knowledge andskills.Recommendation and Action Taken: ABET requires that the program implement a continuousimprovement plan, being sure that the results obtained can be used for improvement and that students’competencies are evaluated. Faculty discussed several approaches, but proposed an examination.ABET emphasized that a variety of methods must be used.

Selected Survey ResultsFavorable• Seniors’ agreement with the following statements:

“This program is academically demanding for most students.” “There are opportunities for majors to discuss their needs, concerns, and suggestions with

faculty.”• Seniors’ satisfaction with the availability of clubs in their major.Results of Concern• Employers’ rating of graduates’ ability to

apply job related knowledge and skills, think critically.

• The degree to which graduates’ experiences at MSCD increased their ability to think critically,read carefully, synthesize ideas, and think creatively.

• The number of times seniors gave an oral presentation during their last 18-24 credits.• Seniors’ satisfaction with availability of courses in the daytime.• The likelihood graduates’ would recommend MSCD to someone interested in their major.

Strengths Identified Through the Review Process• The program is accredited by the Technology Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation

Board of Engineering and Technology (TAC of ABET).• The ABET team found the curriculum rigorous and “well designed to prepare students for

employment with the local industry.”• Both reviewers praised Industrial Advisory Committee. The ABET team found the IAC “well

qualified, diverse, and extremely active and supportive of the program.”• The mechanical engineering technology website was lauded.• The number of MET majors increased from 114 in 2000-01 to 172 in 2002-03, a 50% increase

according to the committee.• The ABET team found “an enthusiastic and diverse student body, many of whom are actively

involved in professional organizations.” This activity will prepare them for professional careers.

Executive Summary of the Review of the Mechanical Engineering Technology Program

10/2/04 Page 2

• The committee found the faculty dedicated to and enthusiastic about the program. Faculty want tobe involved with students and are excited about working with them.

• Although there are only a few faculty, they are ethnically diverse according to the committee.• The committee reported that the program had recently obtained some machines from the Lowry

Manufacturing Center, which enabled faculty to offer computer aided manufacturing.• The ABET team stated that the “new computer laboratories are well equipped with updated

computers and software. Students benefit by working in an environment that will be comparableto those found in modern business and industry settings.”


The ABET team noted that some courses required for the manufacturing concentration had notbeen offered during the last two years. Recommendation: To enable students to graduate in a timely manner, ABET (and MSCD)mandate that courses required for major be taught at least every other year.

The committee found that the first course in the major was taught primarily by part-time facultyand the second course was always taught by part-time faculty. These courses are important inattracting and keeping new majors. Recommendation: The committee urged that care be taken when selecting faculty to teachbeginning courses since the faculty are pivotal in creating interest in the program.

The committee reported that during the review period only 8% of the sections of the first course inthe major were taught in the day and only 15% of the sections of the second course were taught inthe day. The committee provided some evidence that classes scheduled in the day would be moreattractive to students than evening or weekend classes. Recommendation: The committee urged faculty to schedule more courses during the day.

The ABET team found that the program did not have effective leadership. Team members listedseveral items as evidence: inability to provide approved curriculum revisions, no minutes of theIAC meetings, and lack of coordination and communication resulting in errors in the ABET Self-Study report. In addition, the team noted that the program coordinator taught an overload. Recommendation and Action Taken: ABET required that MSCD implement a plan to ensureeffective leadership. MSCD has appointed a new program coordinator and has put the programin a newly created department, the Department of Engineering Technology. The MET programcoordinator is now chair of the department. All program coordinators have reassigned time.

The ABET review team discovered that proposed curriculum changes were not available for theirreview. Despite several attempts, proposed curriculum revisions had not been approved throughthe curriculum process because of poorly prepared paperwork. MET faculty had little clericalsupport in preparing their curriculum materials.Recommendation: The committee urged faculty to review and update their syllabi and to submitcorrect paperwork. Staff should be available given the new status of the program coordinator.

ABET requires that representative samples of student work be available for the review team.However, as in the past, the TAC of ABET team did not find an adequate display of student work. Recommendation: ABET requires that adequate student work be presented at the next TAC visit.

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






3. Credits to Graduation (Excludes Double Majors and Students Seeking a Second Degree) a. Mean total credits to degree for all program graduates 171.1 155.0 149.8 156.3 145.7 b. Mean total credits to degree for native program graduates --- 153.0 148.7 157.5 145.0




10/2/04 Final 1


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03





d. Total Lower Division 432 252 357 597 837 Upper Division 905 643 528 481 637 All Semesters 1,337 895 885 1,078 1,474






10/2/04 Final 2


1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03






i. Online 0 0 0 0 0ii. Other 0 3 6 8 4




Efficiency Measures

10/2/04 Final 3











10/2/04 1











10/2/04 2

1

AGENDA ITEM: Follow-up Report for the Programs Reviewed in 2002-03

ISSUE:

Recommendations made at the time of program review are usually acted upon during thesubsequent year. This agenda item describes the actions taken by the programs whosereviews were completed in June 2003.

BACKGROUND:

Last year MSCD presented the results of the program reviews of the following majorsand indicated that steps would be taken to address certain concerns. This report is afollow-up to the 2002-03 report, providing the Trustees with information about theprogress the college has made in addressing the recommendations. Because there arenumerous recommendations, the Vice President of Academic Affairs together with theAssociate Vice President and Deans narrowed the list of recommendations that arepresented. The questions that were asked are shown in bold type.

REPORT:

African-American Studies Program

1. With the retirement of the two senior faculty members, how are the classesbeing staffed? Have other programs hired faculty who will contribute to theprogram? Since over a third of the program’s courses cover Africa, has aperson been hired who can teach some of those courses?

Classes are being staffed by full-time temporary and part-time faculty. Thecourses covering Africa are being covered by a part-time faculty member. Onefaculty member has been hired as a FRIP appointment.

2. What is the status of the search for a chair?

A search was conducted for the chair’s position but was not successful. Theformer chair has come out of retirement and returned to the department on aninterim basis. He will continue the search for a new chair and is optimistic that achair will be in place by Fall, 2005.

3. What changes or additions have been made or are planned to be made to theprogram’s plan to increase majors and graduates? Some reviewerssuggested the program develop a career-oriented focus.

The college has requested to have African American Studies approved forsecondary teacher education licensure with an endorsement in social studies. TheVice President for Academic Affairs and the Dean met with Dorothy Gotlieb from

2

the Colorado Department of Education and believe that the major will soon beapproved for licensure. MSCD recently sent information supporting the requestto CDE.

4. How has the program capitalized on the Community Advisory Board’sstrong commitment to the program?

The Community Advisory Board has been extremely supportive of the program.One member provided statistics that show the need for teachers who have abackground in African American Studies. A member wrote a letter of support forthe TQE grant, which was recently approved. Members have indicated an interestin assisting in the recruitment of students. The Vice President for AcademicAffairs is actively involved in supporting the program. The African AmericanLeadership Institute now has a representative on the Community Advisory Board,and the President has indicated that MSCD will continue to be involved with theAALI. Since June 1, 2003, $2,035 has been added to the scholarship money forthe program.

5. Please list other actions taken that you would like mentioned.

Naomi Tutu, the daughter of Desmond Tutu, will hold the Rachael NoelDistinguished Professorship this year. She will be on campus in October. TheBlack World conference will be held in February, 2005. Some staff support wasreturned to the program.

Biology Program

1. Concerns about outdated equipment were noted during the review. Theprogram received substantial capital funds to upgrade and replace oldequipment. How much was received? Has this money addressed mostproblems? Does the program have a plan for equipment maintenance,replacement, and acquisition of new equipment? Has the program submitteda proposal to Institutional Advancement for help from private donors?

In terms of additional supplements to the budget, the biology program receivedapproximately $69,500 in FY 2003 (for purchase of computer bioprobes, laptopcomputers, microscopes, and several items of molecular biology equipment). Theprogram received another supplement of approximately $24,500 in FY 2004 (forpurchase of digital projectors, digital cameras and adaptors for photomicrographs,an additional laptop computer, and a set of 24 microscopes for our anatomy andphysiology laboratories). Most of these items (or at least those that have arrived)either have been or are being integrated into undergraduate laboratories. Forexample, the initial set of microscopes (purchased in part by supplemental fundsfrom LAS and in part by residual funds in class fee accounts) is heavily used inthe introductory biology laboratory (BIO 1090), thus addressing a major concernof the program review. The laptop/bioprobes are also being integrated into

3

undergraduate laboratories. The second set of microscopes (acquired this spring)will replace the ancient microscopes in the anatomy and physiology labs. Themolecular biology equipment is being used by two faculty in their advancedlaboratories and by undergraduate research students. As a result of this influx offunds, many of the equipment problems raised by the program review have beenaddressed successfully. A FIPSE (Fund for the Improvement of Post-SecondaryEducation) proposal was submitted to fund the laptops and bioprobes, but was notfunded. Biology faculty submitted a list of equipment needs to the Dean to beforwarded to Institutional Advancement, but have not pursued this further, andthey continue to explore avenues for funding undergraduate research.

2. A serious shortage in full-time faculty was noted at the time of the lastreview; three searches had been aborted. Have new faculty been hired?How has the shortage been addressed?

Although three faculty were converted from temporary full-time positions totenure-track positions in 2003, it is important to note that the Biology Programhas continued to lose ground in the overall number of tenure-track faculty relativeto past numbers. Last year, a senior tenured faculty member took early retirementand the department chair left at the end of spring. Thus, there continues to be ashortfall of two tenure-track faculty despite the conversion of the three positionsin 2003.

3. With the explosion of information in biology and the recommendations madeby the reviewers, what curriculum changes are planned for 2003-04 andbeyond? How will the new tenure-track faculty’s expertise be used todevelop curriculum?

Given the current budgetary crisis, this sort of planning is difficult at best.Nevertheless, the biology faculty have initiated the following new courses sincethe program review: vertebrate zoology (Petcoff – new faculty); laboratory in celland molecular biology (Petcoff); conservation biology (Carello – new faculty);economic botany (Baxendale); and the biology of human reproduction(Cornwall). All five are upper-division courses. In addition, extensive revisionshave occurred in animal physiology (revised by a new faculty member), histology(completely revised and digitized), advanced cell and molecular biology (revisedby a new faculty member to add new molecular information), and vertebrateembryology (revised to add new molecular information). Unfortunately, thechair’s departure will leave the embryology course uncovered, and because thenew chair is a microbiologist, the new chair will leave a gap in the microbiologycurriculum. Finally, one faculty developed two new field courses, one going toCosta Rica and one to the Galapagos. Significant curriculum gaps will remain(e.g., in the emerging areas of genomics and bioinformatics) without new faculty.

4

4. The biology web site was found to be outdated. Has the web site beenupdated? Are there resources available to help with the task?

The website is still being updated, but the retrenchment of college support for thetechnology fellows program was a significant blow to this effort. Previously, afaculty member received reassigned time through this program to support thewebsite update.


In direct response to the program review, biology faculty removed urban ecologyfrom the list of courses meeting the ecology requirement for the B.S. and B.A.degrees. The department has created an ad hoc committee to update its facultyevaluation guidelines in order to prioritize the activities that are evaluated. Threefaculty, two of them new, are providing significant opportunities forundergraduate research despite the lack of resources to support this effort. Thechair wrote a new laboratory manual for BIO 1090, which is being sold tostudents for $10. The funds collected are all placed in a special fund account thatwill be used to support the 1090 laboratory. When he leaves, the chair will granta copyright exemption to MSCD to allow continued use of this manual. Itappears as though approximately $1,500-2,000 per semester will be generated bythis sale once the cost of the manual is covered. This practice also benefitsstudents, since the commercial laboratory manuals were costing more than $40.

History Program

1. The reviewers stated that more tenure and tenure-track faculty were neededsince in 2002-03 there were eight full-time temporary faculty or lecturers andseveral faculty retired at the end of the year. What is the current proportionof full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty to other full-time faculty inhistory and what are the plans for hiring faculty in tenure-track positions?

Staffing remained a problem in 2003-2004. In 2003-2004, the History Programhad thirteen tenured or tenure-tack faculty. However, of those, one was on a one-year leave of absence, one was on a half year sabbatical, one had released time todirect the Honors Program, and three others were teaching crosslisted courseswith other departments. Enrollments remained high, especially in the fall of2003. In 2003-2004, the History Department employed four temporary full time,non tenure-track faculty and six lecturers, who each teach fifteen hours, as well astwenty-two adjunct faculty.

History faculty conducted a search for a full time tenure-track faculty member in2003-04 and the position has been filled. Another search for a tenure-track personwas put on hold because of budget concerns. Dr. Sheila Kaplan, who holds tenurein history, will be joining the Department in the fall of 2004 as a full-timeprofessor.

5

2. What curriculum changes or updates are needed now that several seniorfaculty have retired?

The retirements of tenured professors hurt the History Program because theytaught some of the most popular and needed classes, including Civil War andReconstruction, History of England, History of Ireland, Renaissance andReformation, and Nazi Germany. A new hire in 2002 has expertise on the CivilWar. Dr. Sheila Kaplan will be teaching England since 1714. Luckily, the threeretired professors have continued to teach as adjuncts. Other gaps were filled byhiring adjuncts or by having full-time faculty take on additional coursepreparations.

In Fall 2003, history faculty submitted several curriculum changes for approval.HIS 2770 World of Islam and HIS 3760 Modern Middle East were made GeneralStudies Level II classes because of program review recommendations. HIS 2770was raised to upper-division status because its content justified that. Historyfaculty added a couple courses and did some minor rearranging of requirements.To make it easier for students minoring in history to graduate, the history facultyasked permission to allow students to count one of the courses in their historyminor in General Studies as long as they still have eighteen history hours in theminor.

3. Concern was reported about the scores of some history majors on thePLACE social studies test. How did history majors perform on the PRAXISfor social studies licensure? Based on the results on the PRAXIS exam,would you recommend any changes in the curriculum required of socialstudies students?

History faculty have received the results of the PLACE test administered May 17,2003. Of the twenty-one history students who took the exam, eight passed andthirteen did not. The faculty reviewed CAPP reports for all those students. Of thethirteen who failed, ten pursued programs under the “old” (pre Fall 2001) historymajor, which faculty revised because they did not think that it was giving studentsthe breadth and depth that they needed to pass PLACE. Of the eight who passed,all were pursuing the new major.

The time gap between when students took most of their history classes and whenthey took the PLACE test also seemed to affect their ability to pass. Of thethirteen who failed, eight had not taken substantive history classes for three to fiveyears prior to taking the exam. Of the eight who passed, all appeared to havetaken most of their classes within a year or two of taking the exam.

The students who failed also tended to have lower history grade point averagesthan those who passed. The lowest GPA of a student who passed was 3.08 and allthe rest were above 3.40. Of those who failed, eight had history averages below

6

3.10, and three had averages that would have prevented them from gettinglicensure even if they had passed PLACE. Other factors also contributed. Oneof the failing students, for example, had taken only nine hours of history before hetook the PLACE test, and all of those were taken at least five years before he tookPLACE.

The May 17, 2003 PLACE test results suggest that the new history program isworking, that students who do not take PLACE within a semester or two offinishing their content history courses suffer because of the delay, and thatstudents whose grade point averages are below 3.40 are far less likely to passPLACE than those whose GPAs are above. However, it may be that othervariables are affecting the scores. As increasing numbers of students take the newprogram history faculty will be in a better position to sort out the variables.


In Fall 2003, history faculty revised their evaluation system to conform with newhandbook requirements. In Spring 2004, faculty began a better assessment ofadvising. History faculty are currently working with other faculty to create a LASmajor for elementary licensure and other students.

Land Use Program

1. Several concerns with the curriculum were noted during the review, andfaculty indicated they would be conducting an exhaustive review of thecurriculum starting in Fall 2003. What is the status of that review? Whenwill curriculum changes be forthcoming? What impacts, if any, have facultyretirements had on the curriculum?

The curriculum review has been started. To date land use faculty have reviewed allthe GIS (Geographic Information Systems) courses; some prerequisites havechanged or been eliminated and a title change for at least one course has beenproposed. Faculty have decided how they wish to modify the urban land useplanning concentration; some courses will be dropped and replaced by others.Several courses will be modified. Land use faculty are now working on thegeology and the environment and resources concentrations. They hope that mostof these program changes will be presented to the School and Faculty Senatecurriculum committees in the fall of 2004.

During 2003-04, the position of a retired tenured faculty member was filled with afull-time temporary faculty member who teaches most of the planning courses.Some of the retired faculty member’s courses have been given to adjuncts and orlecturers; others have been taken over by the Chair. The Chair has had to increasethe variety of classes he has taught because of not being able to replace the retiredfaculty member in a timely fashion.

7

2. What changes should be made to the land use curriculum vis a vis theenvironmental science major?

Land use faculty plan to review and modify the environment and resourcesconcentration of the land use major at the same time they revise the environmentalscience major. They have been waiting for completion of the review of theEnvironmental Science Program. Most of the curriculum changes beingconsidered at the moment are to the environmental science major.

3. The reviewers noticed a need for technical support for the two state-of-the-artcomputer laboratories. How is this need being met? If it has not, what is theplan for defining and meeting the need?

Land use faculty sorely need a laboratory technician to help run the laboratories,and they note that other departments, e.g. biology, chemistry and physics, have labtechnician positions. Since the Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Department hasnot been allocated such a position, students who have taken many GIS courses arehired to help in the GIS laboratory. The Title III laboratory is maintained by afaculty member. Recently, the Department has received calls inquiring about theGIS Lab’s ability to do outside work, and land use faculty are looking into thepossibility of using the lab to generate income not only to employ students, but toprovide funds for a lab technician as well. (Is this latter use legal?)

4. Land use faculty offer a number of General Studies courses, and the reviewersnoted that there was little oversight of how the multi-sectioned courses weretaught. How are quality and compliance with General Studies criteriamonitored?

Not only do full-time land use faculty offer a number of General Studies coursesand sections, but also many of the sections are taught by adjuncts. Each facultymember is given the general syllabus for the course to use as a guide and instructedon the General Studies criteria that must be met for that particular course. Forthese courses, faculty use the same book, so all students are exposed to the samecontent. Individual faculty members are allowed use their own style of teaching,but all must ensure that students can express themselves on topics in the particularcourse through writing, oral communication, and analysis of qualitative andquantitative data. In geography courses for example, some faculty have a writtencomponent as part of the major examinations while others have short papers ontopics related to the course. All introductory geography courses are taughtaccording to the national geography standards to ensure consistency in criteria tobe met in individual courses. Faculty are expected to file their course outlines withthe department so general criteria can be monitored.

8


The major lab room for Land Use (SI 110) is being converted to a “more or less”smart classroom by using monies made available by President Kieft.

Meteorology Program

1. The number of graduates has declined and the program has been placed onCCHE’s Low Demand list. What recruitment/retention strategies are beingused to address this possible problem?

Program faculty recognize the need to improve the recruitment and retentionstatistics. In both areas, the program is inherently limited because students arerequired to take three semesters of calculus, differential equations, and eight othercalculus-based courses (meteorology, physics, and statistics). Relaxing the courserequirements could increase the number of majors, but these graduates would be illsuited for careers in atmospheric science. Furthermore, the rigorous curriculum ismandated by guidelines from the American Meteorological Society and federalhiring standards for meteorologists. Despite these limitations, meteorology facultyrecognize the potential to increase number of graduates to at least 10 per year.

In terms of retention, meteorology faculty have found that students who have metwith them early in their program of studies are more likely to complete theirdegrees. Unfortunately, the program coursework begins at the sophomore level,and students who enter MSCD planning to major in meteorology often change theirmajor during their first year before they even take their first meteorology course.Meteorology faculty have initiated a program for periodically deliveringinformation to all majors concerning course selection, scholarships, and studentpositions at atmospheric research laboratories. In these mailings, students areencouraged to visit with a departmental advisor frequently.

In terms of recruitment, a major focus is to recruit more students with a strongmath and science background in high school. These students are more likely notonly to succeed in completing the degree, but also be successful in their careers.Unfortunately, incoming students with a strong background are likely to gravitatetowards the more recognizable physical sciences such as chemistry, physics,engineering, or mathematical science. A long-term project involves meeting withscience and computer clubs at area high schools to introduce the exciting high-techfield of meteorology to students who have little exposure to the area. Withassistance from the School of Letters, Arts, and Sciences, the program isadvertising in Weatherwise, a popular periodical in the field. The program is alsorepresented regularly at on-campus recruiting events such as the Majors Fair andthe Visit Metro State event.

Many inquiries about the program come from prospective students learning aboutthe program from the departmental web page. This web page needs to be

9

improved. Although the college has not supported departments in this area,meteorology faculty are committed to addressing this concern when time permits.

2. Faculty indicated an interest in forming an advisory board. Has one beenformed?

Meteorology faculty and the department chair have met to discuss forming anadvisory board for the Meteorology Program. The consensus view is that a well-conceived advisory board with an appropriate mission and vision could be quiteuseful in advancing the goals of the program. On the other hand, a quickly formedboard with an ill-conceived composition and premise could entail extra work withlittle tangible benefit. To date, the program has worked on delineating theoperation of a board and identifying potential members. The program expects toform a board during the 2004-05 academic year.

3. Both reviewers noted the need to replace or enlarge the current meteorologylaboratory that holds only ten workstations to create a lab that can handle 15-20 workstations. Has this need been met? If not, what are the plans formeeting it?

The primary laboratory need for the program is a larger computer laboratory wheremeteorology-specific software and data are available. The current lab is too smalleven for ten students, but no additional space is available. Some class activitiesmust be done outside of class time and other potential lab activities are not done.This is also a problem for recruitment and retention, as students recognize the lackof adequate facilities (see question 1). The program uses a UNIX-based system,which is incompatible with other computer labs on campus. Through acombination of an external grant written by one faculty member and one-timefunds approved by the MSCD President’s Office, the current lab has been upgradedwith new computers including a server and new furniture. New software and state-of-the-art programs are currently in place. However, lack of a computer lab spacecontinues to be an enormous problem for the program. When/if adequate spacebecomes available, meteorology faculty will proceed with the expansion.


A permanent ceiling projector will be installed in the meteorology classroom.Because of the teaching needs in meteorology, the meteorology classroom was oneof the first “smart classrooms” on campus, using departmental funds. Theoverhead projector system will vastly improve the logistics of the classroom.

As mentioned under the Land Use Program, the Earth and Atmospheric SciencesDepartment needs a staff support technician position for its three specializedcomputer laboratories. In the absence of this support, individual faculty membersdevote a large amount of time to the maintenance and development of thelaboratories.

10

Electrical Engineering Technology Program

1. What high school recruiting efforts have been undertaken and have theybeen successful?

Electrical engineering technology faculty established an outreach contact with theTechnology Magnet at the Denver Public Schools, and they represented MSCD atthe open houses at both West and Thomas Jefferson High Schools in the fall. Inaddition, EET faculty made two recruiting visits with guest lecture/presentationsat the Bollman Technical Center in Adams County. It is too early to determinethe effects of these efforts.

2. Have faculty taken an increased role relative to advising? If so, pleasedescribe the larger role.

All full-time faculty are now actively involved in student advising. Classannouncements have been made regarding faculty availability for advising andencouraging students to approach faculty with issues and concerns. Programfaculty meetings have been held to establish guidelines for CAPP adjustments,and the results of advising sessions have been incorporated into course schedulingon a semester-by-semester basis.

3. The reviewers noted several problems with scheduling: some courses werenot included in the five-year course rotation plan, some required courses werescheduled to be taught every two years, and only 32% of the courses werescheduled during the day. All these made it difficult for students to completethe program in a timely manner. Have improvements been made in thescheduling of courses? Has the five-year rotation plan been modified andimplemented? Are more classes being scheduled during the day?

In each schedule, multiple sections of classes have been offered (morning,afternoon, evening) to determine the actual demand for such offerings. Electricalengineering technology faculty have then cancelled the under-enrolled sectionsand called students to assist in scheduling into available sections. To date, thiseffort has not resulted in a dramatic change in the distribution of classes. Mostclasses supporting large enrollments are now offered both during the day(morning or afternoon) and during the evening.

The five-year rotation of courses has been revisited in detail. Specifically,required courses that have eligible students in matriculation are being offeredessentially on an “on-demand” basis. “Required” courses that do not haveeligible students are not put in the rotation pro-forma.

11

Required upper-division courses that would be significantly under enrolled arebeing offered on an independent study or supervised study basis as teachingoverloads by the faculty.

4. The ABET reviewers found the communications equipment out-of-date andreported that the Industrial Advisory Committee found some power andcontrol equipment “unsafe.” Have there been any improvements in theequipment? Is there a plan for maintenance or repair of the equipment?

Power and Controls: EET faculty have obtained two different bids for updatingthe power laboratory equipment. The new equipment will permit simulation ofmany functions that must currently be accomplished by hands-on experience withpotentially lethal voltages. Faculty are working with Institutional Advancementand the EET Industry Advisory Board to identify funding sources for thisequipment. (Cost ~$650,000)

Communications: Electrical engineering technology faculty have just completeda master plan for updating the communications equipment that addresses currentneeds and anticipates future needs as well. This major upgrade is intended todramatically enhance the capabilities of the program. Faculty will also initiatework with Institutional Advancement and the EET Industry Advisory Board toidentify funding sources. (Cost ~ $500,000)

General Laboratory Equipment: Although not specifically identified in theaforementioned reviews, faculty’s visits to the high schools underscored the needto update the basic laboratory equipment as well. Faculty have developed apreliminary plan for this update, including a redesign of the laboratory benches toincorporate computer workstations at each lab location that would support use ofcircuit analysis programs in the laboratory setting. (Initial Estimate for three labrooms: ~$250,000).

5. Reviewers noted that there were more EET courses than could be offered bythe limited number of faculty. Have courses been archived asrecommended? If so, how many?

Electrical engineering technology faculty have archived three courses. Inaddition, they have developed an “on-demand” model for scheduling the rotationof courses to support the actual student demand, not merely offering the courseson a 1-year, 2-year, or 4-year cycle. This limits the actual courses required. Inaddition, they plan to use qualified adjunct faculty in specialized areas and theindependent study or supervised study model mentioned above to offer requiredcourses.

12


Automated Archiving: Faculty have decided to archive all ABET requireddocuments on the “Y” drive and provide secured access to all faculty. This willserve two purposes:a. First, all ABET required documentation will be stored in a secured area that is

regularly backed up by IT and could be delivered to accrediting teams on asingle CD.

b. Second, the “Y” drive will become a key resource for faculty (full-time andadjunct) as they prepare to teach a course. They will have access to syllabi,sample assignments, previous test examples, etc. This library will providegreater standardization of instruction and provide a repository of informationon how materials should be presented.

Industrial Design Program

1. To meet NASAD accreditation concerns about enrollment management andevaluating students’ work, faculty have instituted a portfolio review process.How are students advised regarding the first portfolio approval and theircontinuation in the program?

Information regarding the NASAD Portfolio Review process is posted on theindustrial design web site in three locations. In addition there will be a statement inall MSCD Catalogs starting with the 2004-05 Catalog notifying prospectivestudents that there is a portfolio review.

Students who fail to pass the review process may have an opportunity to apply fora “second chance.” The faculty will decide, where appropriate, if the student’swork was only poorly presented and does represent the necessary ideation; if so, asecond review for that student would be considered with specificrecommendations. Students who fail to present proper ideation will be counseledinto either an individualized degree program major or an art major. Students couldcertainly consider other choices as well.

2. Has there been any progress on replacing major equipment? Is there a planfor the purchase or replacement of major equipment in the shops andclassrooms? Is there a maintenance or repair plan?

A sum of $25,000 was allocated to replace all of the electric welding equipment.The new equipment has been purchased and is in use. This equipment wasidentified as the highest priority because the Technology Building was closed for aday in Spring 03 when a welder shorted to ground internally and the building mainbreaker had to be re-built on the spot to continue holding classes. There is norepair/maintenance plan in place because the program has no classified technician.The industrial design major is the most studio/lab intense major on the campuswithout classified technician support. The faculty have no expertise in repair and

13

maintaining equipment. (NASAD identified this situation as a “concern”)Currently, equipment that fails or breaks requires outside contract repair services,and the local hourly charges for these services are in excess of $90 per hour.

3. Should faculty offer more courses in the summer, especially lower-divisioncourses? Is a four-year rotation plan in place that justifies summer offeringswithout interfering with fall and spring enrollments?

Industrial design faculty offered three lower-division courses this summer, 04. Atthe present time the four-year rotation does not accommodate lower-divisionsummer courses, and so the effects of offering these courses will be monitored.


The Industrial Design Program has created its first ever Industry Advisory Board.Board members are some of the most “recognized” names in the profession today.The NASAD area visitor was apprised of MSCD’s board membership and hisresponse was: “Wow what a high powered advisory board. Congratulations onyour ability to recruit these folks.”

1

AGENDA ITEM: Academic Program Review Schedule for AY 2004-05

ISSUE:

The state-wide goal has been for every institution of higher education to review eachacademic program every seven years. Below is MSCD’s projected schedule for thereviews.

BACKGROUND:

Metropolitan State College of Denver

2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

AviationManagement(BS)

Behavioral Science(BA)

SpeechCommunications (BA)

Chemistry(BA/BS)

Mathematics(BA/BS) History (BA) Anthropology

(BA)

AviationTechnology(BS)

Hospitality,Meeting and TravelAdm. (BA)

English (BA) Nursing (BS) Physics(BA/BS)

ElectricalEngineeringTechnology(BS)

Human Services(BS)

Social Work(BS)

TechnicalCommunications(BA)

Journalism(BA)

Leisure Studies(BA)

Health CareManagement(BS)

Meteorology(BS) Sociology (BA)

CriminalJustice &Criminology(BS)

Psychology (BA) ModernLanguages (BA) Art (BFA) Music (BM/BA)

AfricanAmericanStudies (BA)

PoliticalScience (BA)

Accounting(BS)

IndividualizedDegree Program(BA/BS)

Philosophy(BA)

Theatre(B.A./B.F.A)

MusicEducation(BME)

IndustrialDesign (BA)

CivilEngineeringTechnology(BS)

ComputerInformationSystems (BS)

Surveying &Mapping (BS)

HumanDevelopment(BA)

ChicanoStudies (BA)

Land Use(BA/BS)

MechanicalEngineeringTechnology(BS)

Economics (BS) Computer Science(BS)

SpecialEducation(B.A.)

HumanPerformanceand Sport (BA)

Biology(BA/BS)

EnvironmentalScience (BS)

Finance (BS)

Management(BS)

Marketing (BS)

1

AGENDA ITEM: Report on Cash-Funded Out-of State and Out-of CountryInstruction to CCHE

BACKGROUND:

MSCD must report to CCHE the number of students enrolled, the credit hours of thecourses, the instructor, and the delivery site for all cash-funded out-of-state and out-ofcountry courses. The report MSCD submitted this year is attached.

The Trustees and CCHE must approve all new study abroad courses. All but one of thecourses in the attached report were approved last year by the Trustees of MetropolitanState College of Denver and CCHE. The exception was From Teotihuacan to MonteAlbán, which was approved by the former Board of Trustees and the CCHE. The coursewas also offered in 2001. The study abroad courses to Germany were canceled becausenot enough students enrolled.

Each course was cash-funded. By MSCD policy, each individual who goes on the studyabroad trip must be registered as an MSCD student and receives college credit forsuccessfully completing the course. Faculty members, regardless of their status at thecollege (full-or part-time), are paid at the rate of part-time faculty.

Students must turn in evaluation forms for their study abroad course so MSCD is able tomonitor the quality of the educational experience.

DRAFT 1

Institution: Date:

Progam Title:Number of

Degrees Granted:

Location:(state or country)

Number of Certificates Awarded:

Prefix/Number Course TitleCredit Value

No. of Students Enrolled Instructor Rank/Title

Courses, Credits, Enrollment:

List below the prefix, number, course title, credit value and enrollment in each course delievered. (Insert additional rows as needed.)

Courses in Programs10/2/04

DRAFT 2



EXPENSES

Total direct costs of: -$

Administration

Instruction

Total of indirect costs

TOTAL COSTS -$

REVENUE

Tuition and fees

Other sources (identify below) -$

TOTAL REVENUE -$

Date

COURSES ONLY - FINANCIAL

Signature of Official Submitting the Report

Special Arrangements - Describe special arrangements with any other organizations, institutions, agencies for delivery of this instruction.

Evaluation of Courses - Provide additional information on the evaluation of the quality of the instruction and support services.


DRAFT 3



Title:


1

INSTITUTION:



Delivery Site (state or country)

FRE 2800 Intl. French - Year II 3 1 Alain Ranwez Professor France

FRE 2800 Intl. French - Year II 6 1 Alain Ranwez Professor France

FRE 3800 Intl. Advanced French 3 2 Alain Ranwez Professor France

FRE 3800 Intl. Advanced French 6 6 Alain Ranwez Professor France

MDL 390HFrom Teotihuacan to Monte Alban 1 24 David Conde Professor Mexico

BIO 488CDarwin's Footsteps-Galapagos 3 18 Cynthia Church Assistant Professor Galapagos

GER 1800, 2800, 3800

International German Year I and II and Advanced International German

6 canceled Lawrence Glatz Associate Professor Germany

REPORT ON OUT-OF-STATE/COUNTRY INSTRUCTION

INFORMATION ON COURSES, LOCATIONS AND INSTRUCTORS

Metropolitan State College of Denver

Complete the information below for each course delivered

JULY 1, 2003 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2004

Courses Only10/2/04

2

EXPENSES

Total direct costs of: 7,384$

Administration -$

Instruction 7,384$

Total of indirect costs 3,983$

TOTAL COSTS 11,367$

REVENUE

Tuition and fees 12,255$

Other sources (identify below) -$

TOTAL REVENUE 12,255$

Date

Title:

Signature of Official Submitting the Report

Special Arrangements - Describe special arrangements with any other organizations, institutions, agencies for delivery of this instruction.

Evaluation of Courses - Provide additional information on the evaluation of the quality of the instruction and support services. See Attached.

COURSES ONLY - FINANCIAL

Courses Only10/2/04

DRAFT 1

Institution: Date:__________________________

Prefix/Number Course Title

Special arrangements - describe special arrangements with any other organizations, institutions, agencies for delivery of this instruction.

Evaluation of Courses - Additional information on the evaluation of the quality of the instruction and support services.

REPORT ON OUT-OF-STATE/COUNTRY INSTRUCTION JULY 1, 2003 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2004

Courses Only - Add'l Info10/2/04

DRAFT 2

Prefix/Number Course Title

Special arrangements - describe special arrangements with any other organizations, institutions, agencies for delivery of this instruction.

Evaluation of Courses - Additional information on the evaluation of the quality of the instruction and support services.

Courses Only - Add'l Info10/2/04

AGENDA ITEM: Personnel

ISSUE: Reporting of personnel actions, which have occurred since the last Boardmeeting of September 8, 2004.

BACKGROUND: Temporary appointments and resignations which are delegated to thePresident and do not require approval by the Board.

The following personnel items are presented to the Trustees as information:

TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS

Ms. Linda Curran, Interim Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs, Curriculum &Programs, $82,500.00 – August 1 through June 30, 2005 (TEMPORARY/ADMINISTRATIVE)

Mr. Dan Steffensen, Instructor, Metro Academy, $30,027.00 – September 9 through June 30,2005 (TEMPORARY/ADMINISTRATIVE)

Dr. Cottee J. White, Chair of African American Studies, $39,004.00 – half time August 18through May 14, 2005 (TEMPORARY/FACULTY)

RESIGNATION

Mr. Ronald Lambert, Director, Creative Services, effective October 11, 2004.

TERMINATION

Mr. Eric Brandt, Instructor, Metro Academy, effective September 7, 2004.

VI. PRESENTATIONS

A. An Adventure of the American Mind – Colorado (Dr. PeggyO’Neill-Jones, Professor of Technical Communications)

B. Teacher Quality Enhancement Program Grant (Dr. Sandra Haynes,Interim Dean, School of Professional Studies)

INFORMATION ON THE PRESENTATIONITEMS WILL BE HANDED OUT AT THE

BOARD MEETING.

Documents

TRUSTEES OF THE METROPOLITAN STATE COLLEGE OF DENVER ...€¦ · F. Faculty Senate Report – Dr. Hal Nees G. Council of Chairs Report – Dr. John Schmidt, Chair H. Foundation, Diana