Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

A REGULAR INTERIM REPORT

Brigham Young University-Idaho

Rexburg, Idaho

April 22-23, 2009

Prepared by

Dr. Laura Polcyn, Chair

Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and

Special Academic Programs

PacificLutheran University

and

Dr. Kay Carnes

Associate Dean, School of Business Administration

GonzagaUniversity

A Confidential Report Prepared for the

Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

that Represents the Views of the Evaluators

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Institution and Accreditation History ...... 3

The Self-Study Report ...... 3

Methods Used to Verify Self-Study Report Contents ...... 3

Individuals Interviewed During Visit ...... 4

Part A ...... 5

Recommendation One (2004 Report)

Recommendation Two (2004 Report)

Recommendation Three (2004 Report)

Recommendation Four (2004 Report)

Recommendation One (2006 Report)

Part B ...... 8

Standard One – Institutional Mission and Goals, Planning

and Effectiveness

Standard Two –Educational Program and Its Effectiveness

Standard Three – Students

Standard Four – Faculty

Standard Five – Library and Information Resources

Standard Six – Governance and Administration

Standard Seven – Finance

Standard Eight – Physical Facilities

Standard Nine – Institutional Integrity

Commendations and Recommendation ...... 12

INSTITUTION AND ACCREDITATION HISTORY

Brigham Young University-Idaho (BYU-Idaho) is a private four-year university affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. BYU-Idaho resides in a picturesque valley, surrounded by majestic scenery. The university can be characterized as a place of innovation and thus appears to be a place of constant change. As one dean indicated, “We expect change.” In recent years, BYU-Idaho transitioned from a two-year college to a four-year university, a new general education curriculum was launched (Foundations), a way to develop a common language around inspired learning and teaching was developed (the Learning Model), and an assessment reporting system was introduced to the community(the report card). All of this together, with substantial building renovation and building construction, provides the current-day platform.

BYU-Idaho’s regular accreditation visit was in 2004. The committee’s report listed four recommendations: maintaining a wholesome academic, cultural, social, and spiritual environment; assessment; faculty workload policies; and faculty scholarship. A focused visit was undertaken in 2006 where all four areas were covered. The 2006 report indicated progress across all four. One recommendation resulted from the 2006 report. It addressed assessment of general education. This current report reflects results from a 2009 regular interim visit.

THE SELF-STUDY REPORT

The self-study report provided a thorough summary of BYU-Idaho activities and progress over the four 2004 and one 2006 recommendations. It was well organized, and gave the evaluators a clear sense of changes since 2004. The report spoke with detail about each of these recommendations as well as addressing the nine NWCCU standards. The report lacked consistent in-depth critical analysis and next steps throughout the report.

METHODS USED TO VERIFY SELF-STUDY REPORT CONTENTS

The evaluators reviewed the 2004 and 2006 Self-Study Reports, the resulting 2004 and 2006 committee/evaluator reports, the 2009 Self-Study Report, the report card system, and various other BYU-Idaho documents provided via the Web and in hard copy. An extensive number of BYU-Idaho individuals were interviewed, with the university responding nimbly to changes in the schedule.

INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED DURING VISIT

Board and Church Representatives (via teleconference)

Roger Christensen

Elder Steven Snow

Sister Julie Beck

Executive Council

President Kim Clark

Academic Vice President Fenton Broadhead

Advancement Vice President Henry Eyring

Student Services and Activities Vice President Garth Hall

University Resources Vice President James Smyth

Assistant to the President for Planning and Strategy Betty Oldham

Other Administrators

Associate Academic VP, Instruction – Phil Packer (NWCCU ALO)

Institutional Research & Assessment Officer Scott Bergstrom

Associate Academic VP, Educational Resources and Development Clark Gilbert

Associate Academic VP, Curriculum Bruce Kusch

Academic Administrator Ric Page

Director, Instructional Development Brian Schmidt

Dean of Students Kevin Miyasaki

University Librarian Martin Raish

Academic Deans and Associate Deans

Dean, Language and Letters John Ivers

Dean, Physical Sciences and Engineering Kendall Peck

Dean, Performing and Visual Arts Kelly Burgener

Associate Dean for Business and Communication Kirk Gifford

Associate Dean, Education and Human Development John Thomas

Associate Dean, Agriculture and Life Sciences, Jerry Scrivner

Dean, Continuing Education Ron Campbell

Faculty

Past President of the Faculty Association Ann Marie Harmon

Current President of the Faculty Association David Peck

Fifteen faculty from various departments and with varying years with BYU-Idaho

Students

Sixteen students representing various majors and levels at BYU-Idaho

PART A

The following is an analysis of the four recommendations from the 2004 Regular Report and the one recommendation from the 2006 Focused Interim Report.

Recommendation One (2004 Regular Report): While the Committee commends the University community for its dedication and diligence in moving from a two-year program to a four-year baccalaureate institution in a very short time period, the Committee recommends that the University re-examine its capacity to accomplish its self-identified aggressive academic goals while simultaneously maintaining a wholesome academic, cultural, social, and spiritual environment. (Standard 1.A.4 and 5)

Five years later BYU-Idaho is a thriving four-year academic institution. Healthy indicators include a robust enrollment, a solid academic program, and a student body which shows all signs of growth, development, and satisfaction.

The enrollment at BYU-Idaho sits at 21,699unduplicated headcount (2008), a growth of 4,279 studentssince 2004. This remarkable expansion has been coupled with intentional academic program structure and appropriate student services. It is evident that this attention to the needs surrounding growth are not only for the present, but also with an eye to the future. BYU-Idaho is expected to grow to 15,000 FTE by 2015 (now 11,600). Demographics support this further expansion and the leadership of BYU-Idaho has plans underway to accommodate this growth.

With many years of preparation, the academic program is transforming to meet the needs of the BYU-Idaho students, both two-year and four-year. The Foundation general education curriculum was launched fall 2008. Information is being gathered regarding the Foundation’s success. The number of courses offered is being adjusted. Majors and minors have been and are continually examined. A number of majors and minors have been eliminated.

In addition, the Learning Model was established to enhance the classroom and education experience. To quote the Self-Study, “The BYU-Idaho Learning Model was developed to provide an architecture reflecting the unique goals and context of a BYU-Idaho education and to provide a common language with which to talk about our vision of inspired learning and teaching.” It pertains to both student and faculty member, and was praised extensively by representatives of both groups during interviews.

It is very clear that these two changes to the educational program have transformed the learning experience, have provided a platform for continued change and academic growth, and will serve BYU-Idaho with tools to make further appropriate change. As mentioned by some and shared opinion of the evaluators, the transformation from two- to four-year, the Foundations, and the Learning Model represent enough change for the present.

To deal with this change, BYU-Idaho has paid attention to student needs. It has instituted a robust activities program. Students appear to like the breadth of opportunities. Students also participate in the spiritual dimension and take ownership in managing meetings and worship opportunities. They also participate in leadership opportunities through student government and activities management.

Student satisfaction surveys are administered regularly. Results are reviewed, and programs enhanced and changes made when needed. Generally, results are very positive. Graduation rates remain strong. The associate degree programs are continuing to keep pace.

A conversation with students bore out the excitement of the Learning Model, the satisfaction with services, and the availability of student voice through student government, relationship with the faculty, and positions on university committees. The latter is taken very seriously by students. They appreciate the confidence the leadership places in them; they accept this trust with regular committee attendance and thoughtful participation.

BYU-Idaho has taken this recommendation to heart and established ways to meet students’ academic, cultural, social, and spiritual needs.

One remaining initiative is online learning. Careful development of courses is present, and BYU-Idaho seems to be able to deliver a number of solid academic courses. The eventual goal is to have each student’s academic portfolio include twenty percent of online coursework. Even under this plan, the student’s environment should not change as the student will remain as an on-campus learner.

The evaluators wish to praise the BYU-Idaho community for the attention to the welfare of students throughout the many recent changes.

Recommendation Two (2004 Regular Report): While the Committee finds considerable evidence of assessment, there is little evidence that assessment is influencing planning across the University. Evidence of the linkage between assessment and planning consistently over time is required. (Standard 1.B.4 through 1.B.8, Standard 2.B, Policy 2.2)

The 2006 focused interim report recognized the dynamic implementation of an assessment system. The evaluator rightly indicated that “President Clark has initiated bold initiatives…” The annual stewardship review program provides a framework. It permeates the campus, with reviews throughout all academic units. A Web-based system is used. BYU-Idaho is commended for instituting this system. It requires much effort for implementation and to continually train and retrain department chairs and others how to use the tool.

Departmental report cards are used to evaluate a variety of aspects of program effectiveness. The report card contains a series of measures across an agreed-upon series of indicators and initiatives. They are: (1) graduates are prepared for their future endeavors, (2) the department’s resources are well managed, (3) the department provides quality educational experiences, and (4) department personnel learn and grow. Departmental report card data are rolled up to the college level.

BYU-Idaho is applauded for developing a university-wide system of assessment for the academic program and for other areas of the university. There is a consistency which works well at this institution. There are also some major cautions.

Report Card Sections: Graduates are prepared for their future endeavors and The department provides quality educational experiences

In reviewing the department report cards, in the majority of cases authentic learning outcomes are absent. Data gathered tend to be about student perception of learning or student satisfaction with the course content. Placement rates (working and in graduate school), student course evaluation data, and “level of perceived learning,” are present in many of the departments. Where “program outcomes” are present (25 of 33departments as reviewed on the Web site do have program outcomes listed), these outcomes are in the majority void of student learning objectives data. However, there is evidence that some departments measure student learning with pre- and post-testing, or use some national data benchmarking. It is important that BYU-Idaho leadership and facultyreexamine the process of developing student learning outcomes data and find ways for faculty in departments where this is evident to assist others across the university.

In the educational experiences section of the tool, it is unclear if the departments (collectively) participate in the setting of the goals. And if not set by the departments, either individually or as a group, how are the goals set?

Report Card Section: The department’s resources are well-managed

This section presents a series of measures including cost data. For many of the measures, the goals are the same across departments. The evaluators suggest that the leadership examine these goals and benchmarks to determine if these should be universal.

It is clear to the evaluators that while BYU-Idaho has implemented a comprehensive system to gather data for assessment purpose, there is work yet to be done. Specifically, assessment data gathered should be authentic and that data drives the revisionof courses, curricula, majors, etc.

Recommendation Three (2004 Regular Report): Noting the emphasis the university placers on teaching and service, the Committee recommends the University develop and implement workload policies that will both maintain those emphases and ensure that faculty are able to maintain currency in their teaching fields at a level appropriate to a baccalaureate institution. The current teaching loads of faculty, coupled with the University’s expectations for service, appear to leave little time for faculty to maintain disciplinary currency. This is exacerbated by the University’s movement to the baccalaureate level, which requires engagement with the discipline at a deeper level than at the associate level. (Standard 2.A.1, Standard 4.A.3)

BYU-Idaho leadership has given attention to the recommendation of 2004 to ameliorate what was seen as teaching and service workloads which allowed faculty too little time to maintain currency in their disciplines. Most notable is a change to the university calendar from a two semester + summer model to a year round schedule of three 15-week semesters. The new model anticipated that faculty would teach a 12-12-12 credit hour load, leaving time each semester for course design, service activities, and professional development.

In addition to the calendar change, improvements to the plan for increased Professional Development Leaves (PDL) were instituted. This plan allows faculty to apply for 3 to 6 hours of release time to pursue innovative course development ideas and other professional development opportunities. Finally, the university has hired student teacher supervisors, academic advisors, and internship coordinators to help ease faculty administrative duties.

While some faculty report that workload expectations have improved and speak positively of reduced administrative demands, the success of the new calendar and improved PDL process have not been realized across all disciplinary areas. At the same time that the intended workload improvements were implemented, the university began development of an extensive reorganization of core courses resulting in the Foundations curriculum. Attention to development and teaching of Foundations courses has led to continued and increasing faculty overloads. Some faculty report that, although structures are in place to reduce teaching loads, they feel obligated to teach more than 12 credits per semester and to delay PDL requests in order to serve student needs. While expressing a deep desire to fulfill the mission of the university, they sense that burnout is making them less effective than they might be.

It is clear to the evaluators that while BYU-Idaho has implemented workload policies with the potential to balance faculty teaching, service, and professional development, realization of such balance has not yet been achieved across all disciplinary areas.

Recommendation Four (2004 Regular Report): Faculty scholarship in the discipline is necessary to maintain effective instruction. The Committee recommends that institutional policies and procedures concerning scholarship be developed and implemented in collaboration with the faculty to ensure that faculty members maintain in a chosen subject a high level of expertise, originality, critical analysis, significance, and demonstrability. (Standard 4.B)

BYU-Idaho has instituted policies to make it possible for faculty members to maintain currency in their respective fields of expertise. Professional Development Leaves (PDLs) of 3 to 6 hours of release time as well as full sabbaticals may be requested. Funding is available for faculty to attend professional meetings, and those who can find suitable programs may apply for some funding toward obtaining a doctoral degree.

Analysis of faculty accomplishments indicates that many faculty attend conferences and make presentations and some publish in professional journals. Preference is given for work in curriculum development or research involving students. An undergraduate research fair was begun in 2005 and faculty are encouraged to act as mentors to student research efforts.

As with workload issues in general, the ability of faculty to pursue such opportunities differs across departments and is dependent upon suitable replacements to meet student needs. The Faculty Learning Fellowship Report shows that whereas between 42-51 semester fellowships were granted each year, between 2004 and 2006 the number dropped to 11 in 2007 and 15 in 2008. Some faculty wanting to pursue research or advanced degrees in subject areas other than teaching and curriculum development expressed the opinion that such development is not encouraged.

The university has in place policies that would allow opportunities for faculty scholarship, research, and artistic creation. It is important that the policies result in actual practice where faculty feel supported in their developmental endeavors and are afforded sufficient time to pursue such endeavors.

Recommendation One (2006 Focused Report): Since review of the Focused Interim Report and interviews of administrators and faculty indicated little evidence of improved assessment of General Education linked to institutional planning, the Evaluator recommends that the current revision of general education include a plan for regular and continuous assessment of general education. The revision needs to include expected learning outcomes for general education and regular and systematic assessment linked to institutional planning (Standard 1.B.4, Standard 2.B.1 through 2.B.3, and Policy 2.2)