Middle States Commission on Higher Education s1

York College, CUNY Middle States Commission on Higher Education Self-Study Design Document April 4, 2016

Institutional Overview

York College, an institution of The City University of New York (CUNY), was authorized by the State of New York in 1966 and received initial accreditation from the Middles States

Commission on Higher Education in 1967. Designated by Carnegie Classification as a

Baccalaureate - Diverse Fields institution, York College is, at its core, a liberal arts institution with specialty programs in business and healthcare professions, and offers several programs at the

Master’s level.

The Vision of York College

The following Vision Statement is a direct quote from the York College website:

York College's hallmark academic programs in liberal arts and sciences will be recognized as centers of excellence within the City University of New York (CUNY), attracting and graduating some of the best and most highly motivated students from New York City and the greater New York area. We will be the first choice for prospective CUNY students interested in the health professions, allied health sciences, and business, including aviation management. York College will also establish itself as a model for enabling first generation college students to earn an undergraduate degree, and will fulfill students' individual academic goals while preparing them for graduate education and the competitive marketplace. Students are at the center of their own learning at York College. We offer multiple opportunities for student engagement, inquiry and research-based scholarship, and experiential learning. York maintains a vibrant campus where students actively participate in extra-curricular programs and collaborate with faculty and academic peers whose backgrounds are distinctly different from their own. The College has a dynamic student life with athletic and visual/performing arts programs, special interest clubs and social organizations where students develop enduring relationships and refine interpersonal skills. The College will enable faculty and students to pursue their highest goals and foster their development as individuals and professionals. York College will be an

1 attractive place to work, which will draw highly qualified candidates for its academic, executive, professional and administrative positions. The multicultural nature of our sustainable academic and social environments enriches the collegiate experience for all students, faculty and staff. York College will be a magnetizing institution within the Queens community where students and graduates are mobilized as advocates/participants in continuous civic engagement. Our strong alumni network supports our programs, serves as ambassadors and donates time, talent and capital to advance our mission. Our Continuing and Professional Education function attracts students, graduates, individuals and professionals in pursuit of continued personal and professional development. Our business outreach activities engage the business community to strengthen our town-grown relationships. (https://www.york.cuny.edu/about)

York College Mission Statement

The York College Mission Statement sums up the Vision Statement:

“ York College enriches lives and enables students to grow as passionate, engaged learners with the confidence to realize their intellectual and human potential as individuals and global citizens.” (https://www.york.cuny.edu/about).

Recent Changes at York College

Since York College’s Periodic Review Report (PRR) in 2013, several key changes have taken place:

1) Revamped academic advising: all first-year and undeclared majors are advised in the renovated Academic Advisement Center while those students who have a declared major are advised within the academic department that houses the major. 2) Realigned the structure of the three schools established in 2009 in fall 2014 to better serve the academic programs. 3) Appointment of two deans in the School of Business and Information Systems Technology and in the School of Arts and Sciences. 4) Completed reaccreditation of the Occupational Therapy program at the Masters level.

2 5) The development and approval of two new Masters level programs in Physician’s Assistant and Pharmaceutical Science. 6) The College Charter was revised and accepted by the Faculty Senate and includes two new committees to oversee governance and resources. 7) Created, searched and filled the position of Executive Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic Planning in an effort to strengthen college-wide assessment.

Intended Outcomes of the Self-Study

York College views the self-study accreditation process as an integral and informative part of a continuous improvement cycle. The expectations for the Self-Study include:

1. Demonstrating how York College meets the criteria for accreditation status with the

Middle States Commission on Higher Education.

2. Exploiting the outcomes of the Self-Study to improve and inform decision-making for the

next 10-year Strategic Planning Cycle, 2020-2030.

3. Engaging in an inclusive and transparent self-appraisal process culminating in actionable

strategies for the continuous improvement at York College.

4. Evaluating assessment practices of student learning outcomes within the academic units,

evaluating the effectiveness of non-academic units, and identifying and recommending

changes as needed.

Organizational Structure

Steering Committee

The process of establishing the Self-Study Steering Committee (referred to on campus as the Executive Committee for Re-affirmation) began in January 2015 after the December MSCHE annual meeting in 2014. Several key people from York College attended the meeting including

3 President Marcia V. Keizs, Director of Institutional Research Aghajan Mohammadi, Dean Donna

Chirico, Dean of the Executive Office William Dinello, and faculty member and former Interim

Provost Linda R. Barley. The new Executive Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic

Planning Mary Osborne became part of this conversation when she arrived in January 2015.

After several meetings of this formative group took place, and members of the Steering

Committee were assembled, letters of appointment went out, and the first meeting of the Steering

Committee convened in March 2015.

The members of the Steering Committee were selected with a variety of criteria in mind: ethnicity and gender balance; representation by areas of the College, prior experience with the self-study and/or the periodic review report; as well as inclusion of individuals new to the accreditation process. Following some turnover during the fall semester 2015, the members of the current Steering Committee were designated as follows:

Membership of the Executive Committee (Steering Committee) Name Department Standard Leader* Gerard McNeil Biology (faculty) Co-Chair Mary Osborne Institutional Effectiveness (admin.) Standard I and Co-Chair Linda Barley Health and Physical Ed (faculty) Standard II Debra Swoboda Behavioral Sciences (faculty) Standard III Vincent Banrey Student Development (administration) Standard IV Donna Chirico Arts and Sciences (administration) Standard V Cynthia Haller English (faculty) Standard V Ismael Perez Finance (administration) Standard VI Margaret Ballantyne For. Lang., ESL, Humanities (faculty) Standard VII Richard Stuckhardt Institutional Research (administration) Verification of Compliance Committee President Keizs acts as an ex officio member of the Steering Committee.

Starting in the fall 2016 semester, one “club hour” per month will be designated for the

Steering Committee meetings and one “club hour” per month will be set aside for the Working

Groups to meet. Club hours are held every Tuesday and Thursday from noon to 2:00 p.m.

4 Working Groups

The purpose of the Working Groups is to generate reports that will be the basis of the

Self-Study document. It is the responsibility of the Steering Committee to assemble these reports and to write the Self-Study.

After the Steering Committee was formed, the first priority was to decide on the structure of the Working Groups. After discussions on the purpose of the Working Groups and the way they would contribute to the Self-study, the Steering Committee structured the Working Groups based on the seven standards for re-affirmation and created a group to complete Verification of

Compliance.

The Steering Committee considered many criteria to constitute the membership of the

Working Groups. While the need for representation of the stakeholders on campus was a consideration, that criterion was not the main focus of selecting the Working Groups’ members.

Competencies within each Standard, knowledge or training within the Standards, and experience with the Self-Study or Periodic Review Report process were considered. In addition, each

Working Group was chaired by a member of the Steering Committee to keep communication between the Working Groups and the Steering Committee flowing throughout the Self-Study process.

Charges to the Working Committees and Guidelines for Reporting

5 In October of 2015, the members of all the Working Groups attended a kick-off meeting.

At this meeting President Keizs emphasized the importance of the work the groups would do under each standard. President Keizs’ general charge to the Working Groups was as follows:

 Demonstrating how the institution currently meets Middle States Standards for

Accreditation with a focus on continuous improvement in the attainment of the

institution’s vision, mission, and goals.

 Documenting current assessment practices to identify challenges and opportunities and

making recommendations for improvement in the use of institutional assessment results.

 Capitalizing on the overlapping efforts of strategic planning and Middle States Self-Study

to inform decision-making and to identify specific opportunities and challenges,

including budgeting and enrollment.

 Providing a concise and accurate analysis of the institution that can guide institutional

planning, growth, and renewal efforts.

 Developing forward-looking recommendations to help the institution attain its goals in

undergraduate and graduate education, research, and service for the public good.

 Assessing the quality and effectiveness of academic programs and administrative

services, at all degree levels and in all departments, particularly in relation to the

changing needs of the institution’s student body and community.

 Analyzing the quality and effectiveness of the institution’s processes for planning and

assessment in order to make adjustments to methods and measurements and ensure the

use of assessment data.

Specific Charges to the Work Groups

6 Standard I Working Group is charged to: 1) evaluate the alignment of the York College

Mission Statement with its stated goals outlined in the Strategic Plan 2010 – 2020; 2) align the

Requirements of Affiliation #7 and #10 with the Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

Member Department Mary Osborne* Institutional Effectiveness William Dinello Dean, Executive Office Sameea Belle SEEK Standard I: Mission and Goals Kenneth Beck Institutional Advancement John Graffeo (faculty) Health Professions Chun-Pin Hsu (faculty) Accounting & Finance/Aviation Institute Fabiola Salek (faculty) Foreign Languages, ESL & Humanities

Standard II Working Group is charged to 1) evaluate the faithful execution of its Mission, honor its contracts and commitments while following its policies, and represent itself truthfully and transparently; and 2) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the

Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

Member Department Linda R. Barley* (faculty) Health & Physical Education Brunilda Almodovar Academic Advisement Jayoung Choi Counseling Center Marcia Moxam Comrie Institutional Advancement Standard II: Stephanie Cooper Human Resources Ethics & Integrity Gail Marshall Compliance and Legal Affairs Kevin Lynch (faculty) Earth & Physical Science Nona Reece Registrar Mary-Jo Kranacher (faculty) Accounting & Finance Renee Wright (faculty) Nursing

7 Standard III Working Group is charged to: 1) evaluate the rigor and coherence of each academic program, certificate and degree level irrespective of modality; 2) align the

Requirements of Affiliation #8, #9, #10 and #15 with the Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

Member Department Debra Swoboda* (faculty) Behavioral Sciences Emmanuel Chang (faculty) Chemistry Heather Robinson (faculty) English Fenio Annansingh-Jamieson Standard III: (faculty) Business & Economics Design and Delivery Heather Gibson (faculty) Nursing of Student Learning Xiaodan Zhang (faculty) Behavioral Sciences Experiences Wenying Huang-Stolte Instructional Technology Paola Veras Student Development Carolette McDonald (faculty) English/Writing Center Manager Carly Gieseler (faculty) Performing & Fine Arts

Standard IV Working Group is charged to: 1) evaluate the student support function including recruitment and admission of students to instructional programs for which they show interest and have the ability to complete, commitment to student retention, graduation, and experiences that enhance student performance and foster success through the coherent strategies of a professional and qualified staff; 2) align the Requirements of Affiliation #8 and #10 with the

Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document

Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

8 Member Department Vincent Banrey* Interim Dean Student Development Janet Guidi Academic Advising Robin Harper (faculty) Behavioral Sciences Robert Duncan (faculty) Undergraduate Experience Robert Clovey (faculty) Accounting & Finance Standard IV: Helene DePalma (faculty) Health Professions Support of the Student Experience Johnny Diaz Registrar's Office Randy Punter Career Services Claudio Lindow Information Systems La Toro Yates Admissions Beverly Brown Financial Aid Mondell Sealy Institutional Advancement

Standard V Working Group is charged to: 1) evaluate the process by which York College assesses student learning outcomes that show students have achieved educational goals consistent with their program of study, degree level and in accordance with the institutional mission goals and appropriate with the expectations for an institution of higher education; 2) align the Requirements of Affiliation #8, #9, and #10 with the Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Co-Chairs of this group are indicated with an *):

Member Department Donna Chirico* Dean, Arts & Sciences Cynthia Haller* (faculty) English Standard V: Bernadette Amicucci (faculty) Nursing Educational Tracey Ellis SEEK Program Effectiveness Kang Bok Lee (faculty) Business & Economics Assessment Jennifer Chin Academic Advising Edoardo Carta-Gerardino (faculty) Math & Computer Science Truett Vaigneur Students with Disabilities

9 Standard VI Working Group is charged to: 1) evaluate that the alignment of York

College’s planning process, resources, and structures is sufficient to fulfill the institutional mission and goals, and provides for the continuous improvement of programs and services to students while remaining responsive to opportunities and challenges; 2) align the Requirements of Affiliation #8, #10 and #11 with the Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

Member Department Ismael Perez* Administrative Affairs Donald Auriemma (faculty) Occupational Therapy Phoebe Massimino (faculty) Business Standard VI: Timothy Paglione (faculty) Earth & Physical Sciences Planning, Resources, Aghajan Mohammadi Institutional Research and Institutional Peter Tighe Chief Information Officer Improvement James Minto Executive Director Facilities & Planning Laura Beaton (faculty) Biology Gwendolyn Harewood Human Resources Lawrence Cowen Institutional Advancement

Standard VII Working Group is charged to 1) evaluate how York College governs and administers in a manner that permits it to realize its mission and goals, even when affiliated with

(CUNY); 2) align the Requirements of Affiliation #12 and #13 with the Standard; and 3) use relevant documents, policies and procedures (found in the Document Roadmap) to make recommendations for institutional improvement. The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

10 Member Department Margaret Ballantyne* (faculty) Foreign Languages, ESL, & Humanities Anthony Andrews Student Activities Panayiotis Meleties Academic Affairs Farley Mawyer (faculty) Math & Computer Sciences Theresa Rooney (faculty) English Standard VII: Scott Sheidlower (faculty) Library Governance, Leadership, and Qiana Watson Legal Affairs & Labor Relations Administration Ron Thomas Administration Valarie Taylor-Haslip (faculty) Nursing Boadnarine Bharosay (faculty) Accounting & Finance Richard Stuckhardt Institutional Research Gerald McNeil (faculty) Biology Leslie Keiler (faculty) Teacher Education

The eighth Working Group is charged to assemble documentation and evaluate York

College’s compliance with the remaining seven (7) Requirements of Affiliation not covered by the Standards. The charge to this committee is to: 1) collect documents to prove compliance with federal law; 2) search for discrepancies and, if noted, inform the College so changes can be implemented to bring the College into compliance; and 3) demonstrate evidence for the following Requirements for Affiliation:

1) Authority to operate

2) Institution is operational

3) Graduating one class before accreditation

4) Communicating with the Commission in English

5) Compliance with government policies, regulations and requirements

6) Complying with Commission Policies

14) Governing Board providing information

11 The members of this working group are as follows (the Chair of this group is indicated with an *):

Member Department Richard Stuckhardt* Institutional Research Sharon Davidson Registrar Beverly Brown Student Financial Aid La Toro Yates Admissions Verification of Yvette Williamson Bursar Compliance Donna Chirico Dean of Arts & Sciences Randy Punter Student Development Ismael Perez Finance Gail Marshall Compliance

Organization for Final Self-Study Report

The organization of the Self-Study will be as follows:

1) Executive Summary will consist of the major findings and recommendations for the York College Self-Study (not more than 5 pages).

2) Institutional Introduction: 2-4 pages long a. A brief description of York College b. Description of the Self-Study process

3) Standards and Working Groups: 10 pages for each Working Group Standard report. Each report will contain an evaluation of the Standard criteria in relation to the Mission of York College, analysis of the documentation, descriptions of work completed in conjunction with other Working Groups, and identification of Requirements of Affiliation and recommendations. a. Standard I: Mission and Goals b. Standard II: Ethics and Integrity c. Standard III: Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience d. Standard IV: Support of the Student Experience e. Standard V: Educational Effectiveness Assessment f. Standard VI: Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement g. Standard VII: Governance, Leadership, and Administration

4) Conclusions and Recommendations

5) Appendices

12 Editorial Style and Format

The Steering Committee is the authority for the final Self-Study document. All Working Groups will adhere to the editorial style outlined below when submitting their reports to the Steering Committee: 1) Use a 12 point, New Times Roman type with one inch margins on all sides. 2) Individual Working Group reports will be no longer than 10 pages double spaced. 3) Contain no headers or footers other than page numbers at the bottom-middle of the page. 4) Use APA style – references should be at the end of the report and properly cited. 5) Write in the third person; avoid “I” and “we” statements. 6) Figures and tables should be numbered consecutively. 7) For figures, the description must appear in 10 point font immediately beneath the figure. 8) The title and description for each table must appear above in 14 point font. 9) All portions of the reports will be in a narrative format. DO NOT use bulleted or numbered lists.

Timetable for the Self-Study March 2015 Assemble Steering Committee. April – June 2015 Disseminate and review MSCHE Self-Study Documents June – September 2015 Steering Committee recruits Working Group Members October 2015 Self-Study Kick-off event with all members of Working Groups November 2015 Self-Study Institute December 2015 Delegation attended MSCHE Annual Conference January – February 2016 Working Groups assemble Document Roadmap January – March 2016 Prepare draft of Self-Study Design March 2016 Submit draft of Self-Study Design to MSCHE Liaison April 2016 MSCHE Liaison visit to provide feedback on Self- Study Design

13 May 2016 Self-Study Design revisions completed. Working Groups organize and review data June – August 2016 Steering Committee populates a website with the Document Roadmap with pertinent links to documents. Communication shared drives access and public web sites completed

August – November 2016 Working Groups continue to collect and review data, conduct interviews, prepare and analyze data

October 2016 College Convocation – campus-wide communication of Self-Study progress

December 2016 Team Chair is selected

November 2016 – January 2017 Working Groups prepare and submit first drafts of reports to Steering Committee

February 2017 Spring Symposium campus-wide communication of progress with Self-Study; Feedback on the first drafts returned to the Working Groups, work on revisions to report drafts

April 2017 Second drafts from Working Groups submitted April – May 2017 Working Group Chairs write the first draft of the Self-Study May 2017 Review of Self-Study draft by the stakeholders of York College June – August 2017 Second draft of Self-Study generated and distributed

September 2017 College-wide Convocation

September -- October 2017 Verification of Compliance generated. Self-Study second draft sent to Team Chair

November 2017 Preliminary on campus visit by the Team Chair December 2017 Verification of Compliance submitted to MSCHE December 2017- January 2018 College Self-Study revised based on Team Chair feedback February 2018 Spring Symposium, Final version of Self-Study produced and sent to Visiting Team

14 March – April 2018 Visiting Team on campus June 2018 Commission meets to determine accreditation action

Profile of the Evaluating Team

York College respectfully requests that the Commission consider the following characteristics when selecting the visiting evaluation team:

1) The Chair should understand and have worked at a commuter, urban, diverse campus in a

public, four year college/university system.

2) Members who have experience with colleges within a large university system.

3) Members who have experience at urban public four-year colleges.

4) Members who come from highly diverse, urban commuter campuses.

5) Members who have served at institutions with predominately underrepresented student

populations that are first generation and do not necessarily speak English as their first

language.

6) Members who have experience in liberal arts institutions with programs in professional

fields, such as health related programs, at the baccalaureate and master’s levels.