BACKGROUND

Following up on a long-standing interest in accountability, the 1997 legislature established, for the first time, specific performance measures for higher education, and connected achievement of targets in those areas to funding. For WSU, $3,011,000 of its biennial allocation is tied to its performance indicators.

In the 1997-99 Operating Budget Notes the legislature established three of the five measures it will require, along with long-term goals for each one. The Higher Education Coordinating Board was directed to set interim targets for each of the intervening years. Those three measures are the Graduation Efficiency Index, the Undergraduate Retention Rate, and the Five-year Graduation Rate.

The legislature also required each baccalaureate institution to select its own Faculty Productivity measure, and one additional measure unique to the institution. WSU has selected as its fifth measure a goal that will communicate its commitment to the integration of technology into teaching and learning. Both of the latter measures, and the goals and targets associated with them, must be approved by the HECB. Each of these two measures can include up to four sub-parts.

In the tables included in this document, the difference between each measure in the base year, 1995-96, and the long-term goal for 2004-05 is labeled the "gap." For the first three measures the HECB set annual targets that start small, at 7%, and gradually grow, until the gap to be closed during 2004-05 reaches 16%. Since the current document is a plan for the 1997-99 biennium, it displays – and discusses strategies for – only the first two years of this timeline. Where the institutionally selected measures lend themselves to the same pattern of increments, the same approach has been applied. Other targets are based on institutional strategic plans or other goals set by the university.

The current document represents a small part of WSU’s larger accountability effort. It is intended only to respond to the legislature’s 1997-99 Operating Budget guidelines, and does not represent the wider array of priorities and activities valued by the university in carrying out its mission.

WSU also recognizes that each member of its community makes a different contribution to its success, and that no one individual will be represented by "average" cases. In undertaking the actions that will enable WSU to reach these goals, no one person or department is expected to address all of them.

Finally, to the extent that these measures do not adequately assess the important efficiency and quality outcomes to which WSU is committed, the legislature has invited the universities, working together and with the HECB, to review and recommend revisions before the next biennium. WSU intends to work together, both internally and externally, to respond to this invitation.

INTRODUCTION

Washington State University is wholly committed to accountability as an integral part of all of our processes and operations. Each unit is developing a new accountability plan that expresses the mission of the unit as well as supporting the mission of the institution. Collectively, these plans reflect the multitude of ways in which the university is organized to serve students and the people of Washington.

WSU has two purposes for its accountability plans: (1) Evaluation that leads to improvement, and (2) Communication about its activities and accomplishments. The current document represents a small part of WSU’s larger accountability effort, and is intended to respond to the legislature’s 1997-99 Operating Budget guidelines.

BROADER CONTEXT

The Strategic Plan for Washington State University (Spring 1996) closely parallels The Higher Education Coordinating Board’s (HECB) statewide Master Plan. Highlights of the strategic plan’s seven goals include:

(1) Selective Excellence: " Building excellence must rest ultimately on the criteria of quality, centrality, need and cost. . . . The university can afford to contribute to the support needed for eminence for just a modest number of programs, which can be assisted through the budget process only if they are clearly identified." To this end, "the university will identify programs for enhanced resources and also duplicative and other low-priority programs for consolidation, downsizing, or elimination."

(2) Expanded Access with Quality: "WSU will expand enrollment at the Pullman campus. . . .The branch campuses and ICNE will continue to grow in enrollment. . . . WSU will continue its cutting edge programs in the use of telecommunications for instruction. . . .Learning Centers will be created throughout the state. . . .with the help of telecommunications and computer technology."

(3) Increased Diversity: "WSU will increase its percentage of faculty, staff, students, and administrators of color by rigorous recruitment and retention efforts. Periodic targets for adding faculty of color and admission of students of color will be set as necessary. The university will strengthen its efforts to diversify the curriculum. Progress . . . will be tested on an annual basis."

(4) Enhanced Graduate Education and Research: Consistent with the HECB goal for WSU, "The university will double the enrollment of graduate and professional students by the year 2010." Expanded graduate programs at the branch campuses will "meet the special scheduling requirements of students and [the] economic needs of the regions served. . . WSU will increase the level of external grants and contracts [and] will look for innovative partnerships with industry. . . . The university will seek new and effective means of transferring the results of research and technology to society."

(5) Enriched Learning: It is WSU’s goal to "provide the preeminent undergraduate learning environment in the state. . . .The university will remain dedicated to quality teaching and will. . . aggressively examine innovative forms of pedagogy and design of curriculum to better enhance student learning." WSU "will provide an enriched co-curricular educational experience. . . and will strengthen the interactions of students with faculty and staff."

(6) Diversified Funding Base: WSU will " continue to work with the state legislature to establish maximum flexibility for managing its resources. . . aggressively pursue gift opportunities with foundations, industries, and individual donors. . . increase the level of [grant and contract]support from federal and state governments. . . explore novel ways and nontraditional granting processes for entering into partnerships with industry. . .[and]increase the level and stability of state support to provide a solid foundation for quality programs."

(7) Effective Personnel and Resource Management: "All WSU campuses will recruit and retain the very best and most diverse faculty and staff and maintain a university environment that is hospitable and supportive of its entire employee community. . . . WSU will establish and maintain excellent facilities and services. . . the university will rely on the responsible involvement of all employees in the management process, will be an effective steward of public and private funds, and will continually find ways to make operations more efficient."

Assessment at WSU is intended to support the university’s mission and goals, particularly in teaching. It has three primary purposes for the institution: (1) as a catalyst for programmatic changes (e.g., curriculum, instruction), (2) as a tool for institutional self-reflection, and (3) as an influence on measures of accountability.

Budget policies are informed by assessment data to support the allocation of new resources to areas of high priority and enrollment growth and reallocation from areas of lower priority. Using assessment data, academic departments are expected to continually reevaluate and modify their disciplinary curricula to meet the needs of the state and society.

WSU’s exemplary writing program, the reform of general education, increased use of instructional technology, implementation of teaching portfolios, increased emphasis on student development, establishment of the Center for Teaching and Learning, and widespread availability of faculty development workshops on assessment-related topics are a few of the changes initiated or influenced, to date, by assessment activities and data.

Washington State University is revising its Academic Program Review process for both undergraduate and graduate degree programs. It will demonstrate, at periodic intervals, (1) whether the objectives of the program are compatible with the goals of the University, (2) how effectively and efficiently the program is meeting its objectives, (3) whether changes should be made to increase the effectiveness, efficiency and quality, and (4) what the impact of such changes would be on students and the rest of the institution. The process is compatible with and supportive of the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s Existing Program Review Process.

In addition, WSU continually reconfigures, consolidates, and eliminates programs based on student demand and changing societal needs. WSU’s recent Low Output and Duplicative Programs Report (June 1997) shows that, of the degrees noted in the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s initial report, 21 already have been eliminated (9 of which have been replaced by other degrees), and 4 are under consideration for elimination or reconfiguration. Of the rest, 19 have increased their enrollments since the report years, 8 are recently approved programs with growing enrollments, 8 are master’s degrees in programs that typically move directly from the B.S. to the Ph.D., 2 are critical programs in their units, and 1 has been reconfigured. These reviews – and action on them -- will continue unabated with close attention to costs and benefits.

Diversity continues to be a very high priority for Washington State University. The annual Report on Diversity Programs and the companion Diversity Plan show the extent of this commitment. Each unit of the institution has developed a diversity plan for which it is responsible, and each year it reports on the effectiveness of the plan. As an example of the institution’s accomplishments, its enrollment of multicultural students went from 1,356 (8%) in 1990 to 2,134 (12.3%) in 1996. The Cultural Pluralism Team/Diversity Committee works to enhance diversity in the curriculum, partly through a five-year mini-grant program, and every student in the General Education core completes at least one inter-cultural course.

ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES AND STRATEGIES

1. Undergraduate Graduation Efficiency Index (GEI) – The GEI is a ratio of credits required for a degree minus credits accepted in transfer divided by total credits attempted. It is a good measure of the efficiency with which students use educational resources, regardless of whether they are part or full-time, or how long they take to reach the degree.

2. Undergraduate Student Retention – This measure counts the proportion of undergraduates who attend one fall and either graduate or return the following fall.

3. Five-year Graduation Rate – This measure tracks a cohort of first time, full-time, entering freshman to determine the proportion who have graduated after five years.

Strategies -- Graduation efficiency (GEI) is a credit-based view of the utilization of resources. Graduation rate is similar to GEI in the ways it can be addressed, but is a time-based measure. Retention is essentially a subset of graduation rate, since students who are not retained will not show up later as graduates. All three are increased by a variety of means that encourage and enable students to move through their educational experience with the fewest possible barriers, delays and digressions.

WSU will make a concerted effort to ensure that 1997-98 seniors have every opportunity to graduate on time. Representatives of the Provost’s office will meet with the department chairs in each college to encourage them to identify these students and to foresee and forestall the potential barriers or delays that could arise.

In the longer term, for all three of these measures there is no one action that could effect a major or sudden change. Rather, many small but significant steps are already building greater efficiency into the WSU system, and will continue to do so over time. For example, the Degree Audit Report System (DARS) comes fully online for entering students in fall 1997. It is a software package that will soon provide an efficient, electronic means for students and advisors to review degree requirements in any field against a transcript and display how different choices of courses and majors will affect progress.

Telephone and Web-based registration, just newly implemented, will allow better information and better choices for students. It will also give the university continuous information during registration about over and under enrollment in classes that can often be addressed on the spot. In another development, freshmen participating in orientation for fall 1997 expressed an interest in the four-year degree guarantee program at four times the rate of last year’s freshmen.

Articulation agreements recently developed or under development will enable transfer students to move more smoothly from the community college to the university. Greater limitations built into the withdrawal policies will encourage students to select courses more carefully and to persist once they are enrolled. Newly enhanced tutoring programs and supplemental instruction sessions added to high-risk courses will reduce course failures and withdrawals. To that end, the math department is also implementing review sessions for students to brush up their skills before entering new math courses after an interval of time.

Advising, peer advising, mentoring, freshman seminars, residence hall learning communities, pre-session orientation seminars, targeted financial aid, tutoring for at-risk and struggling students are all programs that have been newly implemented, reconfigured, or otherwise enhanced to focus more effectively on students at risk of dropping out. For example, a new survey given to all freshmen can help advisors identify and assist those who may be more likely to drop out.

The new freshman seminars are not "orientation to the university" sessions, but rather "orientation to critical thinking and problem solving"-- how students at universities need to be able to think. Early results from the pilots already suggest that students in the seminars do significantly better in their classes than students without these experiences. A five-year WSU Multicultural Student Retention Strategy 1997-2002 (Nov. 1996) has been implemented recently to bring multicultural student retention and graduation rates in line with those for all students. The plan focuses on climate, academic support, financial support, and monitoring its effectiveness. For example, new multi-cultural students will be assigned a trained peer mentor who are in contact with them during the year.

A recently completed fund-raising campaign has tripled institutional financial aid resources from $14 million to over $47 million. This expansion will help to offset tuition increases for students and will allow some of them to work less and attend school more. The success of this campaign will also enable WSU to assist some of the students in the most dire financial straits who would otherwise not be able to continue their education.

There is no way to predict the impact of each strategy, nor the ultimate gains that will be achieved by these measures. Nevertheless, the number of strategies that are now in place and will reach fruition within the next few years – combined with the level of commitment demonstrated by all areas of the university – gives us great confidence that very aggressive long-term goals are well within reach.

4. Faculty Productivity

Measures – Three measures have been selected to sample faculty productivity. Two represent teaching and one, research. The first measure of teaching productivity is the number of student credit hours generated per FTE faculty. The eight-year goal is to increase student credit hours taught by ranked faculty by 20%. The second attempts to capture the amount of individualized academic work faculty members do with upper division students in the form of supervising undergraduate research, practica, internships, senior theses, private lessons, and independent studies. Within eight years this type of faculty-student contact should double.

Research productivity will be gauged over time by tracking the percent of faculty members who produce high quality scholarly works each year. As a research institution, WSU expects all of its faculty to participate, and it values scholarship both in areas that generate large amounts of money and in areas that do not. Numerically, this measure will be largely composed of faculty publications in refereed journals, but it will also recognize that books, plays, musical compositions, artistic works, and other scholarly products make major contributions to research and scholarship. The institution is more interested in encouraging a very high proportion of the faculty to be engaged in high quality scholarship than in the sheer number of articles amassed.

¹ Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor.
² All instructional faculty.

Strategies

TEACHING

The Provost’s Office, Deans, and Chairs will work together to begin a gradual shift of student credit hours toward the ranked faculty, with less reliance on TAs and part time instructors. When enrollments increase, student credit hours generated per faculty member will also rise. In addition, each department will review the appropriateness of class sizes to maximize enrollment opportunities while protecting educational quality.

The use of technology as envisioned at WSU will gradually allow more students to take self-paced modules and courses, and to interact more directly with faculty in the process. The growth in these opportunities also will generate, on the average, additional credit hours per faculty member.

There is widespread interest at WSU, as well as in the business community, in opportunities for undergraduate students to apply what they are learning under the close supervision of a faculty member. This translates into increasing numbers of departments designing one-on-one experiences for these students to do research with faculty, to participate in supervised internships, to complete senior theses and projects, and to engage in other academic activities that bring the students into closer interaction with faculty members. The university will encourage the development of these opportunities and will track their growth because it believes this kind of interaction results in a high quality education for students.

RESEARCH

Each department will define what constitutes high quality scholarly works in that field and will provide a count of the number of its members who have completed such work during the baseline period. Together, the provost’s office and the colleges will establish the baseline and set targets. Scholarly activity, as defined for this purpose, will be tracked through the annual faculty review process. Using the methodology of Graham and Diamond, described in The Rise of the American Research Universities (1997), timely completion of scholarly work is defined as an average of at least one every year in the sciences, every two years in the social sciences, and every three years in the humanities.

5. Instructional Technology

WSU has selected the area of instructional technology as its institutional measure for two reasons. First, the university is committed to the rapidly expanding utilization of leading edge technologies as an integral part of its core academic mission. Second, appropriate uses of instructional technologies have the potential to help the institution reach its performance goals in other areas.

Measures – Four measures have been selected to sample the degree to which instructional technologies are being integrated into the university. Two measures will track the growth in distance learning opportunities. The number of student credit hours earned through distance technologies will at least double from the baseline year to 2004-05, representing very roughly 10% of WSU’s total FTEs. The number of degree programs offered entirely at a distance, away from any of the four campuses, will increase from three to at least twelve. Two additional measures will assess the integration of technology on the campuses. By 2005, nearly 300 more courses will have been reengineered to be learner-centered, asynchronous, technology-based, for a total of approximately 30% of the curriculum. Also by 2005, 90% of the university classrooms on campus will have been fully equipped to support technology-intensive teaching.

* Includes site-to-site off-campus programs, Extended Degree Programs, and degrees wholly on the Web
___________
Extended Degree Program-Social Sciences; Nursing-Yakima; Hotel and Restaurant Administration-Seattle

Strategies – Student credit hours earned through distance technology is closely tied both to the deployment of the K-20 Network and to the expansion of WSU’s Extended Degree Program enrollments. The institution has placed a high priority on both programs and has incorporated these goals into the strategic planning and budgeting processes of the units responsible for attaining them.

WSU is actively supporting the development of new distance degree programs with a combination of grant, contract, and institutional funding as well as WHETS-based programs in Yakima, Wenatchee, and Seattle. The university currently offers the bachelor’s degree in Social Sciences as an Extended Degree Program. Within the next year a business degree will be offered. Degrees in Biological Systems and Human Development are under development, and additional degree programs will be considered for delivery over the Web.

WSU’s strategic plan calls for rapid growth in the uses of technology on campus for teaching and learning. The goal is to transform significant segments of the curriculum into learner-centered, technology-based, asynchronous experiences. Courses initially targeted for transformation include high enrollment courses, clusters of upper division courses that lead to specific degrees, and individual courses that lend themselves to this format.

Grants from Boeing, Asymetrix, and Microsoft have generated a wide variety of instructional technology projects. While still limited in number, reengineered courses are drawn from all areas of the university. Some projects have campus-wide application, such as developing an on-line writing and learning lab and establishing an application for any course to set up on-line discussion groups.

Workshops and consultation are available to assist faculty in reengineering their courses. Funding allocations to the various units of the university will reflect the priority it places on this transformation. One of the central goals of the new Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) is to maximize the availability of technology enhanced learning at WSU. The CTL works closely with Information Technologies to reach out to faculty and provide the training needed to use computers creatively in their teaching.

The WSU campuses are now fully networked, including all faculty offices, libraries, academic buildings, residence halls, and sorority and fraternity houses. However, lack of funding has slowed the process of equipping classrooms and labs to use technology. To meet the university’s goals for using technology in the curriculum, more classrooms must be fully equipped. WSU will place a high priority on this process through both funding requests and internal allocations as necessary to meet these targets.

PROPORTION OF FUNDS TIED TO EACH GOAL

For the 1997-99 biennium, Washington State University proposes to assign the proportion of funds to each accountability measure, as follows:

Measure 1 - Graduation Efficiency Index 10%

Measure 2 - Undergraduate Student Retention 20%

Measure 3 - Five-Year Graduation Rate 10%

Measure 4 - Faculty Productivity 30%

Average SCHs per Ranked Faculty 10%

          Individualized Enrollments/FFTE 10%

Faculty Completing Scholarships 10%

Measure 5 - Instructional Technology 30%

SCHs by WHETS, EDP, Web 10%

Distance Degrees Offered 5%

On-Campus Courses Reengineered 5%

Classrooms Technology Equipped 10%

SUMMARY

Washington State University believes that accountability throughout the institution is critical to achieving the goals of its mission and its strategic plan, and to meeting the expectations of the people of Washington. Accountability efforts also help the university to communicate its achievements. This document – and the state initiative it represents -- is important in making public the results of many, intensive efforts at the institution. It is intended to respond to the legislature’s 1997-99 Operating Budget guidelines, however, and does not fully represent the wider array of priorities and activities valued by the university in carrying out its mission.

WSU also recognizes that each member of its community makes a different contribution to its success, and that no one individual will be represented by "average" cases. In undertaking the actions that will enable WSU to reach these goals, no one person or department is expected to address all of them.

Finally, to the extent that these measures do not adequately assess the important efficiency and quality outcomes to which WSU is committed, the legislature has invited the universities, working together and with the HECB, to review and recommend revisions before the next biennium. WSU intends to work together, both internally and externally, to respond to this invitation.

References

_________, Diversity Plan--Washington State University (Washington State University, 1996)
_________, Low Output and Duplicative Programs Report (Washington State University, 1997)
_________, Report on Diversity Programs 1994-1995 ( Washington State University, 1996)
_________, Strategic Plan for Washington State University, Spring 1996 (Washington State University, 1996)
_________, WSU Multicultural Student Retention Strategy 1997-2002 (Washington State University, Nov. 1996)
Graham, Hugh Davis and Nancy Diamond, The Rise of American Research Universities (Baltimore:  The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997)

Accreditation
Accountability
Assessment
AAA
WSU Provost
WSU Home