1. Relationship with
San Jose´ State University.
The National
Hispanic University's relationship with
San Jose´ State University, in terms of
the levels of support, interaction, and
positive results remains vital to NHU’s
continued development. The strong endorsement
of the NHU program, the high levels of
institutional commitment and engagement,
and the practically seamless cooperation
between faculties of the two institutions
are the foundation for NHU's further growth
and development. The Commission encourages
the University to continue to build its
relationship with SJSU. Should the agreements
between the two institutions be terminated
or changed significantly, the Commission
is to be notified immediately.
NHU has continued
a collegial relationship with San Jose State
University. Both University presidents have
met three times since NHU's WASC accreditation
in 2002 and have reaffirmed the willingness
to work collaboratively.
An NHU faculty
member has successfully articulated the key
general education courses and has done so
by working closely with the SJSU articulation
office. All of the NHU basic science courses
are now articulated with SJSC. The NHU's
new Chair of Math, Science and Computer Science
has set up meetings with the Dean of Engineering
in order to solidify the 3+2 pre-Engineering transfer to San Jose State.
This has taken us much longer than expected
due to the departures of our former Chair
and a key faculty member. It has remained
difficult for us to compete with Silicon
Valley salary levels for science and engineering
professionals.
The library directors
on both campuses have forged strong working
relationships that allow NHU students access
to the SJSU library. They are also working
on a proposal to bring more diverse students
into the field of library science. The SJSU
Bookstore also continues to order several
of the text books for NHU classes.
The NHU acting
Provost will explore both faculty and staff
development opportunities with the Provost
at SJ State. In conclusion, while the relationship
is collegial with SJSU, it is noted that
NHU is growing on its own and that the initial
dependency has been lessened.
2. Quality Assurance
and Educational Effectiveness.
The University
has taken steps toward the implementation
of program review processes and the assessment
of student-learning outcomes. Over the
past two years, several programs received
external reviews and the University has
begun to develop an assessment process
at several levels. This includes a holistic
writing rubric and plans to assess all
student writing at the junior year, beginning
fall 2002. While these actions are positive
steps, the team was less certain about
the University's intentions for developing
a comprehensive quality review and improvement
process, which would include cyclical program
review for all academic programs and the
assessment of student-learning outcomes
across the full range of competencies and
skills desired for its students. The University
should move ahead with the development
of a quality assurance system that integrates
the use of the results of program evaluation
and student outcomes assessment
into its regular institutional functioning
and decision-making.
The NHU has to
acknowledge that this recommendation has
not been addressed fully and as it was planned
in the institutional proposal submitted to
WASC in 2004. The essay on Educational Quality explains in detail the reasons behind this
and establishes the path that will be followed
during the current academic year in order
to start addressing this important area.
As of fall 2006, the university has not formalized
its Quality Assurance System, but it already
has a scheme to follow in order to develop
it. The university is currently planning
on having a five-stage cycle where data is
collected, analyzed, and disseminated among
different academic, service and administrative
departments that in turn will make decisions
and improvements based on the information
they receive. We perceive this process as
cyclical and constant in order to make sure
that quality is promoted at all times.
NHU does collect
a vast amount of data on student demographics,
enrollment trends, grade distributions, graduates,
units taken, and retention and graduation
rates. However, the dissemination process
has not been as successful as one would like,
and the use of data for decision-making is
not widespread yet. This is an issue on which
the university will start working.
Other efforts
that have been already implemented are the
Program Reviews that are currently underway,
the evaluations of different areas such as
the Library, Student Services, the Student
Academic Advising Center, and the faculty
evaluations that take place every module.
All this information is being collected,
but they need to be integrated as part of
the quality assurance system that we are
planning. Specific paths of action will be
established to make decisions based on the
information collected through these venues,
as well as to update and fine-tune all these
evaluation efforts we currently have.
In terms of assessment
of student-learning outcomes, the NHU also
has to make more progress. In the institutional
proposal of 2004, the university had planned
to develop student assessment plans for each
academic program. However, as it is explained
in the Educational Quality essay, the constant
changes in the Provost position—that oversees
this area—has delayed the development and
implementation of such plans. Students continue
to be assessed in their courses and although
they have some capstone courses, there is
not an assessment plan that oversees their
progress throughout their studies at the
NHU. A first step on the assessment plans
was taken in 2005 when the faculty developed
an Assessment Vision, Principals, and Goals
document (Appendix 3A). The office of the
Provost is planning on using these principals
to re-start the conversation and development
of the student assessment plans in this academic
year.
All in all, the
NHU took some steps to address this key recommendation.
However, we acknowledge that more work needs
to be done and that the formalization and
establishment of the quality assurance system
is still pending. The university sees this
area as a priority for the current academic
year and expects to have a system in place
and giving results by the WASC Educational
Effectiveness visit.
3. Strategic and
Financial Planning.
The University
has developed a number of institutional
planning documents. These include the University
Advancement Plan, 2000-2005; the 10 Year
Plan, 1997-2007; the 5-Year Plan, 2002-2007;Office
of Institutional Planning and Evaluation
(OIPE) University Wide Evaluation Plan,
1999-2000; NHU Academic Plan, 2001; the
Assessment Plan, September 2001; Work plan
for OIPE; and the Technology Plan, 2002.
Despite the numerous planning documents,
it is in the area of planning or lack of
planning that the University is most vulnerable.
The team uncovered a significant gap between
the University’s expectations for its development
and its financial plans.
Projected expenses
[...] exceed expected financial growth. The
team's analysis of the detailed budget
projections indicated that there will be
a significant increase in costs for personnel
[...], thereby producing a deficit. Coupled
with the University's dependence on Trustee
and donor contributions to meet shortfalls,
these projections could have serious implications
for the stability of the NHU budget and
the institution’s future sustainability.
The team wrote: "From the team's analysis,
it is clear that revenues must either be
increased through increased tuition or
additional gifts, or planned expenses must
be reduced." While donor support for the
Capital Campaign is to be encouraged, the
Board should consider establishing an endowment
fund for the University to serve as a source
of revenue for the University as it develops.
Indeed, given the projected financial deficit,
an endowment fund could prove to be of
greater value in the long run than new
construction funded by the Capital Campaign.
The University must make certain that its
priorities are in alignment with its financial
capacity by developing and implementing
strategic planning.
After receiving
this recommendation from WASC, the NHU embarked
in a six-month long process to develop its
strategic plan. All the university community-students,
faculty, staff, and Board of Trustees-were
involved in this process, and as a result,
the university came out with a five-year
Strategic Plan that was approved and adopted
in June 2003.
The plan was developed
based on the needs and vision that all the
stakeholders shared during multiple meetings
and addresses, and with the recommendations
that WASC made to the university in 2002
as a background. The plan provides strategic
initiatives on financial planning, strengthening
of student services and academic offerings,
and on the development of a quality assurance
system.
In terms of financial
planning, the plan stresses the need to build
capacity. In order to accomplish this initiative,
the university considered that constant work
on recruitment, enrollment, and retention
is needed. In addition, the establishment
and growth of an endowment appeared as necessary,
accompanied by good policies on budget development
and management. The essay on Financial Planning expands
what has been done in this area and presents
the future plans to continue building capacity
at NHU.
Student services
were seen as an area that needed further
development in order to help with the initiatives
on increasing enrollment, recruitment and
retention rates. Specifically, the institutionalization
of the Student Academic Assistance Center
(SAAC), the enhancement of the Library services
and collection, and the creation of a career
and job center were seen as some of the areas
that needed to be developed and strengthen.
The essay on Student Services narrates the
results of an evaluation about the services
students at NHU receive and the recommendations
that need to be followed to really develop
and strengthen the area. Additionally, the
report on the Library (Appendix 1Z) explains
in detail what has been done so far and what
work is still pending in order to reach the
goals that the library needs to reach. On
the other hand, the importance and use of
the SAAC to support retention efforts can
be read in the Strategic Plan Implementation
report (Appendix 1H) and in the Strategic
Planning (pp. ) essay.
Several initiatives
in the academic area were listed in the Strategic
Plan. Among the most important ones were
the development of new academic offerings,
the increase in full-time faculty, the development
of partnerships with other universities and
community colleges, and the support of research
and scholarly work to share NHU’s work with
Hispanic and other minority students. The
Strategic Planning (pp. )essay gives more
details on these areas and reports the current
implementation status for these initiatives.
Finally, quality
assurance was seen in terms of program reviews,
student assessment, faculty and staff professional
development, and faculty assessment through
faculty portfolios and other evaluation tools.
The essays on Strategic Planning (pp. ) and
Educational Quality, and the response to
Recommendation #5 (below) expand on these
initiatives and the work done so far.
The implementation
of the plan saw the use of technology throughout
the academic, support and administrative
areas as a key element to succeed. The Strategic
Plan (p. 12) gives four basic goals that
needed to be achieved: 1) update of available
technology; 2) offer training on the use
of technology for academic purposes; 3) offer
training on the use of technology for administrative
purposed; and 4) develop partnerships to
develop NHU’s technological infrastructure.
The Strategic Planning essay (p. ) reports
on the status of these goals.
Within the Strategic
Plan Implementation (p. 12), a Quality Assurance
System was proposed. The main focus of this
system was to provide information to different
university stakeholders about the strategic
plan implementation, and to make decision-making
more data-based. The four major processes
within this system were: 1) Inquiry; 2) Assessment;
3) Feedback; and 4) Improvement. Because
of the changes in the University’s leadership
positions and the changes in the way the
strategic plan implementation was approached,
this model of quality assurance was not followed
as intended.
The overall status
of the strategic plan implementation is reported
in the Strategic Planning essay, as well
as the expectations for 2008 when this plan
expires.
4. The Enhancement of
Library Services.
The cooperative
agreement between the University and SJSU
has played a pivotal role in judgments
reached by the Commission about the quality
of library resources and services available.
The fact that NHU was found to have no
evidence of students using the SJSU library
is a major concern. There is an evident
need to increase the quality of NHU library
resources and services available for student
use. Steps to be taken by the University
should include establishing a budget for
library acquisitions beyond those to be
purchased by the Title V grant; installing
a more robust online catalog and library
automated system, and incorporating plans
for the growth and development of the library
into University’s strategic planning process.
It will also be important to demonstrate
that library use is a key expectation in
NHU courses.
Library service
at NHU has improved since 2002. The specific
points raised in the letter of July 2002
have been met with varying degrees of success.
The report in Appendix 1Z gives a detailed
account of what has been accomplished in
terms of library services, and Table 5.1 shows
the information resources available at NHU.
The agreement
with the San Jose State University Library
has been significantly altered, largely because
of the University Library and Public Library
merger in 2004. Any NHU student, faculty
member, or staff person can acquire a Public
Library card that allows access to and borrowing
privileges from the University collection.
We do have an agreement that allows cross-registration
and therefore cross-library use. The SJSU
Library administration has agreed to allow
NHU students the same late night access as
their own students. The Library Directors
are collaborating on a grant proposal and
more joint programs are being considered.
We still do not know how many of our students
use the SJSU Library, although a recent survey
indicated that almost sixty percent of our
undergraduate students use other libraries.
The quality of
library resources has dramatically improved.
Our users now have access to ten full-text
online periodical databases and a 20,000
volume electronic book collection. The in-house
library collection has also improved dramatically
with the purchase of over 2,000 scholarly
books. Over 3,000 dated books have been withdrawn.
In 2003 the SIRSI automated system was acquired
which brought the catalog and other automated
library services into the present. The current
system is a Java, web-based system accessible
from off campus.
The library now
has a full-time reference librarian who is
doing outreach to faculty and students to
determine needs and fill them if at all possible.
New courses are expected to include library
use in the course plan.
There is still
not a budget for the library, and in fact,
spending for acquisitions has gone down in
the last two years. This is an ongoing problem,
tied into the University's overall financial
processes and health.
Although the library
received a mention in the Strategic Plan,
it has not been a priority. There have been
no strategic planning meetings in the last
two years that included a representative
from the library.
5. The Development of
a Core Faculty.
The Commission
recognizes the efforts made by The National
Hispanic University to address issues related
to the development of a core faculty. These
include expanding the faculty role in governance,
increasing the number of full-time faculty,
raising faculty salaries to a competitive
level, and making research grants available
as part of the NHU faculty development
program. Key to the development of a core
faculty, however, is the availability of
multi-year contracts. The academic freedom
of faculty, and the faculty role in governance,
curriculum, or advising, could be significantly
compromised with a year-to-year faculty
contract system. Faculty should have the
protections and assurances of multi-year
employment that are tied to strong systems
of peer evaluation and review.
The NHU did address
the issue of multi-year contracts for its
full-time faculty members. After WASC granted
initial accreditation to the university in
2002, the Provost and full-time faculty started
to work towards developing a system that
would allow the university to evaluate faculty
members and based on their evaluation results,
extend them multi-year contracts.
During 2003, the
Faculty Affairs Committee worked on the design
of such a system and after some research
was done, the committee and the Provost decided
to establish a portfolio system where faculty
would be evaluated in several areas in order
to obtain their contracts. Three major areas
serve as the core for the portfolios: teaching
effectiveness, university service, and professional
development. The Faculty Handbook in section
9 (pp. 17-20) explains in detail what each
of these areas comprises and what areas would
be taken into consideration for the professional
review. It is also explained in this section
that faculty would be evaluated every year
regardless of length of appointment, and
that only those faculty members who are full-time
and paid from the general fund budget are
eligible for multi-year contracts.
After developing
the criteria for the portfolios, the Faculty
Affairs Committee presented the project to
the Provost who approved it. The then Acting
President also approved the criteria. Eligible
faculty members participated in a training
session on the development of portfolios
organized by the office of the Provost and
after that, they were asked to prepare their
work and present it to the Provost in January
2004. In November 2003, the Provost left
his post and an Interim Provost was hired.
It became the Interim Provost’s job, then,
to oversee the process and actually review
the portfolios presented by the faculty and
decide on the awarding of the contracts.
Eight full-time
faculty members plus the Library director
prepared and turned in their portfolios.
Seven full-time faculty members and the Library
director were granted multi-year contracts.
One faculty member was awarded a one-year
contract. The contracts were signed by the
faculty members and the President in fall
2004.
The NHU has to
acknowledge, though, that after the contracts
were granted, the process has not received
much attention. It has not been formally
evaluated and some of the principles have
not been actually followed. For example,
in fall 2004 a new Library Director was hired
after the former director resigned, and two
new full-time faculty members have been hired
since 2004. None of them have been asked
to present a portfolio in order to obtain
their multi-year contracts. Another area
that needs more attention is faculty evaluations.
According to the professional review guidelines,
faculty members would be evaluated on different
fronts: peer evaluations, student evaluations,
self-evaluations, and administrative evaluations.
Only the student evaluations have been actually
conducted every semester and even those,
have not been analyzed and discussed with
faculty members appropriately.
Professional development
is another area that is considered an important
part of the professional review. However,
little has been done to help faculty members
fulfill this requirement. Scholarly research,
contributions to the field of study, and
continuing development are the three main
elements that define professional development
(Faculty Handbook, p. 18). Full-time faculty
members, however, have focused mostly on
their teaching and advising duties, and have
not worked towards fulfilling these areas.
In terms of university
service, full-time faculty members have concentrated
their efforts on participating in university
committees and faculty governance. However,
the area of community service, which is the
third component of university service, has
not been addressed (Faculty Handbook, p.
17).
Faculty members
and the current Interim Provost are aware
of these shortcomings and plan to start addressing
all the issues related to faculty portfolios
and multi-year contracts during this academic
year. The University realizes the importance
of reviewing the process that started two
years ago and the need to continue building
its full-time faculty group. During 2006,there
have been many changes in the full-time faculty
composition: several people resigned, others
have been assigned to administrative or special
duties, and new faculty have been hired.
This is an appropriate moment to take decisions
in terms of the process to award multi-year
contracts, replenish the full-time composition
and address issues on faculty professional
development, evaluation, and teaching effectiveness.
6. General Education.
The University
does not offer general education courses
at the upper division level. This is a
requirement under the 1988 Handbook and
is a guideline in the 2001 Handbook. The
Commission expects the University to review
its general educational curriculum and
modify its curriculum accordingly.
The NHU addressed
this recommendation immediately. Originally
general education added 9 units of upper
division GE in 2002 and it went into effect
in January 2003. The upper division GE areas
were first added to the Liberal Studies program
when the program was doing the CCTC program
upgrade, and were then subsequently added
to each of the other undergraduate degree
programs as they each went through their
own curricular reviews in 2003. When the
areas were first included in the catalog
they were called Area F: Advanced Written
Composition, which was fulfilled by ENG 300
Advanced Writing Skills; Area G: Human Expression
Across the Globe, which was fulfilled by
ENG 301 World Literature; and Area H: World
Issues and Problems, which was fulfilled
by HIS 314 World History I. This in turn
created a little problem because it gave
us two area F’s. When the GE program was
redesigned, more changes were made. In June
2005, two more upper division GE courses
were created in order to give more options
to the students: PHL 300 Personal Professional
and Social Ethics was added to Area II, and
SPC 300 Argumentation and Advocacy of World
Issues was added to Area III. The official
description, from the catalog, of the upper
division GE courses that was written and
approved by the senate and signed by the
President in November 2004 is here included.
Upper Division GE:
9 units minimum
Nine units of integrated and integrative
course work, incorporating contents from
Area A or Area B, and C and D:
Area I. Writing Proficiency (ENG 300)
Area II. Human Expression Across the
Globe (ENG 301 or PHL 300)
Area III. World Issues and Problems (HIS
314 or SPC 300)
General Education
is more than an accumulation of skills and
mastery of content. It also gives students
sufficient opportunity to integrate a variety
of skills and content areas by applying them
to issues and areas of life they will face
as citizens of a complex world. Students
should be able to relate the major to seemingly
unrelated areas of knowledge. Upper Division
General Education courses are intended to
provide the student with a culminating GE
experience and help the student to transition
into their upper division major course work.
The Upper-Division GE courses must include
one writing proficiency course and provide
opportunity to investigate such seminal issues
crossing disciplinary boundaries in a manner
that exemplifies the skills and knowledge
that both students and professors bring to
bear. Prior completion of 41 semester units,
including all GE core (Area A) courses, is
a prerequisite to students beginning the
upper division requirements.
Upper Division
GE courses will identify clearly a set of
basic enduring questions, which humans have
asked about themselves and their world, across
time, place, and cultures. Courses should
also explore the alternative answers, which
different peoples have arrived at for the
same question. Each program at NHU is responsible
for determining which program specific Upper
Division GE courses, under the guidelines
explained in this section, best suit their
individual program goals. Each Upper Division
GE course should:
- Include a writing proficiency course
with a minimum writing requirement of 8000
words.
- Incorporate, build upon, and nurture
skills from Area A.
- Encourage investigation by a variety
of perspectives and integrate significant
content from Areas B and from Areas C and
D.
- Show planning and coordination among
instructors and subject matters of the
courses with notable points of connection
among course materials and the themes principle
unifying topics.
Each course participating in Upper-Division
GE must:
- Be integrated with all other courses
in the theme and be integrative with the
unifying thematic conception of the theme.
- Be principally an integration of two
or all three GE content areas deal with
the value assumptions and issues raised
by two or more disciplines or perspectives.
- Use primary sources and data sets in
analyzing the courses major issues.
- Have assignments that allow the student
to integrate materials, deal with value
assumptions or issues, and creatively speculate
about the theme and its impact on humanity.
