Upload
lythuan
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A1
Appendices
Fifth-Year
Maintenance of Accreditation Report
Fall 2012
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A2
Table of Contents
Faculty Sufficiency and Qualifications Tables .................................................... A3
2-1 ................................................................................................................ A4
9-1 .............................................................................................................. A10
10-1 ............................................................................................................ A14
10-2 ............................................................................................................ A21
Assurance of Learning ............................................................................... A25 Program Overviews
BADM............................................................................................ A26
BSIS ............................................................................................... A28
MBA .............................................................................................. A30
Narratives: Process and Outcomes
BADM............................................................................................ A34
BSIS ............................................................................................... A47
MBA .............................................................................................. A53
Areas of Goodness ..................................................................................... A57
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A3
Faculty Sufficiency and Qualifications Tables
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A4
TABLE 2-1 FIVE YEAR SUMMARY OF INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AY 2011-2012 (sum of semesters)
Expectations regarding the production of Intellectual Contributions are communicated to faculty starting with the recruitment
process, and continue through the retention, tenure, and promotion system (RTP). The type of contributions favored by the
College is stated in our Mission: "...We emphasize applied research..." The expected amount and quality of production, as well
as the relationship between AQ status and RTP decision, is stated in each Department's personnel policy document.
Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs
NAME
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Jo
urn
als
Res
earc
h
Mo
nog
rap
hs
Bo
ok
s
Ch
ap
ters
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pro
ceed
ing
s
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pa
per
Pre
sen
tati
on
s
Fa
cult
y R
esea
rch
Sem
ina
r
No
n-P
eer
Rev
iew
ed J
ou
rna
ls
Oth
er
Lea
rnin
g &
Ped
ago
gic
al
Res
earc
h
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
to
Pra
ctic
e
Dis
cip
lin
e-B
ase
d
Res
earc
h
Notes
ACCOUNTING
Bruder, Joshua
Chiang, RuFang 1 3 4
Deberg, Curtis 3 3 2 1 5 2 2 Sabbatical
Estes, Crystal
Ficklin, Kenneth
Griffin, Amy
Guy, Paul 4 1 2 3 4 FERP
Irvine, Thomas
Jones, Joseph
Kizirian, Tim 7 2 1 4 Dept. Chair
Leese, Wallace 1 1
Milliron, Valerie 2 3 5
Murdoch, Brock 7 2 9 FERP
Nissan, Samir 1 4 5
Pladson, Holly
Pobloske, Paule
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A5
TABLE 2-1 Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs
NAME
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Jo
urn
als
Res
earc
h
Mo
nog
rap
hs
Bo
ok
s
Ch
ap
ters
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pro
ceed
ing
s
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pa
per
Pre
sen
tati
on
s
Fa
cult
y R
esea
rch
Sem
ina
r
No
n-P
eer
Rev
iew
ed J
ou
rna
ls
Oth
er
Lea
rnin
g &
Ped
ago
gic
al
Res
earc
h
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
to
Pra
ctic
e
Dis
cip
lin
e-B
ase
d
Res
earc
h
Notes
BUS INFO SYSTEMS
Bahl, Harish 2 2 4
Boykin, Raymond 2 1 5 6 1 1 FERP
Chiang, Dalen 3 3 1 2 5 Sabbatical
Connolly, James 1 1
Gardiner, Lorraine 2 1 5 7 1
Gardiner, Stan 2 1 1
Jones, Nancy 2 1 1 1 1 5 1
Lauck, Marsha
Lees, John 2 1 1 2 FERP
Mensching, James 2 1 1 4 8 FERP
Pike, Ronald 1 1 1 3 1 1 4
Sager, James 3 3 3 2 1 Dept. Chair
Sandoe, Kent 2 1 2 1
Wilder, Thomas 1 1
FINANCE
Ahern, Daniel
Anderson, Clayton
Bordenave, Neal
Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen 3 1 2
Huang, Jian 1 1
Moosa, Suleman 4 1 3 FERP
Ponarul, Richard 2 1 1 2 1 1
Treanor, Stephen 2 7 9
Weigand, Douglas
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A6
TABLE 2-1 Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs
NAME
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Jo
urn
als
Res
earc
h
Mo
nog
rap
hs
Bo
ok
s
Ch
ap
ters
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pro
ceed
ing
s
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pa
per
Pre
sen
tati
on
s
Fa
cult
y R
esea
rch
Sem
ina
r
No
n-P
eer
Rev
iew
ed J
ou
rna
ls
Oth
er
Lea
rnin
g &
Ped
ago
gic
al
Res
earc
h
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
to
Pra
ctic
e
Dis
cip
lin
e-B
ase
d
Res
earc
h
Notes
MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2)
Ariely, Gil 4 3 5 1 11
Bettencourt, Randall
Special justification for
Qualification (see below)
Cagle, Rebecca
Cambridge, Charles FERP
Casler, Angela 1 1
Gundlach, Michael 5 1 1 1 3 1 4
Halford, Jennifer
Halimi, David
Hames, John
Hinrichs, Kim 9 1 5 15
Hubbard, Richard
Indvik, Julie 3 5 1 9 Interim Assoc. Dean
Jones, Dana
Jones, Ryan
Keller, Pamela
Kim, Hyunjung 2 5 1 2 1 6 3
Kodai, Scott
Kromer, Ted
Levine, Helen 1 2 3
Levine, Mark 2 2 2 5 1 FERP
Lewis, Kathryn 2 1 1 2 FERP
McDonald, L. Tracy 1 1 2 3 1 FERP
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A7
TABLE 2-1 Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs
NAME
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Jo
urn
als
Res
earc
h
Mo
nog
rap
hs
Bo
ok
s
Ch
ap
ters
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pro
ceed
ing
s
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pa
per
Pre
sen
tati
on
s
Fa
cult
y R
esea
rch
Sem
ina
r
No
n-P
eer
Rev
iew
ed J
ou
rna
ls
Oth
er
Lea
rnin
g &
Ped
ago
gic
al
Res
earc
h
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
to
Pra
ctic
e
Dis
cip
lin
e-B
ase
d
Res
earc
h
Notes
MANAGEMENT (2 OF 2)
Mclaughlin, Matthew
Morgan, James 3 2 1 2 4
Morgan, Sean
Persons, Bonnie 1 1 1 2 1
Credit for Validating
Experience
Pizarro, Nelson 1 1 2
Polsan, Michael
Potter, Dirk
Special justification for
Qualification (see below)
Rahn, David 1 1 2
Rehg, Michael 6 1 6 1 12
Siegall, Marc 3 1 1 3 Interim Assoc. Dean
Straus, Peter 1 1 2
Special justification for
Qualification (see below)
Trailer, Jeff Dept. Chair
York, Matthew
Special justification for
Qualification (see below)
Zivnuska, Suzanne 13 1 3 1 3 1 14
Barton, Mary BusComm
Cohen, Marsha 1 1 2 BusComm
Sprague, Robert BusComm
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A8
TABLE 2-1 Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Summary of Types of ICs
NAME P
eer
Rev
iew
ed
Jo
urn
als
Res
earc
h
Mo
nog
rap
hs
Bo
ok
s
Ch
ap
ters
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pro
ceed
ing
s
Pee
r R
evie
wed
Pa
per
Pre
sen
tati
on
s
Fa
cult
y R
esea
rch
Sem
ina
r
No
n-P
eer
Rev
iew
ed J
ou
rna
ls
Oth
er
Lea
rnin
g &
Ped
ago
gic
al
Res
earc
h
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
to
Pra
ctic
e
Dis
cip
lin
e-B
ase
d
Res
earc
h
Note
MARKETING
Andrews, Vernon 1 2 1 2
Post-Doctoral Bridge Program
Grad
Blanshei, Lance
Chan, Kenny 5 3 1 2 5 2 Dept. Chair
Chapman, Kenneth 6 1 1 1 5 4
Donoho, Casey 4 2 5 7 3 1
Heinze, Timothy 11 2 3 7 3 6
Maligie, William Qualified for MKTG and SCMS;
teaches more MKTG
McGowan, William 2 2
Meda, Edward
Meuter, Matthew 6 5 5 6
Misra, Shekhar 4 1 1 1 3 4 FERP
Nelsen, Jennifer
Schifferle, Kathryn
Toy, Daniel 3 2 3 3 FERP
Wright, Lauren 3 1 2 4 2 FERP
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A9
Special Justifications for Qualification
Bettencourt, Randall Per our policy, qualified as PQ by being a JD teaching the Introductory Business Law course
Potter, Dirk Per our policy, qualified as PQ by being a JD teaching the Introductory Business Law course
Straus, Peter While he only has a BA, earns PQ status through significant work experience and scholarship.
York, Matthew While he only has a BA. Earns PQ status by being President of two firms, at least one of which is long standing and top in its
field (Videomaker Magazine.)
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A10
TABLE 9-1
SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY BY DISCIPLINE,
DEPARTMENT, AND COLLEGE
AY 2011-2012 (sum of semesters) Policy: Tenure/Tenure-Track faculty have, as part of their normal job duties, significant Service requirements. Therefore, these faculty are deemed to be
“Participating” if the Department/Unit Chair is satisfied that the faculty member’s documented level of Service activity normally would be associated with
an evaluation of at least Adequate in the RTP process. Temporary Faculty whose appointments include service activities are deemed to be “Participating” if
the Department/Unit Chair is satisfied that the faculty member’s documented level of Service activity normally would be evaluated as appropriate in time
and significance for his/her work assignment. “Appropriate in time” will be determined on a pro-rata basis considering the faculty member’s appointment
time-base.
Some faculty are hired only to teach; therefore, they cannot be considered to be “Participating” unless they perform an appropriate amount and level of
Service activities. For additional details, please see the College Policy and Procedures Manual.
FERP faculty work one semester a year (or half-time over both semesters). They are considered normal Tenure/Tenure-Track faculty during their "on"
semesters, and retired (not university employees) the rest of the year.
Faculty on sabbatical do not teach; however, the nature of a sabbatical requires them to be working 100% in support of the College's mission.
NAME
Participating
or Supporting
(P or S)
Amount
of
Teaching
(Student
Credit
Hours) if
P
(blank if
S)
Amount
of
Teaching
(Student
Credit
Hours) if
S
(blank if
P)
Percent Participating
Must be > 60%
ACCOUNTING
Bruder, Joshua P 168
Chiang, RuFang S 1134
Deberg, Curtis P 471 Sabbatical
Estes, Crystal P 423
Ficklin, Kenneth P 168
Griffin, Amy S 1377
Guy, Paul P 165 FERP
Irvine, Thomas P 279
Jones, Joseph S 303
Kizirian, Tim P 57 Dept. Chair
Leese, Wallace P 687
Milliron, Valerie P 534
Murdoch, Brock P 372 FERP
Nissan, Samir P 699
Pladson, Holly P 384
Pobloske, Paule P 1236
TOTAL ACCOUNTING 5643 2814 67%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A11
TABLE 9-1
BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Name P/S SCH if P SCH if S Notes
Bahl, Harish P 825
Boykin, Raymond P 456 FERP
Chiang, Dalen P 312 Sabbatical
Connolly, James P 852
Gardiner, Lorraine P 437
Gardiner, Stan P 523
Jones, Nancy P 1356
Lauck, Marsha S 45
Lees, John P 306 FERP
Mensching, James P 174 FERP
Pike, Ronald P 864
Sager, James P 423 Dept. Chair
Sandoe, Kent P 1086
Wilder, Thomas P 771
TOTAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SYS. 8385 45 99%
FINANCE
Name P/S SCH if P SCH if S Notes
Ahern, Daniel P 1185
Anderson, Clayton S 153
Bordenave, Neal P 237
Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen P 612
Huang, Jian P 648
Moosa, Suleman P 231 FERP
Ponarul, Richard P 699
Treanor, Stephen P 567
Weigand, Douglas S 42
TOTAL FINANCE 4179 195 96%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A12
MANAGEMENT TABLE 9-1
Name P/S SCH if P SCH if S Notes
Ariely, Gil S 126
Bettencourt, Randall S 909 Special justification for Qualification
Cagle, Rebecca S 123
Cambridge, Charles P 297 FERP
Casler, Angela P 987
Gundlach, Michael P 729
Halford, Jennifer S 306
Halimi, David S 540
Hames, John P 885
Hinrichs, Kim P 810
Hubbard, Richard P 393
Indvik, Julie P 0 Interim Assoc. Dean
Jones, Dana S 132
Jones, Ryan S 252
Keller, Pamela S 456
Kim, Hyunjung P 588
Kodai, Scott S 273
Kromer, Ted P 768
Levine, Helen S 504
Levine, Mark P 477 FERP
Lewis, Kathryn P 375 FERP
McDonald, L. Tracy P 273 FERP
Mclaughlin, Matthew S 765
Morgan, James P 600
Morgan, Sean P 1107
Persons, Bonnie P 762 Credit for Validating Experience
Pizarro, Nelson P 447
Polsan, Michael S 1011
Potter, Dirk S 744 Special justification for Qualification
Rahn, David P 945
Rehg, Michael P 504
Siegall, Marc P 0 Interim Assoc. Dean
Straus, Peter P 894 Special justification for Qualification
Trailer, Jeff P 159 Dept. Chair
York, Matthew S 60 Special justification for Qualification
Zivnuska, Suzanne P 513 SCH
Barton, Mary Not Included
BusComm 654
Cohen, Marsha Not Included
BusComm 558
Sprague, Robert Not Included
BusComm 744
TOTAL MANAGEMENT 12513 6201 67%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A13
TABLE 9-1
MARKETING
Name P/S SCH if P SCH if S Notes
Andrews, Vernon P 144 Post-Doctoral Bridge Program Grad
Blanshei, Lance S 171
Chan, Kenny P 192 Dept. Chair
Chapman, Kenneth P 360
Donoho, Casey P 645
Heinze, Timothy P 720
Maligie, William P 1260 Qualified for MKTG and SCMS; teaches more
MKTG
McGowan, William P 900
Meda, Edward P 1161
Meuter, Matthew P 624
Misra, Shekhar P 369 FERP
Nelsen, Jennifer P 372
Schifferle, Kathryn P 1230
Toy, Daniel P 315 FERP
Wright, Lauren P 357 FERP
TOTAL MARKETING 8649 171 98%
Must be > 75%
TOTAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS 39369 9426 81%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A14
TABLE 10-1
SUMMARY OF FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS, DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES, AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
(RE: STANDARD 10)
AY 2011-2012
Academic Qualification normally is earned through the publication of at least two refereed journal (blind review by two or more peers) articles, plus at least one “Other
Intellectual Contribution” (Other IC), over the most recent five year period. Further, these activities should be spread out over the five years and relevant to the faculty
member’s field of teaching. Faculty who do not hold full-time appointments for the whole academic year (e.g., FERP) need one refereed journal publication plus an
“other IC.”
Faculty who hold an administrative position (e.g., Department Chair, Associate Dean) might be able to qualify as AQ with fewer ICs than required for full-time faculty. It
is possible that a faculty member’s extraordinary activities can be argued as demonstrating the maintenance of AQ without the production of traditional ICs (e.g.,
significant editorial involvement with a reputable journal). The Dean may allow such special cases for AQ, as long as they apply to no more than one quarter of the
faculty in the discipline.
Professional Qualification (at time of hire): The candidate normally will have at least an MBA or other Masters level degree appropriate to the courses to which he/she
will be assigned. Exceptions to “normally” include recent employment of exceptional responsibility and duration, relevant to the teaching assignment.
The highest full-time professional position held by the candidate must have been significantly beyond an entry-level professional job. The candidate should have been
employed full-time in such position for at least the past three years. (For the purposes herein, running one’s own small business counts as full-time employment beyond
the entry level.) Professional certifications and other objective evidence strengthen the case for determining that the candidate is PQ.
Academic Year: We run on a semester system. Fall is late August through mid-December; Spring is late January through mid-May.
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed
an
d Y
ear
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to t
he
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to t
he
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sion
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of
Development Activities Supporting
AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
tes
NAME In
tell
ectu
al
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
ACCOUNTING (1 OF 2)
Bruder, Joshua BS 2008 Fall 2010 13% YES 2 1 UG
Chiang, RuFang PhD 1973 Spring 2005 100% YES 4 1 10 UG
Deberg, Curtis PhD 1985 Fall 1990 100% YES 9 3 UG RES SER Sabbatical
Estes, Crystal BA 2008 Fall 2010 55% YES 2 1 UG SER
Ficklin, Kenneth BA 1973 Spring 2012 13% YES 1 1 UG
Griffin, Amy MS 1995 Fall 2006 90% YES 2 1 UG
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A15
TABLE
10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed a
nd
Yea
r
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to
the
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to
the
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sio
n
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of
Development Activities
Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
tes
NAME
Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
ACCOUNTING (2 OF 2)
Guy, Paul PhD 1979 Fall 1979 50% YES 7 UG RES SER FERP
Irvine, Thomas BA 2003 Fall 2010 25% YES 1 1 UG
Jones, Joseph MS 2006 Fall 2011 30% YES 1 1 UG
Kizirian, Tim PhD 2001 Fall 2001 100% YES 7 1 UG ADM RES
SER Dept. Chair
Leese, Wallace PhD 1978 Fall 1978 100% YES 1 UG RES SER
Milliron, Valerie PhD 1984 Fall 1990 100% YES 5 1 UG RES SER
Murdoch, Brock PhD 1984 Fall 1985 50% YES 9 UG RES SER FERP
Nissan, Samir PhD 1971 Fall 1980 50% YES 5 UG RES
Pladson, Holly BS 1989 Fall 2011 33% YES 2 1 UG SER
Pobloske, Paule MBA
2001 Fall 2010 100% YES
2 1 UG SER
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A16
TABLE
10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed a
nd
Yea
r
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to
the
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to
the
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sio
n
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of
Development Activities
Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
tes
NAME
Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
BUSINESS INFO SYSTEMS
Bahl, Harish PhD 1980 Fall 1990 100% YES 4 4 1 UG GR RES SER
Boykin, Raymond PhD 1986 Fall 1986 50% YES 8 11 3 UG GR RES SER FERP
Chiang, Dalen PhD 1976 Fall 2001 100% YES 7 1 7 UG GR RES SER Sabbatical
Connolly, James PhD 1996 Fall 1996 100% YES 1 1 UG GR RES SER
Gardiner,
Lorraine PhD 1989 Fall 2002 100% YES 8 9 UG GR RES SER
Gardiner, Stan PhD 1987 Fall 2002 100% YES 2 1 UG RES SER
Jones, Nancy MBA
1997 Fall 2000 100% YES 6 3 5 UG SER
Lauck, Marsha MBA
2003 Fall 2011 10% YES UG
Lees, John PhD 1973 Fall 1981 50% YES 3 UG RES SER FERP
Mensching,
James PhD 1976 Fall 1991 50% YES 8 3
UG RES SER FERP
Pike, Ronald PhD 2009 Spring 2001 100% YES 6 UG RES SER
Sager, James PhD 2002 Fall 2002 100% YES 6 5 UG ADM RES
SER Dept. Chair
Sandoe, Kent PhD 1994 Fall 1998 100% YES 3 UG RES SER
Wilder, Thomas MBA
1996 Spring 1997 100% YES 1 4 2 UG SER
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A17
TABLE
10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed a
nd
Yea
r
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to
the
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to
the
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sio
n
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of
Development Activities
Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
tes
NAME
Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
FINANCE
Ahern, Daniel MBA 1976 Fall 2005 100% YES 1 UG
Anderson,
Clayton JD 1999
Spring
2002 20% YES 1 1 UG
Bordenave, Neal JD 2002 Fall 2006 20% YES 1 1 UG
Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen PhD 1987 Fall 1985 100% YES 3 1 UG RES SER
Huang, Jian PhD 2010 Fall 2011 100% YES 1 UG RES SER
Moosa, Suleman PhD 1972 Fall 1980 50% YES 4 UG RES SER FERP
Ponarul, Richard PhD 1985 Fall 1984 100% YES 4 UG RES SER
Treanor, Stephen PhD 2008 Fall 2008 100% YES 9 UG GR RES SER
Weigand, Doug MBA 1990 Spring
2011 10% YES 2 UG
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A18
TABLE
10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed
an
d Y
ear
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to t
he
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to t
he
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sion
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of Development
Activities Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
te
NAME
Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2)
Ariely, Gil PhD 2006 Spring 2012 10% YES 12 UG
Bettencourt, Randall
JD 1993 Spring 2005 70% YES 1 1 UG Special justification for Qualification
Cagle, Rebecca MPA 2010 Spring 2012 10% YES 2 UG
Cambridge, Charles PhD 1981 Fall 1978 50% YES 8 UG RES SER FERP
Casler, Angela MBA 2000 Spring 2006 100% YES 1 3 1 UG SER
Gundlach, Michael PhD 2003 Fall 2006 100% YES 8 UG RES SER
Halford, Jennifer JD 2003 Fall 2008 23% YES 3 1 1 UG
Halimi, David MS 1977 Fall 2009 40% YES 7 UG
Hames, John JD 1982 Fall 2004 70% YES 1 1 UG SER
Hinrichs, Kim PhD 2003 Fall 2011 100% YES 15 UG RES SER
Hubbard, Richard PhD 1999 Fall 2010 40% YES 2 UG
Indvik, Julie PhD 1985 Fall 1983 100% YES 9 3 ADM RES SER Interim Assoc. Dean
Jones, Dana MBA 1986 Spring 2012 10% YES 3 1 UG
Jones, Ryan MBA 2010 Spring 2011 20% YES 3 1 UG
Keller, Pamela MBA 2009 Spring 2010 40% YES 3 UG
Kim, Hyunjung PhD 2009 Fall 2009 100% YES 10 3 UG GR RES
SER
Kodai, Scott MBA 2006 Fall 2007 20% YES 2 UG
Kromer, Ted MBA 1965 Spring 2003 90% YES 1 UG SER
Levine, Helen MS 1993 Spring 2007 40% YES 3 1 1 UG
Levine, Mark PhD 1978 Fall 1978 50% YES 6 UG RES SER FERP
Lewis, Kathryn PhD 1983 Fall 1978 50% YES 3 UG RES SER FERP
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A19
TABLE 10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed
an
d Y
ear
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to t
he
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to
th
e
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sion
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y
Qu
ali
fied
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of Development
Activities Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l P
rofe
ssio
na
l
Res
po
nsi
bil
itie
s
No
tes
NAME
MANAGEMENT
(2 OF 2) Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
McDonald, L. Tracy PhD 1983 Fall 1983 40% YES 4 UG RES SER FERP
Mclaughlin, Matt MBA 2007 Fall 2007 50% YES 3 1 UG
Morgan, James JD 1980 Spring 1981 100% YES 6 1 1 UG RES SER
Morgan, Sean MBA 2005 Fall 2005 100% YES 3 5 UG SER
Persons, Bonnie JD 1992 Spring 2008 100% YES 3 2 1 1 UG GR RES SER
Validating Experience
Pizarro, Nelson PhD 2011 Fall 2011 100% YES 2 UG RES SER
Polsan, Michael JD 1990 Fall 2005 60% YES 1 2 UG
Potter, Dirk JD 1982 Spring 1983 60% YES 1 1 UG Special justification for Qualification
Rahn, David MS 1991 Fall 2000 92% YES 2 UG SER
Rehg, Michael PhD 1998 Fall 2008 100% YES 13 1 2 UG GR RES SER
Siegall, Marc PhD 1987 Fall 1986 100% YES 4 UG ADM RES SER
Interim Assoc. Dean
Straus, Peter BA 1972 Fall 2002 100% YES 2 2 UG SER Special justification for Qualification
Trailer, Jeff PhD 1995 Fall 2001 100% YES 1 3 UG GR ADM RES SER
Dept. Chair
York, Matthew BA 1978 Spring 2012 10% YES 2 1 UG Special justification for Qualification
Zivnuska, Suzanne PhD 2003 Fall 2006 100% YES 18 2 1 UG GR RES SER
Barton, Mary MS 1994 Fall 2006 90% Yes 1 UG SER BusComm
Cohen, Marsha MA 2007 Spring 2002 70% Yes 2 1 UG BusComm
Sprague, Robert MDiv 1983 Fall 2008 90% Yes 2 1 3 UG BusComm
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A20
TABLE
10-1
Hig
hes
t D
egre
e E
arn
ed a
nd
Yea
r
Da
te o
f F
irst
Ap
po
intm
ent
to t
he
Sch
oo
l
Per
cen
t o
f T
ime
Ded
ica
ted
to t
he
Sch
oo
l's
Mis
sion
Aca
dem
ica
lly
Qu
ali
fied
Pro
fess
ion
all
y Q
ua
lifi
ed
Oth
er
Five-Year Summary of
Development Activities
Supporting AQ or PQ Status
No
rma
l
Pro
fess
ion
al
Res
po
nsi
bil
i
ties
No
tes
NAME
Inte
llec
tua
l
Co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
Pro
fess
ion
al
Ex
per
ien
ce
Co
nsu
ltin
g
Pro
fess
ion
al
Dev
elo
pm
ent
Oth
er
Pro
fess
ion
al
Act
ivit
ies
MARKETING
Andrews, Vernon PhD 1996 Fall 2010 20% YES 3 2 1 1 UG RES SER
Post-Doctoral
Bridge Program
Blanshei, Lance MBA 1985 Spring 2005 20% YES 2 UG
Chan, Kenny PhD 1988 Fall 1985 100% YES 9 2 UG ADM RES SER Dept. Chair
Chapman, Ken PhD 1996 Fall 2001 100% YES 9 2 UG GR RES SER
Donoho, Casey PhD 1990 Fall 2008 100% YES 11 1 UG RES SER
Heinze, Timothy PhD 2007 Fall 2007 100% YES 16 UG RES SER
Maligie, William MBA 1984 Spring 2008 100% YES 2 UG SER Qualified for MKTG
and SCMS; teaches
more MKTG
McGowan, Wm. MBA 1981 Spring 1999 100% YES 2 1 UG SER
Meda, Edward MBA 1994 Spring 2011 100% YES 1 UG
Meuter, MatT PhD 1999 Fall 2000 100% YES 11 2 UG RES SER
Misra, Shekhar PhD 1986 Fall 1985 50% YES 7 5 UG RES SER FERP
Nelsen, Jennifer MA 2004 Fall 2005 40% YES 4 UG
Schifferle, Kathryn MBA 2008 Spring 2007 70% YES 3 UG
Toy, Daniel PhD 1979 Fall 1989 50% YES 5 UG RES SER FERP
Wright, Lauren PhD 1990 Fall 1989 50% YES 6 UG RES SER FERP
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A21
TABLE 10-2
CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED
FACULTY
RE: Standard 10
AY 2011-2012 (annualized) FERP faculty work one semester a year (or half-time over both semesters). They are considered normal Tenure/Tenure-Track
(T/TT) D6faculty during their "on" semesters, and retired (not university employees) the rest of the year. The requirements for
maintaining AQ status are half that for full-time T/TT faculty.
Faculty on sabbatical do not teach; however, the nature of a sabbatical requires them to be working 100% in support of the
College's mission.
NAME
QUALIFICATION
(ACADEMIC-AQ,
PROFESSIONAL-
PQ OTHER-O)
(FROM TABLE
10-1)
AQ
FACULTY-
%OF TIME
DEVOTED
TO
MISSION
(FROM
TABLE 10-
1)
PQ
FACULTY-
% OF TIME
DEVOTED
TO
MISSION
(FROM
TABLE 10-1)
OTHER
FACULTY-
% OF
TIME
DEVOTED
TO
MISSION
(FROM
TABLE 10-
1)
QUALIFICATION RATIOS PER
STANDARD 10
<NOTES>
ACCOUNTING
Bruder, Joshua O 13%
Chiang, RuFang PQ
100%
Deberg, Curtis AQ 100% Sabbatical
Estes, Crystal O 55%
Ficklin, Kenneth O 13%
Griffin, Amy PQ 90%
Guy, Paul AQ 50% FERP
Irvine, Thomas O 25%
Jones, Joseph PQ 30%
Kizirian, Tim AQ 100% Dept. Chair
Leese, Wallace O 100%
Milliron, Valerie AQ 100%
Murdoch, Brock AQ 50% FERP
Nissan, Samir O 50%
Pladson, Holly O 33%
Pobloske, Paule O
100%
TOTAL ACCOUNTING 400% 233% 375%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 40%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 62%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A22
TABLE 10-2
BUSINESS INFORMATION SYSTEMS % Mission % Mission % Mission
NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES
Bahl, Harish AQ 100%
Boykin, Raymond AQ 50% FERP
Chiang, Dalen AQ 100% Sabbatical
Connolly, James O 100%
Gardiner, Lorraine AQ 100%
Gardiner, Stan AQ 100%
Jones, Nancy PQ 100%
Lauck, Marsha O 10%
Lees, John AQ 50% FERP
Mensching, James AQ 50% FERP
Pike, Ronald AQ 100%
Sager, James AQ 100% Dept. Chair
Sandoe, Kent AQ 100%
Wilder, Thomas PQ 100%
TOTAL BUSINESS INFORMATION SYS. 850% 200% 110%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 73%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 91%
FINANCE
% Mission % Mission % Mission NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES
Ahern, Daniel PQ 100%
Anderson, Clayton PQ 20%
Bordenave, Neal PQ 20%
Hsu, Hsieh-Yuen AQ 100%
Huang, Jian AQ 100%
Moosa, Suleman AQ 50% FERP
Ponarul, Richard AQ 100%
Treanor, Stephen AQ 100%
Weigand, Douglas PQ 10%
TOTAL FINANCE 450% 150% 0%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 75%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 100%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A23
TABLE 10-2 MANAGEMENT (1 OF 2) % Mission % Mission % Mission
NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES
Ariely, Gil AQ 10%
Bettencourt, Randall
AQ 70% Special justification for Qualification
Cagle, Rebecca PQ 10%
Cambridge, Charles O 50% FERP
Casler, Angela PQ 100%
Gundlach, Michael AQ 100%
Halford, Jennifer PQ 23%
Halimi, David PQ 40%
Hames, John PQ 70%
Hinrichs, Kim AQ 100%
Hubbard, Richard PQ 40%
Indvik, Julie AQ 100% Interim Assoc. Dean
Jones, Dana PQ 10%
Jones, Ryan PQ 20%
Keller, Pamela PQ 40%
Kim, Hyunjung AQ 100%
Kodai, Scott PQ 20%
Kromer, Ted PQ 90%
Levine, Helen PQ 40%
Levine, Mark AQ 50% FERP
Lewis, Kathryn AQ 50% FERP
McDonald, L. Tracy AQ 40% FERP
Mclaughlin, Matthew
PQ 50%
Morgan, James AQ 100%
Morgan, Sean PQ 100%
Persons, Bonnie AQ 100% Credit for Validating Experience
Pizarro, Nelson AQ 100%
Polsan, Michael PQ 60%
Potter, Dirk AQ 60% Special justification for Qualification
Rahn, David PQ 92%
Rehg, Michael AQ 100%
Siegall, Marc AQ 100% Interim Assoc. Dean
Straus, Peter PQ 100% Special justification for Qualification
Trailer, Jeff O 100% Dept. Chair
York, Matthew PQ 10% Special justification for Qualification
Zivnuska, Suzanne AQ 100%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A24
TABLE 10-2
MANAGEMENT (2 OF 2) % Mission % Mission % Mission
NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES
Barton, Mary PQ
NOT INCLUDED
BusComm
Cohen, Marsha PQ
NOT INCLUDED
BusComm
Sprague, Robert PQ
NOT INCLUDED
BusComm
TOTAL MANAGEMENT 1280% 915% 150%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 55%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 94%
MARKETING
% Mission % Mission % Mission NAME QUALIFICATION AQ PQ O NOTES
Andrews, Vernon AQ 20% Post-Doctoral Bridge Program Grad
Blanshei, Lance PQ 20%
Chan, Kenny AQ 100% Dept. Chair
Chapman, Kenneth AQ 100%
Donoho, Casey AQ 100%
Heinze, Timothy AQ 100%
Maligie, William PQ 100% Qualified for MKTG and SCMS; teaches more MKTG
McGowan, William PQ 100%
Meda, Edward PQ 100%
Meuter, Matthew AQ 100%
Misra, Shekhar AQ 50% FERP
Nelsen, Jennifer PQ 40%
Schifferle, Kathryn PQ 70%
Toy, Daniel AQ 50% FERP
Wright, Lauren AQ 50% FERP
TOTAL MARKETING 670% 430% 0%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 61%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 100%
TOTAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS 3650% 1927% 635%
% AQ 50% Ratio Standard 59%
% AQ or PQ 90% Ratio Standard 90%
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A25
Assurance of Learning Program Overviews
The following Tables include, for each degree program, the full set of:
Learning goals and objectives
Measures used for assessing achievement on each goal/objective
o Including frequency, outcome thresholds, and plans for improving the
measures
Recent findings
Actions taken as a result of each finding (“Loop Closing”)
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A26
Business Administration -- Overview -- Page 1 of 2
Learning Goal Learning Outcome Measure Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance
Frequency of Measurement
Communication
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to effectively present information orally
Presentations in Capstone Class; using rubric developed in April 2005 by COB committee
At least 80% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
Communication
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to effectively present information in writing
Rubric developed by ALAB in Spring 2005.
At least 70% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
Information Technology
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to demonstrate proficiency in the use of information technology
Modified MINS 300 Excel exercise
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Analytical Thinking & Problem-solving
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to evaluate, analyze and interpret information to make reasoned business decisions.
Critical Thinking Rubric - dev. 2006-2007
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Developing” or “Mastering.” At least 20% of the ratings are evaluated as “Mastering.”
2x in 5 years
Ethics
Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate proficiency in evaluating ethical issues and situations.
Rubric developed by Ethics ALAB Spring 2009.
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”
2x in 5 years
Teamwork
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to work effectively in teams.
Team Peer evaluations from BADM 495 group projects
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Globalization & Diversity
Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate an awareness of how organizations are affected by globalization and diversity.
UCC 30-item MC test (Spr 2010)
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Business Functional Areas (CBKT)
Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to apply business concepts in evaluating business issues.
71 MC questions To be determined 2x in 5 years
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A27
Business Administration -- Overview -- Page 2 of 2
Most Recent Loop Closing
Learning Goal
Last Two Times Measured Most Recent Results
Is the measurement process/instrument slated for improvement? Curricular Innovation Improvement Target
Communication (Learning Goal: Oral)
Spring 2010 Spring 2012
All traits met the goal of 80% or more of the students being rated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”
No
Nov 2011: Provided oral presentation rubric to COB faculty for use in courses, since several new faculty have been hired recently. Survey of faculty teaching in core found 58% use the rubric (16/26 respondents).
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Communication (Learning Goal: Written)
Spring 2007 Spring 2012
Six of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at “Acceptable” or “Superior.”
Being examined; may be refined for Spring 2013
Spring 2007: Writing handbook English Simplified being systematically adopted across core classes. Advisors and major academic plans (MAPs) putting the Business Communications course earlier in students degree plan. COB writing tutor hired as resource for students, 10 hours/week. Chairs sending messages to faculty regarding writing (e.g., to use rubric and writing handout, use English
Simplified, include written assignments where appropriate, grade quality of writing). More
writing being incorporated into classes (e.g.,
MKT 305, ACCT 202, ACCT 321)
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Information Technology
Spring 2006 Spring 2012
Overall 55.7% on Excel practical test.
Yes. Developed measure based on MINS 301 test, focused on Excel. Need to improve and include other IT areas
2007: Core course coordinators agreed to find ways to better integrate use of Excel in classes
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Analytical Thinking & Problem-solving
Spring 2007 Spring 2012
Two of six traits above the 80% goal of Developing and Mastering combined; 21.6% of ratings were above Mastering; these are both decreases from 2007.
No, but closer fit needed between assignment and rubric.
Spring 2007: Recommended use of critical thinking rubric in class; recommended greater use of cases, simulations and real world projects
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Ethics
Spring 2009 Spring 2012
Spring 2009: 34.6% of the responses were rated as unacceptable, 51.6% were acceptable, and 13.8% were superior.
No
Oct 2010: Sent email to COB faculty recommending use of the ethics rubric; March 2011: sent ethics rubric and PowerPoint slide show to faculty as a result of faculty core course survey from Fall 2010; 2012 survey found 19% of faculty teaching in core use ethics rubric, although 58% include an ethics related assignment
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Teamwork
Spring 2010 Spring 2011
Overall peer evaluation average of 4.82 on a 6 point scale (n=1745).
Will need to change, since BADM 495 no longer uses Glo-bus simulation; new peer evaluation form to be developed
2012: UCC has recommended development of Teamwork module by management faculty, similar to what was done with Ethics. Teamwork module could be used by faculty to emphasize teamwork knowledge dissemination across core.
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Globalization & Diversity
Fall 2009 69.6% mean test score; 70.9% met or exceeded UCC expectations
Yes; Fall 2013
March 2010: Recommended to department chairs, core course coordinators, and involved faculty to continue to emphasize consistency within multisection courses, and continue to have material (e.g., chapters, readings, cases) focused on the globalization of business and weave globalization into multiple aspects of each core course.
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Business Functional Areas (CBKT)
Fall 2010 Fall 2011
Fall 2011: 57.9% overall average
Yes, Fall 2012
To be determined at next "loop closing" with curriculum committee.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A28
Business Information Systems -- Overview -- Page 1 of 2
Learning Goal Learning Objective Measure Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance
Frequency of Measurement
Communicate Effectively
Effectively present business information orally.
Presentations in capstone course (BSIS 496); COB Oral Presentation Rubric
At least 70% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
Communicate Effectively
Effectively present business information in writing.
Position paper in capstone class (BSIS 496); COB Written Communication Rubric
At least 70% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
IT Proficiency
Demonstrate an operating knowledge of integrated business information systems implementation in a diverse, global business environment.
Executive summary with appendices; instructor rubric based on BIS Industry Council input
This was a new measure so no initial thresholds were established.
2x in 5 years
Problem Solving
Critically evaluate, analyze and interpret information to identify and solve business problems related to business information systems.
Position paper in capstone class (BSIS 496); COB Critical Thinking/Problem-Solving Rubric
At least 70% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
Ethics Understand and evaluate ethical issues and situations.
Ethics scenario assignment in capstone course (BSIS 496); COB Ethics Rubric
At least 70% of ratings of each trait should be evaluated as Acceptable or Superior
2x in 5 years
Project Mgt. & Teamwork
Demonstrate an operating knowledge of project management.
BSIS 444 final exam questions bundled into major concept areas
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Project Mgt. & Teamwork
Demonstrate an understanding of issues involved in working effectively in teams.
Team peer evaluations from capstone class (BSIS 496); Teamwork KSA test also used in 2008 but not feasible afterward due to its expense
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Core Business Knowledge
Demonstrate knowledge of core business areas
COB Core Business Knowledge Test (62 of 71 MC questions; HR questions removed)
To be determined 2x in 5 years
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A29
BSIS – Overview – Page 2 of 2 Most Recent Loop Closing
Learning Goal Last Two Dates Measured Most Recent Results
Is the measurement process/instrument slated for improvement? Curricular Innovation Improvement Target
Communicate Effectively (Learning Goal: Oral)
Spring 2006 Spring 2009
Spring 2009: All thresholds met except body language
No.
Spring 2010: In addition to using the COB Oral Presentation rubric for grading, faculty teaching BSIS 496 will emphasize body language (and other characteristics) of good oral presentation using the rubric as a reference.
Meet current threshold level for all traits
Communicate Effectively (Learning Goal: Written)
Spring 2010 Spring 2012
Spring 2012: Not in yet
No.
Spring 2010: In addition to continuing the use of the COB rubric and English Simplified, faculty teaching BSIS 496 will incorporate more formally the opportunity to rewrite assignments after faculty and peer feedback
To be determined after analysis of Spring 2012 data
IT Proficiency Fall 2010
Fall 2010: Students demonstrated weakness in consideration of database issues, data communications issues, risks and the five-year TCO.
Yes. AY 2012-2013
Spring 2012: The BIS faculty are in the process of devising a new curriculum that reduces the total number of units and emphasizes enterprise information systems more fully. They intend for this learning goal and objective to be measured in a course, BSIS 420, that includes hands-on configuration of an enterprise system and will be required in the new proposed curriculum.
To be determined after the first administration of the new measure
Problem Solving Spring 2010 Spring 2012
Spring 2012: Not in yet
Yes, align it more closely with the goal and objective. AY 2012-2013
Spring 2007: Discuss the COB Critical Thinking/Problem Solving rubric traits with students and use it when grading relevant student work.
To be determined after analysis of Spring 2012 data
Ethics Spring 2009 Spring 2012
Spring 2012: Not in yet
No.
Fall 2009 - Spring 2010: An accounting faculty member developed scenario-based ethical decision model materials that gave practical examples to help students better understand the concepts measured by all the rubric traits. BIS faculty provided input for the materials and approved their distribution for use in all courses with an ethics component.
To be determined after analysis of Spring 2012 data
Project Mgt. & Teamwork (Proj Mgmt)
Spring 2012 Spring 2012: Not in yet
No.
To be determined after analysis of Spring 2012 data
Project Mgt. & Teamwork (Teams)
Spring 2008 Fall 2010
Fall 2010: Peer evaluation instrument was not sufficiently refined to produce useful results
Yes. We will discuss the use of CATME in Fall 2012.
Spring 2008: The Management Department would enhance teamwork coverage, group activities and consistency across MGMT 303 sections. Fall 2010: Finding an acceptable measurement instrument.
To be determined
Core Business Knowledge
Spring 2009 Spring 2012
Spring 2012: 55.6% overall average
Yes. The results were difficult to interpret due to a possible mismatch in questions with the most important functional concepts. Spring/Summer 2012
Spring 2012: A biproduct of the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee's reviwion of the CBKT is a list of the most important functional area concepts that can be distributed to students and reinforced in their core courses.
To be determined
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A30
MBA – Overview – Page 1 of 4
(MBA Only) Capacities As Per Standard 10 Learning Goal Learning Outcome
2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments
Data-Driven Decision-Making
Students receiving the MBA degree will integrate business data and concepts with core business knowledge to make tactical and strategic business decisions using appropriate information technology
1. Capacity to lead in organizational situations 2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments 4. Capacity to understand management issues from a global perspective
Teamwork Students receiving the MBA degree will be able to manage group dynamics in a multicultural team environment.
1. Capacity to lead in organizational situations 2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments
Ethics Students receiving an MBA degree will recognize and respond to ethical issues related to business practice.
2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 3. Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems, to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in unpredictable environments
Communication Skill (a) Students receiving the MBA degree will demonstrate effective oral communication skills.
2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines
Communication Skill (b) Students receiving the MBA degree will produce professional written communications.
2. Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar circumstances through a conceptual understanding of relevant disciplines 4. Capacity to understand management issues from a global perspective
Globalization Students earning the MBA degree will recognize and be able to respond to international issues that impact business.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A31
MBA – Overview – Page 2 of 4
Learning Goal Measure
Threshold level of acceptable achievement/performance
Frequency of Measurement
Last Two Times Measured
Data-Driven Decision-Making
BADM 693 Assignment 3
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Even
Spring 2012
Teamwork 1. Teamwork Evaluation Form 2. Leadership Test ? 3. Peer eval scores (catme?)
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Even
Spring 2008 Spring 2012
Ethics Ethics Rubric To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Odd
Spring 2009 Spring 2011 Spring 2012
Communication Skill (a)
Oral Communication Rubric
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Odd
Spring 2007 Spring 2010 Spring 2011
Communication Skill (b)
Written Communication Rubric
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Odd
Spring 2005 Spring 2007 Spring 2011 Spring 2012
Globalization Globalization Rubric
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee
Two years: Odd
Spring 2011 Spring 2012
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A32
MBA -- Overview -- Page 3 of 4 First Three Goals
Most Recent Loop Closing
Learning Goal Most Recent Results
Is the measurement process/instrument slated for improvement? Curricular Innovation Improvement Target
Data-Driven Decision-Making
Spring 2012 (new) No. Measure developed Fall 2011, used for first time Spring 2012.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Knowedge tests in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 Other: Discussions at each class mtg ACCT623; financial data analysis & sytem dynamics modeling BADM693; written team project requires decision making based on provided data MKTG673; Excel PivotTables, Data Analysis Solver, XLMiner, GoldSim, SAP queries, SAP data mining BADM610
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Teamwork Spring 2008 1. Planning & Task Coordination dimension, 3 items, range of mean ratings 3.17-3.26 (4-point scale) 2. Percent correct for Self-Mgmt Dimension of Teamwork KSA Test 83.2. Spring 2012 TBA
Yes. Would like to move to CATME as peer eval system. Need to discuss with Bonnie & GPC.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Knowedge tests in: ACCT623 Teamwork required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Peer evals in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: hands-on exercise ACCT623; class discussions on importance of teamwork & support students in resolving issues MKTG673
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Ethics Spring 2011 19% Unacceptable, 24% Acceptable, 57% Superior Spring 2012 TBA
No, unless Bonnie requests revisions to better fit with her course.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 AoL slides/handouts used in: MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 Assignments in: MKTG673 Rubric used in: MGMT635 BADM693 Knowedge tests in: MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: Discussions & examples ACCT623
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A33
MBA – Overview – Page 4 of 4 Last Three Goals
Most Recent Loop Closings
Results
Is the measurement process/instrument slated for improvement? Curricular Innovation Improvement Target
Communication Skill (a)
Spring 2011 Trait 1: 48% Acceptable, 52% Superior Trait 2: 19% Unacceptable, 29% Acceptable, 52% Superior Trait 3: 48% Acceptable, 52% Superior
No. Revised rubric Fall 2011.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Required readings in: ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Rubric used in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 BADM693 Knowedge tests in: ACCT623 Oral presentations required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Other: students present cases ACCT623 BADM693; indiv & team presentations play an important role in this course MKTG673
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Communication Skill (b)
Spring 2011 19% Unacceptable, 24% Acceptable, 43% Superior Spring 24012 TBA
No. Revised the rubric Fall 2011.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 BADM610 Required readings in: ACCT623 Assignments in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Rubric used in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 Knowedge tests in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Individual written work required in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 English Simplified req'd/recmded: SCMS60 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 BADM610 English Simplified used in: ACCT623 BADM610 Other: Professional written cases required ACCT623; essay quizzes, final exam, & case studies BADM693; professional mktg plan req'd MKTG673; executive summaries reqd for each case, extensive feedback & industry examples BADM610
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Globalization Spring 2011 50% Not Proficient, 40% Ltd Proficiency, 10% Proficient Spring 2012 TBA
No, unless Bonnie requests revisions to better fit with her course. Revised the rubric Spring 2012.
Learning goal included in syllabi: SCMS607 MGMT635 BADM693 MKTG673 Classroom lectures in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 MKTG673 BADM610 AoL slides/handouts used in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Required readings in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 MKTG673 Assignments in: SCMS607 ACCT623 MKTG673 Rubric used in: MGMT635 ACCT623 Knowedge tests in: SCMS607 MGMT635 ACCT623 BADM693 Other: classroom discussions ACCT623; cultural intelligence surveys BADM693; major case is global MKTG673; sometimes part of case studies BADM610
To be determined by the Graduate Programs Committee during next "loop closing"
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A34
Assurance of Learning Program Narratives: Processes and Outcomes
Business Administration
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A35
AoL summary – Fall 2011-Spring 2012
In spring 2012 data were collected to assess learning goals in Oral Communication, Written
Communication, Critical Thinking, and Ethics. In addition, the Core Business Knowledge Test
(CBKT) was updated and administered in fall 2011, and data that was collected on Teamwork in
three previous years was analyzed in spring 2012. The only goal not measured in AY 2011-2012
was globalization/diversity. Senior exit surveys were administered in fall 2011 and spring 2012,
and an alignment matrix faculty survey was completed in spring 2012, along with a syllabus
analysis of all core course syllabi. The results of all of these efforts will be presented to the
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) in the fall for discussion / action, with the
exception of the CBKT results which have already been discussed and acted upon by the UCC.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A36
The Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT)
Business Functional Areas Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be
able to apply business concepts in evaluating business issues.
Student Learning Objective Students will be able to apply basic business concepts of
accounting, finance, human resource management, management, marketing, supply chain
management, and management information systems in evaluating business issues.
Proposed Standard: Varies by subject area
Our Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT) was developed with inputs from faculty in all areas
of our core curriculum. A total of 71 test questions were developed for that first administration in
Fall 2010. This test was also administered in Spring and Summer 2011. All three of these
administrations resulted in very similar results – overall average for the test was between 55 –
59%. Discussions with Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) members in Spring 2012
noted the following about the test and the process:
- The results reflect students’ knowledge with no preparation – they are not given any
indication of what will be on the test, only that it covers knowledge from their core
classes; no study guide was provided (although some other schools do provide one)
- Students may have taken some of their core classes two or more years past, and may
have forgotten much of the material by the time they take BADM 495
- The students may not be motivated to do well, since the test is administered in
BADM 495 for extra credit; thus good students may not take it at all or not try as hard
- It was unclear what to expect the students to score, given the conditions; was 60% a
bad score, necessarily?
- Test fatigue may be an issue; students scored poorest on the finance questions, which
were at the end of the test
- The questions may or may not represent the core concepts in each area being tested
During the first three administrations of the test, some procedures were done differently to
determine whether test scores were being adversely affected. This included administering both
on-line and in-class, modifying the make-up of the test, as well as making the test worth 5% of
the student’s grade, to increase their motivation. Results were not statistically different regardless
of these changes.
The test was revised in Fall 2011 to add supply chain management questions, eliminate questions
that showed low reliability, and improve wording in some questions that could have been
confusing to students. In addition, some questions were eliminated to fit the supply chain
questions into the test without making it longer. When the revised test did not produce a
significantly different overall average, the UCC decided to take a closer look at the test.
Although the test was originally developed by faculty from each specialty area, no attempt was
made to identify specific concepts from each subject area which our faculty felt were the most
important for our graduates to remember. Rather, faculty members were left to decide what
questions to include, with no guidance on this task.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A37
Based on this realization, the UCC embarked on a three – phased process of refining the CBKT.
First, they enlisted faculty from each subject area to identify the 5 – 10 key concepts in their
area, concepts that they would absolutely want students to know when they “walked across the
stage.” These concepts would be expected knowledge of all graduates, not just students in a
particular option. Thus, these concepts should be emphasized in the core classes. For each area,
the original list of concepts was refined by the respective faculty members from that area until
they came up with their final list.
The second step in refining the test was to map the current CBKT questions onto the list of
concepts that had just been developed. Faculty in a couple of areas found that several of the core
concepts had not been represented in the test, while other concepts had been overrepresented on
the test. New questions were developed so that a wider coverage of the core concepts would be
on the test. This new test will be deployed in Summer and Fall 2012.
A related outcome to this process is the development of the list of core concepts that all students
should know when they graduate. This is an extremely useful tool in a couple of ways. First, it
can be provided to faculty teaching in the core, so that they understand what the core concepts
are, not only from their own course, but in other core courses as well. This gives faculty a better
understanding of what students should be learning along the way, so they can reinforce or relate
those concepts to the concepts they are teaching. It can be as simple as the capstone instructors
understanding that Time Value of Money is the most important concept in finance, so they can
re-emphasize it in their class. Another example is the standardization of finance and accounting
terms across sections, so that students get the same terminology for key concepts.
A second benefit of this list is to the students themselves. Instructors teaching the capstone
BADM 495 class will be able to share the list of concepts to the students, so they understand that
the areas are interrelated, and they will be held accountable for the knowledge across all their
core classes. This will help establish a clearer picture of their education being an integrated
whole, rather than knowledge that is stove-piped in functional areas that don’t relate to each
other. This is one of the latest efforts by the COB to improve the integration and coordination
across faculty teaching in the BADM core, and the benefits are expected to build as the culture of
the college changes to be more integrative in its instruction.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A38
BADM Assessment of: Analytical Thinking and Problem-Solving
Analytical Thinking and Problem-Solving Learning Goal: Students graduating with a
BADM degree will be able to evaluate, analyze and interpret information to make reasoned
business decisions.
Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate the ability to evaluate, analyze and
interpret information to make reasoned business decisions.
Standard:
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Developing” or
“Mastering.”
At least 20% of the ratings are evaluated as “Mastering.”
An Assurance of Learning Advisory Board (ALAB) was formed in fall 2006 to research critical
thinking assessment and develop a rubric. The critical thinking rubric chosen was based on a
well used and tested rubric developed at Washington State University. In spring 2007, 60 papers
based on a case analysis that were a graded component of the BADM 495 course were assessed
for this goal. Problems noted with the process included inter-rater reliability, which was quite
low. Percent agreement was only 49%, while the average Cohen’s kappa was .27. A total of five
out of six traits met the goal of 80% of each trait being rated at the Developing or Mastering
level. Averaging across the six traits, 16.7% of the critical thinking ratings were “Emerging,”
53.4% “Developing,” and 29.9% “Mastering”. Thus the secondary goal was met – 29.9% of the
ratings were evaluated as Mastering, beating the goal by about 10%. The main weaknesses were
business analysis and evaluation of the quality of evidence.
In 2012 the process unfolded somewhat differently. The same rubric was used for the
assessment, which was used to grade all of the papers in six sections of BADM 495. Since the
instructors were using the rubric for grading purposes, multiple raters were not used. Prior to the
evaluations, the instructors did discuss the rubric and how to apply it to the case. The six
questions that the students were given to answer about the case were evaluated as to where they
would fit into the rubric. It was not always clear how some of the traits could be applied, since it
was not modified to fit the case study developed for the assignment. In the future it would be
easier to apply the rubric if it was shaped to fit the assignment. The instructors did differ in their
ratings across traits. Although the average percent of Mastering ratings given by both instructors
was very consistent, with less than a 1% difference, there was a 9% difference across the
Emerging and Developing traits. A total of 167 papers were evaluated.
The overall results were somewhat lower in 2012 than in 2007. Only two of the six traits were
above the 80% mark for Developing and Mastering ratings combined. Similar to 2007, this task
was very difficult to execute. An attempt was made in 2012 to avoid the problems with
interpretation of case analyses, which have been known to differ by instructors, so that validity
of conclusions in a typical case study approach to learning is problematic. Forrester (1991) and
Sterman (2006) have both noted the fuzzy nature of qualitative case analysis in management
courses. One recommendation from the 2007 assessment was to use a case with more data
analysis opportunities and instructions. For the 2012 case, an attempt was made to base it more
closely on use and analysis of numerical data, which is more reliable than qualitative data
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A39
interpretation. Unfortunately, the standardized rubric, inherent differences between raters and
slight differences in instructions supplied to the students for the case made for difficulties in
executing the assessment.
Actions recommended in 2007 included use of the rubric in courses. Based on the 2012 survey of
faculty teaching BADM core classes, 24% (6/25) indicated they did use the rubric, representing 3
out of 12 classes (1 core class was not represented in the responses). This is not a surprising
finding, given the need to adapt the rubric to the assignment or the assignment to the rubric to
use it most effectively. However, 92% of instructors (23/25) indicated they had an assignment
related to analytical thinking in their core course. Thus there is a lot of potential to increase the
use of the rubric in more core courses.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A40
BADM Assessment of Ethics
Ethics Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will demonstrate
proficiency in evaluating ethical issues and situations.
Student Learning Objective: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to
identify an ethical dilemma and make an appropriate recommendation to address it.
Standard:
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or
“Superior.”
Background
In fall 2009, the ethics assurance of learning advisory board (ALAB) consulted the literature on
ethics and the COB faculty in order to develop an ethics rubric. Several ethics scenarios were
adopted from Fritzsche and Becker, 1984, Academy of Management Journal, v. 27(1), 166-175.
The rubric and scenarios were pilot-tested and refined. One scenario was selected for use. In
addition, data was collected on how well ethics is integrated into the BADM core curriculum, in
both 2009 and 2012.
Graduating student’s ethics were first assessed in 2009, and data has been collected from 86
students in BADM 495 in Spring 2012, using the same scenario selected for the 2009
assessment. Additional data collection is planned for summer 2012. This data will be analyzed in
fall 2012. The 2009 results showed only two of six traits to be meeting the goal of 80%
acceptable or superior ratings. Two traits were particularly low – understanding the need for
additional information and the influence of corporate culture – which showed between 30-40%
of ratings at the acceptable or superior level. As a result, the ethics rubric was disseminated to
COB faculty, and an ethics PowerPoint module was developed for faculty to use in classes in
which ethics was covered. Depending on what the 2012 data show, other actions may be
necessary to improve student scores on this learning goal. BADM Assessment Summary –
Ethics learning goal
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A41
BADM Assessment of Globalization and Diversity
Globalization and Diversity Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree
will demonstrate an awareness of how organizations are affected by globalization and
diversity.
Student Learning Objective Students will demonstrate knowledge of how organizations are
affected by globalization and diversity.
Standard:
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Met Expectations” and
“Above Expectations (64% or higher on the globalization test: Above=84%+, Met=64-
83%, Below: 63% or less)
In general, globalization is anything to do with the international aspects of business and the
increasing connectivity and interdependence of the world's markets and businesses. The first
step in this process was to see where globalization issues are addressed in our BADM core
curriculum. The second stage of the globalization assessment effort was to test students’
knowledge. A 30 question multiple-choice test was developed.
This goal was first assessed in spring 2010, and is scheduled to be assessed in AY 2012-2013.
The results from the spring 2010 assessment showed an average score of 70%, but some
questions may need to be refined for clarity. The alignment matrix and globalization test from
2010 suggested that most students were leaving the BADM program with a reasonable degree of
exposure to, and knowledge of, the globalization of business.
The alignment survey administered in spring 2012 showed fairly good coverage of globalization
and diversity in the BADM core, reinforcing the results from the 2010 survey. A total of 68% of
instructors teaching core classes (17/25) indicated their class included required readings on the
topic, while 52% had assignments related to the learning goal. This represented seven of the 12
classes in the core addressing globalization and diversity in these two areas.
Recommendations in 2007 from the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) included the
need to emphasize consistency across multi-section courses. Consistency was found in the 2012
survey across five courses that obtained responses from more than one faculty (BADM 101,
BADM 300, MGMT 303, MGMT 304 and BADM 495). A majority of faculty (from 52 – 84%)
responded with Yes answers to the five question survey on the globalization learning goal. This
translates into an average of 3.36 yes answers out of five possible on the survey, or 67%. Only
two faculty members had zero yes answers in their responses. Thus it appears the BADM core is
still providing a solid level of coverage of this learning goal.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A42
BADM Assessment of Information Technology
Information Technology Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be
able to demonstrate proficiency in the use of information technology.
Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective use of IT skills in the areas
of information search, word processing, use of spreadsheets, and presentation software.
Standard: TBD
Measure: Modified MINS 301 test – 25 point Excel test
The COB initially assessed IT skills in spring 2006 using the Prentice-Hall Train and Assess IT
software. This tested students’ abilities in Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. The tests
were timed and students were given two tries at each task. In addition, a 30 question multiple-
choice test was designed to assess students’ knowledge of IT concepts and vocabulary. BADM
students overall averaged 64.7 on the software tests, and had the most difficulty with Excel and
Word. Recommendations from the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) included an IT
proficiency exam for all students, additional Excel and Word assignments in core classes, and
Microsoft Office certification at the “specialist” level for all students.
In Spring 2012, the IT goal was evaluated both directly and indirectly. A direct measure of
student’s ability to obtain data from the internet and manipulate it in Excel (25 separate tasks)
was developed and administered to six sections of BADM 495 (126 students total). Results were
somewhat lower than in 2006, but differences in test administration and content may have
affected the results. The indirect measure was included on the BADM 495 final exam in the
same sections that administered the Excel test. Three (no credit) questions were included on the
exam which asked how proficient the students considered themselves to be in Microsoft Word,
Excel and PowerPoint. Response choices were a = Poor to d = Excellent. The results (n = 156)
showed that on average students rated themselves lowest in Excel skills (mean = 2.95), followed
by PowerPoint (mean = 3.46) and Word (mean = 3.63). The survey results are supported by the
results of the Excel test. Students who indicated they possessed “Excellent” Excel skills averaged
66% on the Excel test; students who indicated they possessed “good” Excel skills averaged 54%
on the Excel test; students who indicated they possessed “fair” or “poor” Excel skills averaged
48% on the Excel test.
The overall conclusion on Excel skills is that the students need more training and practice in
Excel during the course of their education. The means for improving student’s IT skills will be
discussed with the UCC in fall 2012.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A43
BADM Assessment of Communication (Oral)
Communication Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to
effectively present information orally and in writing.
Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective oral presentation skills.
Standard:
At least 80% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or
“Superior.”
Oral Presentation Assessment Summary
Oral presentations have been assessed in the senior capstone course three times since 2004 using
the same rubric. Overall the results have been very similar. The difficulty in duplicating methods
across sections, understanding of the rubric and inherent differences across evaluators lead to
differences in some of the ratings. Overall though, there is remarkable consistency in the
evaluations across years, demonstrated by the results in Table 1 for the last two assessments.
This rubric has been widely accepted across the COB, and may be one reason for the students
doing well on their presentations.
Table 1. Results of Oral Presentation assessment in 2010 and 2012.
In spring 2012 two BADM 495 instructors rated the presentations that students were required to
perform for their final case analysis. The presentations were evaluated using the COB
presentation rubric and were worth 5% of the overall course grade. Each instructor individually
rated their own students.
During the semester students were graded using the rubric for article presentations they were
required to give. This helped the students become familiar with expectations, and helped the
instructors gain skill in applying the rubric.
In 2012, all areas met the goal of 80% or more of the students being rated at acceptable or
superior for each trait. While this is good, it is possible that the instructors were not as strict in
Traits
% Unacceptable % Acceptable % Superior
2010 2012 2010 2012 2010 2012
Body Language 11.8 4.0 57.8 36.2 30.4 59.8
Eye Contact 21.7 10.3 46.0 37.9 32.3 51.7
Vocal Presentation
and Tone
9.3 4.0 70.2 54.6 20.5 41.4
Attire 4.4 2.3 95.7 97.7 N/A
Word Choice 1.3 0.6 90.0 15.5 8.8 79.9
Use of Visual Aids 2.5 8.0 72.7 69.5 24.8 22.4
Organization 2.5 10.3 79.3 51.7 18.2 37.9
Support/ Evidence ---- 5.7 96.3 57.5 3.7 36.8
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A44
applying the rubric as evaluators were in the past. For instance, in 2012 the percent of
presentations rated as unacceptable increased for three traits – Use of Visual Aids, Organization
and Support/Evidence. However, in the other five traits the percent unacceptable all decreased.
This could be just a difference in what the evaluators particular biases were in making their
judgments.
At this time the results do not warrant any changes to what is occurring in the curriculum in
regards to oral presentation skills. The emphasis on practicing presentation skills and the use of
the rubric across the core classes seems to be having a positive effect on students. If a subsequent
assessment produces similar success, the COB may consider revising the goal upwards from its
current 80% level, which was established in 2004 as an initial goal.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A45
BADM Assessment of Communication (Written)
Communication Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to
effectively present information orally and in writing.
Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate effective business writing skills.
Standard:
At least 70% of the ratings of each trait should be evaluated at “Acceptable” or
“Superior.”
In spring 2007, a total of 60 papers randomly selected from BADM 495 were evaluated by two
raters using the written communication rubric. After their evaluations the raters met to discuss
their ratings and resolve differences. Agreement between raters was excellent – 96.8%. The
papers were based on a case analysis and were a graded component of the course.
In this assessment, three of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at
“Acceptable” or “Superior,” with one trait paragraph structure, coming in at 65% or just under
the goal. The main weaknesses were writing mechanics (grammar, punctuation, spelling),
followed by professionalism, and then sentence structure.
As a result of this assessment, faculty were encouraged to (1) incorporate more written
assignments and provide quality feedback and require/use English Simplified. Also, the
Corporate Reality Writing in the Workplace event was developed..
In spring 2012, a total of 164 papers from BADM 495 were using the written rubric developed
previously. The papers were again based on a case analysis and were a graded component of the
course. A total of six sections taught by two instructors were involved.
In this latest assessment, six of the seven traits met the goal of 70% or greater being evaluated at
“Acceptable” or “Superior.” The Professional Format and Use of Conventions trait did not meet
the goal. Overall, the number of “Acceptable” ratings was vastly improved, with a resultant
decrease in “Unacceptable” and “Superior” ratings. Validation of the results will occur in fall
2012, to ensure that the rubric was applied in a similar manner.
The 2012 faculty survey showed that overall it appears that the use of written assignments and
the writing rubric is rebounding in core classes. Feedback and discussion with the Undergraduate
Curriculum Committee will occur in Fall 2012.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A46
BADM Assessment of Teamwork
Teamwork Learning Goal: Students graduating with a BADM degree will be able to work
effectively in teams.
Student Learning Objective: Students will demonstrate the ability to collaborate as a team to
achieve a common objective.
Standard: TBD
Spring 2008
Student performance on this goal was measured in spring 2008 through the Teamwork
Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA) test developed by Stevens and Campion (1994, Journal
of Management, v 20(2), 503-530). This is a proprietary test that is widely used for pre-
employment screening and professional development. The overall average test score for BADM
students was approximately 67%, and somewhat higher for Redding students (71%).
A second (though indirect) measure of teamwork, based on as survey by Senior and Swailes,
(2007) was used. No differences were found based on gender, whether or not students were
transfer students, or if students were in the Redding program. Overall, students in each program
rated their teams as functioning rather well on the traits measured.
Based on these findings, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) recommended some
changes in classes that use teams (especially MGMT 303, MKTG 305 and BADM 495). One of
these recommendations was the consistent use of peer evaluation forms, which was done in
BADM 495 (see analysis below).
Spring 2012
Over much of the last 5 years, the BADM 495 senior capstone class used an on-line simulation
called Glo-bus as the major, team-based project in the course. Part of the on-line simulation
included a peer evaluation process, the results of which only the instructor could see. Students
were told that their grades could change depending on the evaluations they received from their A
total of 1745 student evaluations were included in the analysis. The evaluations took place
between fall 2008 and spring 2011.
Overall, the scores are very good, demonstrating that most of the students know how to be good
teammates. Nevertheless, the UCC has requested that a teamwork module be developed by the
Management department for use by instructors who use student teams. This would help increase
the actual instruction of team theory and practice
The UCC also began discussion about a replacement assessment tool, as the Glo-bus simulation
is no longer used in BADM 495. This discussion will continue in Fall 2012.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A47
Assurance of Learning Program Narratives: Processes and Outcomes
Business Information Systems
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A48
Business Information Systems Program (BS-BSIS)
Assurance of Learning Summary
June 2012
Continuous Improvement Overview
The BIS faculty maintains regular, open communication among its members, students and
industry partners that contributes to continuous improvement of the program. BIS faculty
members typically meet weekly or bi-weekly to discuss program matters and upcoming events.
The BIS Society (http://chicobis.org/index.php) invites faculty to its weekly meetings and targets
one or two meetings a year to discuss courses and program issues with faculty. Finally, the BIS
program meets semiannually with the BIS Industry Council. The purpose of these meetings is to
facilitate dialog with industry partners concerning the BIS curriculum vis-à-vis a quickly
changing information technology landscape and its impact on the program direction, course
content and pedagogy.
Assessments and Improvements
The current learning goals and objectives are the result of discussion and approval by the BIS
faculty with input from industry partners. Where appropriate (e.g., communication goal), they
are similar to BS-BADM goals since the two programs overlap in a number of their business
core courses. Where this is the case, the BIS program typically uses the same measurement
instruments as BADM.
Recent assessments and improvements for each learning objective are summarized below. The
entire BIS faculty serves as the program curriculum committee. Assessment results are presented
to them and, when performance is not acceptable, faculty members brainstorm improvement
ideas in a meeting. The potential improvements are discussed further with one or more ideas
typically being approved by the group to be incorporated into the curriculum and its pedagogy.
In some instances, ideas may be vetted with the BIS Industry Council.
BSIS Goal 1: Communicate Effectively
1.1 Effectively present business information orally
The oral presentation objective is measured using a course-embedded individual presentation in
the capstone course (BSIS 496). Students select an organization and present an overview of the
organization's strategy and how IT contributes to its success. This assignment is based on the
BIS Industry Council's encouragement to challenge students to make brief presentations that
force a prioritization of content and emphasize effective delivery. The instructor discusses the
COB oral presentation rubric traits with students as part of the preparation for the presentation.
The last assessment of oral presentation occurred in Spring 2009. We recorded the student
presentations and assigned two faculty members (one outside BIS) to evaluate the student work
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A49
using the COB oral presentation rubric. After a check of inter-rater reliability, the assessment
facilitator brought the evaluators together to review videos where their scores differed
significantly. Evaluators adjusted scores when they felt that they were misaligned with the rubric
scoring definitions.
The students' performance was, in general, acceptable but did not meet the threshold for body
language. The BIS faculty discussed the results and decided to supplement the past practice of
discussing the rubric with students and using it for grading purposes. The suggested
improvement was that the course instructor provide additional emphasis on body language and
provide specific examples of both good and bad practice using sample presentation videos as a
source.
1.2 Effectively present business information in writing
The capstone course is designated as a writing proficiency course for the BIS program. The
writing learning objective is typically assessed in this course using a position paper in which
students take a controversial position relevant to IT and defend it. The resulting paper can be
submitted to the Fredrick A. and Corinne E. Schwartz Award paper competition. The instructor
includes the COB writing rubric with the position paper instructions and discusses traits as they
relate to the assignment.
A faculty member who has taught BSIS 496 previously has been assigned the assessment of
Spring 2012 papers but the results are not yet available. Previous assessments indicated general
weakness across most of the traits, especially those related to mechanics. Instructors have used
the COB writing rubric for discussion with students and grading for at least five years and
included English Simplified as a reference textbook. Where budget allowed, students have also
had access to a COB writing tutor. Achieving significant improvements in writing quality has, as
yet, been difficult.
We added an improvement, based on assessment results and research on improving writing,
which incorporates more formally the opportunity to rewrite assignments based on feedback
from either the instructor or peers. Some writing assignments in the course have designated draft
and final versions. Others have mandatory rewrites if the quality is deemed unacceptable by the
instructor. All writing assignments also have an open rewrite policy to improve the writing
component of the grade.
BS-BSIS Goal 2: IT Proficiency
2. Demonstrate an operating knowledge of integrated business information systems
implementation in a diverse, global business environment
At its Spring 2010 meeting with faculty, the BIS Industry Council provided input on both the
type of case study and rubric traits they felt would be appropriate for measuring this learning
objective. The industry partners suggested either the construction of an RFP or the
recommendation of an IT solution from a set of alternative choices. They also emphasized the
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A50
importance of the quality of a student's analysis process and support for a recommendation rather
than the recommendation itself.
We assessed this learning objective in Fall 2010 using a case study based on cloud versus on-site
implementations of an ERP system. The instructor evaluated the students' performance on the
case study relative to writing quality and traits that included consideration of fit with user
requirements, database issues, data communications issues, training and change management,
relative benefits and risks as well as five-year total cost of ownership (TCO) estimates. Students
were especially weak in their consideration of database issues, data communications issues, risks
and the five year TCO.
Faculty discussions eventually led to a recommendation to require a hands-on enterprise system
implementation course (BSIS 420) that has previously been an elective. The BIS faculty is
currently in the process of devising a new curriculum that reduces the total number of units and
emphasizes enterprise information systems more fully. BSIS 420 will be part of the upper
division core in the proposed curriculum with this learning objective being measured in it in the
future.
BS-BSIS Goal 3: Problem Solving
3. Critically evaluate, analyze and interpret information to identify and solve business
problems related to business information systems
The critical thinking and problem solving objective is typically assessed in the capstone course
simultaneously with the writing objective using the same position paper assignment described
above. Evaluators score the papers with the COB critical thinking/problem solving rubric which
has also been included with the position paper instructions and discussed in class in preparation
for the assignment.
A faculty member who has taught BSIS 496 previously has been assigned the assessment of
Spring 2012 papers in conjunction with the writing assessment but the results are not yet
available. In previous assessments, student performance has generally exceeded the threshold on
all traits. The BIS faculty has expressed some concern that the COB critical thinking/problem
solving rubric may not be aligned closely enough with the BIS objective and will consider
alterations to the rubric after the Spring 2012 results are presented at an early Fall 2012 meeting.
BS-BSIS Goal 4: Ethics
4. Understand and evaluate ethical issues and situations
The capstone course contains an ethics scenario analysis which is used for course-embedded
assessment of the ethics objective. Recently, the scenario analysis has focused on one of the
ethical dilemmas described in the required book, The Adventures of an IT Leader. The course
instructor discusses the COB ethics rubric with students and uses it for grading the assignment.
The course instructor is providing Spring 2012 assessment data based on the COB ethics rubric
but the results are not yet available for analysis. The last assessment (Spring 2009) revealed
weak performance on two traits: the need for additional information and the impact of corporate
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A51
culture. The BIS faculty decided that an ethical decision making handout would be helpful for
use in BIS courses that have an ethics-related component. An accounting faculty member
developed a summary of ethical decision making steps and approaches that are consistent with
common practice, MGMT 303 concepts and the COB ethics rubric. The handout included a
practical example of following the steps for a realistic ethical dilemma. The draft module was
revised based on BIS faculty input and distributed to faculty in Spring 2010.
BS-BSIS Goal 5: Project Mgt. & Teamwork
5.1 Demonstrate an operating knowledge of project management
The BIS faculty began planning the assessment of project management in Fall 2009 with the
gathering of the most important concepts from faculty teaching project management. After
analysis of the curriculum matrix, however, the group concluded that project management
knowledge was not sufficiently covered in the curriculum to justify assessing students'
knowledge. The BIS faculty recommended emphasizing project management concepts in the
Systems Analysis course (MINS 350).
The initial measure of students' performance in key project management areas will be Spring
2012 final exam questions from BSIS 444 (Systems Project Management). BSIS 444 is a course
added to the curriculum in the 2009-2010 academic year, required for the MINS and SCMS
options and elective for AIS (an option currently under administrative suspension). The data are
not yet available but will be analyzed over the summer with results being presented to the BIS
faculty for discussion in Fall 2012. Whether this will continue to be the course-embedded
measurement of choice will depend on the usefulness of the results as well as the fate of the AIS
option since the course is only an elective in this option.
5.2 Demonstrate an understanding of issues involved in working effectively in teams
The first assessment of this objective occurred in Spring 2008 and consisted of a standardized
teamwork knowledge and skills test (Teamwork KSA) developed by Stevens and Campion
(Journal of Management, 1994, v 20(2), 503-530). The instructor administered the test to
students in the capstone course. The results indicated that students struggled with collaborative
problem solving and team communication concepts. The improvement initiative (developed at
the college level) included an enhancement of MGMT 303 to increase coverage of teamwork
concepts, group activities and consistency across sections. The proprietary Teamwork KSA test,
unfortunately, became infeasible due to its industry-based cost and lack of academic discount for
use with students.
In Fall 2010, open-ended peer evaluations from a capstone class team project that described task
allocations and contributions were used to assess teamwork. The assessment was not sufficiently
structured to produce clear results for assessment purposes. This academic year (2011-2012), the
BIS faculty discussed the possible use of the Comprehensive Assessment for Team-Member
Effectiveness (CATME) survey (see https://engineering.purdue.edu/CATME) to capture
assessments for this objective. Final discussions and trial use of CATME are planned for 2012-
2013.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A52
BS-BSIS Goal 6: Core Business Knowledge
6. Demonstrate knowledge of core business areas
The initial assessment of this objective occurred in Spring 2009 with the administration of the
CSU Business Assessment Test (BAT). At that point, the COB had not developed its own core
business knowledge test, and the BIS faculty wanted to get an initial measurement of how our
students might perform on a test covering broad business concepts. The BIS students'
performance compared favorably to other business students in CSU business schools who
administered the test. The BIS faculty, however, felt that the results were not particularly
actionable due to the relatively small sample and potential lack of alignment with our core
courses.
Subsequent to the use of the CSU BAT for BIS program assessment, the COB developed its
Core Business Knowledge Test (CBKT). The capstone course instructor administered the CBKT
in Spring 2012. BIS students scored similarly to BADM students and, as expected, better on the
MIS questions. As discussed above, there were difficulties in interpreting the CBKT results and
using them for meaningful improvements. There are two positive outcomes from the faculty
discussions regarding the CBKT analysis. Each area in the COB has developed a list of key
concepts that can now be distributed to students and the CBKT will now contain questions
driven by the key concepts.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A53
Assurance of Learning Program Narratives: Processes and Outcomes
MBA
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A54
MBA Assurance of Learning
2008 – 2012
Suzanne Zivnuska, PhD
Five years of dynamic change and growth in our MBA Assurance of Learning (AOL) efforts
leave us well positioned to move forward into the next review period with a clear strategic goal
and sound methodologies to track our students’ learning and continuously improve our
programmatic offerings.
Pivotal moments from the past five years are highlighted below:
Spring 2008 · Assessment: MBA Teamwork
Fall 2008 · Loop Closing (Teamwork): Assessment results reviewed, no
improvements indicated
Spring 2009 · Assessment: MBA Ethics & Exit Survey; PMBA Ethics, Oral, &
Written Communication, Exit Survey, & Alignment Matrix
Fall 2009 · Leadership of the MBA AOL effort passed from Ken Chapman to
Suzanne Zivnuska
· Loop Closing (Learning Goals): Learning goals reviewed and revised by
the Graduate Program Committee (GPC)
· Loop closing (Ethics): development of standardized ethics slides and
handouts
· PMBA program discontinued
Spring 2010 · Assessment: Oral Communication
· Loop Closing (Exit Survey): Graduate Programs Executive Speaker &
Reception
Fall 2010 · Assessment: Alignment Matrix
· Loop Closing (Exit Survey & Teamwork): Graduate Business
Association (GBA) reinstated, Suzanne Zivnuska Faculty Advisor
Spring 2011 · Assessment: Ethics, Written Communication, & Globalization
Fall 2011 · Loop Closing (MBA AOL Program): streamlining and organization of
the AOL effort, areas for improvement identified
Spring 2012 · Loop Closing (Learning Goals): Revision and ratification of Learning
Goals
· Loop Closing (Measurement): Revision and ratification of rubrics for
Oral and · Written Communication, Ethics, & Globalization
· Loop Closing (Globalization): development of standardized
globalization slides & handouts
· Assessment: Written Communication, Ethics, Globalization, &
Teamwork
As shown, the major efforts have been threefold: gaining increased traction regarding regular
assessment, loop closing, and making programmatic improvements to the AOL process itself. In
addition, there has been extensive commitment to loop closing efforts at the course level, with
every instructor regularly working to improve their course and better align it to our
programmatic learning goals. These course-level loop closings are reported in the MBA AOL
Summary Matrix.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A55
Several points of pride emerge as I reflect on the timeline above. In particular, in the last five
years we have developed two new measures (globalization and data driven decision making),
focused heavily on loop closing at both the curricular and the assessment system levels. Each of
these will be discussed in turn.
At the time of our last assessment, we had never measured data-driven decision making. In fact,
although the faculty has generally felt quite passionately that it teaching data-driven decision
making is a clear priority for our program, it has also been one of the most difficult for the
faculty to define. Therefore, quite a bit of time and effort has gone into facilitating discussions
clarifying the goal and the learning objective to clearly reflect the intent and strength of our
program. Having clarified the goal, the measurement piece still did not fall easily into place.
Creating a global measure that could be used in any course became quite difficult, as faculty had
discipline specific ideas about what kind of data students should be proficient and in the tools
that they should be using in making their decisions.
The first attempt to create a measure was therefore focused on the creation of a very broad, all
inclusive case study. Eventually it became clear that this sort of case would be equivalent to a
30-50 page Harvard Business School Case Study, and was well beyond the scope of the
assessment effort, in terms of time developing the case, student time analyzing the case, and rater
time assessing student work.
Therefore, I redirected my efforts, focusing on finding course embedded assignments that we
could leverage for the assessment of this goal. I am very pleased with the measure that we now
have in place. Data-driven decision-making is now assessed in the capstone course using a series
of three course-embedded assignments. With some minor adjustments to the assignments, we
are now able to tap into student ability to “integrate business data and concepts with core
business knowledge to make tactical and strategic business decisions using appropriate
information technology” in a smooth, well-integrated way that complements and supports our
curriculum.
Additionally, at the time of our last assessment, globalization was not targeted as a particular
learning goal. Over a series of discussions with the graduate faculty, it was agreed upon that a
goal for globalization did in fact need to be added to our list. This decision meant that there was
yet another goal that had yet to be measured.
Developing an adequate tool for assessing globalization proved to be more difficult than
expected. The first attempt focused only on assessing student knowledge of facts and figures.
Trying to keep the tool easy to use meant that we focused on trying to create a multiple choice
test of what students knew about global business. It was quickly apparent that this approach was
not at all suited to our expectations of graduate student achievement. Thus, we switched gears
and developed a case study. The case we developed was too short to provide much analytical
framework and was also created outside of the course. Therefore, it should come as no surprise
that the first time we piloted the case was somewhat disappointing. Because the case was not
embedded as a graded class assignment, it was difficult to get adequate compliance in terms of
assignment completion or attention to quality. Revisions were clearly in order.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A56
I focused my revisions in three areas: 1. finding a more compelling, detailed, real-world case; 2.
revising the rubric with an eye towards more curricular integration, and 3. packaging the entire
assessment in a course-embedded assignment. Our new course, BADM 647 (Leadership, Ethics,
and Corporate Social Responsibility) provided me with the perfect vehicle to assess this goal.
The case is based on a current event reported in the Wall Street Journal. The article provides
enough context and depth to allow students to grapple with the issues, but is written in an
accessible, direct style so that it is not too cumbersome. The rubric was refined to better fit with
best practices and current thinking in globalization. And best of all, this new case also allowed
us to vastly streamline our assessment process by lending itself to the measurement of two other
learning goals, ethics and written communication. As a result, we can now assess three learning
goals with one, course-embedded, graded case study and three rubrics.
In addition to the substantial effort that was dedicated towards measurement and assessment in
the past five year cycle, we have also increased our attention and commitment to loop closing.
At the curricular level, we have begun to use a yearly survey that asks faculty members to report
on all the loop closing activities that they engage in to support student achievement of our
learning goals. This survey helps to remind faculty members of the small improvements that
they can make in their courses through a series of “yes/no” loop closing suggestions (e.g., do you
include learning goals in your syllabi) as well as encourages them to think outside of the box
with open ended questions about new readings, assignments, and other innovations that they
have integrated into their coursework.
I have also dedicated myself to several loop closing activities at the more macro level. This last
year in particular, my main focus was on taking all of the incremental pieces of the graduate
program assessment and integrating them into one comprehensive, integrated, streamlined
system of assessment. To that end, I focused with the faculty on reviewing and revising our
learning goals and objectives. We went from a complex, overwhelming structure of 6 learning
goals with 24 associated learning objectives, to a more straightforward system including a far
more manageable 6 learning objectives. We have developed a calendar that will support a more
regular periodic assessment of each learning goal. We are working to develop agreements
around the minimum level of achievement that we expect from students for each learning goal,
as well as defining some improvement targets for each goal. Our assessment tools have all been
reviewed and revised for increased practicality.
In sum, what was once a cumbersome, overwhelming process of program assessment is now a
very useable, actionable system. It lends itself to the true goal of any assessment activity:
identifying areas for improvement, tracking efforts to improve our learning community, and
committing ourselves to continuously improve student outcomes.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A57
We don’t just have a few Centers of Excellence; we have many…
Areas of Goodness
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A58
Areas of Goodness
The Goodness of SAP
THE PROGRAM
In June of 1996, SAP America, Inc., the world leader in enterprise business software systems,
selected California State University, Chico, as its first partner in the SAP America University
Alliances (UA) Program. In 2002, due to rapid growth in the UA program, SAP asked Chico to
provide application hosting services for outside educational institutions that could not afford the
in-house staff required to self-host. In 2006, Chico was chosen to become one of five
universities worldwide to provide academic hosting services and was designated an SAP
University Competence Center (UCC). Presently, the Chico UCC serves the SAP hosting needs
of more than 120 universities in North and South America.
As a pioneer in bringing enterprise-class software to the classroom, Chico’s SAP program
provides more depth across more disciplines than any other university in North America. The
Chico program has grown from a single class integrating SAP in 1996 to about 20 courses that
actively integrate the use of SAP software in the classroom. Since the beginning of the program,
Chico faculty have attended more than five hundred days of formal training at SAP training
centers, workshops, and conferences.
AWARD WINNING FACULTY
In 2012, Dr. Ray Boykin was given the Majdi Najm Outstanding Service Award, for providing
outstanding service to the SAP University Alliances program. This award recognizes those who
have advanced, and continue to advance the use of SAP in the classroom. The winners are
notable for their collaboration with faculty members from other SAP University Alliances
campuses. Since the inception of this award, the honorees chosen have demonstrated a history of
leadership in the program, through participation at the SAP Curriculum Congress and workshop
events, development of curriculum content, mentoring of other faculty, and promotion of the
SAP University Alliances program both on and off their home campus.
UNIQUE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS
The TERP 10 (Training Enterprise Resource Planning) Academy is a two week SAP certification
course that students can get through the SAP University Alliance. The students become
"Certified Business Associates in SAP ERP 6.0" upon passing the test. There are only a handful
of these Academies across the US. Two Chico faculty member teach TERP 10 at Chico, and
there are only 14 TERP instructors in the whole United States. Approximately 45 students will
be attending the academy this year.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A59
The Goodness of Innovative Faculty
Dr. Hyunjung Kim, Assistant Professor of Management, writes:
The Department of Management at CSU Chico is one of the few programs in the United States
where students can get a system dynamics education at the undergraduate level.
System dynamics recognizes that decision tasks are often embedded in a system that is composed
of many interrelated parts. Delayed causal responses and the complexities of the system often
counteract, amplify, or dynamically change the intended outcomes of managerial decisions. The
results often leave managers confused and frustrated. With the help of computer simulation
models, system dynamics allows decision makers to broaden their perception of the system to
incorporate diverse perspectives, communicate with more clarity how systems are structured,
understand the complexity of the systems that they manage, understand potential side effects of
policies with good intentions, and ultimately make better decisions.
As mentioned in the report, we have the largest MIT trained Systems Dynamics group outside of
Massachusetts. We have been integrating system dynamics into different courses, to meet the
growing demand for managers who are able make decisions with the whole system in mind.
In the Department of Management, we offer an online system dynamics course, MGMT 470
Business Dynamics. This is a “hard-core” modeling course for those who want to build
mathematically rigorous simulation models to support decision making. For more general
business applications of system dynamics, the undergraduate and graduate capstone courses
(BADM 495, Applied Strategic Decision-Making; BADM 693, Seminar in Strategic
Management and Administrative Policy) have adopted a system dynamics approach. In addition,
the qualitative aspect of system dynamics has been introduced in our sustainability and
introductory management courses.
By equipping our students with system dynamics tools and perspectives, we believe that we are
enhancing their career prospects as managers or entrepreneurs. Our graduates will see the big
picture of how a system’s behavior is explained by its structure. Being able to find effective
leverage points for change, they will bring long-term success to their organizations.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A60
The Goodness of the Business Advising Office
PEER ADVISING
Since the Fall of 2006, our Business Advising Office has used peer advisors to work with
Business students and those enrolled in our Minors. Typically, we have three to six advisors
working up to 20 hours per week. Peer Advisors go through the same extensive training as the
full-time advisors. Beginning by seeing freshmen and sophomores, and as their knowledge level
grows peer advisors begin seeing juniors and seniors. Their duties include working every Fall
semester to help our freshmen and sophomores select courses and register.
AWARD WINNING DIRECTOR
Amy Lance (Director of Advising) won the 2010 Maggie Award. The Maggie Awards
originated in 1994 as a way for the AS Women's Center and women's council to recognize
Maggie Pattison, an office manager for the Associated Students. After her retirement in 1994,
Pattison's legacy lives on through women in the community. The Maggie Award ceremony
is held to honor women's achievements through their advocacy and ability to create change on a
local, national and global level.
BEING GREEN
Creating a sustainable learning and working environment is a priority for Business Advising.
Towards that end, we have or will be moving paper processes to paperless in an effort to lessen
our impact on the environment, while strengthening our impact with the students we serve.
Milestones in this effort include:
Moved from paper advising to paperless with our Electronic Advising System.
o Includes “exceptions” records, multiple forms for evaluations and clearance
processes, including Major/Minor Clearances
Electronic COB Advisor Manual
Implemented the use of VISTA/Blackboard as a tool for communicating with our
students and a resource for them to find important documents (advising sheets, etc.).
The Chico State Institute for Sustainable Practices recognized the Advising Office as one of the
most sustainable offices on campus for its entire set of “green” practices.
A PROFESSIONALLY ACTIVE STAFF
Every semester, team members from Business Advising have presented at the National and
Regional conferences of the National Academic Advising Association. Our staff are considered
experts in “best practices” within the country. Our Director has been awarded scholarships,
asked to be an editor and author for various monographs, journals, and other publications
published by the association.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A61
The Goodness of Sustainability
NET IMPACT
Net Impact is an international, nonprofit organization determined to change the world through
sustainable business. Our program focuses on social responsibility, nonprofit management, and
environmental sustainability. Our members include undergraduate students, graduate students,
and professionals worldwide. Through our network, this organization strives to educate, equip,
and inspire others to magnify their impact. We offer a variety of internship and leadership
opportunities designed to improve our campus and community.
Net Impact (NI) advisor Bonnie Persons writes: NI students received the top
honor in sustainability for a campus group in 2012! The nominations are open system wide (UC
and CSU) and the award is presented at the This Way to Sustainability Conference opening
banquet. I could not be more proud of these students! NI is a relatively small group of dedicated
students who are all passionate about the NI mission, “changing the world through sustainable
business”. These students have worked very hard on projects including bike sharing, solar
assessment, and Free-recycle (a monthly fund raiser originally started to support fire victims).
SUPPORTING STUDENTS AND LOCAL BUSINESSES
Angela Casler was the recipient of the 2012 Paul Maslin Award. The award looks to celebrate
and honor individuals who are passionate about environmental health, personal environmental
impact, and promoting social awareness of humanity’s relationship with the natural environment.
Angela has dedicated herself to class projects that increase sustainable practices with small
business in Chico. These projects are designed to identify small cost-effective solutions to
increase the sustainable practices of small businesses Angela was recognized for her efforts to
bringing students together with the local community to increase sustainability on campus and
within the community.
PERMEATING THE COLLEGE
Many of the Areas of Goodness collected here have an additional theme of sustainability. More
on the College’s activities in sustainability are described here
http://www.csuchico.edu/cob/theCollege/leadership/sust-research.shtml and here
http://www.csuchico.edu/sustainablefuture/academicPrograms/documents/7-22-
09%20minor_mgmt_%20brochure.pdf
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A62
The Goodness of Being Entrepreneurial
COME FOR A WEEKEND, STAY FOR A WEEK
The Center for Entrepreneurship hosts an annual weeklong celebration of entrepreneurship called
eWeek. The week of events (which includes business competitions, entrepreneurial videos, and
guest speakers) is designed to promote the entrepreneurial spirit at Chico State and provide a
platform for students to apply their entrepreneurial skills.
The 2012 event included the first annual Jumpstart Weekend; a 36 hour intense event bringing
together Chico State students and recent graduates who are united in their passion to launch a
business in one and a half days. All are welcome but especially entrepreneurs, graphic designers,
engineers, coders and dreamers.
Similar to the well-known Startup Weekend events which occur worldwide, the concept of
JumpStart Weekend comes from a simple idea: If people with different skills and ideas are
brought together and locked in a room, provided with food and copious amounts of coffee,
spectacular results are bound to happen.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A63
The Goodness of Faculty and Students as World Citizens
AN AMAZING ALUMNUS
Recent accounting graduate Koala Koudougou is Founder and President of Feeding Nations
Through Education (FNTE). FNTE works to relieve famine and raise literacy by equipping
African villagers with bulls, plows, and training in sustainable agriculture so they can grow
enough food to sell a surplus to fund their children’s education. Koudougou was an international
student who was born, raised and educated in a village outside of Thyou, Burkina Faso.
STUDYING ABROAD
The College of Business has more students who participate in the campus’ Study Abroad
Program than any other major in the University. In 2011-2012, 75 business students headed
overseas, equaling about 20% of all CSUC students. The next highest majors were
Communication (31) and International Relations (20).
BUILDING HOPE, HALF A WORLD AWAY
In 2002 a young man named Saah Joseph met a group of missionaries in a refugee camp in
Senegal (West Africa). Saah had ended up at this camp after years of running from the civil
wars in West Africa beginning at the age of 12 (when his father was executed by rebel soldiers)
in his home country of Liberia. At the time of the meeting Saah had just heard that his mother
had been shot by rebels in the civil war going on in Sierra Leone (country from the movie
“Blood Diamonds”) and needed surgery. The missionaries provided Saah the funds to return to
Sierra Leone and paid for his mother’s surgery.
Fast forward to the fall of 2007, Raymond Boykin (Professor Emeritus, Supply Chain
Management) joins a group of people traveling to Sierra Leone to help with building schools,
churches, and clinics in a country only a couple of years removed from civil war. The
organization that Ray is now a part of (and on the board) is West Africa Partners. Through the
efforts of the organizations affiliated with West Africa Partners there are now more than 30
churches with over 5000 member and over 30 schools educating more than 10,000 children. In
addition, other projects include 40+ fresh water wells, fishing businesses, agricultural projects,
work training projects for adults, and several clinic and medical facilities.
Ray is currently working with a team from Grace Community Church in Chico on several
projects in a village called Tissana. Tissana is about 30 miles from the capital of Sierra Leone,
Freetown. Projects in this village include a school (K-6 and Middle School), a church and
community center, clinic, agriculture research (growing West African dry land rice and corn) and
several new water wells. In addition, Ray provides teacher training and leadership training to
other teachers and pastors in Sierra Leone when he is in country.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A64
FIT FOR A KING
Dateline Abuja, Nigeria, 1 December 2011: Traditional chieftaincies are exclusive titles given to
members of a community or a few outsiders who must have distinguished themselves in the
service of the land.
Visiting leaders like the former United States president, Mr. Bill Clinton were honoured with a
chieftaincy titles: the “Danmasanin Ushaffa” by the Gbagyi community of the FCT, etc.
The honour list continues when last week, the president of the Students for the Advancement of
Global Entrepreneurship [SAGE], Prof. Curt De-Berg came visiting in Abuja. De-Berg,
himself, an American like Clinton was honoured with the title of “Buzanga of Jikwoyi” by the
chief of Jikwoyi, Rev. [Dr] Jetta Bawa.
Prof. De-Berg, according to the Jikwoyi community, has done them proud as the American did
impacted positively on the entrepreneurship skill of students of the Junior Secondary School, JSS
Jikwoyi located within his domain.
Rev.[Dr] Bawa said that the new Buzanga Jikwoyi [De-Berg] has brought innovation to his
community, the community’s college as well as Nigeria as a whole, through the entrepreneurship
option to young Nigerians from primary to secondary education level.
“From today your title will now be called Buzanga of Jikwoyi kingdom. Buzanga in Gbagyi
language means light and we are giving you this title because entrepreneurship is all about
sending light to the world and you have brought light to Jikwoyi community therefore, I call you
the light of Jikwoyi”
The FCT Administration would also honour the Buzanga with another award by naming a youth
resource centre after Prof. De-Berg as a way of immortalizing him and his good works in Nigeria
through SAGE. According to him, an initiative devoted to discovering children is a cause
deserving of commendation and support.
Senator Mohammed commended the United States professor for helping to discover the
potentials in Nigeria and other youths worldwide. He assured him that the FCT Administration
would boost its support of the SAGE initiative by setting up relevant institutional frameworks to
take its lofty ideals higher. The FCT Administration wants to transform not only in infrastructure
but also in micro economic and human resource development, he stressed.
Prof. De-Berg said that SAGE is now operating in 20 countries across the world with a plan to
extend its services to 60 others within the next 10 years. He described Nigeria as a wonderful
country due to the hospitality and potentials of her citizens.
http://nationalaccordnewspaper.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3460:bu
zanga-de-berg-gbagyi-title-of-appreciation&catid=61:metro-news&Itemid=91
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A65
The Goodness of Learning and Serving
COMMUNITY SERVICE PROJECTS IN OUR COURSES
In Ryan Jones’ Management 303 course, students teams were required to plan and implement
a community service project. The goals of this assignment were to give the students an
opportunity to connect with the community of Chico while gaining hands on management
experience. Students projects touched many areas of the Chico community such as: the Butte
Human Society, Bidwell Park, Jesus Center, Chico Unified School District, Caring Choices,
Little Chico Creek, and clean up in Chico neighborhoods. Highlights of their efforts include:
donating 873 cans of food, 125 donated items of school supplies, planting 17 trees, and raising
direct donations of cash.
In BSIS 444 (Systems Project Management), students create websites for local small
businesses. Look at http://myweb.csuchico.edu/~twilder/sites to see the sites that the students
have built. As of the end of Spring 2012, students will have built almost 70 sites.
STUDENTS FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP—SAGE
Approximately 30 Chico State students, primarily from the business discipline, served as SAGE
mentors and leaders for teenagers from across the USA during 2010-2011. In this co-curricular
role, students worked with Professor Curt DeBerg to become entrepreneurship consultants to
approximately 200 teens from 20 high schools throughout the country. In May 2011, the SAGE
USA tournament took place in Chicago, and in July 2011, the SAGE World Cup took place in
Buffalo, New York.
SAGE’s mission is to help create the next generation of entrepreneurial leaders whose
innovations and social enterprises address the major unmet needs of our global community.
There are currently more than 6,000 high school students participating in SAGE programs at
more than 600 high schools around the world.
SAGE is driven by three primary outcomes: (1) greater awareness among youth of the power of
socially-responsible business and entrepreneurship to improve their lives; (2) greater social
capital contributed by the participants and greater social assets enjoyed by the community; and
(3) stronger links among local education and business activists to effect meaningful changes in
their communities by being linked to the global SAGE network.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A66
The Goodness of Doing, Learning, and Winning
Instructor Sean Morgan reports on Fall 2011’s activities of the Chico State Project
Management Group:
1) Works every semester with Keifer Consulting and Microsoft in MS Sharepoint
Competition. After Chico teams compete winner competes with Sac State. All teams
gain working knowledge of MS Sharepoint and certifications from Keifer Consulting.
Winning team members get scholarships from Keifer. This program was started here and
is expanding from here.
2) Spring 2011 every graduating member of PMG was hired. 20+ students. 100%
placement was always our goal and I never thought we’d actually hit it but we did, and in
a horrible economy.
3) Every semester the PMG sponsors the Project Forum. Professional Project Managers are
brought in (including alumni) to promote the discipline and inform students about where
they’re potentially headed. Working in partnership with the Sacramento Valley Chapter
of the Project Management Institute this forum has introduced students to internships and
jobs at Accenture, KPMG, Sutter Health Information Systems, Blue Shield, DBS
Solutions, and PG&E.
a. This semester is an attempt to help their group the PMG partnered with Net Impact
and brought them alongside to run the forum. We brought in sustainability project
managers and students in both disciplines benefited.
4) Recently a Project Management class worked together with university resources, city
resources, and private enterprise to produce a Public Service Announcement about the
negative effects of drinking. The University has asked to use it for incoming freshman,
Brown’s towing has asked to use it for advertising (they donated a car), and the City of
Chico Fire Department has asked to use it for training purposes (they were on sight to
remove a student from a car using the “Jaws of Life”, the scene was done so well people
started calling 911 thinking a real accident had taken place). This was a terrific example
(which I can expand on) of our students bringing together state, city, and private
resources for the betterment (is that a word?) of everyone.
SWEET 16 SALES CHALLENGE
The “Sweet 16 Sales Challenge” (SW16SC) on December 3, 2011 was designed as a method by
which to
provide sales students practical role-playing experience
offer corporate interactions and project experience
showcase student talent to recruiters
select a Chico State team for the Western States Collegiate Sales Competition
The SW16SC was initiated during the fall semester of 2011 and will be held every fall semester.
The first SW16SC was sponsored by Ferguson Corporation. Ferguson provided seed money of
$2,000 which was used to run the competition and provide the following student prizes: 1st Place:
$400; 2nd
Place: $300; 3rd
Place $200 & 4th
Place: $100. The “Top 4” winners were offered a
spot on Chico State’s WSCSC team.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A67
Event Overview
The SW16SC is a component of Bill McGowan’s Marketing 473 course (Strategic Personal
Selling). During the course of the semester, sixteen students are selected after being evaluated in
20 different skill areas. The “Sweet 16” then visit Ferguson’s Sacramento location for a day of
training. The grand finale is a full-day role play competition in which students perform sales role
plays in front of corporate judges.
Results
The SW16SC attracted 11 companies that provided 20 judges for the event. Attending companies
included ADP, Pepsico/Frito-Lay, Southern Wines and Spirits, TEKsystems, Victaulic, Graybar,
Fort Dearborn, Ranstad, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, Sherwin Williams and Stanley Security
Solutions. The competition was followed by corporate interviews. Company representatives
passed along glowing praise for the competitors, the Professional Sales Program, and the COB
for providing another forum for students to excel in relating to” real world” scenarios.
AND MORE WINNING SELLING
The Chico State selected via the Sweet 16 Sales Challenge took first place in this year’s Western
States Collegiate Sales Competition. This even provides a venue for students in the College of
Business' Professional Sales Program to compete against students from both Western and
Midwestern university sales programs. The all-day event drew approximately 80 participants and
10 corporations. Not only did the team collectively take the overall 1st place spot, but individual
Chico students also garnered all top three individual prizes (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place)
STUDENTS IN FREE ENTERPRISE (SIFE)
SIFE is a non-profit educational organization that works in partnership with businesses and
higher education, which provides college students the leadership experience of establishing free
enterprise community outreach programs that teach others how market economies and business
operate.
SIFE has been an official student organization at CSU, Chico since the Fall of 1993. Since SIFE
has been here at Chico State, our team has won numerous awards and recognition in the business
community, winning awards from: The GE Foundation, Business Week, The Federation of
Independent Business, Kraft Foods, The Kaufmann Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, as
well as winning regional, national, and international recognition presenting our works at SIFE
team competitions.
Chico State SIFE believes that we can make a difference in the lives of our community, our
nation, and our world.
The 2011-2012 presentation team won the Regional Championship and took home the
Environmental Sustainability award.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A68
STUDENTS HELPING STUDENTS: ISIFE
Mission: Our mission is to assist the incoming Under Represented Business Students by
providing the tools, resources and support needed to build the foundation of a successful collage
experience and to provide an encouraging learning environment where diverse students can learn
and grow freely.
iSIFE is a Mentorship Program designed to ensure student’s success by providing assistance in
the enrollment process, orientation and experience at Chico State University.
What we do:
Support incoming students through their transition from High School, Junior College
Inform students about existing on and off campus resources to ensure student success
Facilitate access to resources by helping student set up meeting and tutors if needed
Educate students through workshops and hands on training
How it works
SIFE students will become mentors to incoming students
Mentors will be student’s first connection
Mentors will create a Support System for freshman SIFE members
Mentors will create reachable goals
STUDENTS PARTICIPATE IN A BIOPHARMACEUTICAL START-UP IN REDDING
Management instructor Ted Kromer is the HR consultant for Linnet Biopharmaceuticals. Linnet
is a family run business, founded in 2010, that is using science research from the University of
Pacific, Thomas J. Long School of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, and the resulting patent
portfolio, to develop therapies in the fields of sleep aids, heart health, and transplant rejection.
Ted is coordinating the ramp-up of several start-up elements that support the Business Plan,
including identification of a licensing lawyer, administrative policy, job structure, and selection
of student interns from the Chico State College of Business to help conduct direct sales, SEO,
and Online Social Media and Marketing. In the process, the students will gain valuable start-up
experience in a life-science environment.
We are proud to assist this start-up venture, and to offer the resources of the College of Business.
And indeed we are most proud that our coalitions and expertise will contribute to the future of
Redding.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A69
The Goodness of Building a Solid Classroom Experience Through Technology
Historically noted for our small class sizes, having to teach a class of 290 students requires some
adaptation by the instructor. Kathryn Schifferle writes about using technology to maintain
quality in the introductory Marketing course.
I designed a strategy to use technology to engage students at all levels: before class, in class, and
following class. This course was delivered two days a week, Tuesday and Thursday .
Each week one chapter in the textbook was covered. This was designed to focus the student on
the material and concepts in that chapter. To engage 290 students deeply in chapter content, I felt
it was critical to make the students responsible for reading the chapter in the textbook in advance
of each week’s Tuesday lecture. To that end, I set up a quiz on Blackboard for each chapter.
There were 20 critical questions taken from each chapter, and those 20 questions were delivered
in randomized sets of 10 questions each time the student took the online quiz. Students could
take that quiz as many times as they wished to earn up to 10 points. Answers were not revealed
until after the end date, which was at the start of class on Tuesday at 11am.
At the Tuesday lecture, students’ knowledge of core concepts was tested at the beginning of class
through polls using ‘Top Hat Monocle’, a texting version of the clicker. Students were asked one
or more relevant concept questions to see if they remembered/had read the material. Of course,
this in-class response system also acted as a check on whether the student was in class. Students
were required to create a Top Hat account, and either registered their phone for the texting
service, or logged in through their online account to answer the questions – the questions were
only open during random periods in class - to confirm their attendance. They earned participation
points when they attended. Attendance average was 88%.
Tuesday’s lecture was ‘advertised’ as, and intended to be, a review of the most important
concepts presented in the chapter, with real-world examples and an interactive session that
provided an opportunity for the class to ask questions. I was surprised that, even in the large
auditorium, I was able to engage students in some lively discussions and they did respond to my
general questions.
As a follow up to the Tuesday lecture, students then had one week to engage in one more online
‘exercise’ or practice. This online exercise was typically three separate questions like case
studies in that they presented a situation and then required that the student apply their
knowledge. They could do the exercise as many times as they wanted before the deadline.
Students liked the exercises as they included videos, drag and drops, and other kinesthetic
activities.
Because of these online activities I was able to track, and manage, individual engagement. We
sent emails to students who were not participating, to ask if they were having problems, or
needed to meet. As a result there were a number of students who came to office hours to work
through issues or questions, and we saw improvement in their performance.
The course still maintained a “high touch” component. Our Survey of Marketing course requires
that the students do two team projects. I organized students into teams of five. To facilitate team
work, I structured the class to incorporate team activities in class on Thursdays. Teams turned in
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A70
their work in class either online or physically, and the team members that participate were
tracked.
Participation rates in the on-line activities exceeded 90%. In-class attendance was 88%. Students
seemed to have enjoyed this class, describing it as “their favorite,” or “fun,” and commenting “I
thought I wasn’t going to like this class, but I do.”
IN OTHER “TECHNOLOGY” NEWS:
The Information Assurance Courseware Evaluation (IACE) Program has recertified California
State University, Chico courseware as meeting all of the elements of the Committee on National
Security Systems (CNSS) National Training Standards for Information Systems Security
(INFOSEC) Professionals, NSTISSI No. 4011
LIVING AMONG THE CLOUDS
We were mentioned in a Forbes blog on cloud computing: http://onforb.es/zm1dzz. We
implemented a new cloud based system with a retail price tag of about $3M. Part of this came in
the $1.2M donation from NetApp last year and we completed the acquisition and construction of
the full system over the past couple months. This system replaced the decade old system with
which we’ve been performing similar activities. We support courses and research at about 150
schools outside of Chico (including a number of other CSU campuses) and we conduct the same
activities at Chico. For instance, students in MINS 301 play a simulation game in which they
work in teams and compete against the other teams in the room to run a retail business. Each
team has limited financial resources, though they can borrow more, and they must manage their
money, their acquisition processes, marketing expenses and pricing to maximize net profit. For
example, Ron Pike has a current research project that examines the ability of cloud-based
business analytics to detect fraudulent activities within a procurement system in real time. We
have more than 50,000 faculty and students from across the Americas (from Canada to Chile and
most countries between) using the system.
Fifth Year Maintenance Report – California State University, Chico – Appendix Page A71
The Goodness of Students Sought After as Employees
A word from the Chico State Career Center about the 2011-2012 academic year:
We had 114 companies come on campus to interview students for internships and full time
positions and 261 employers attended business-related career fairs. Recruiters who hired the
most business students during the recent academic year were Workday, Insight Global,
Fireman’s Fund Insurance, Kohl’s Department Stores, Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Blackhawk
Networks.
Joe Kessing, Regional Claims Manager for Federated Insurance said, “My favorite part about the
teaching philosophy at Chico State is the effort to create work-like scenarios through the various
group projects. I just hired two of my best candidates yet from Chico State this year!”
The reported average starting salary for students graduating from the College of Business was
$49,992, which is 4.7% higher than the national average for Business students, (according to the
National Association of Colleges and Employers April 2012 Salary Survey). The reported
average starting salary for students in the Business Administration program was $44,992 and
from the Business Information Systems program was $64,136.
Megan Odom, Associate Director of the Career Center said, “I continue to hear high praise from
employers about our business students’ communication skills, ability to collaborate and work
with others and their problem solving skills. They graduate ready to work and join a team!”