2009 Self-Study Report T O T H E Mi D D L E St a T E S Ass O C I a T I O N O F Co L L E G E S a N D Sc H O O L S Co Mm I Ss I O N O N Hi G H E R Ed U C a T I O N

2009 Self-Study Report t o t h e Mi d d l e St a t e s Ass o c i a t i o n o f Co l l e g e s a n d Sc h o o l s Co mm i ss i o n o n Hi g h e r Ed u c a t i o n

Dr. Si d n e y A. Ri b e a u , Pr e s i d e n t Se p t e m b e r 2009 Chapter

The impressive wrought iron gates, located at various entrances to Howard University, are widely regarded as treasures, symbolic of the history and ongoing legacy that defines the institution.D esigned by Albert Cassell and Louis Edwin Fry, Sr., in the 1930s, the gates were intended, in Fry’s words, to be the “trademark of Howard University” and to dominate each entrance with strength and grace. For decades, the gates have served as the literal and symbolic entryways to a vibrant learning community where students enter to prepare themselves and depart to serve the world.

ii ❘ Howard University 2009 Self-Study Report t o t h e Mi d d l e St a t e s Ass o c i a t i o n o f Co l l e g e s a n d Sc h o o l s Co mm i ss i o n o n Hi g h e r Ed u c a t i o n

Si d n e y A. Ri b e a u , Ph.D., Pr e s i d e n t Se p t e m b e r 2009

Table of Contents

President’s Letter Board of Trustees...... vi Members of the University-Wide Self-Study Team...... viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... x Executive Summary...... xi List of Tables...... xix List of Figures...... xx LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS...... xxi Chapter 1: Introduction...... 1 Chapter 2: Design and Methodology...... 7 Chapter 3: Accomplishments Relative to The 1999/2004 MSCHE Concerns...... 11 Chapter 4: Mission and Goals...... 17 Chapter 5: Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal...... 21 Chapter 6: Institutional Resources...... 33 Chapter 7: Leadership and Governance...... 47 Chapter 8: Administration...... 53 Chapter 9: Integrity...... 59 Chapter 10: Institutional Assessment...... 65 Chapter 11: Student Admissions and Retention...... 81 Chapter 12: Student Support Services...... 91 Chapter 13: Faculty...... 101 Chapter 14: Educational Offerings...... 109 Chapter 15: General Education...... 113 Chapter 16: Related Educational Activities...... 119 Chapter 17: Assessment of Student Learning...... 127 Chapter 18: Research...... 137 Chapter 19: Conclusion...... 153 CD of Supporting Documents Located in Inside Back Cover

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ v Board of Trustees

MR. ADDISON BARRY RAND SIDNEY A. RIBEAU, PH.D. Chairman President Chief Executive Officer Howard University AARP

RENEE HIGGINBOTHAM-BROOKS, ESQ. Vice Chairwoman Chair and Chief Executive Officer Block Capital, Inc.

MR. NNAMDI ANOZIE MRS. MARIE C. JOHNS Undergraduate Student Trustee President (Ret.) College of Arts and Sciences Verizon Washington, DC

MS. KIRSTEN BOWDEN VERNON E. JORDAN, JR., ESQ. Graduate Student Trustee Senior Counsel School of Law Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP Senior Managing Director PAUL A. COTTON, PH.D. Lazard Freres & Co. Alumni Trustee Program Director WARNER LAWSON, JR., ESQ. Health Behavior and Minority Health Graduate Faculty Trustee Division of Extramural Activities Professor National Institute of Nursing Research School of Law (NINR) CHARISSE R. LILLIE, ESQ. MRS. ELIZABETH G. EARLY Vice President of Community Investment and Health Care Consultant Executive Vice President of the Comcast Foundation—Comcast Corporation APRILLE J. ERICSSON, PH.D. Alumni Trustee MR. ROBERT L. LUMPKINS Instruments Manager & Aerospace Engineer Chairman National Aeronautics and Space The Mosaic Company Administration ANITA STEARNS MAYO, ESQ. HAROLD P. FREEMAN, M.D. Alumni Trustee Founder and President Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care and Prevention CHARLES J. MCDONALD, M.D. Professor of Medical Science and Chair MR. EARL G. GRAVES, SR. Department of Dermatology Chairman and Publisher The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown Earl G. Graves, Ltd. FLORETTA DUKES MCKENZIE, PH.D. MRS. DIANNE ATKINSON HUDSON Chairwoman Emerita Television Executive/Producer (Ret.) Founder and Chairwoman The McKenzie Group, Inc.

vi ❘ Howard University STACEY J. MOBLEY, ESQ. WAYMAN F. SMITH III, ESQ. Senior Vice President, Chairman Emeritus Chief Administrative Officer & Attorney-at-Law General Counsel (Ret.) The Smith Partnership, P.C. DuPont MR. JOHN A. THAIN CORNELL LEVERETTE MOORE, ESQ. Former Chairman & CEO Partner Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. Dorsey & Whitney LLP MR. GREGORY A. WHITE MS. JESSYE NORMAN Partner and Managing Director Concert and Opera Singer Thomas H. Lee Partners, L.P.

RICHARD D. PARSONS, ESQ. THE HONORABLE L. DOUGLAS WILDER Chairman of the Board of Directors Former Governor Citigroup State of Virginia

MR. GERALD D. PROTHRO MR. JOHN D. ZEGLIS Managing Director Chairman and CEO (Ret.) IKT Investments AT&T Wireless

M. KASIM REED, ESQ. Partner, Holland & Knight, LLP and Georgia State Senator

RUTH J. SIMMONS, PH.D. President Brown University

TRUSTEES EMERITI

THE HONORABLE FRANKIE M. FREEMAN MARTIN D. PAYSON, ESQ.

MR. JOHN E. JACOB GENERAL COLIN L. POWELL, USA (RET) Chairman Emeritus MR. FRANK SAVAGE THE HONORABLE GABRIELLE K. Chairman Emeritus MCDONALD

PATRON EX-OFFICIO

THE HONORABLE ARNE DUNCAN U.S. Secretary of Education

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ vii Members of the University-Wide Self-Study Team

CHAIRMAN: Orlando L. Taylor, Dean of the Economics n Vasant Telang, Office of the Provost Graduate School and Professor (Emeritus) n Veronica Thomas, Human Development and Psychoeducational Studies n Michael Wallace, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: Alvin Thornton, Institutional Assessment and Evaluation Interim Provost and Chief Academic Officer (Chair) n Donald Bell, Vice President for SELF-STUDY WORK GROUPS n Presidential Initiatives Florence Bonner, Acting MISSION AND GOALS: Horace Dawson, n Vice President for Research and Compliance Ralph Bunche International Affairs Center Theodore Bremner, Faculty Senate Chair n O. (Chair) n Raymond Archer, Alumni Relations n Jackson Cole, Senior Advisor Emeritus to the Daphne Bernard, Pharmacy n Levena De La Rosa, President n Sidney H. Evans Jr., Senior Vice Psychology n Chontrese Doswell Hayes, Graduate President and Chief Financial Officer n Charles School n Shirley Jackson, Occupational Therapy Gibbs, Interim Vice Provost for Student Affairs n Charles McDonald, Board of Trustees n Sylvia n Artis Hampshire-Cowan, Senior Vice President McDonald-Kaufman, Divinity n William Roberts, and Secretary of the Board of Trustees n Marie Howard University Student Association n Harold n Johns, Board of Trustees Jerome Joseph, Howard Scott, Ralph Bunche International Affairs Center University Student Association Vice President n n Eleanor Traylor, English Brenda Joyner, President of Howard University Staff Organization n Norma Leftwich, General PLANNING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND Counsel n Roberta McLeod, President of Howard INSTITUTIONAL RENEWAL: William Spriggs, University Staff Organization n Hassan Minor, Economics (Chair) n Soleman Abu-Bader, Social Senior Vice President for Strategic Planning Work n Latrice Foster, Dentistry n Lorenzo and External Affairs n Nicholas Owen, Howard Gregory, Architecture and Engineering Services University Student Association President n Bryan n Lynne Kelly, Finance, International Business Smart, Howard University Student Association and Insurance n Paul Musgrave, Administrative n Elizabeth Stroud, Vice President for Human Services n Karen Qawiyy, Office of the Secretary Capital Management n Marcus Ware, Howard n Mercedes Tibbits, Modern Languages and University Student Association President n Literatures n Anthony Woodburne, Howard Donald Wilson, Senior Vice President for Health University Student Association Sciences n Marian Wilson, Senior Executive for Academic Operations INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES: Beatrice Adderley-Kelly, Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied STEERING COMMITTEE: Orlando L. Taylor, Health Sciences (Chair) n Antwan Clinton, Dean of the Graduate School and Professor Howard University Bookstore n Philip Gatti, n (Emeritus) (Chair) Beatrice Adderley-Kelly, Pharmacology n Patrick Jadin, Architecture n Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied Health Sciences and Design n Victor McNaughton, Architecture n Winston Anderson, Biology Carole Borggren, and Engineering Services n Takeisha Presson, n Financial Analysis and Budget A. Wade Boykin, Dentistry n Kamran Tavakol, Pharmacy, Nursing, n n Education D. Kortright Davis, Divinity Horace and Allied Health Sciences n Arthuree Wright, Dawson, Ralph Bunche International Affairs n University Libraries James Donaldson, Arts and Sciences n Alfred Fisher, Office of SeniorV ice President for Health Sciences LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE: Kurt n Lorraine Fleming, Engineering, Architecture and Schmoke, School of Law, (Chair) n Carolyn Computer Science n Rodney Green, Economics n Broome, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology n Barbara Griffin, Office of the Provost n Michael Alice Gresham Bullock, Law n Porsche Gordon, Harris, Administrative Services n Charlene Hogan, Alumni Relations n Alan Halloway, Howard Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied Health Sciences n University Bookstore n Courtney Hudson, Arts Santina Merchant Huff, Arts and Sciences n Gerunda and Sciences n Odessa Jackson, Office of the Hughes, Institutional Assessment and Evaluation n General Counsel n Charles McDonald, Board of Marie Johns, Board of Trustees n Victoria Kirby, Trustees n Michael Newheart, Divinity n Steve Howard University Student Association n Celia Pierre, Medicine n Tashon Thomas, Howard Maxwell, Office of Senior Vice President for University Student Association Health Sciences n George Middendorf III, Biology n Teresa Redd, Center for Excellence, Teaching, ADMINISTRATION: Jacqueline Smith, Social Learning and Assessment n Kurt Schmoke, Law n Work (Chair) n Toi Carter, Office of the General Jacqueline Smith, Social Work n William Spriggs, Counsel n Pauline Hazel, Office of theA ssociate

viii ❘ Howard University Vice President for Administrative Services n n Thomas Heinbockel, Anatomy n Garnett Cynthia Henderson, Office of T otal Compensation Henley, Dentistry n John Hughes, WHUT n Ivor n Lorraine Kittrell, Campus Police n Thomas Livingston, Sociology and Anthropology n Carol Lawson, Center for Academic Reinforcement McKinnon, Enrollment Management n Anita n Tamia McClain, School of Business n Haile Nahal, Graduate School n Dana Williams, English Mezghebe, College of Medicine n Maxine n Kamilah Woodson, Education Williams, Enrollment Management n Darrion Woods, Howard University Student Association GENERAL EDUCATION: Barbara Griffin, Office of the Provost (Chair) n Marjay D. INTEGRITY: D. Kortright Davis, Divinity (Chair) Anderson, Biology n Carolyn Byerly, Journalism, n Shea Drake, Student Government Association n Mass Communications and Media Studies n Linda Jones, Office of theD ean, Arts and Sciences Kitty L. Ellison, English n Kimberly Freeman, n Marlene Mahoney, Louis Stokes Health Sciences Education n Quanice Floyd, Howard University Library n Kimberly Moffitt, Graduate School Student Association n Stephanie Johnson, Laureate Scholar and Undergraduate Programs INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT: Lorraine of Excellence n Anna McCorvey, Engineering, Fleming, Engineering (Chair) n Lila Ammons, Architecture and Computer Sciences n Anissa African American Studies n S. Tyrone Barksdale, Ryan, Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied Health Office of the Provost n Gerald Duncan, Howard Sciences n Zindzi Thompson, Howard University University Student Association n Mohamed Student Association Mekkawi, University Libraries n Mahmoud Nasr, Dentistry n Jacob Ortiz, Community Association RELATED EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES: n Lenny Patterson, WHUT Television n Jarvis Teresa Redd, Center for Excellence for Teaching, Seegars, Howard University Student Association n Learning and Assessment (Chair) n Roy DebyiiT homas, Journalism, Mass Communications Beasley, Continuing Education n Annette Davis, and Media Studies n Dawn Williams, Education n Educational Advisory Center n Maria Gomes, Loretta Woodruff, Auxiliary Enterprises Social Work n Rackham Goodlett, Center for Academic Reinforcement n Lawrence Joseph, STUDENT ADMISSIONS AND RETENTION: Founders Library n Aaron Stills, Education n Carole Borggren, Office of Financial Analysis Frances Stubbs, Engineering, Architecture and and Budget (Chair) n Ura-Jean Oyemade- Computer Sciences n Clint Wilson II, Journalism Bailey, Education n Iverson Bell, Engineering, Architecture and Computer Sciences n Eugene ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING: Cooper, Office of Financial Analysis and Budget Veronica Thomas, Human Development and n Alicia Criner, Howard University Student Psychoeducational Studies (Chair) n Spencer Association n Linda Sanders-Hawkins, Office of Chenier, Alumni Relations n Constance Ellison, Admissions n Sterling Lloyd, Medicine n Romaine Human Development and Psychoeducational Peace, Engineering, Architecture and Computer Studies n Janine Jackson, Human Development Sciences n Paul Pressley, Graduate School n and Psychoeducational Studies n Vernon Jones, Margo Smith, Auxiliary Enterprises Information Systems and Services n Marguerite Neita, Clinician Laboratory Science n Nichole STUDENT SUPPORT AND SERVICES: Celia Newman, Educational Administration and Policy Maxwell, Office of Senior Vice President for n Sherry Scott, Pharmacy, Nursing, and Allied Health Sciences (Chair) n Linda Akoth, Student Health Sciences Life and Activities n Darcel Bryant, Louis Stokes Health Sciences Library n Tonya Guillory, Student RESEARCH: Winston Anderson, Biology (Chair) Life and Activities n Konya Hurt, Information n Folohan Ayorinde, Chemistry n Charles Betsey, Systems and Services n Lynnette Mundey, Student Economics n Georgia Dunston, Microbiology n Health Center n Shelly McDonald-Pinkett, Internal Gary Harris, Engineering n Gregory Jenkins, Arts Medicine and Sciences n Earl Kudlick, Dentistry n George Littleton, Physiology n Kelly Mack, Office of FACULTY: A. Wade Boykin, Psychology (Chair) Undergraduate Research n James Mitchell, n Sheik Hassan, Medicine n Kimberly Jones, Chemical Engineering Engineering n Danielle Parker-Mason, Howard University Student Association n Kay T. Payne, UNIVERSITY-WIDE SELF-STUDY OFFICE Communication Sciences and Disorders n Lloyd STAFF: Gareth McCartney, Web Developer Sloan, Psychology; Jeanne Toungara, History n n Mary Pitman, Editor n Lisa Rawlings, Writer/ Charles Verharen, Philosophy Liaison n Nicole Retland, Administrative Assistant n Ronyelle Bertrand Ricard, Coordinator n EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS: Rodney Green, Marquitta Webb, Assistant Coordinator/Writer/ Economics (Chair) n Moses Garuba, Systems and Editor n Lynda Young, Special Events Manager Computer Science n Victor Gordeuk, Medicine n Peng Yu, Data Analyst

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ ix Acknowledgments

The Howard University 2009 Self-Study Report is the product of many dedicated individuals working together as a team for two years to discuss, analyze, and examine the University’s mission, programs, resources, services, and facilities. While involving the entire university community, recognition must be given to the following:

n The 139 members of the Self-Study work groups for their efforts in conducting the study; n The Executive Committee and the Self-Study Steering Committee members for their dedication, intellectual debate, and meaningful discussions; n The professional staff of the University’s Self-Study Office for their attention to the day- to-day details involved in coordinating the overall Self-Study process; n The staff of the Office of theP rovost for their timely data gathering and general administrative assistance; n Dr. Gwendolyn Bethea, Ms. Katherine McGraw, Ms. Diane Peoples, and the staff of the Graduate School for their assistance and support; n Dr. Gerunda Hughes and the staff of the Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation for their assistance in the design, development, and administration of the Self-Study surveys; n Dr. O. Jackson Cole and Dr. Don Bell for their insightful and professional review of the final report; n Mr. Rodney C. Williams, President/Creative Director, Michele Thomas, Art Director, Steve Madison, Production Director, Patricia Kouttab and Rahsaan Williams, Designers and the entire staff of RCW Communication Design Inc. for the graphic design, layout, photography, print production and printing (Peake DeLancey Printing) of the final report; n Dr. Judi Moore Latta, Interim Executive Director of Communications and Marketing, Ms. Kerry Ann Hamilton, Media Relations Manager, Ms. Raven Padgett, Ms. Grace Virtue, and Mr. Justin D. Knight, Staff Photographer in the Office of University Communications for their assistance in providing insight and professional dialogue regarding the message and images associated with the design of the Self-Study Report; n Mr. Justin D. Knight, Mr. Ron Ceasar, and Ms. Kerry Ann Hamilton for their photographs; n Dr. Lorraine N. Fleming for providing historical linkage to the 1999 Self-Study; n Dr. Orlando Taylor for his comprehensive oversight of the entire Self-Study process; and to n Dr. Alvin Thornton, Interim Provost and Chief Academic Officer for his leadership, vision and attention to detail.

Special thanks are extended to the Howard family for its unequivocal support and encour- agement in assuring the successful completion of this 2009 Self-Study.

x ❘ Howard University Executive Summary

Howard University, as one of the nation’s be a part of President Swygert’s legacy of leading research universities, is dedicated enhanced academic standing, an upgraded to educating students from diverse back- university infrastructure, academic program grounds at the undergraduate, graduate, and streamlining, unprecedented fundraising, professional level, with a particular focus on sustained federal support, and improved African-American students. Since its found- community partnerships. ing, Howard has been open to men and Sidney A. Ribeau, Ph.D., was appointed as women from all racial and ethnic groups. the 16th President of Howard University in The University received its first accredita- the Spring of 2008 and assumed his position from the Middle States Association of tion in August 2008. In his 2008 Opening Colleges and Schools in 1921, and thereaf- Convocation speech, and Fall 2008 and ter has had its accreditation reaffirmed by Spring 2009 State of the University Howard the Association at every required interval. addresses, President Ribeau articulated an is a unique Howard is a unique university with a spe- expanded and evolving vision that empha- cial mission that addresses national and sizes the following: reinforcing an envi- university international higher education needs that ronment of academic freedom; sharpening with a special are important to the strategic interest of our academic offerings and quality; increasing mission that nation. It is one of only two non-military col- attention to graduate programs; develop- leges or universities chartered by the United ing a more robust research agenda with addresses States Congress and the only research uni- increased productivity; expanding service national and versity in the nation with this status. Howard to the nation and the world; improving the international was the nation’s only Historically Black gender balance in enrollment, retention, College or University (HBCU) to achieve and graduation; increasing internationaliza- higher Research I status under the old Carnegie tion of academic and research activity; and education Classification system and the only institu- diversifying and strengthening academic, needs that are tion within this group to be truly compre- public, and private sector partnerships in the hensive with respect to its array of under- United States and abroad. important to graduate, graduate, and professional degree President Ribeau’s vision reinforces a the strategic programs. Howard’s unique mission focuses commitment to attracting, retaining, and interest of our on academic excellence and preparing stu- supporting stellar faculty, staff, and admin- dents for national and international leader- istrators. An enhanced dedication to being nation. ship roles. Howard prepares students to be a student-centered University was evi- highly qualified, socially aware, and ethical denced by the launch of the Students First individuals. As a comprehensive research Initiative, which is designed to improve the university with a diverse, predominantly student experience at Howard. Additionally, African-American student body and faculty, President Ribeau has expressed a strong Howard contributes to the development of commitment to assessment, evaluation, and new knowledge that seeks to solve social accountability in advancing the University’s and economic problems in the domestic and mission and promoting the development of international arenas that particularly impact its academic programs. the African Diaspora. During the past two years, Howard Since its last Self-Study in 1999, the University has engaged in a decennial self- University operated largely under the lead- examination to assess the significant changes ership of its 15th President, H. Patrick and continuing areas of concern since the Swygert (1995-2008). During this period, last full reaffirmation of accreditation by the University experienced several impor- the Middles States Commission on Higher tant developments that will undoubtedly Education (MSCHE) in 1999. The find-

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xi Executive Summary ings from this examination provide a critical global climate, Howard University recently point-in-time assessment of ongoing system- revised its mission statement to reflect a atic efforts that have continually informed complementary mix between teaching and institutional decisions regarding programs, research, with a focus on the expectation services, initiatives, and resource allocation. that research must be an integral part of The University selected the comprehensive undergraduate, graduate, and professional model in the context of the 14 Middle States education requirements. The University’s standards in Characteristics of Excellence as mission statement was revised to enhance its approach to institutional Self-Study. The the ability of the University to compete in Self-Study examined all aspects of its pro- a changing social, technological and global grams and services, governing and support- society. Currently, the University achieves its ing structures, resources, and educational mission through its focus on four overarch- outcomes in relation to the institution’s ing goals, two of which are directly related mission and goals. To supplement the 14 to academic programs: strengthening aca- Standards, a section on Research was added demic programs and services, and promoting to highlight the strategic importance that is excellence in teaching and research. Goals assigned to the University’s research agenda. three and four are associated with increasing Additionally, this Self-Study focused on top- private support and enhancing national and ics and concerns that were addressed in the community service. Details regarding this MSCHE 2004 Periodic Review Report. Standard are found in Chapters 4 and 5. Fifteen work groups were chosen to collect and analyze data and formulate recom- Standard 2: Planning, mendations for each section of the Self- Resource Allocation and Study and submit a draft summary report. A broadly representative University Self- Institutional Renewal Study Steering Committee, consisting of The University’s mission has driven stra- the chairs of the 15 work groups, a member tegic planning as is evident in Strategic of the Board of Trustees, and selected fac- Framework for Action (SFA) I and II (SFA ulty, staff, and students reviewed the work I and II), which set the short- and long- groups’ study designs, and ultimately their term goals of the institution. The process individual Self-Study reports. An Executive of assigning resources (i.e., human, finan- Committee, chaired by the Interim Provost cial, physical, and technical) to projects to and Chief Academic Officer and consisting ensure optimization has been driven in part of the Self-Study Chair, University Officers by SFA I and II. Despite the success of the and key stakeholders, reviewed and vetted University’s recently completed Capital the Self-Study report prior to its transmis- Campaign, the University must raise addi- sion to the University President. tional resources from private, alumni and The Self-Study Report, a compendium of public sources to support faculty, staff, the salient findings and key recommenda- technology and infrastructure to achieve tions from the University’s assessment pro- its historic mission. The University, like all cess, includes 19 chapters: an introduction, higher education institutions, is facing fiscal methodology, accomplishments related to the challenges. To address its fiscal challenges 1999/2004 Middle States concerns (Details and ensure that allocation of resources are are included in Chapter 3), and 15 chapters aligned with its strategic academic goals, the representing the 14 Standards, the additional University has developed and implemented Research Emphasis section, and a conclusion. a three pronged strategy consisting of a new Outlined below is a brief summary, organized budget development process, a long-term by the Standards, of the Self-Study findings: tuition and fees strategy, and an academic renewal initiative that will review and stra- Standard 1: Mission and tegically align the University’s undergraduate, graduate and professional degree pro- Goals grams with its mission and fiscal resources. In view of the changing imperatives in Chapters 5 and 6 contain additional details higher education and in the national and regarding Standard 2.

xii ❘ Howard University Executive Summary

Standard 3: Institutional improved instructional capabilities, student Resources learning, and staff productivity. Although the University needs to make significant infra- University resources are allocated to structural improvements, it has made con- achieve University goals while meeting inter- siderable improvements in its physical infra- nal and external auditing and federal over- structure. Details regarding this Standard are sight requirements. During the past decade, found in Chapter 6. and recently with increased concern from all segments, the University has given increased Standard 4: Leadership and attention to the manner in which its resources are allocated and the level of involvement by Governance faculty and other members of the University Legal authority for final decision-making community. In the midst of the financial chal- at Howard University is vested in its Board lenges that Howard and other institutions of of Trustees and the President as delegated by higher learning face, the University contin- the Board. The University’s governance pro- ues to support priority areas and is imple- cess, as established by its Charter, By-laws, menting short- and long-term strategies to policies, and regulations, provides oppor- respond to these challenges. The short-term tunities for appropriate input into decision- strategy has included a university-wide fur- making by faculty, staff, and students. lough and salary and hiring freezes. Among The University has a shared governance the long-term measures are a Voluntary structure, with appropriate roles for fac- Separation and Incentive Retirement pro- ulty, students, and staff outlined in govern- gram (VSIRP), which was completed on June ing handbooks, constitutions, and By-laws. 30, 2009, and an academic renewal initiative Issues concerning the extent to which (academic program portfolio review and pro- shared governance exists at the University gram prioritization), which will begin in the have been raised and have been the sub- Fall of 2009. Technology has significantly ject of much discussion. President Ribeau

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xiii Executive Summary has embraced the concept of a shared gov- scholarly teaching, research, and service to ernance approach. In the first year of his the community. In pursuit of knowledge, presidency, he instituted policies and prac- faculty and students must engage in schol- tices that increased the transparency of the arly activities with the highest level of integ- University’s decision-making process and rity. Howard adheres to its various policies, provided increased opportunities for faculty, rules, and regulations that assure that its student, and staff involvement. Increased internal and external relationships are char- meetings with the leadership of the Faculty acterized by integrity. The University com- Senate and the Howard University Student plies with its policies concerning integrity and Staff Associations have facilitated their in relationships within the University and all involvement in decision-making. There related entities, business units, subsidiaries is general agreement that the University’s and affiliated organizations. Details regard- Faculty Handbook, which was last changed ing this Standard are found in Chapter 9. in 1993, needs to be revised. As referenced above, the University implemented a new Standard 7: Institutional budget development process to improve constituent involvement in its decision-mak- Assessment ing process. Leadership involvement across In 1921, Howard conducted its first uni- the campus was also enhanced as a result versity-wide Self-Study to support its initial of the Students First Initiative that focused application for Middle States accreditation. on improved decision-making regarding The University was fully accredited by the the delivery of services to students and the MSCHE and has received university-wide University community. As noted above, reaffirmation of its accreditation by MSCHE the University is launching an Academic since its initial accreditation. In addition to Renewal Initiative, which will include broad the University’s MSCHE accreditation, 30 participation across the University, to make bodies currently accredit 60 academic pro- recommendations to the President about grams at the University. School-specific future academic priorities. Details regarding assessments are conducted on a periodic this Standard are found in Chapters 7 and 8 basis, typically for disciplinary accreditation. of the Self-Study. An added important assessment dimension results from annual institutional reviews by Standard 5: Administration the U.S. Department of Education. Since its 1999 Self-Study, Howard has The University is governed under a char- increased substantially its institution-wide ter from the U.S. Congress by a Board of commitment to, and engagement in assess- Trustees that delegates the management of ment activities, as reflected in its contin- the University to the President and several ued incorporation of assessment across University Officers. Supporting theP resident all university functions. The creation of and University Officers are school and college the Office of Institutional Assessment and academic deans, and program directors, and Evaluation (OIAE) in 2008 is an indicator managers. University Officers are recruited of the University’s growing commitment to and hired using national searches, published the assessment enterprise. The OIAE has vacancy notices, and formal search commit- developed a short and long-term strategic tee interviews. In recent years, the University assessment initiative and is aggressively has implemented a number of administrative implementing it in collaboration with all changes designed to address operational chal- academic and administrative segments of the lenges and improve administrative efficiency. University. Details regarding this Standard Details regarding this Standard are provided are found in Chapter 10. in Chapters 7 and 8. Standard 6: Integrity Standard 8: Student Howard University affirms that the main Admissions and Retention purpose of an institution of higher education At the core of Howard University’s mission is the discovery of new knowledge through is effective student recruitment, admission,

xiv ❘ Howard University Executive Summary and retention at the undergraduate, gradu- service in an ever changing nation and ate, and professional levels. In Standard 8, global community. Howard addresses these the Self-Study examined the University’s challenges by providing a high quality aca- central and school/college enrollment man- demic experience of great breadth and depth agement functions. The goal of this section across its five colleges (Arts and Sciences; is to assess whether the University is recruit- Dentistry; Engineering, Architecture, ing, admitting, and retaining students whose and Computer Sciences; Medicine; and interests, goals, and abilities are aligned Pharmacy, Nursing, and Allied Health with Howard’s mission. Details regarding Sciences) and seven schools (Business, this Standard are found in Chapter 11. Communications, Divinity, Education, Graduate, Law, and Social Work). Howard’s Standard 9: Student Support colleges and schools have a strong tradition Services of academic excellence, offering undergraduate degrees in 80 disciplines, master’s Within the scope of its mission, the degrees in 63 disciplines, Ph.D. degrees University provides various student services in 29 disciplines, other doctorates in four that are designed to support successful stu- areas, first professional degree in five disci- dent matriculation and personal and career plines, and professional certification in five development. These activities include resi- areas. In addition, the University offers five dential, recreational, academic, healthcare dual degree programs. (including mental healthcare), spiritual and Over the past 10 years, 51 academic pro- social support services. Details regarding grams have been accredited. One program has this Standard are found in Chapter 12. not been reviewed, one program closed, and one program is seeking first-time accredita- Standard 10: Faculty tion. Between 2008 and 2009, there were 29 Howard’s faculty members perform a vari- programs in 8 schools/colleges undergoing ety of functions within and on behalf of the self-studies and external reviews for reac- University as they strive to fulfill theU niversity’s creditation. Details regarding this Standard mission. While these functions coalesce around are found in Chapter 14. the core responsibilities of teaching, research, service and professional development, the level Standard 12: General at which these tasks are accomplished and the Education quality of the faculty hinge on key contextual considerations. These key contextual consider- General Education at Howard is designed ations include the faculty voice in governance, so that undergraduate students can acquire faculty perceptions of their professional quality and demonstrate college-level proficiency of life at Howard, how well faculty believe they in essential skills: (1) oral and written com- impact the lives of their students, the finan- munication, (2) scientific and quantitative cial benefits that they accrue, the facilities and reasoning, (3) critical analysis and reason- physical environment in which they work, and ing, and (4) technological competency. A the technology that is available for their sup- Core Curriculum to advance the goals of the port. Details regarding this Standard are found General Education requirements has been in Chapter 13. instituted within all undergraduate Schools and Colleges, and an aggressive strategy for Standard 11: Educational assessing its outcomes is currently underway. Details regarding this Standard are Offerings found in Chapter 15. The University’s academic programs, many of which are over 100 years old, Standard 13: Related emanate from Howard’s mission of being a comprehensive research university. The Educational Activities University is also confronted with the task The University offers a number of related of responding to evolving societal needs educational opportunities, which complement and preparing students for leadership and academic coursework, expand educational

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xv Executive Summary offerings, and enhance student learning. RU/H private and public universities with These include internships, honors programs, this designation. co-op programs, fieldwork, on-line instruc- In Chapter 18, the Self-Study describes tion, integrated technology, and certificate examples of major research activities at the programs, all of which adhere to academic University, changes in the organizational and professional standards, and support the structure to advance research administra- University’s mission. Details regarding this tion and compliance, and strategies initiated Standard are found in Chapter 16. to increase the level of extramural funding for research, while reducing the barri- Standard 14: Assessment of ers in infrastructure and facilities that limit Student Learning research activity. At the University, student learning is a fun- Conclusion damental and critical institutional outcome. The 2009 Self-Study Report of Howard All units at the University, directly or indi- University has affirmed that like many other rectly, function to support student learning. institutions throughout the United States, A comprehensive, coordinated approach to Howard faces a number of contemporary the assessment of student learning outcomes challenges, which include: reflects the complexity required to capture n Increased expectations and requirements the multifaceted processes. The articulation to provide more documentation on stu- of expected student learning outcomes has dent learning and institutional effective- emerged from the University’s mission and ness through ongoing assessment, and goals. Student learning outcomes assess- to use more effectively these assessment at Howard is mission-driven, student- ments systematically to guide program centered, broadly defined, collaborative, and improvement. results-oriented. n Increased competition from Traditionally The Assessment of Student Learning White Institutions (TWIs) and HBCUs chapter summarizes learning outcomes for the best and brightest of African- assessment since the 1999 reaffirmation of American students—Howard’s core con- accreditation by the MSCHE. In particular, stituency—at the undergraduate, gradu- this chapter provides updates on outcomes ate, and professional student levels. assessments related to university support n Graying of the professoriate, which systems, plans, activities, and measures. requires the development of succes- Data emerging from student learning (direct sion plans for the faculty—and the and indirect) assessments measures are high- University’s leadership—to attract new lighted. Additionally, case examples from individuals to sustain institutional core various units are reported and recommenda- values and legacy, while bringing new tions are offered for strengthening the col- ideas and perspectives to meet chang- lection and use of student learning assessing times and student needs. ment data. Details regarding this Standard n Increasing tuition rates to keep pace are found in Chapter 17. with the cost of education, while simultaneously increasing need-based finan- Special Emphasis: Research cial aid to meet the requirements of In recent years, Howard University talented students who are otherwise was classified as a Research I University, compromised in their ability to enroll and subsequently as a Doctoral-Research and remain at the University. University-Extensive by the Carnegie n Evolving priorities in research funding Classification of Institutions of Higher at the national level, maintaining rel- Education based largely on the extensive- evance, while increasing academic and ness of its Ph.D. programs and extramu- scholarly activities; thereby requiring rally funded research activity. In the current a possible realignment of research and Carnegie classification system, Howard is academic priorities in order to increase categorized as a Research/High Research extramural support and indirect cost Activity University. Howard joins 103 recovery.

xvi ❘ Howard University Executive Summary

This Self-Study has provided the Univer- foster academic excellence within an envi- sity with an opportunity to reflect upon and ronment that encourages and demands aca- explore ways in which its mission can be demic freedom and dialogue. more fully realized. Each chapter that dis- The Report outlines current shortcom- cusses a Standard in this 2009 Self-Study ings at the University and what is cur- Report offers recommendations. The fol- rently being done to remedy issues such lowing represent major recommendations as the imbalance in its student popula- that are promulgated in this Report: tion between men and women, by work- n Review and assess the impact of plan- ing harder to identify, encourage and once ning, resource allocation, and institu- enrolled, support young Black men in tional renewal initiatives on a periodic their efforts to succeed and graduate. The basis. Report also includes information regard- n Align the University’s resources and ing the University’s plan to enhance its budget with academic priorities result- capacity to address disparities that exist ing from program reviews and portfolio within society, particularly in medicine, assessments. law, and education and in any other aspect n Establish a dedicated recruitment and of the human endeavor, where one seg- retention fund to attract and retain ment of the community is lesser served additional nationally recognized schol- than another. ars; improve the support for and retain While pointing out shortcomings and set- the strongest current faculty; and pro- ting directions, the Self-Study has revealed mote the development and retention of that Howard is in compliance with the the University’s young and promising Characteristics of Excellence as defined by faculty. the Middle States Association of Schools n Appoint a body of faculty, students, and Colleges and is eligible, therefore, for and staff to review the current Board- its accreditation to be reaffirmed. Further, approved university-wide core compe- the Self-Study has revealed that the tencies and to recommend strategies University has made considerable progress to schools and colleges for revising, in addressing the issues raised in the 1999 updating and assessing curriculum to MSCHE reaffirmation of accreditation and implement the competencies. the concerns raised in the 2004 Periodic n Appoint a university-wide task force Review Report (PRR). At the same time, to craft a more coherent set of learning the University faces significant challenges, outcomes for all Howard undergradu- many of which are associated with rising ates and a methodology for assessment. costs in the midst of the current domestic n Revise the University’s Faculty Handbook and global economic downturn, which have to reflect greater compatibility with - cur affected virtually all aspects of its opera- rent policies and practices, as well as tions, including faculty/staff salaries, the trends governing faculty roles and respon- maintenance of physical facilities, and the sibilities at research universities. academic/research infrastructure. Despite This 2009 Self-Study Report provides this situation, the University is poised and important background information which working actively to aggressively pursue its is critical in understanding our current aspiration to climb systematically into the efforts to elevate the research agenda at top echelon of research universities in the the University which will provide a cruci- United States. ble for a robust intellectual and academic This Self-Study has provided a candid environment. Additionally, the Self-Study look at the progress that the University delineates the multifaceted approach the has made over the past ten years, where University has taken to sustain its histori- the institution stands today, and more cal legacy and mission to meet the needs of importantly, where new journeys and African American students and communi- pathways can and will lead in the future. ties, while also positioning itself as a leader It has also provided major findings for among the nation’s research universities. It enhancing institutional and educational also challenges the institution to continue to effectiveness.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xvii Executive Summary Middle States Commission on Higher Education 3624 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-2680 Phone: 267-284-5000 Fax: 215-662-5501 www.msche.org

Certification Statement: Compliance with MSCHE Requirements of Affiliation and Federal Title IV Requirements (Effective March 1, 2009)

An institution seeking initial accreditation or reaffirmation of accreditation must affirm that it meets or continues to meet established MSCHE requirements of affiliation and federal requirements relating to Title IV program participation by completing this certification statement.

The signed statement should be attached to the executive summary of the institution’s self-study report.

If it is not possible to certify compliance with all requirements of affiliation and federal Title IV requirements, the institution must attach specific details in a separate memorandum.

Howard University is seeking: (Name of Institution)

(Check one): Initial Accreditation X Reaffirmation of Accreditation

The undersigned hereby certify that the institution meets all established requirements of affiliation of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education and federal requirements relating to Title IV program participation, and that it has complied with the MSCHE policy, “Related Entities.”

Exceptions are noted in the attached memorandum (Check if applicable) List of Tables

Chapter Page 4.1 average SATC and ACT Scores, HS-GPA, and Top 10% HS Class for Enrolled howard University First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, Fall 2000-2007...... 19 5.1 Comparison of Restricted vs. Unrestricted Gift Types...... 25 5.2 howard University Approved and Projected Tuition Rates for AY 2009-2013...... 27 6.1 Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2008...... 36 6.2 technology Infrastructure Upgrades...... 39 6.3 Student, Faculty, Senior Administrator and Staff Perceptions of the University’s Facilities...... 41 10.1 overall Areas of Greatest Need: Howard University Students and Normative Sample from Private Colleges...... 69 10.2 perceived Student Need for Assistance in Personal and Academic Areas...... 69 10.3 Students Interaction of their Experiences with Student Support Services...... 70 10.4 parent Ratings of “Quality of Information”...... 71 10.5 parent Ratings of “Responsiveness of Personnel”...... 71 10.6 availability, Quality, and Adequacy of “Physical Facilities” at the University...... 72 10.7 Quality and Adequacy of “Technology” at the University...... 73 10.8 overall Satisfaction with University Systems: Undergraduate Graduating Students ...... 74 10.9 overall Satisfaction with University Systems: Graduate/Professional Graduating Students...... 74 10.10 A Description of Institutional Assessment for the AY 2008-2009...... 76 11.1 Retention and Graduation Rates for Undergraduate School/Colleges: Cohort Years 1996 – 2008...... 84 11.2 total Student Aid Disbursed, by Type, Academic Year 2006-2007...... 86 11.3 Staff Evaluations of Offices of Enrollment Management...... 90 12.1 Students’ Responses to Items Related to Financial Assistance...... 97 13.1 Summary of Selected Student Responses to Faculty Instruction...... 104 13.2 howard University Faculty Authors and Student Co-author, 1999−2009...... 105 16.1 number of Freshmen Scoring Below the English 002 Cut-Score Compared to CAR-Verbal Enrollment...... 120 17.1 department of English Posttest Assessments Results in English 002 and english 003: Fall 2005 and Spring 2006...... 129 17.2 average Cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) by School/College, Level, and Gender: Spring 2008...... 130 17.3 Students’ Perceptions of the Learning Environment at Howard University: Spring 2008...... 132 17.4 placement Reports of Howard University Graduating Seniors: Class of 2007...... 132 18.1 total Funds Awarded by School/College for FY 2003-2008...... 138 18.2 total Funds Awarded by Sponsor Type for FY 2003-2008...... 139 18.3 examples of Research Centers...... 146 18.4 participants in the Seminars, Workshops, and Certification Program...... 148 18.5 peer and Aspirational Peer Universities...... 149 18.6 federally Financed R&D Expenditures at Universities and Colleges, Ranked by Expenditures FY1999-2007...... 150 18.7 impediments to the Conduct of Sponsored Programs...... 151 18.8 faculty Reasons for Not Applying for Research Awards...... 151

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xix List of Figures

Chapter Page 5.1 Capital Campaign Contributions by Size...... 24 6.1 fy 2008 Revenue by Source ($Millions)...... 33 6.2 federal Appropriation 2000-2009 (Millions)...... 34 6.3 total Operating Budget ($Millions) and AGR, FY 1999-2009...... 35 6.4 operating Revenues and Expenses, FY 2004-2008...... 35 6.5 operating Expenses ($Millions), FY 2008...... 36 6.6 endowment Market Value...... 37 8.1 organizational Chart...... 54 11.1 total Enrollment, AY 1998-2008...... 82 11.2 Graduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008...... 82 11.3 undergraduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008...... 83 11.4 application for Undergraduate Admission and Matriculation, AY 2002-2008...... 83 11.5 average SATC Scores of FTIC Applicants, AY 2002-2008...... 84 11.6 freshman Retention Rate vs. Non-Local Peers, AY 2004-2007...... 85 11.7 freshman Retention Rate vs. Local Peers, AY 2004-2007...... 85 11.8 Graduate School Ph.D. Recipients Time-to-Degree, AY 2005-2009...... 86 11.9 ph.D. Graduate Rate Year-to-Degree, Cohorts Fall 1999-Fall 2005...... 87 11.10 Masters Graduate Rate Year-to-Degree, Cohorts Fall 1999-Fall 2007...... 87 11.11 Undergraduate Tuition Rate Increases Howard and National Averages...... 88 11.12 Average Percentage of Tuition and Fees Increase for howard University and Institution Types for AY 2007-2008...... 88 12.1 library Expenditure at Howard Peer University Research Libraries, 2006-2007...... 93 12.2 Quality of On-Campus Residential Facilities...... 95 13.1 faculty (FT & PT) by Rank and Gender, Fall 2008...... 101 13.2 faculty (FT & PT) by School/College, 2008...... 102 13.3 faculty Distribution by Ethnicity, Fall 2008...... 102 16.1 Grade Distribution for CAR-Math vs. Non-CAR Students in College Algebra I...... 120 17.1 School of Business Structure for the Assessment of Student Learning...... 128 18.1 number of Proposals Submitted and Awarded, FY 1999-2008...... 138 18.2 total Amounts of Funds Received During FY 2003-2009...... 138 18.3 total Award Amount from NIH and NSF, FY 1999-2008...... 140

xx ❘ Howard University List of Supporting Documents

2006 Senior Leadership Development and Succession Assessment Report 2007 Faculty Research Survey Summary 2008 Enrollment Management Strategic Plan 2008 Howard University Cooperative Institutional Research Project (CIRP) Results 2008 Self-Study Survey Instruments 2009 Graduate and Professional Graduating Students’ Exit Survey Report 2009 Undergraduate Graduating Students’ Exit Survey Report AAMC Honors Howard’s Donald E. Wilson with Its Highest Award Academic Affairs Strategic Planning and Budgeting Updates, 2007 Alternative Spring Break Summary Assessment Measures Utilized in the University’s Academic Programs Bingham, Howard Launch Diversity Fellowship: Partnership with School of Law Board of Trustees 2009-2010 Membership List Case Study – A Review of Operating Procedures to Increase Effectiveness of Student Services Case Study - Evaluations of Counseling Center Services Case Study: Biology Department Review leads to Facilities Renovation and Improvement in Academic Programs Case Study: Improvements in Passage Rates: United States Medical Licensure Examinations Case Study: Predicting Successful Matriculation through Basic Sciences Case Study: Using Survey Results to Improve the Curriculum Certificate Programs at Howard University and Peer Institutions College of Engineering, Architecture and Computer Science (EACS) Mission, Goals, Objectives, and Expected Student Outcomes in Relation to University’s Mission College of Medicine Accreditation Report Comparison of DL vs. On-Site Enrollment, AY 2003-2004 to AY 2006-2007 Credit Certificates Awarded at Howard University, 1997-2007 Directory of HBCU DL Programs Engineers Without Borders – HU Improve Lives in Kenya, Brazil Enrollment in CAR, Fall 2005-Spring 2008 Example of a Course Syllabus from the Health Sciences Example of a Course Syllabus from the Humanities Example of a Course Syllabus from the Natural Sciences Example of a Course Syllabus from the Social Sciences FACTS 2009 – Howard University Faculty Handbook, 1993 Faculty Senate Constitution, 2000 Faculty Senate Letter to Middle States Commission, April 2008 Faculty Workload Policy, 2000 Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 Sample of Results for the Senior Comprehensive Examinations for Departments in the College of Arts and Sciences - Pass/Fail Scores Fall 2008 Sample of Results for the Senior Undergraduate Comprehensive Examinations for Departments in the College of Arts and Sciences General Education Grid: Fulfillment of Competencies Graduate Bulletin Graduate Certificate in College and University Faculty Preparation Graduate Certificate in Computer Security Graduate Certificate in International Studies Graduate Certificate in Women’s Studies Graduate School Thesis and Dissertation Manual, 2008 Howard Students from Across Nation Spend Spring Break Helping Needy in New Orleans and Panama Howard University 2009-2010 Student Handbook Howard University Academic Code of Student Conduct, 1987 Howard University and AAAA Announce Partnership to Increase Inclusion in Advertising Howard University By-laws of the Board of Trustees, 2007 Howard University Certificate Programs by School/College Howard University Code of Ethics and Conduct Policy, 1998

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ xxi Supporting Documents

Howard University Dental School Dean Receives Presidential Citation from Nation’s Leading Dental Education Association Howard University Employee Financial, Personal and Private Information Confidentiality Agreement, 2008 Howard University Fall 2009 Student Reference Manual Howard University Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Request to the Department of Education Howard University FY 2009 Internal Audit Plan Howard University Guiding Principles for Assessment, 2001 Howard University Junior Named Truman Scholar Howard University Libraries Strategic Plan for the Main Library Group Howard University On-line Courses, August 2005-January 2008 Howard University Policy Against Sexual Harassment and Gender-Based Discrimination in Education Programs and Activities, 1999 Howard University Policy and Procedure on Equal Opportunity in Employment and Education Programs and Activities, 1999 Howard University Signs MOU with Botswana to Establish University Howard University Staff Organization By-laws, 2004 Howard University Student Code of Conduct, 2000 Howard University Student Performance by Level for On-line Courses, January 2003- August 2007 Howard University to Receive $70.6 Million from Pace Howard University’s Distance Education Vendors Howard University’s WHUR 96.3 FM “A Helping Hand” Radiothon HU 101: Parent Survey of Selected SQL Units Library Advisory Committee Report, 2008 Library Assessment Plan Number and Types of DL Programs at Howard and Its Peer Institutions Outcome Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Report, July 2009 Personnel Guideline and Statement of Current Benefits, 1999 President Ribeau’s Letter to Member of the Howard University Community, December 3, 2008 Referencing Rubrics Report on the Infusion of Information Technology Supporting Academic Instruction and Student Life at Howard University, January, 2005 Richard D. Parsons Appointed First Holder Gwendolyn S. and Colbert I. King Chair in Public Policy Role of HBCUs as Baccalaureate-Origin Institutions of Black S&E Doctorate Recipients School of Law Accreditation Report School of Pharmacy and CVS/pharmacy Open New Practice Laboratory Scores of Kids Get Free Care at “Give Kids a Smile Day” Services 2009 - Howard University Spring 2009 Assessment of General Education Outcomes in Quantitative Reasoning Spring 2009 Assessment of General Education Outcomes in Written Communication Strategic Framework for Action I Strategic Framework for Action II Strategic Framework for Action II Status Report Strategic Plan for the Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation Students First Campaign Students First Campaign Summary Report Summary of First-Time-in-College Undergraduate Recruitment and Enrollment Activities (February 2008) Summary of the National Conference on Undergraduate Research Summary of the Rangel Program Supply Chain Management (SCM) Program Technical Report for the 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys Technical Report for the 2009 Howard University College Students’ Needs Assessment Survey The Campaign for Howard The Web Opportunities Analysis for Howard University Report Three Howard Seniors Awarded Fulbright Scholarships Top Producers of African-American Master’s Degrees, Including On-line Degrees Undergraduate Bulletin Undergraduate Interdisciplinary Research Course

xxii ❘ Howard University 1 Introduction

1 Introduction

Institutional Overview It currently awards more on-campus Ph.D. degrees to African Americans in science Howard University as one of the nation’s and engineering, as well as in several of the leading research universities is dedicated humanities and social science fields, than to educating students from diverse back- any other research university in the United grounds at the undergraduate, graduate, and States. Many of these Howard scholars are professional level, with a particular focus on members of the nation’s professoriate. In African-American students, as well as those many critical professional fields, most nota- of all other racial and ethnic groups from bly medicine, dentistry, and law, Howard the United States and around the world. continues to be, despite the elimination of The University received its first accredita- traditional barriers of segregation and overt tion from the Middle States Association of discrimination, among the nation’s larg- Colleges and Schools in 1921 and has had its est producers of African-American degree accreditation reaffirmed by the Association recipients. At the same time, these gradu- at every required interval thereafter. ate and professional degree programs attract Howard is a unique university with a special both significant numbers of international mission that addresses the higher education students from around the world, and students …Howard needs of the nation and the world. It is one of from all the major racial/ethnic groups in the produces only two non-military colleges or universi- United States. It is safe to say, therefore, that ties chartered by the United States Congress without Howard University, the nation would more African and the only research university in the nation experience significant barriers to its goal of American with this status. Howard is the nation’s only achieving full participation by all citizens— undergraduates Historically Black College or University particularly African Americans—in higher (HBCU) to have achieved Research I status education and, thereby, would experience in the science under the old Carnegie Classification system a significant diminution in the diversity of and engineering and the only institution within this group to its intellectual and professional workforce fields who later be truly comprehensive with respect to its that fuels the innovation, creativity and ser- array of undergraduate, graduate, and pro- vice that keeps America competitive on the obtain the Ph.D. fessional degree programs. It has produced global scale. degree than Rhodes Scholars, two in the last decade, as The confluence of these factors and oth- any college or well as Truman, Fulbright, Marshall, and ers makes it very difficult, if not impos- Presidential Scholars. Since its founding, sible, to use traditional definitions to cat- university in the Howard has been open to men and women egorize Howard within the constellation of United States. from all racial and ethnic groups. American research universities. It is both Among the HBCUs at the undergraduate an important HBCU undergraduate desti- level, Howard is a leader in many academic nation, especially for African Americans, areas, especially research and training proj- while at the same time it competes with ects involving the science, technology, engi- the full spectrum of the nation’s public and neering, and mathematics (STEM) disci- private research universities for extramu- plines. According to recent statistics from ral research dollars and for academically the National Science Foundation, Howard talented African Americans and students produces more African-American under- from all other racial/ethnic groups and from graduates in the science and engineering around the nation and world. fields who later obtain theP h.D. degree than Howard’s unique mission focuses on aca- any college or university in the United States. demic excellence and preparing students for At the graduate and professional degree leadership roles and service in the national levels, Howard maintains its uniqueness. and global communities. In addition, Howard

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 1 Chapter 1 prepares students to be highly qualified, Science Library and the Law Library, both socially aware, and ethical individuals. As of which opened in 2001. In addition, the a comprehensive research university with a Moorland-Spingarn Research Center, one diverse, predominantly African-American of the world’s largest and most comprehen- student body and faculty, Howard contributes sive research collections dedicated to docu- to the development of new knowledge that menting the history and culture of people of seeks to solve social and economic problems African descent throughout the world, is a in the domestic and international arenas that unique university asset. particularly impact the African Diaspora. For The University has an array of media example, its students and faculty are actively outlets that address the educational, social, engaged in research dealing with such economic, and informational needs of the diverse topics as the treatment of cancer and academic and wider communities. Its radio HIV/AIDS; sickle-cell anemia; the genomic station, WHUR-FM, and television sta- identification and tracking of racial dispari- tion, WHUT-TV, a PBS affiliate, serve the ties in various diseases; free press journalism Washington metropolitan area and beyond. programs around the world; global climate Each provides training laboratories that change; business and community develop- assist in preparing students for professional ment in minority communities; urban edu- broadcasting and other careers. cation reforms; and nanofabrication and the synthesis of nanomaterials. In an effort to promote excellence in teach- Location and Characteristics ing and research, the University has devel- The University’s main campus is located oped collaborations and established strong in Washington, DC, within five miles of the professional peer interactions and academic United States Capitol and consists of more linkages with other leading universities and than 57 buildings on more than 89 acres colleges domestically and internationally. In of land. It also maintains a 22-acre West this regard, Howard has also formed many Campus in upper Northwest Washington, educational partnerships with universities which houses the Law School; a 22-acre cam- in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America pus in Northeast Washington, home to the in keeping with its mission to groom 21st- Divinity School; and a 108-acre Beltsville, century students who will serve humankind Maryland research campus, which houses as citizens of the world through their profes- a major atmospheric science research facil- sional and personal pursuits. Additionally, ity. The 248 licensed-bed university hospi- the University has established partnerships tal (Howard University Hospital) provides through Memoranda of Agreement with services for a significant segment of the many governmental agencies. Washington, DC metropolitan community, Howard has an impressive number of dis- in addition to providing a clinical setting tinguished alumni which include a Nobel for training physicians, nurses, and other Laureate, Pulitzer Prize winners, U.S. gover- healthcare providers. nors, mayors of large U.S. cities, international The University’s mission and goals are opera stars, a former U.S. Supreme Court achieved through a diverse faculty, which Justice, U.S. Cabinet members, presidents for Fall 2008 consisted of 1,064 full- and of numerous disciplinary societies, foreign 456 part-time faculty and approximately heads of state, members of Congress, state 3,869 full- and part-time staff. Among the and local elected officials, and hundreds of faculty, 86% have earned the highest degree distinguished academicians and research- in their discipline. ers in numerous disciplines throughout the Howard’s total enrollment for AY 2008- nation and the world. 2009 was 11,227: 8,638 full- and 2,589 part- The University library system, typifying time students from virtually every state in Howard’s commitment to research, contains the Union, the District of Columbia, and 67 more than two million volumes and is a mem- countries. Of the total, 33% were graduate ber of the Association of Research Libraries. and professional students. In its 12 colleges Among the system’s many resources are and schools, the University offers a full the state-of-the-art, Louis Stokes Health array of undergraduate degrees in 80 dis-

2 ❘ Howard University Introduction ciplines, master’s degrees in 63 disciplines, on Higher Education (MSCHE) Self-Study Ph.D. degrees in 29 disciplines, other doc- examination has established informal bench- torates in 4 areas, 1st professional degree in marks for comparing Howard’s systems, 5 disciplines, and professional certifications operations, and policies against a small set in 5 areas. In addition, the University offers of research universities of comparable size 5 dual degrees. with medical and engineering schools. The Since its founding in 1867 by Major choice of these institutions resulted from General Oliver Otis Howard, a Civil War a review process that involved input from hero and Commissioner of the Freedmen’s many university stakeholders, i.e., deans, Bureau, Howard has awarded more than administrators, students, staff, and members 100,000 degrees and certificates in the of the Middle States Steering and Executive professions, the arts, the natural and social Committees. sciences, and the humanities. In the 2008 From this process, more than 30 institu- graduating class, the University conferred tions were recommended for consideration. 2,324 degrees, including 924 graduate and The following ten prominent national uni- professional degrees. versities were finally selected as peer/aspirant institutions for benchmarking purposes for selected aspects of the current Self- Institutional Aspirations Study: Case Western Reserve University, While there is great debate within the aca- Emory University, George Washington demic community as to the validity of rank- University, Georgetown University, Temple ings of universities by various popular pub- University, Tulane University, the University lications, Howard, nonetheless, generally of Maryland College Park, Vanderbilt competes favorably compared to the nation’s University, and Washington University in St. major research universities. Under the old Louis. While Howard University will con- Carnegie classification system for universi- solidate and significantly expand its standing ties, Howard was classified as a Research I among the nation’s leading research universi- university. Under the current Carnegie clas- ties, it remains mindful of the fact that it also sification system, revised in 2005, Howard must continue to compete with many liberal is classified in the top overall category for arts and master’s-focused institutions for the research universities with medical schools, nation’s best African-American undergradu- specifically Comprehensive Doctoral with ate students. In particular, Howard competes Medical/Veterinary Schools, alongside 78 with the nation’s leading HBCUs for talented of the nation’s leading research universities. African-American undergraduate students. In this 2005 Carnegie classification,H oward was listed in the second research grouping Important Recent among research universities, High Research Developments Activity. Further, in the 2009 U.S. News and World Report rankings, the University ranked The Swygert Legacy 102 out of 240 universities that achieved Since the last Self-Study in 1999, the “National Universities Rankings” stature. University has operated largely under the This same publication ranked Howard 36th leadership of its 15th President, H. Patrick among the Top 50 “Best Value” National Swygert (1995-2008). During this period, Research Universities when both quality the University experienced several impor- and cost factors were considered. tant developments that will undoubtedly Within this context, Howard, under be a part of President Swygert’s legacy of President Sidney A. Ribeau’s leadership, will enhanced academic standing, upgraded uni- seek to build upon the solid reputation it has versity infrastructure, academic program garnered among the nation’s research uni- streamlining, unprecedented fundraising, versities to advance to an even higher level. and improved community partnerships. Thus, the University will seek to advance Specifically, under President Swygert’s to Carnegie’s highest research activity cat- leadership, the Strategic Framework for egory, Very High Research Activity. Action I, and the Strategic Framework for The current Middle States Commission Action II were developed and a significant

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 3 Chapter 1 number of the goals mentioned in these stra- n sharpening academic offerings and tegic plans were implemented, which were quality; responsible for guiding many of the recent n increasing attention to graduate pro- academic, research, and student support grams; enhancements at the University. To undergird n developing a more robust research these plans, a successful Capital Campaign agenda and increased productivity; was launched in 2004 that exceeded its goal of n expanding service to the nation and the $250 million. Other major accomplishments world; during the Swygert presidency included n improving the gender balance in enroll- increased financial support for undergradu- ment, retention, and graduation ate and graduate students, increased oppor- n increasing internationalization of aca- tunities for students interested in interna- demic and research activity; and tional affairs, several capital improvements, n diversifying and strengthening aca- upgraded technological infrastructure, and demic, public, and private sector partner- new learning and research laboratories in ships in the United States and abroad. the natural sciences. The vision reinforces a commitment to To broaden its research mission, a new attracting, retaining, and supporting stel- building (Howard University Research lar faculty, staff, and administrators. An Building I or HURB1) was created in enhanced dedication to being a student-cen- 2005. New research centers were estab- tered university is evidenced by the launch lished, including the National Center for of the Students First Campaign, which is Atmospheric Sciences (NCAS), funded designed to improve the student experience by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric at Howard. Additionally, President Ribeau Administration (NOAA), and the General has expressed a strong commitment to Clinical Research Center (GCRC), funded assessment, evaluation, and accountability by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). in advancing the University’s mission and To enhance teaching and learning and the promoting development of its academic assessment thereof, with a strong emphasis programs. on faculty development, the University cre- President Ribeau’s vision promotes the ated a Center for Excellence in Teaching, aforementioned aspiration of advancing Learning, and Assessment (CETLA) in Howard University to be included as one of 2003. The University also opened a new the nation’s top 50 leading research univer- Office of Institutional Assessment and sities as defined by the indicators promul- Evaluation (OIAE) in 2008. The OIAE gated by such bodies as the Association of coordinates university-wide assessment of American Universities and the National student learning and institutional effective- Research Council. To accomplish this goal, ness and provides a mechanism for com- the President has outlined an agenda that municating data derived from such assess- embraces increased interdisciplinary study, ments to academic units as well as offices new models of teaching and learning, and responsible for University planning and streamlined academic offerings. The refo- budgeting. cusing and realignment of academic offerings, with a focus on the STEM disciplines, The Ribeau Vision is a cornerstone of this strategic vision and Sidney A. Ribeau, Ph.D. was appointed as will require identifying niche academic the 16th President of Howard University in areas and aligning the University’s budget- the Spring of 2008 and began leadership of ary allocations and priorities to pursue these the institution in August 2008. In the 2008 goals. To this end, the University is currently Opening Convocation, Fall 2008 State of involved in a transparent process of engag- the University, and Spring 2009 State of ing the faculty, the academic leadership, a the University Addresses, President Ribeau select commission consisting of internal articulated an expanded and evolving vision and external members, and the Academic for Howard that emphasizes the following: Excellence Committee of the Board of n Maintaining the commitment to an envi- Trustees in these efforts. Also characteristic ronment of academic freedom; of this effort is the creation of a new bud-

4 ❘ Howard University Introduction

get process that includes the formation of a University conducted a thorough and focused university-wide budget committee (Budget look at its research enterprise as an impor- Advisory Committee—BAC) headed by the tant aspect of the Self-Study. Specifically, Provost and Chief Academic Officer. A B C Howard sought to examine its infrastructure is charged with the responsibility of review- for supporting extramurally funded research; ing all aspects of the University’s budget and the reward system for faculty to conduct making recommendations to the President research and obtain grants and contracts that on capital and expenditure priorities and fund research; the allocation of funds to sup- measures of accountability. port faculty and student research; and the extent to which research is an integral part of the academic experience for undergradu- About the 2009 Self-Study ate, graduate, and professional students. This current Self-Study was shaped by Because of Howard’s Carnegie classification the comprehensive model as defined by and its aspirations as described above, it was the Middle States Commission on Higher a propitious time for the University to con- Education’s Self-Study: Creating a Useful duct a thorough and extensive assessment of Process and Report. Because the University its research enterprise. was in a period of transition that involved the The Self-Study was conducted also within appointment of a new president, the compre- the context of concerns identified by the hensive model was the most appropriate. The MSCHE in the 1999 site visit report. These comprehensive model approach enabled the concerns included the need to revisit the University to evaluate and assess the effec- University’s mission; to formulate a com- tiveness of the policies and practices that prehensive program to evaluate institutional undergird its systems and operations. The effectiveness and student learning; to develop approach was particularly beneficial to the a better balance between full deliberation on University and its new leadership during a policy issues and timely adoption and imple- period of transition. mentation of policy; to expand and deepen In addition to the 14 Standards articu- its research program; and to continue taking lated under the MSCHE Characteristics steps to assure future financial security. of Excellence in Higher Education, the Further, the Self-Study process was

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 5 Chapter 1 mindful of the MSCHE response to the ability of many students and their families University’s 2004 Periodic Review Report. to pay for a higher education. Also con- Specifically, it addressed the need to assess sidered within this Self-Study were such the alignment and integration of its under- realities as the increased competition from graduate, graduate, and professional aca- “for profit” and on-line universities, glo- demic programs to meet its traditional mis- balization of higher education, and more sion of providing high quality academic competition for African-American stu- programs, while reorganizing its academic dents and faculty from the full spectrum priorities to become a major research uni- of American higher education. The emer- versity. It also concentrated on the expec- gence of the millennium student, rapid tation that the University must implement and costly technological advances, new its plans to establish a university-wide approaches to teaching and learning, and comprehensive program for assessing assessment of core institutional planning institutional effectiveness and student and priorities also provided a critical con- learning. Similarly, the current Self-Study text for this Self-Study. sought to assess the extent to which the As a result of the Self-Study process, the University’s infrastructure for research had Faculty, administrators, staff, and students been strengthened and barriers to faculty committed significant amounts of time and research productivity had been eliminated energy to examine the University. Reports or mitigated. The University has addressed were prepared; data collected and analyzed; these concerns and others in a variety of and recommendations advanced—all of ways including: which are used to reflect upon the progress n the successful completion of the afore- of the institution and to inform its planning mentioned Strategic Framework for far into the future. In the sections of this Action I (SFAI) and the substantial summary status report that follow, major completion of Strategic Framework for findings and recommendations regard- Action II (SFA II); ing the 14 Standards for Accreditation as n the establishment of a cabinet level Vice described in the guidelines of MSCHE President for Research and Compliance; Characteristics of Excellence in Higher n the opening of the Center for Excellence Education, and resulting from a thorough in Teaching, Learning and Assessment and focused look at Howard’s research (CETLA); enterprise, are described and summarized. n the creation of an Office of Institutional Finally, recommendations for Howard’s Assessment and Evaluation (OIAE); future enhancement are made. n the adoption of a University-wide core curriculum for undergraduate students; and n the creation of an internal funding mechanism to promote faculty engagement in assessment and teaching effectiveness through the Fund for Academic Excellence. Finally, this study was conducted within the context of national and global trends and realities that affect Howard and all institutions of higher education. These trends and realities include the current domestic and global economic downturn that is occurring in the midst of rising costs and declining financial support for higher education from the public and private sectors. These downward trends have impacted endowments, operating budgets, the availability of scholarships, and the

6 ❘ Howard University 2 Design and Methodology

2 Design and Methodology

Self-Study Goals and pline of communication. He served as Chair Objectives of the MSCHE University-wide Self-Study Committee in 1987–1989. The Self-Study was designed to examine Howard’s continued progress in meeting the Steering and Executive Characteristics of Excellence standards as defined by the Middle States Commission Committees on Higher Education (MSCHE) and to docu- Consistent with MSCHE guidelines, ment its eligibility to have its accreditation a Steering Committee and an Executive reaffirmed.T he University’s governing board, Committee provided critical input to the administrative leadership, faculty, students, Self-Study process, including the review and university community will use the results and approval of the final Self-Study Report to further advance the University’s mission as submitted to the University President for a national research university of the first rank approval and submission to MSCHE. that is competitive with its peer and aspira- The Steering Committee consisted of a tional institutions, and to achieve its stated broad range of individuals from the University goals and objectives. community, specifically the chairs of the 15 In addition to the reaffirmation of accredi- Work Groups, as well as faculty, administra- tation, the ultimate goal of this Self-Study tors, staff, and students nominated by various was to produce a living document that pro- faculty, student, and staff stakeholder groups vides a “snapshot” of the University for its and units of the University. Additionally, relevant stakeholders to assist in defining the Chair of the Academic Excellence and securing Howard’s future within the Committee of the Board of Trustees also context of its past and current standing. served on the Steering Committee, assuring broad engagement of the Board of Trustees Self-Study Leadership and in the Self-Study process. Staff The Executive Committee, which was chaired by the Interim Provost and Chief The University President has provided Academic Officer, consisted of all members overall leadership of the Self-Study process of the President’s cabinet in addition to rep- with significant support from the Interim resentatives from the Student Association, the Provost and Chief Academic Officer and the Faculty Senate, and the Staff Association. The Senior Vice President for Health Sciences Committee was responsible for reviewing and and their respective staffs. The Self-Study providing input from senior level adminis- process began under the leadership of trators and student, faculty, and staff leaders President H. Patrick Swygert, who retired into the Self-Study process. This Executive from the University on June 30, 2008, and Committee advised the President on the prog- has continued under the leadership of Sidney ress of the Self-Study and made recommen- A. Ribeau, Ph.D., the University’s new pres- dations for presidential interventions when ident who began his duties in August 2008. needed. It also advised the President on pos- President Ribeau continued the Self-Study sible implications of Self-Study findings for process with the existing protocol. university planning and institutional renewal. Orlando L. Taylor, Ph.D., Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, chaired the current Self-Study process from Work Groups its inception. Dr. Taylor is a national leader Fifteen Work Groups were established to in graduate education and within the disci- conduct the work of the Self-Study—one

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 7 Chapter 2

Work Group for each of the 14 standards of Self-Study process and to serve as a member accreditation provided by MSCHE and one of the Steering and Executive Committees. additional Work Group on Research. The Other Board members, including the entire Research Work Group was formed, in part, Academic Excellence Committee, were because of issues raised by MSCHE in 1999, available for participation and engagement and because of the University’s commitment in the Self-Study Process as required. to significantly raise its research productivity and the extramural funds required to sup- Self-Study Office Staff port research. To ensure that each Work Group repre- A staff was hired to provide administra- sented students, faculty, staff, and adminis- tive and coordinating support for the devel- trators from across the University commu- opment of the Self-Study. The staff consists nity, nominations were sought and received of a coordinator, an administrative assistant, for Work Group membership from vari- a data analyst, two technical writers, a Web ous stakeholders and leaders: the Faculty designer, and a special events manager. Senate; the senior administrative officers of the University; the deans of the schools Other University Assessment and colleges; the directors of academic support units; the leadership of the University’s and Accreditation Initiatives staff organization; and the leadership of the Several other assessment and accreditation University’s student body. Volunteers were activities within Howard’s schools, colleges, also solicited throughout the University to and departments were conducted concur- submit their names and areas of interest for rently with this Self-Study process. These membership consideration. included an annual institutional review by From this pool of candidates, staffs from the U.S. Department of Education and pro- the Office of the Provost and the Office of fessional society accreditation efforts in the the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of schools of Law; Business; and Education; the Graduate School populated the work and the Colleges of Medicine; Engineering, groups in accordance with stated interests, Architecture and Computer Science; and experiences, and expertise of the nominees Dentistry. Where appropriate, the MSCHE and volunteers. All nominees and volunteers Self-Study process considered and utilized were subsequently selected and assigned to the results from these rigorous assessment a Work Group, resulting in approximately efforts. Four other assessment related activi- 7–10 persons per Work Group. ties are also being conducted concurrently Each Work Group was required to estab- with the MSCHE Self-Study, each of which lish key study questions for consideration, informed, as appropriate, the current exer- to review existing data from various uni- cise. These activities are outlined below. versity sources on the subject area of its n The Academic Excellence Initiative—An focus, to review assessment data generated initiative of the Academic Excellence by the Office of Institutional Assessment Committee of the Board of Trustees and and Evaluation obtained specifically for the the Office of theP rovost designed to pro- Self-Study, and to make recommendations vide assessments and recommendations to guide future institutional planning. required to align the departmental and programmatic offerings of the schools Board of Trustees and colleges with strategic objectives and financial resources. Engagement n The Long Range Financial Planning Because the Self-Study process was cen- Committee—A special committee of tral to several interests and initiatives of the the Board of Trustees charged with Board of Trustees, e.g., the Long Range recommending a strategy for aligning Financial Planning Committee and the the University’s budget with its mis- Academic Portfolio Initiative, the Chair of sion and goals, and with ascertaining the Board’s Academic Excellence Committee evolving trends in higher education and was designated to work directly with the the society at large that affect Howard

8 ❘ Howard University Design and Methodology

University’s present and future status schools/colleges and administrative units, as a national research university with a accreditation reports of schools/colleges, predominantly African-American stu- periodic reports from schools/colleges and dent body. administrative units, assessment plans, and n Presidential Select Commission on four Self-Study surveys. Academic Renewal—A Commission Four survey questionnaires were appointed by the President to review and designed—one for each of the four stake- make recommendations for adjustments holder groups: Howard University Self- to the University’s academic programs. Study 2008 Student Survey, Howard n Assessment of Administrative Processes University Self-Study 2008 Faculty Survey, Initiative—An initiative designed to Howard University Self-Study 2008 improve and optimize service delivery. Senior Administrator Survey, and Howard University Self-Study 2008 Staff Survey. Self-Study Methodology Items in 15 topic areas were distributed to the four stakeholder groups. All question- The University selected the compre- naires consisted of both closed-ended and hensive model as defined in the MSCHE open-ended items. The items that eventu- guidelines, Self-Study: Creating a Useful ally appeared on the questionnaires came Process and Report, for its institutional from four sources: (1) research questions Self-Study. This model examines all aspects in the Howard University Self-Study of programs and services, governing and Design that were generated by the Working supporting structures, resources, and edu- Groups; (2) items from the 1998 Self-Study cational outcomes in relation to Howard’s questionnaires; (3) new items suggested mission and goals. by the Steering Committee members, and Data for the study were collected from (4) new items suggested by the Office of interviews with university administrators, Institutional Assessment and Evaluation student focus groups, annual reports of (see Supporting Document 2.1).

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 9 Chapter 2

The surveys were made available to all supervisory position, 68.1% were female, students, faculty, senior and mid-level and 45.7% of them have been employed at administrators, and staff. Rather than sam- Howard University for more than 16 years pling each population, a census was con- (see Supporting Document 2.2). ducted to assess perceptions of the programs, resources, facilities, and services of Communications with the the University. Potential respondents were University Community contacted via web-based and paper-based formats. The Office of the University-Wide Self- The student sample consisted of a Study implemented several measures to total of 652 respondents—undergraduate communicate with the Howard community (81%), graduate (15.3%), and profes- to ensure that the Self-Study process was sional (3.7%) students. In addition, 73.2% interactive, transparent, and collaborative. of the student respondents were female Through use of the Howard University and 26.8% were male. The faculty sample e-mail system, periodic updates on Self- consisted of 150 respondents. The distri- Study activities, and milestones were pro- bution across faculty ranks was: Professor vided to the university community. A Web (32.7%), Associate Professor (36%), site was created specifically for the Self- Assistant Professor (20%), Lecturer Study. Additionally, Executive Committee, (4.7%), and Instructor (6.7%). In addi- Steering Committee, and Work Group tion, 55.3% of the faculty respondents members had access to draft documents were female and 44.7% were males. Most through a password-protected Web site, respondents in the senior and mid-level which provided these committees a forum administrators’ category were Directors to comment and share their work. with Faculty positions or Chairpersons The Self-Study design, draft reports, (40.3%), followed by Deans or Associate/ and initial draft final report have been Assistant Deans (25.45%). The remain- distributed to and vetted by the University ing administrators were senior level rang- Community via the Web site and in a ing from senior vice president to associ- series of Town Hall meetings. The final ate provost (34.25%). There were 50.7% Self-Study document was discussed and males, 37.3% females, and 11.9% of the subsequently approved by the Steering respondents did not report their gender. and Executive Committees prior to sub- Among the staff respondents, 35.9% held a mission to President Ribeau for final review, approval, and transmission to the MSCHE.

Supporting Documents 2.1 2008 Self-Study Survey Instruments 2.2 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys

10 ❘ Howard University Accomplishments Relative to the 3 1999/2004 MSCHE Concerns

Accomplishments Relative to the 3 1999/2004 MSCHE Concerns

Introduction n the opening of the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning and Assessment While it involved a comprehensive (CETLA); analysis of the University over the past n the creation of an Office ofI nstitutional two years, this Self-Study process also Assessment and Evaluation (OIAE); included a review of concerns identified by n the adoption of a University-wide core the MSCHE in the 1999 site visit report. curriculum for undergraduate students; These concerns included the need to revisit and the University’s mission; to formulate a n the creation of an internal funding comprehensive program to evaluate insti- mechanism to promote faculty engage- tutional effectiveness and student learning; ment in assessment and teaching effec- to develop a better balance between full tiveness through the Fund for Academic deliberation on policy issues and timely Excellence. adoption and implementation of policy; to Accomplishments related to the five expand and deepen its research program; MSCHE concerns that emerged following and to continue taking steps to assure future the 1999 reaccreditation process and the financial security. 2004 Periodic Review Report are detailed Further, the Self-Study process was as follows: mindful of the MSCHE response to the University’s 2004 Periodic Review Report. Concern #1: The University must closely Specifically, it addressed the need to assess review its mission in light of changing the alignment and integration of its under- times, specifically the nature of the undergraduate, graduate, and professional aca- graduate student body sought and the mix demic programs to meet its traditional mis- between the undergraduate and graduate/ sion of providing high quality academic professional studies. programs, while reorganizing its academic The Self-Study Work Group on the priorities to become a major research uni- University Mission was assigned the spe- versity. It focused also on the expectation cific task of reviewing the University’s that the University must implement its mission and charged with the responsibil- plans to establish a university-wide com- ity for making recommendations for refine- prehensive program for assessing institu- ments for Board of Trustees’ consideration. tional effectiveness and student learning. The Board received these recommendations Similarly, the current Self-Study sought to and approved a refined Mission Statement assess the extent to which the University’s at its June 2009 Executive Committee meet- research infrastructure had been strength- ing. The refined mission statement reaffirms ened and barriers to faculty research pro- Howard’s mission as a research university ductivity eliminated or mitigated. As and its commitment to pursuing students of stated in Chapter one, the University has exceptional quality and potential, as well as addressed these concerns and others in a a commitment to research, globalization, and variety of ways including: service. The Board approved revised Mission n the successful completion of the afore- Statement states: mentioned Strategic Framework for Howard University, a culturally Action I (SFAI) and the substantial diverse, comprehensive, research completion of Strategic Framework for intensive and historically Black Action II (SFA II); private university, provides an edu- n the establishment of a cabinet level Vice cational experience of exceptional President for Research and Compliance; quality at the undergraduate, gradu-

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 11 Chapter 3

ate, and professional levels to stu- A Select Commission on Academic dents of high academic standing and Renewal, chaired by the Provost and Chief potential, with particular empha- Academic Officer, will be appointed by the sis upon educational opportunities President by September, 2009. Among its for Black students. Moreover, the responsibilities will be a review of the orga- University is dedicated to attract- nization of the University’s academic struc- ing and sustaining a cadre of faculty who are, through their teaching, ture within the context of the University’s research and service, committed to mission, academic priorities, and fiscal the development of distinguished, resources. In making such recommenda- historically aware, and compassion- tions to the President, the Commission will ate graduates and to the discovery collect and consider such data as required to of solutions to human problems in make thoughtful decisions. For a fuller dis- the United States and throughout cussion of the responsibilities of the Select the world. With an abiding interest Commission and other initiatives that have in both domestic and international been underway at the University to enhance affairs, the University is committed the academic enterprise at the University, see to continuing to produce leaders for Chapter 5—Planning, Resource Allocation America and the global community. and Institutional Renewal. The issue of the University’s mix of undergraduate to graduate/professional Concern #2: The University must formu- students continues to be a subject of con- late a comprehensive program to evaluate siderable attention at the University. The institutional effectiveness, including clear institution has reaffirmed its commitment quantitative and qualitative measures of to realigning its academic program priori- student learning. ties, enrollment management strategies, and supporting budgets in such a way as Considerable attention and progress has to bring its enrollment ratio of undergrad- been made since 1999 to address issues of uate students to graduate/professional assessment of institutional effectiveness and students in line with that of many other of student learning. These issues were the private research universities, i.e., approxi- focus of Work Groups 7 and 14 in the cur- mately 40% undergraduate and 60% grad- rent Self-Study. In general, the assessment uate/professional. A detailed portfolio work was greatly enhanced by the creation assessment and academic program review of a new Office of Institutional Assessment process is underway at the University. The and Evaluation (OIAE), currently housed strategic goal of the program review effort in the Office of the Provost, and three uni- is to adjust the University’s academic pro- versity assessment committees: Committees grams and align them with its mission on College/School Assessment (CSAC), and strategic vision, goals and objec- Student Quality of Life (SQL), and the tives. The recently developed Provost-led University Community Experience (UCE). Budget Advisory Committee facilitates The OIAE has developed a university-wide the alignment of fiscal resources with the assessment and evaluation plan. University’s mission and strategic goals. In addition, considerable attention to aca- A Board of Trustees Ad Hoc Committee demic assessments and assessment of student on Long Range Financial Planning has learning has taken place within the colleges already rendered a report which proposes required to seek disciplinary accreditation strategies for realigning the University’s (e.g., law, medicine, dentistry, education, budget to meet the needs of its academic engineering, communication, business), as priorities and mission. well as assessments conducted on a periodic Additionally, a university-wide effort is basis by the Graduate School and the College underway to address gender imbalance in of Arts and Sciences. Other accomplishments the student body, with a particular focus on that have occurred in this area include: the declining presence of African-American n The University developed and imple- males (currently only approximately 36% mented Strategic Framework for (Fall 2008) of the student body). Action I and II:

12 ❘ Howard University Accomplishments Relative to the 1999/2004 MSCHE Concerns

n Center for Excellence , Teaching Learning, coaching to help units assess their and Assessment (CETLA) and effectiveness in achieving institu- n Assessment and review of all graduate tional goals. programs. n The Graduate School conducted peri- n The Office ofU niversity Communication odic reviews of each of its master’s developed and administered a survey in and doctoral degree programs through 2004 to incorporate alumni into the Uni- self-studies and analyses. The exercise versity’s outcomes assessment initiative. resulted in the “Future of Graduate n The Library System established an Education at Howard University” that assessment plan. rendered recommendations for future n A Task Force was organized in 2001 benchmarking and strategic planning to facilitate and galvanize the devel- for graduate programs. opment and institutionalization of the Concern #3: The University should develop Office of Institutional Assessment a better balance between full deliberation and Evaluation (OIAE). on policy issues and a timely adoption and n OAIE has proposed development implementation of policy. (with faculty input) of templates and a process for completing or updating Since the 1999 Self-Study, the University an annual assessment. has taken a number of actions to assure that n An assessment program for each aca- its policies, upon promulgation, are well demic and non-academic unit has been communicated to the community and imple- designed and is being implemented. mented in a timely manner. Specifically, the n The College of Arts and Sciences responsibilities of the former position of Vice has developed a protocol for the sys- President for Governmental Affairs have tematic review of its academic pro- been expanded into a Senior Vice President grams that includes a student devel- for Strategic Planning, Operations, External opment assessment component and Affairs & Chief Technology Officer. This has resulted in the evaluation of the University officer is responsible for -assur College’s 20 academic units. ing that policies related to external affairs, n The OAIE Committee arranged for including those associated with the Federal in-service learning, modeling, and government, is linked to the institution’s

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 13 Chapter 3 strategic planning process. Additionally, n A faculty-driven research think tank that technology is used in the most effec- was established to address barri- tive manner to communicate these and other ers to research at the University and policies effectively within the academic to explore the feasibility of estab- community. lishing certain niche areas in which Second, under President Ribeau’s lead- to prioritize research activity. The ership, a new position, Vice President Science, Technology, Engineering, and for Presidential Initiatives, was created to Mathematics (STEM) disciplines gen- assure that policies and initiatives emanat- erally have received the greatest degree ing from the Office of the President are of support for research priority. effectively implemented in a timely man- n A series of strategic meetings with fac- ner and that the University’s resources are ulty members with large-scale spon- properly aligned to implement such poli- sored research projects was convened cies and initiatives. to review pre- and post-award admin- Finally, an Executive Assistant to the istrative practices that impede the effi- President has been appointed to assure coor- cient processing of research grants and dination between the academic leadership of contracts. the University with academic support units n All internal faculty research programs and with the Office of the President. These and funding streams have been consoli- three individuals and their offices, working dated to establish a new university-wide together as a team, provide an institutional faculty research fund of approximately infrastructure for assuring that policies have $4 million. This program provides seed been promulgated by various sources within funding for junior and senior faculty the University, including Board of Trustees research in separate competitions, policies are carried out in an efficient and matching funds for selected extramural timely manner. efforts, and funding for undergraduate and graduate student research activity. Concern #4: The University should expand Interdisciplinary research is encour- and deepen its research program. aged. Attention to the University’s extra- n A variable salary component was estab- mural research enterprise has received lished to reward faculty for obtaining major attention from the University since extramural awards. the 1999 Self-Study. In addition to creat- n A faculty recognition program to show- ing a cabinet level officer (Vice President case and honor faculty researchers was for Research and Compliance) to provide established. leadership and administrative support for n After a thorough review, the Graduate the research enterprise, this Self-Study School recommended a new and more process included a special Work Group to liberalized policy governing Graduate examine issues related to research at the Faculty membership eligibility. University. As stated in Chapter 18—Research, the In addition, several other important devel- University has completely overhauled its opments in the research arena have occurred research infrastructure in recent years culmi- since the last reaffirmation of accreditation. nating in the appointment of a cabinet level They include: officer to provide stewardship of research n In 2006, the University engaged a con- administration and compliance. Moreover, sulting group to assist with the imple- the University has instituted compensation mentation of the approved research models to increase the reward system for organizational structure. The consult- faculty actively engaged in extramurally- ing group also assisted in the devel- funded research activity. Most recently, a opment and implementation of new Provost-led budget advisory committee rec- policies and procedures for research ommended and received presidential and administration. Board approval to enrich the University’s n A 13-member Faculty Research Advi- budget for FY 2010, specifically to enhance sory Council was formed. the University’s research infrastructure.

14 ❘ Howard University Accomplishments Relative to the 1999/2004 MSCHE Concerns

Concern #5: The University should con- In 2007, the University concluded a suc- tinue to take steps to assure future financial cessful Capital Campaign which raised stability. approximately $276 million. The value of The Board of Trustees has taken actions Howard’s endowment on June 30, 2007, to assure the University’s future financial when the Self-Study process was initiated, stability. Some of them have been taken in was $523.7 million. The University’s endow- the wake of the current national economic ment now stands at less than $500 million downturn. Other measures have been taken due to the national economic situation. independently of this situation in an effort A voluntary staff separation and retire- to assure fiscal prudency and to assure the ment package was completed which will financial health of the University. allow the University to overhaul its work- The Federal appropriation to the University force in view of current costs and strategic over the past five years has averaged objectives. Likewise, a number of fiscal approximately $230 million per year. The and human resource management controls University’s enrollment has remained rela- have been put into place. New technology- tively stable. Tuition rates have risen mod- based solutions, specifically theP eopleSoft estly in recent years. Efforts have now been Suite, have been introduced to enhance fis- made to bring tuition rates up to levels com- cal management. parable to other research universities without Other accomplishments that contrib- excluding students from its core constitu- ute to the University’s financial stability ency. Thus, tuition rates for the next three include: years will increase for undergraduates, grad- n Establishment of a coordinated cam- uate, and professional students. Over time, pus-wide donor solicitation approach, tuition rates are expected to approach market a strengthened alumni database and value for the Washington metropolitan area, revamped efforts related to donor with the caveat that more need-based finan- relations and stewardship. As a conse- cial aid will be made available to preserve quence, the rate of alumni giving has and enhance student access. increased steadily over the years.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 15 Chapter 3

n Continued exploration of ways to II, funded from a variety of sources. reduce operating costs, such as a com- The two new state-of-art libraries for prehensive review of the University’s Health Sciences and Law were feder- employee benefits package to ensure ally funded. The Howard University efficiencies and enhance employee Television network was also supported options, and the installation of more by federal funding. Planning funds modern and efficient mechanical sys- for the new Interdisciplinary Science tems in campus buildings. and Engineering Center (ISE) and the n Implementation of consistent and Charter Middle School in Science and effective cost control measures has Mathematics, have also been provided resulted in Howard’s rate of increases through Federal appropriations. The for operating expenditures tracking University’s charter school initiative is lower than national averages. designed to model for the region and n Development of five-year fiscal pro- nation best practices in urban school jections to facilitate long-term strate- education. gic planning and decision-making. n Developed and implemented a Faculty n Funding allocations made follow- performance salary program to encour- ing the blueprint laid out in Strategic age more extramural research funding. Framework for Action I and II and Strategies that were developed to continue several of the recommendations per- the progress made and to evaluate its effec- taining to repairs and maintenance tiveness in addressing the 1999 Self-Study (#29) and building renovations (#30) Concerns as well as those of the 2004 Periodic found in the 1999 Self-Study. Review Report are addressed further in each n Completed a number of the capi- chapter corresponding to a MSCHE Standard tal projects identified in SFA I and in this 2009 Self-Study Report.

16 ❘ Howard University 4 Mission and Goals

4 Mission and Goals

MSCHE Standard 1 The institution’s mission clearly defines its purpose within the context of higher education and indicates who the institution serves and what it intends to accomplish. The institution’s stated goals, consistent with the aspirations and expectations of higher education clearly specify how the institution will fulfill its mission. The mission and goals are developed and recognized by the institution with the participation of its members and its governing body and are used to develop and shape its programs and practices and to evaluate its effectiveness.

Introduction erally embraced by students, staff, faculty, and administrators. The mission is the foundation The University’s mission defines the char- for institutional effectiveness and assessment. acter, scope, and values of the institution. The This mission has driven strategic planning, as University’s goals are consistent with the aspira- is evident in Howard’s Strategic Framework tions and expectations of higher education and for Action I and II (SFA I and II), which set articulate how the institution aims to achieve the short- and long-term goals of the institu- the stated mission. This Standard addresses tion and established the criteria for assessing the University’s mission and goals in light of institutional effectiveness (see Chapter 5 for changing societal demands, institutional aspi- discussion on strategic planning). Additionally, rations, and universal imperatives. The goals the mission guides all activities such as recruit- and objectives have been closely aligned with ment and admissions, marketing, curriculum the University’s mission. The official mission proposals evaluation, and the creation of new statement is guided by the core principles of majors or programs. In addition to the mission, teaching, research, and service. The previous the University vision statement, adopted in mission quoted below described the institu- 1995, concisely states its purpose: tion’s central aim as approved and adopted in 1989 by the Board of Trustees. Howard University is a comprehensive research university, unique and irreplaceable, defined by its core val- Mission Statement ues, the excellence of all its activities Howard University is a comprehen- in instruction, research, and service, sive, research-oriented, historically and by its enduring commitment to Black private University providing an educating youth, African Americans educational experience of exceptional and other people of color in particu- quality to students of high academic lar, for leadership and service to our potential with particular emphasis nation and the global community. upon the provision of educational In 2007, the University’s Board and lead- opportunities to promising Black stu- ership reevaluated the mission statement to dents. Further, the University is dedi- assess its continued relevance given changing cated to attracting and sustaining a cadre of faculty who are, through their societal demands and the dynamic environ- teaching and research, committed ment in which the University functions. After to the development of distinguished careful consideration and reflection, the Board and compassionate graduates and to reaffirmed the mission statement maintain- the quest for solutions to human and ing that it was still relevant and appropriate social problems in the United States in view of the changing times. This sentiment and throughout the world. is reflected in findings from recent attitudinal Howard University’s mission statement is studies of the University’s primary stakehold- readily accessible, widely publicized, and gen- ers. Results from the 2008 Self-Study surveys

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 17 Chapter 4

indicated that the vast majority of students domestic and international affairs, the (84%), faculty (77%), senior administrators University is committed to continuing (78%), and staff (78%) feel that this empha- to produce leaders for America and sis accurately captures where the University the global community. wants to be and wishes to be perceived in the 21st century vision for the institution (see Supporting Document 4.1). Fulfilling the Mission However, in view of the changing impera- The achievement of the University’s mission The University tives in higher education and in the national is evidenced in many aspects of campus-wide and global climate, the mission of the activities. The following are samples of such has been University was revisited in 2009. The review activities as they relate to the various dimen- successful in suggested that slight changes be incorporated sions of the mission. Global racial disparities in providing an in the current mission statement to place more educational access and opportunities highlight emphasis on a complementary mix between the critical need for Howard to remain among educational teaching and research, with a focus on the the institutions taking the lead in providing experience of expectation that research must be an integral educational opportunities to persons of color. exceptional part of the undergraduate, graduate, and pro- As a Historically Black University, Howard is fessional education requirements at a research particularly committed to providing a quality quality to university such as Howard. Additionally, the education to students of African descent from students of review suggested that explicit mention could throughout the world. While the University is high academic be made of a commitment to attracting, sensitive to the issues of diversity and the real- retaining, and sustaining a cadre of faculty ity of the international character of its student potential with who, through teaching and research, are com- population, faculty, and staff, the University particular mitted to the development of motivated and community decided to disregard any retreat emphasis upon compassionate graduates and the quest for from an emphasis on Black students, which solutions to human and societal problems in would represent a shift in the University’s long- the provision the United States and throughout the world. standing commitment. of educational Another suggestion was that the mission The University has been successful in provid- opportunities reflects an adaptation to changing require- ing an educational experience of exceptional ments and opportunities in an increasingly quality to students of high academic potential for promising technological and global society. Drawing with particular emphasis upon the provision of black students. upon the insights and recommendations, the educational opportunities for promising black University made the following refinement to students. The results from the 2008 Self-Study the Mission Statement, which was adopted surveys revealed that this emphasis is strongly by the Board of Trustees in June 2009: supported by students (89%), faculty (85%), senior administrators (87%) and staff (86%) Howard University, a culturally (see Supporting Document 4.1). diverse, comprehensive, research intensive and historically Black pri- According to the National Science vate university, provides an educa- Foundation, Howard is the largest producer tional experience of exceptional qual- of African-American undergraduate students ity at the undergraduate, graduate, and who later get a Ph.D. in science and engineer- professional levels to students of high ing fields (see Supporting Document 4.2). academic standing and potential, with Additionally, Howard ranks as the highest particular emphasis upon educational producer of African-American on-campus sci- opportunities for Black students. ence and engineering doctoral degrees nation- Moreover, the University is dedicated ally, indicating outstanding performance in the to attracting and sustaining a cadre of graduate enterprise, a central university goal. faculty who are, through their teach- Increasing the graduate and professional stu- ing, research and service, committed to the development of distinguished, dent population continues to be a priority as historically aware, and compassion- the University has taken preliminary steps to ate graduates and to the discovery align its budget with academic priorities with of solutions to human problems in the appointment of an ad hoc committee to the the United States and throughout the Board of Trustees in 2007. The impact of these world. With an abiding interest in both relevant initiatives is still evolving.

18 ❘ Howard University Mission and Goals

Table 4.1: Average SATC and ACT Scores, HS-GPA, and Top 10% HS Class for Enrolled Howard University First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, Fall 2000-2007

FTIC Category 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Size of Entering Freshmen Class 1,438 1,524 1,375 1,460 1,453 1,415 1,520 1,461

Avg. High School GPA 3.17 3.12 3.15 3.04 3.20 3.19 3.21 3.16

Grad. in Top 10% of HS Class 21% 18% 19% 23% 22% 21% 24% 21%

Avg. SATC of Stud. Matriculated 1062 1046 1079 1081 1082 1093 1076 1049

Avg. ACT of Stud. Matriculated 22 21 22 22 22 22 22 22

Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

At the undergraduate level, the University through its Office of theD ean of the Chapel has been successful in attracting an increas- and other campus organizations has partici- ing number of highly qualified undergraduate pated in a number of humanitarian, social, students. During the past ten years, Howard political, and other activities throughout the University’s high school SATC and ACT years. The Office of the Chapel established scores, High School GPA, and percent of stu- Alternative Spring Break (ASB) in 1994, dents in the top 10% of their high school class where students participate in a number of have remained consistently high as depicted projects during the Spring recess. ASB is in Table 4.1. a service-learning experience in which stu- Another example of Howard successfully dents use their gifts and skills to meet the attracting an increasing number of highly needs of target communities and the world qualified undergraduate students is evident at large. In 2006, in the wake of Hurricane in the number of its scholars. During the Katrina, 250 students answered the call to last decade, the University has produced serve through the ASB program in New 2 Rhodes Scholars, 1 Marshall Scholar, 2 Orleans, LA. This number increased dra- Truman Scholars, 10 Presidential Scholars, matically to 500 students in 2007 and 550 19 Fulbright Scholars, 1 Luard Scholar, and students in 2008 (see Supporting Documents 10 Pickering Fellows. Also, there were 239 4.6 and 4.7). Due to the resounding successes National Achievement Scholars enrolled of ASB in New Orleans, during the 2009 during the academic year 2007-2008 (see Spring recess with approximately 300 stu- Supporting Documents 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5). dents, ASB expanded its outreach program The University’s goal of attracting and to the Washington metropolitan area, New sustaining an outstanding cadre of fac- Orleans, Chicago, and Detroit. Additionally, ulty is exemplified by the large number of during the 2007, 2008, and 2009 Spring faculty members who received commen- breaks, members of the Howard Chapter dation in a number of national organiza- of Engineers Without Borders devoted tions including the National Association their time to assist with projects in Egypt, for the Advancement of Science, the Panama, Central America, Kenya, and Brazil Institute of Medicine, National Academy (see Supporting Documents 4.8 and 4.9). of Engineering, and American Academy As a leading Historically Black University, of Nurses. In addition, a number of faculty Howard has expanded its influence in the have received awards such as the Carnegie national and global arena through its academic Scholar, Fulbright Ambassador, Fulbright partnerships with universities abroad. In the Senior Specialist, Fulbright Fellow, National past several years, the University has created Endowment for the Humanities Fellow, and and expanded domestic and international part- the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s 20 nerships with universities in North America, Best Scholars in Academia (see Supporting South America, Asia, Africa, and Europe that Document 4.3). facilitate research, faculty and student mobility In fulfilling the mission of developing and international cooperation (see Supporting compassionate graduates, the University Document 4.10).

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 19 Chapter 4

University Goals Findings Building on the achievements of the 1996 1. While the University’s mission and Strategic Framework for Action I (SFA I) (see other foundational documents are regularly Supporting Document 4.11), the University revisited, there has been no established embarked on the Strategic Framework for timetable for reviewing the University’s Action II (SFA II) in 2000 under the leadership mission statement. and direction of President Swygert. In March 2. The mission statement did not explic- 2000, an e-mail was distributed to all university itly address the international character or faculty members outlining the SFA II develop- commitments of the University. ment process. The University community was 3. The mission statement focused more encouraged to submit ideas and proposal for on students of high academic potential and incorporation into SFA II in April of 2000 to the less on students with academic achieve- Office of University Research and Planning. ment. During the Board of Trustees Fall Retreat in 4. The mission statement was not strong September 2000, the Board reviewed and in its commitment to research and gradu- approved the goals of SFA II. For strategic con- ate/professional education. tinuity, SFA II was developed around the same Recommendations for Improvement four overarching goals as SFA I. Of the four goals, two are directly related to academic pro- 1. Institutionalize a policy to review the grams: (1) strengthening academic programs University’s mission at least every five and services and (2) promoting excellence in years. teaching and research. Goals three and four are 2. Continue to recruit and retain highly associated with, increasing private support and qualified students and faculty to further enhancing national and community service the overall university mission inclusive (see Supporting Document 4.12). In Chapter 5, of the commitment to expand its interna- some of the achievements with respect to the tional character, its commitment to recruit four strategic goals are highlighted. students with high potential, and its commitment to expand research and graduate/ Summary, Findings and professional education. Recommendations Supporting Documents The University’s legacy, reflected in its mission, retains salience for the University com- 4.1 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard munity. The foci remain on providing an excep- University Self-Study Surveys tional educational experience to students of 4.2 Role of HBCUs as Baccalaureate- both high achievement and potential, with spe- Origin Institutions of Black S&E cial attention to Black students. The research Doctorate Recipients emphasis articulated in the mission and goals 4.3 FACTS 2009—Howard University continues to be strengthened by faculty produc- 4.4 Howard University Junior Named tivity and increased attention to expanding and Truman Scholar deepening the research enterprise. The dedica- 4.5 Three Howard Seniors Awarded tion of faculty to the development of compas- Fulbright Scholarships sionate graduates and a focus on human and 4.6 Alternative Spring Break Summary social problems also ground the Howard expe- 4.7 Howard University’s WHUR 96.3 FM rience. The mission has driven strategic plan- “A Helping Hand” Radiothon ning, as is evident in SFA I and II. Currently, the 4.8 Engineers Without Borders—HU University is achieving its mission through four Improve Lives in Kenya, Brazil overarching goals: (1) strengthening academic 4.9 Howard Students from Across Nation programs and services; (2) promoting excel- Spend Spring Break Helping Needy in lence in teaching and research; (3) increasing New Orleans and Panama private support; and (4) enhancing national and 4.10 Strategic Framework for Action II community service. The following findings and Status Report recommendations for improvement emerged 4.11 Strategic Framework for Action I from this Standard: 4.12 Strategic Framework for Action II

20 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation 5 and Institutional Renewal

Planning, Resource Allocation 5 and Institutional Renewal

MSCHE Standard 2 An institution conducts ongoing planning and resource allocation based on its mission and goals, develops objectives to achieve them, and utilizes the results of its assessment activities for institutional renewal. Implementation and subsequent evaluation of the success of the strategic plan and resource allocation support the development and change necessary to improve and to maintain institutional quality.

Introduction ning process, which provided for wide con- Howard has made progress in enhancing stituent participation. To prepare its last insti- university planning, resource allocation, and tutional plan, SFA II, a 30-member University advancing institutional renewal through two Advisory Committee (UAC), comprised of 25 strategic plans. However, the University has faculty members drawn from all the schools experienced some fluctuations in funding and colleges, two students, and three admin- streams that have impacted the University’s istrative staff, was appointed in September planning and resource allocation process. As 2000 and given the charge by then President a private research university, partially funded Swygert. UAC formed taskforces in four with an annual Congressional appropria- strategic areas: (1) strengthening academic tion administered by the U.S. Department of programs and services; (2) promoting excel- Education, the planning and resource alloca- lence in teaching and research; (3) increasing tion processes at the institution are partially private support; and (4) enhancing national affected by the Federal appropriation. This sec- and community service. These four areas tion focuses on the University’s planning and broadly guide the University and its units in resource allocation processes that are intended their planning, resource allocation, and edu- to advance the mission and ensure that the cational activities. In November 2000, UAC institution continues to improve performance. submitted its Report to the President. The President’s preliminary and revised drafts of SFA II were distributed electronically to Institutional Planning the University community in January and The planning process at the University February of 2001 for comments. During April involves the entire institution and is con- 2000, Town Hall meetings were scheduled for ducted through various mechanisms. General all university stakeholders (faculty, students, direction for the planning and improve- staff, and alumni). The SFA II summary of ment processes is derived from the Board’s comments was presented to the Board for focus areas, which then are emphasized in review and possible incorporation into the the President’s annual target areas for the final document. Adopted by the Board of University. At the beginning of each aca- Trustees in June 2001, SFA II focused on 31 demic year, schools and colleges typically objectives organized under the four afore- hold annual retreats or designated meetings mentioned overarching goals (see Supporting to discuss and review their plans for the Document 5.1). upcoming year. Additionally, at the end of The University’s strategic goals and related the fiscal year each school/college and unit/ areas of emphasis provided the context for department produces an annual report of each unit to establish and pursue its own indi- the progress made towards achieving goals, vidual goals and objectives. In SFA II, there inclusive of future plans. is no one-to-one correspondence between Over the past decade, the University has goals or objectives and elements of the mis- demonstrated commitment to institutional sion; rather, all or most elements of the mis- renewal through a concerted strategic plan- sion guide every objective in the strategic

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 21 Chapter 5 plan. To implement SFA II, many academic in terms of using an electronic communica- and administrative units, in response to self- tion method to enhance education at the insti- assessments, developed and carried out stra- tution. The University’s progress toward digi- tegic plans. tizing essential information and building the With the Federal appropriation remaining requisite infrastructure to facilitate asynchro- flat for the last six years and current expenses nous education (Objective 10) is noteworthy. increasing by 4.8% and revenues by 2.5% Founders Library has created a continually annually, achievement of the strategic goals has expanding digitized reserve course collection been difficult.H owever, forward movement has that serves all academic departments, except occurred on a number of critical projects con- Law and Health Sciences, which have their sidered beneficial to its success.A lthough most own digital libraries. Prior to 2004, there SFA I objectives have been achieved, as sum- was no digitized course reserve collection. marized in SFA II (June, 2001) (see Supporting Presently, about 300 course-required read- Document 5.1) and SFA II Year 5 Status Report ings are digitized and available to students (April, 2007) (see Supporting Document 5.2), via the Internet. In the past two years, more several on-going projects remain. Examples instructors have linked to digital course read- illustrative of accomplishments in the four ing materials from their Blackboard course main goals are as follows: sites, thus making the material more directly accessible to their students. Goal I: Strengthening Academic Programs Major progress has also occurred in pro- and Services viding access to computing resources for In an effort to provide students with an all students. University residence halls were excellent learning environment that embod- upgraded with high-quality access to voice, ies and reflects the vast explosion of knowl- data, and video communications (Objective edge, the interconnectedness of traditional 7). Students were provided high-bandwidth academic disciplines and the integration of switches and wired access ports to the teaching and research, the University identi- University data network to ensure access fied 13 objectives to fulfill GoalI . Only a few to multimedia presentations for both class- objectives are highlighted herein with regard room and distance education applications. to this goal. Significant efforts have been made Additionally, the University enhanced its campus-wide wireless capacity (Objective 9). The Middle School of Mathematics and Science, established at Howard in 2004, is the prototype for information technology at the University. Wireless access is now available in the Carnegie Building, Blackburn lab, all residence halls, the Technology Center, the School of Business, the two new digital libraries, and key conference rooms in the Administration Building, Howard University Hospital, Howard Center, the College of Engineering, Architecture and Computer Science, and the College of Medicine. Wireless capacity has been extended to the School of Law and to key College of Dentistry facilities. Additionally, significant progress has been made in establishing additional public and private strategic partnerships (Objective 3). Congressional and foundation funding has been maintained for a University-U.S. State Department program (the Rangel Fellows) to increase minority participation in the Foreign Service. Former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice confirmed in a letter to

22 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal

President Swygert her continued support of selected Howard in 2004 for its academic part- these recruiting initiatives. With the recent nership, under which the University received selection of twenty (20) 2009 Rangel Fellows, an in-kind contribution of software and other 81 current or past Rangel Fellows have either technology, including computer based prod- entered the Foreign Service or are in the pro- uct management, engineering, design and cess of doing so (see Supporting Document manufacturing software, as well as hardware 5.3). Also significant, Kauffman Foundation and training (see Supporting Document 5.9). funding supports the promotion of entrepre- neurial education throughout the University. Goal II: Promoting Excellence in Several other partnerships have been created Teaching and Research recently with public and private organiza- Efforts to increase the number of endowed tions, a few of which are described herein. chairs at the University to promote excel- The College of Dentistry in association with lence in teaching and research (Objective 17) the D.C. Dental Society and the American are encouraging. Gift-established chairs have Dental Association, held for D.C. children been established in Architecture, Business, its 7th annual “Give Kids a Smile Day” (see Medicine, and Arts and Sciences. An ini- Supporting Document 5.4). tial gift from United Technologies estab- In July 2008, the Division of Pharmacy, lished an Endowed Professorship, which will College of Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied rotate between Mechanical Engineering and Health Sciences, through its partnership with Business. Two endowed chairs are in place or CVS Pharmacy, launched its new, state-of- in progress in the School of Business—the the-art Pharmacy Practice Laboratory where KPMG endowed chair in Accounting has students hone their skills in a practice setting, been filled and the John E. Jacobs chair is learning how to dispense medication, coun- in progress. Both the James Silcott Chair sel patients and utilize the latest technology of Architecture and the David and Lucile found in many pharmacies (see Supporting Packard Professor of Materials Science were Document 5.5). In April 2008, the American filled. Additionally, $12.8 million from the Association of Advertising Agencies initi- Howard University Capital Campaign has ated a partnership with the John H. Johnson been designated to establish 13 endowed School of Communications. This new part- chairs. In March 2008, former Board CEO nership established a comprehensive center and Chairman of Time Warner Inc., was to address challenges, eliminate barriers, appointed first holder of the Gwendolyn S. and identify opportunities to achieve a more and Colbert I. King Endowed Chair in Public diverse and inclusive advertising industry Policy for the period, March 1, 2008 to June workforce at middle to senior management 30, 2009. This chair is intended to encourage levels (see Supporting Document 5.6). Also highly accomplished individuals to come to in 2008, Bingham McCutchen, LLP launched Howard to share their experiences with stu- at the Howard University School of Law its dents (see Supporting Document 5.10). 1L Diversity Fellowship program, the most Faculty excellence is denoted by the increase recent example of Bingham’s commitment to in membership in the National Academies and recruiting, retaining, and advancing lawyers other professional recognitions for outstand- who will contribute to the diversity of the ing scholarship and leadership (Objective 20) firm and the legal profession (see Supporting (see Supporting Document 5.11). Dr. Renee Document 5.7). Jenkins, former Chair of the Department of In March 2007, former President Swygert Pediatrics and Child Health, became the first and Mrs. Festina S. Bakwena, Permanent African-American President of the American Secretary of the Ministry of Education Academy of Pediatrics for the 2007-2008 year. of the Republic of Botswana, signed a In December 2008, Leo E. Rouse, D.D.S., Memorandum of Understanding outlining Dean of the College of Dentistry, was selected Howard’s commitment to support the new by the American Dental Education Association Botswana International University of Science (ADEA) to serve on the Commission on and Technology (see Supporting Document Dental Accreditation (CODA), the accredit- 5.8). The Partners for the Advancement of ing body for all dental education programs Collaborative Engineering Education (PACE) in the United States. Also in January 2009,

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 23 Chapter 5

Dean Rouse was honored as the recipient of a Campaign for Howard was launched in 2002 2009 American Dental Education Association with the goal of raising $250 million over a (ADEA) Presidential Citation, which recog- five-year period.T he Campaign ended March nizes individuals and institutions that have 2008 with gifts, pledges, and planned gifts significantly contributed to the ADEA mis- totaling $276 million, which exceeded the ini- sion to provide leadership in the dental educa- tial Campaign goal by 10% (see Supporting tion community to address issues influencing Document 5.14). This accomplishment rep- education, research, and the delivery of oral resents the largest successful fund-raising health care (see Supporting Document 5.12). endeavor ever achieved by an institution pri- Senior Vice President for Health Sciences, marily serving African Americans. Outlined Donald E. Wilson, M.D., M.A.C.P., received are major dimensions of the Campaign that the Association of American Medical made it an important development in the his- Colleges’ (AAMC) most prestigious award— tory of Howard University. the Abraham Flexner Award for distinguished n Alumni participation was increased service to medical education in November from 12% at the start of the Campaign 2008 (see Supporting Document 5.13). Dr. to 17%. The national average participa- Winston Anderson, a professor of Biology, tion rate is 12.4%. was listed among the 20 best scientists in n Alumni gifts to the Campaign repre- academia by the Howard Hughes Medical sented, at 32%, the second largest cat- Institute, which awarded him $1 million to egory of contributors; again higher than help transform his innovative ideas into action the national average of 27.5% for such (see Supporting Document 5.11). campaigns. Relevant initiatives to create new inter- n Howard was the first university whose disciplinary research groups are underway primary focus is to serve the educational in several schools and colleges (Objectives needs of African Americans to launch 19). These include the Keck Center for and successfully complete a Capital the Design of Nanoscale Materials for Campaign of this magnitude. Molecular Recognition and the National Figure 5.1 illustrates the distribution of Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration contributions to the Campaign. The Capital (NOAA) National Center for Atmospheric Campaign supports the University endow- Sciences (NCAS). Other important inter- ment, ensuring the long-term financial disciplinary research groups include human viability of the University. Additionally, it genome, environmental science, neurosci- has funded several efforts to enhance insti- ence, and material science as well as compu- tutional effectiveness in the area of student tational biology and high performance com- learning: puting. Interdisciplinary research groups have also been formed between researchers in the School of Law and their counterparts in the College of Arts and Sciences and 83 Gifts the School of Education. Additionally, an & Pledges Interdisciplinary Graduate Environmental over $1 Million Studies Program has been approved by the = $186 Million Graduate Faculty and is undergoing further 173 Gifts & Pledges review. All schools and colleges are collab- between $100,000 and $999,999 orating under the umbrella of the Institute = $51 Million for Entrepreneurship, Leadership and Innovation made possible by the grant from Over 35,500 Gifts & Pledges the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. under $100,000 = $39 Million Goal III: Increasing Private Support A major component of the SFA II was the Capital Campaign (Objective 25), which Figure 5.1: Capital Campaign Contributions addressed the need to increase and diver- by Size sify university revenues. To that end, the Source: Office of University Advancement

24 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal

n $187,000 established 8 Lectureships; was completed under SFA I. Phase II of the n $2.5 million created 4 Professorships; LeDroit Park Initiative (Objective 29) was to n $12.8 million initiated 13 Endowed convert 29 of the areas boarded-up proper- Chairs; ties and 17 vacant lots in the area into hom- n $91.5 million produced 293 Named eownership opportunities, thereby providing Scholarships; and a catalyst for neighborhood-wide revitaliza- n $97 million established and enhanced tion. Today, 45 homes have been constructed hundreds of funds supporting individual and rehabilitated; their owners are University schools and colleges. employees, municipal firefighters and police Table 5.1 shows a detailed analysis of the officers, DC public school teachers, and breakout between restricted and unrestricted area community members. Infrastructure gifts that were received during the Capital improvements were made in Phase III, Campaign. As is the case with most capi- including street resurfacing, new street light- tal campaigns, contributions to Howard’s ing, bricking of sidewalks, tree planting and Capital Campaign came in the form of gifts, traffic calming measures undertaken by the pledges, planned gifts and gifts in-kind. City, supplemented by $5 million in federal grants awarded to the University. Goal IV: Enhancing National and The American Institute of Architects rec- Community Service ognized the LeDroit Park Initiative with its The University has a long tradition of com- 2002 Community Design Award and its 2003 mitment to national and community service. Honor Award for Outstanding Regional and Each year, the Office ofU niversity Research Urban Design. The Washington Post hailed and Planning, in association with the the plan as “the most significant redevelop- Howard University Community Association, ment proposal to be unveiled in the District publishes a booklet that identifies the many since the master plan for the revitalization city and community activities engaged in by of Pennsylvania Avenue was approved 23 University faculty, staff, students, alumni, years ago” and urged the City to “endorse and retirees (see Supporting Document the Howard initiative as a prototype for revi- 5.15). One example is the LeDroit Park talization of other neighborhoods.” The suc- Initiative. Over a decade ago, Howard con- cess of this project has been cited as key to sciously decided to use its assets, capabili- Fannie Mae’s decisions to invest $1 billion ties, and influence to revitalize the adjoining in District of Columbia neighborhoods, and neighborhood. With strong support from the replicate the program at more than 15 uni- Fannie Mae Foundation and the District of versities nationwide. Columbia Government, and considerable National and community service was community input, the University developed exemplified through the development of a a plan for the 151-block area within a 1-mile National Digital Network to support urban radius of the main campus. The LeDroit Park education (Objective 30). The University Initiative was regarded as an opportunity to designed a National Digital Network that was demonstrate to the nation’s capital that urban used to distribute events of the White House neighborhoods can be turned around, and Conference for Helping America’s Youth, held that sustainable, balanced, comprehensive on Howard’s campus, over the Internet and via revitalization can be accomplished. satellite to participating partner-universities. Phase I of the LeDroit Park Initiative Nineteen flagship universities representing 18

Table 5.1 Comparison of Restricted vs. Unrestricted Gift Types

Gifts Pledges Planned Gifts Gifts In Kind Totals

Restricted $87,284,310 $76,653,831 $30,096,443 $41,000,000 $235,034,584

Unrestricted 6,877,349 29,272,813 4,865,263 0 41,015,424

TOTAL $94,161,659 $105,926,644 $34,961,706 $41,000,000 $276,050,009

Source: Office of University Advancement

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 25 Chapter 5 states participated, with each able to convert n Faculty Performance Evaluation System video streams sent from Howard into desired —An on-going evaluation that seeks format(s) for their campuses. Furthermore, to improve the existing faculty perfor- the partner-universities were to provide com- mance evaluation process. ments, feedback, and inquiries via Conference n Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) e-mail servers based at Howard. —An on-going evaluation system that seeks to improve staff performance. The Other Planning and Improvement Office of Human Capital Management Activities/Efforts recently restructured the PEP. Other planning and improvement activities n Customer Service Training—A univer- at Howard include: sity-wide initiative to provide employ- n The Academic Excellence Initiative— ees with customer service training with An initiative of the Academic Excellence the aim of transforming the workforce Committee of the Board of Trustees and culture to one that is customer-centered, the Office of theP rovost designed to pro- placing priority on delivering outstand- vide assessments and recommendations ing service and leadership to all stake- required to align the departmental and holders, especially the students. programmatic offerings of the schools Additionally, individual departments/units and colleges with strategic objectives have been actively engaged in planning and and financial resources. improvement activities that are clearly com- n The Long Range Financial Planning municated to their constituents with out- Committee—A special committee of comes incorporated in the assessment of the Board of Trustees charged with these various departments/units. Such plans recommending a strategy for aligning are as follows: the University’s budget with its mis- n Office of the Internal Auditor’s Fiscal sion and goals, and with ascertaining Year 2008 Audit Plan—Approved by evolving trends in higher education and the President and the Board of Trustees’ the society at large that affect Howard Audit and Legal Committee Chairperson University’s present and future status in October 2007. This plan emphasized as a national research university with a assessment of the status of corrective predominantly African-American stu- actions that the University and Hospital dent body. Offices agreed to take in response to inter- n Presidential Select Commission on nal and external audit reports and federal Academic Renewal—A Commission agreements. Moreover, the plan directs appointed by President Ribeau to review audits into areas where the University’s during the 2009-2010 academic year and and Hospital’s assets and resources are make recommendations for adjustments exposed to risk of theft, mismanagement, to the University’s academic programs. or misappropriation (see Supporting n Assessment of Administrative Processes Document 5.16). Initiative—An initiative designed to n Howard University Libraries Strategic improve and optimize service delivery. Plan for the Main Library Group n Students First Campaign—A multi- (Revised August 2007)—A detailed phase initiative launched in Spring 2009 description of the library’s goals and designed to integrate the “student-centered strategic direction for the next five years learning concept” throughout all facets as well as performance indicators for of the University in order to improve the each strategic direction (see Supporting overall “student experience” at Howard Document 5.17). University. n 2008 Enrollment Management Strategic n Howard University African-American Plan—A five-year enrollment plan devel- Male Initiative—A long-term effort that oped to provide a systematic evaluation seeks to increase the number of first- of the current enrollment situation and to time-in-college African-American male design strategies to achieve enrollment students at Howard University in under- missions with each of the schools and col- graduate programs. leges (see Supporting Document 5.18).

26 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal

Resource Allocation process and initiatives to improve services, At Howard, the process of assigning control costs, increase efficiency, and make resources (i.e., human, financial, physical, and transparent its use of resources. In the Fall technical) to projects to ensure their optimal of 2008, a new TRAC that is chaired by the use is driven by the SFA II and the availabil- Interim Provost and Chief Academic Officer ity of funds. The university’s formal budget and includes deans, enrollment management development process for the University typi- staff, and student leaders was convened to cally begins annually in November by conven- develop a 5-year tuition strategy. The prin- ing the Tuition and Rates Advisory Committee ciples of the new strategy were as follows: (TRAC). However, the existing tuition recom- n Planning Horizon—multi-year approach mendation process was identified for improve- leads to predictability which is desirable ment and modified duringAY 2008-2009. for all constituencies; n Competitors—Howard’s tuition should Old Tuition Process not be lower than tuitions at other premier Previously, the TRAC, chaired by the Office HBCUs; for non-HBCUs, Howard should of Financial Analysis and Budget Director, was over time move into alignment with other comprised of the school and college deans, Research 1 private universities and/or “out student leaders, and representatives from the of state” tuition for public universities, as Office of theP rovost, Enrollment Management, Howard draws from a national pool and Student Affairs, and the Office of Financial it needs comparable resources to provide Analysis and Budget (OFAB). The TRAC care- a high quality education while providing fully considered information on a number of substantial financial aid to enable access; important factors impacting tuition, including n Preserve Access—access to a Howard national trends, competitors’ data, and enroll- education must be preserved; this goal is ment and financial aid data. The Committee most properly measured by the number made recommendations for changes in tuition, of well-qualified students able to attend housing, meal plans, and other student fees to Howard regardless of their family’s finan- the CFO. The CFO then recommended a tuition cial situation; increased tuition rates part- and rates schedule to the President for approval nered with increased need-based aid will and presentation to the Board of Trustees. open access more productively and effectively than low tuition rates; and New Tuition Strategy n The Need—premier education like the The tuition determination process is not one received by Howard students comes viewed as an isolated decision; rather, it is at a price; increased tuition will help fund considered integral to the comprehensive academic program, research, and infra- reform underway at all levels and thus is syn- structure improvements for current and chronous with the University’s new budget future Howard students.

Table 5.2: Howard University Approved and Projected Tuition Rates for AY 2009-2013

Tuition Rates

Classification Current AY2009-10 AY2010-11 AY2011-12 AY2012-13 AY2013-14

Undergraduate Program $14,205 $15,270 $17,100 $19,150 $21,450 $24,025

Graduate Programs 17,385 19,125 21,995 25,295 29,090 33,455

MBA Program 17,385 22,950 24,195 27,495 31,290 35,655

School of Divinity 15,650 16,435 17,665 18,990 20,415 –

Law 22,415 23,535 25,420 27,960 30,755 34,445

Dentistry 24,225 26,165 28,780 32,235 37,070 – Medicine 30,015 32,415 35,010 37,810 – – Doctor of Pharmacy 19,765 20,755 22,415 24,210 – – Source: Office of the Provost

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 27 Chapter 5

Consequently, the TRAC recommended ing and investment plans of the University a series of aggressive tuition rate increases and reflects its aspirations and priorities. In over the next five years.T he Board endorsed the Spring of 2009, a new budget process was the strategy and approved the five year tuition established with the appointment of a Budget plan and authorized implementation of the Advisory Committee (BAC) which is chaired rates for the next two years (AYs 2009-10 by the Interim Provost and Chief Academic and 2010-11) at the January 2009 meeting. Officer and consists of two individuals from Table 5.2 shows the approved and projected each constituent group: faculty, staff, and stu- tuition rates for academic years 2009 through dents, plus at-large members, including the academic year 2013. Faculty Senate. For continuity, BAC members serve staggered terms. In the new budget In addition to Previous Budget Process process, the CFO integrates the University’s implementing In the past, the allocation of fiscal resources mandatory spending requirements, plans began each year in late January with a budget and requests from Academic Affairs, Health a new budget call from the President to all divisions. At the Sciences, and other Divisions into a 5-year development same time, the Budget Task Force, chaired by draft budget. The draft multi-year budget is process, the the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial then used as the starting point for BAC delib- Officer (CFO)/Treasurer, served as an advisory erations. BAC examines all areas of the pro- University in group to the President, convened to discuss posed budget, paying particular attention to 2008 proposed broad issues and concerns facing the University. areas that are most easily changed, and makes the development After all budgets were submitted, the Office of recommendations to the President reflect- Financial Analysis and Budget analyzed the ing their best judgment on how to advance of a capital submissions and prepared a summary report. the University towards its agreed vision. To budgeting The President and the Chief Financial Officer/ continually improve the process, BAC also process which Treasurer held budget hearings in early April recommends improvements to the budget with Deans and key executives to review bud- process for use in following years. In keep- will unify and get submissions in light of university priorities ing with the governance documents, the coordinate and parameters established at the beginning of Faculty Senate additionally develops budget capital and the budgeting process. Based on the allocation recommendations and submits these to the decisions, the Office ofF inancial Analysis and President. The President then submits the infrastructure Budget prepared a university-wide operating budget recommendations to the Board of planning. budget for submission to the President and the Trustees for approval. The President distrib- Board. The Board approved the budget at its utes the approved budget and explanatory June meeting. materials to the University community. During the 1999-2008 period, a number of improvements were observed in the bud- New Capital Budget Planning Process get development process resulting from In addition to implementing a new budget establishment of a Budget Task Force and development process, the University, in 2008 the inclusion of various stakeholders. One proposed the development of a capital bud- area of continuing concern was the minimal geting process which will unify and coordi- involvement of the entire campus, most espe- nate capital and infrastructure planning. For cially the Faculty, in the budget development the first time, budgets for capital long-term process. To address this concern, President projects will be separate and distinguishable Ribeau implemented a new budget process, from normal University operating budgets. which operates within the existing gover- Since University capital planning involves nance structure and explicitly recognizes the large fixed capital investments and building faculty’s role in shared governance. projects that take years to complete, creating assets that will remain in service over many New Budget Process decades, long term and strategic approaches The budget development process is now are essential. designed to engage the entire University The new process uses a Capital Planning community and improve transparency and Council (parallel to the Budget Advisory openness. It reflects the belief that the bud- Committee previously described) to assem- get, while financial, derives from the operat- ble, assess and prioritize capital funding

28 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal requests and maximize the alignment of capital funds to University priorities. Drawing input from academic units, physical facilities, health sciences planning, information technology, real estate operations and the CFO’s areas, the Council will recommend to the President, capital expenditure plans for 2, 5, and 10 year planning horizons. Although evolving needs and priorities will undoubtedly cause plans to change over time, a need for broad engagement with the campus is essential to determine capital requirements and allocation priorities, which will inform decisions that university leadership makes about which projects move forward and at what pace. Assessment of Resource Allocation Notwithstanding the success of the recently concluded Capital Campaign, the findings from the 2006 Senior Leadership Development and Succession Assessment showed that the participants’ perceptions residence life, (7) student accounts, and (8) of limited resources (financial, facility, and student life & activities. Each area, through a technology) signify a challenge for the orga- process called “Ford Rapids,” identified prob- nization and its leaders (see Supporting lem areas and generated recommendations Document 5.21). Concerns about the avail- for improvement. The facilitators, along with ability and allocation of resources were the responsible administrators, narrowed fur- expressed by the majority of the participants ther the specific changes and actions that will in both interviews and surveys. There was a be implemented in Fall 2009 (see Supporting strong belief that additional resources were Document 5.20). needed to compete for and retain talent and Other examples of institutional renewal to support the work of leaders and distin- at Howard are Human Capital Management guished faculty. In recent years, the lack of (HCM) initiatives; specifically, HCM reor- alignment between the elements of the strate- ganization and Customer Service Training. gic vision and the allocation of resources has In May 2008, the Office of Human Capital hindered the University’s ability to achieve Management retained outside consultants its goals of preeminence. President Ribeau’s to assist in the restructuring of the Office of plans and initiatives are explicitly designed Total Compensation (OTC), which stemmed to achieve this alignment. from the 2007 assessment of the functions and services of OTC. This restructuring was Institutional Renewal based on recommendations that the functions The Students First Campaign (SFC) is an of compensation and performance manage- example of institutional renewal. In January ment, benefits and pension administration, 2009, President Ribeau launched the Students and benefits counseling and retirement ser- First Campaign, which is a multi-phase vices should be separated in an effort to pro- presidential initiative designed to integrate vide targeted customer service to the employ- student-centeredness throughout all facets ees, retirees, and vendors. To that end, OTC of the University to improve the overall “stu- was reorganized to eliminate the long wait dent experience” at Howard (see Supporting for responses to issues concerning compen- Document 5.19). The first Phase of SFC, led sation, benefits and retirements, and to speed by SFC Steering committee, focused on eight the provision of vendor information. target areas: (1) advising, (2) admissions, (3) In the Fall 2008 State of the University cashiers, (4) financial aid, (5) records, (6) Address, President Ribeau indicated that

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 29 Chapter 5

Howard’s workforce culture needed to be and support niche programs of the highest transformed into one that was customer- quality that are deserving of national rec- centered. A charge was given to the Office ognition. The root cause of this may lie in of Human Capital Management to lead a the perception that the University supports university-wide initiative to provide cus- far too many academic programs across too tomer service training with Cabinet-level broad a spectrum. leadership. Beginning in April 2009, the The University also faces other challenges Professional Development and Leader- that may affect the development of academic ship Academy implemented two courses programs. These include: an aging faculty intended to position the University’s work- and staff; a physical plant so deteriorated that force to implement cutting edge strategies it may inhibit attracting nationally recog- for “customer-centric” service. The first nized faculty, research leaders, and students. course, “Impact 21: Five-Star Service for Many of Howard’s academic and research the 21st Century,” is a prerequisite for a new facilities urgently need replacement, repair Certificate Program in Customer Service or modernization; and salaries are not always Essentials and Student Service Excellence. as uniformly competitive with peer or aspi- The second course, “Bolstering the Climate rant institutions. for WeCUI (Welcome, Comfortable, Under- The remedy to these challenges, according stood, and Important),” provides strategies to President Ribeau, lies in a highly targeted for ensuring that the workplace operates in process of re-budgeting resources to assure a manner conducive to the delivery of what the national reputation and growth of pro- the service-quality education program labels grams that best align with the University’s “five-star service.” mission and its future. The President intends Other institutional renewal efforts such as for the Academic Renewal Process to pro- the Faculty Performance Evaluation System duce recommendations which identify pro- (discussed in detail in Chapter 13—Faculty) grams that will yield resources as well as and Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) programs that will benefit from the reallo- are on-going. More than five years ago, the cation of resources. The evaluation of pro- University decided that PeopleSoft would be grams will be data-driven and occur at a fine the University’s ERP application system. In level of detail—specifically at the level of July 2007, the Human Resource Management individual degree programs, rather than at module was implemented and five financial the departmental or school/college levels. modules were implemented during July 2008: (1) General Ledger, (2) Asset Management Academic Renewal Process (Fixed Assets), (3) Purchasing, (4) Grants The President will appoint a Select Management, and (5) Accounts Payable. Commission on Academic Renewal to guide the Academic Renewal Process (program Academic Renewal review and portfolio assessment) and undertake the review in Fall 2009. Members of Like all dynamic institutions, Howard the Commission will serve as citizens of the intends to assess its current state and future entire University, rather than as representa- developmental trajectory in light of the tives of a constituent group. They will func- dramatic changes that have occurred in the tion in sub-committees that will look respec- nation and the world over the past genera- tively at graduate/professional programs, tion and the influences those changes have graduate research programs, and undergrad- made on higher education. At the University, uate programs. Over the next 12 months, the a combination of incremental growth in aca- Select Commission on Academic Renewal, demic programs over the years and incre- in collaboration with the academic leader- mental budgeting to support this growth ship, will develop detailed recommendations has led to circumstances in which many of whereby over the succeeding three years the the University’s 181 degree programs are financial resources supporting the weak- perceived to be seriously under-funded. est programs will be reallocated to support Presently, programs compete for a share of those programs that are deemed central to a pool of resources insufficient to develop the University’s future development.

30 ❘ Howard University Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal

The process has already begun and will high level of autonomy with regard to their continue in stages. The first phase was com- administration, research, revenues, and pleted at the close of fiscal year 2009 (June expenses. 30, 2009). The purpose of Phase I was to The process of Academic Renewal, of achieve efficiencies and cost reductions in which the Select Commission is a major current operations concurrently with univer- component, will result not only in recom- sity-wide efforts that included restrictions mendations to be adopted and budgets to be on hiring and the expenditure of university reallocated, but also a different framework funds, and the Staff Voluntary Separation for managing academic programs into the and Incentive Retirement Program (VSIRP). future. Academic renewal will become a Within the divisions of Academic Affairs dynamic process at Howard, rather than a and Health Sciences, complementary steps series of discrete course corrections on peri- include reducing the number of adjunct fac- odic cycles of three, five, or seven years.A t ulty members and canceling under-enrolled a minimum, the process will require a new courses. level of awareness throughout the University The work of Phase 2 (FY 2010) has also of the imperative routinely to set goals, begun. This phase involves further cost assess performance, and make appropriate reductions aimed toward reducing the pro- changes based on data. Academic leaders jected budget deficit. External consultants at the school/college and departmental lev- are assisting in analyzing current staffing els must adopt a new approach to achieving levels in all administrative units against and maintaining quality in their programs. national benchmarks and the practices of Faculty members can expect competitive peer and aspirant institutions. Phase 2 will compensation and to receive needed support, also involve establishing and enforcing including modern, properly equipped teach- appropriate faculty workloads, determining and research environments; in turn, facing appropriate numbers of faculty mem- ulty performance will be tracked and expec- bers and support staff in academic areas tations will be high. Academic support staff (schools, colleges, and departments), and will also play an important role, with new defining performance goals and objectives levels of skill required to support faculty and at the level of the individual faculty member students, but in this role they too can expect and the academic unit. to be compensated competitively. Continued Phase 3 will begin in Fall 2009 with efforts at aligning personnel resources— appointment of the Select Commission on perhaps to include a phased retirement plan Academic Renewal and run concurrently for faculty and continued restructuring of with Phase 2. Once appointed, the Select administrative assignments—are a central Commission will follow a rigorous meth- feature of academic renewal. odology that will include regular feedback Successful academic renewal is intended of its work to the campus community. The to reduce the range of program offerings so Commission will determine the data required, that every program offered at Howard has the supervise collection and analysis of the data, resources it needs to be a program of distinc- and make recommendations to the President. tion. The Academic Renewal Process will Recommendations will comprise a broad determine which programs best fit Howard’s narrative of the Commission’s findings, as mission, vision, priorities, and opportunities well as specific analyses of each program, in the years ahead and lead to more targeted rankings, and recommendations for future and focused offerings, higher quality, and growth or contraction (in a number of cases greater productivity. elimination). The Commission will work in three sub- Summary, Findings and committees, each addressing one of the broad program levels: graduate/professional, Recommendations graduate research, and undergraduate. The Over the past decade, the University has graduate/professional program sub-commit- been committed to institutional renewal tee will rank programs with a view toward through a concerted strategic planning pro- identifying those that might operate with a cess in relation to its mission and goals.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 31 Chapter 5

Building on the successes of the 1996 ment directly to the University’s strategic Strategic Framework for Action I (SFA plan. I), the University embarked on Strategic 2. Review and assess the new tuition and Framework for Action II (SFA II) in 2000. rates and budget processes periodically to Although a significant number of the capital determine their effectiveness. projects identified in SFA I and II have been 3. Review and assess the impact of plan- achieved, several on-going projects remain. ning, resource allocation, and institutional A major achievement from SFA II was the and academic renewal initiatives on a peri- Capital Campaign, which exceeded the ini- odic basis. tial $250 million goal in gifts and pledges. Other university-wide strategic initiatives are: advancing the research agenda; improv- Supporting Documents ing the gender balance of the student body; 5.1 Strategic Framework for Action II enhancing the student experience, increasing 5.2 Strategic Framework for Action II openness and transparency; and improving Status Report services. Despite the success of the Capital 5.3 Summary of the Rangel Program Campaign, available resources (financial, 5.4 Scores of Kids Get Free Care at “Give facilities, and technology) remain a chal- Kids a Smile Day” lenge for the organization and its leaders. 5.5 School of Pharmacy and CVS/phar- Howard has enacted institutional renewal macy Open New Practice Laboratory projects: the Students First Campaign and 5.6 Howard University and AAAA two Human Capital Management initiatives Announce Partnership to Increase —Customer Service Training and Human Inclusion in Advertising Capital Management Reorganization, and 5.7 Bingham, Howard Launch Diversity Academic Renewal (program review and Fellowship: Partnership with School portfolio assessment). These processes will of Law be reviewed and assessed on a periodic 5.8 Howard University Signs MOU with basis. The following findings and recom- Botswana to Establish University mendations for improvement emerged from 5.9 Howard University to Receive $70.6 the review of the University’s status relative Million from Pace to MSCHE Standard 2: 5.10 Richard D. Parsons Appointed First Holder Gwendolyn S. and Colbert I. Findings King Chair in Public Policy 1. Planning and improvements by indi- 5.11 FACTS 2009 – Howard University vidual departments are not always based 5.12 Howard University Dental School upon systematic evaluations and strategic Dean Receives Presidential Citation priorities. from Nation’s Leading Dental 2. The Budget and Resource Allocation Education Association process was not aligned with the academic 5.13 AAMC Honors Howard’s Donald E. and research priorities of the University. Wilson with Its Highest Award 3. The University has not adequately 5.14 The Campaign for Howard reviewed and assessed the impact of plan- 5.15 Services 2009 – Howard University ning, resource allocation, and institutional 5.16 Howard University FY 2009 Internal renewal initiatives on a periodic basis. Audit Plan 4. Assessment of resource allocation 5.17 Howard University Libraries shows that additional resources are needed Strategic Plan for the Main Library to compete for and retain talent and to sup- Group port the work of university leaders and dis- 5.18 2008 Enrollment Management tinguished faculty. Strategic Plan 5.19 Students First Campaign Recommendations for Improvement 5.20 Students First Campaign Summary 1. Implement expeditiously a university- Report wide planning process that links individual, 5.21 2006 Senior Leadership Development departments, and unit planning and assess- and Succession Assessment Report

32 ❘ Howard University 6 Institutional Resources

6 Institutional Resources

MSCHE Standard 3 The human, financial, technical, physical facilities and other resources necessary to achieve an institution’s mission and goals are available and accessible. In the context of the institution’s mission, the effective and efficient uses of the institution’s resources are analyzed as part of ongoing outcomes assessment

Introduction Financial Resources Howard has a range of institutional resources The University’s major sources of finan- for support of its mission and goals. During cial resources are the Federal appropriation, the past decade, great strides have been made tuition and fees, grant and contract revenues, to broaden and deepen these resources. Since and the auxiliary enterprises. In addition to the last Middle States visit, the University these sources, the University also gener- has implemented several investment strate- ates revenue from its endowment and other gies, including bond financing, to support and investments, the medical faculty practice enhance university resources, in particular, plan, and private gifts. In FY 2008, approxi- technology and facilities resources. This chap- mately $202 million (39%) and $117 million ter describes the scope of the financial, human, (23%) of the University’s operating revenue facilities, and technical resources in the con- was derived from the Federal appropriation text of recent gains and ongoing challenges and tuition, respectively (Figure 6.1). as well as initiatives to responsibly utilize and The Federal appropriation represents the manage these resources. single largest category of the University’s

FY 2008 Revenue by Source ($Millions)

$201.7 (39.0%)

$64.4 (12.5%)

$8.0 (1.5%)

$20.2 (3.9%)

$117.3 (22.7%) $1.7 (0.3%) $61.8 (12.0%) $5.3 (1.0%) $36.9 (7.1%)

Tuition & Fee (22.7%) Federal Appropriation (39.0%) Grants & Contracts (12.5%)

Contribution (1.5%) Investment Return (3.9%) Sales: Educational Departments (0.3%)

Sales: Auxiliary Enterprises (12.0%) Faculty Practice Plan (7.1%) Other (1.0%)

Figure 6.1: FY 2008 Revenue by Source ($Millions) Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 33 Chapter 6

total revenue. The total appropriation pro- in coming academic years (see New Tuition vided by the Department of Education to Strategy in Chapter 5). Howard includes about $29 million for Howard University Hospital and about $3.5 Operating Budget million to match gifts to Howard’s endow- Over the past ten years, the University’s ment. The bulk of the appropriation supports operating budget has increased by $176 the University and, under the 1997 general million, growing at a compound annual The bulk of the statute for Howard, can be allocated at the growth rate of 4.1%, as shown in Figure 6.3. appropriation University’s discretion for its academic and As illustrated in Figure 6.4, the University research programs and construction activi- had maintained a balanced budget from the supports the ties. As shown in Figure 6.2, the Federal reporting period of FY 2000 through FY University and, appropriation has been relatively flat for the 2007. In 2008 the institution experienced under the 1997 past eight years. In five of the past seven an operating loss, and expects to end FY years Congress has imposed rescissions on 2009 with a loss as well. Howard’s Board general statute funding for most non-defense federal pro- of Trustees has allowed a small planned for Howard, can grams and as a result, Howard’s approved deficit for FY 2010 on the way to achiev- be allocated at appropriation for federal fiscal year 2009 ing a balanced budget in 2011 to enable the was slightly lower than in 2002. University to invest in a limited number of the University’s Tuition and fees represent the second critical strategic priorities as it develops its discretion for largest source of revenue for the University, long-term plans. its academic excluding the hospital. Gross revenues from tuition and fees increased 60% over the past Operating Results and research ten years, growing from $101 million in Figure 6.4 shows actual operating rev- programs and FY 1999 to $162 million in FY 2008. The enues and expenses in financial statement construction tuition increase for students entering in Fall format from FY 2004 through FY 2008. It 2008 included a 7.5% increase for under- should be noted that the University expe- activities. graduate and most graduate programs and a rienced operating surpluses through FY 15% increase for incoming students in four 2007. Over the five-year period, revenues professional schools (Medicine, Dentistry, grew at a compound annual growth rate of Pharmacy and Law). More aggressive 2.5%, while expenditures have grown at tuition rate increases will be implemented nearly twice that rate (4.7%). In FY 2008,

Howard University Federal Appropriation, FY 2000-2009 $250 30.3 30.3 30.1 29.9 29.7 29.4 29.4 28.9 28.9 $200 30.3 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 $150 $185.5 $198.6 $203.5 $204.7 $205.2 $205.5 $204.4 $204.4 $200.8 $202.6 $100 Millions

$50

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

University Academic Programs University Endowment University Hospital

Figure 6.2: Federal Appropriation ($Millions), FY 2000-2009 Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget

34 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources

Total Operating Budget ($Millions) and AGR, FY 1999-2009 650 10% 9.4%* 9% $590.2 8% $563.3 7% 550 6.0% 6.5% $528.7 6% $516.9 5% $500.4

Annual Growth Rate $489.1 3.3% 4% Operating Budget 450 2.7% $447.1 3% 1.9% $437.4 2.2% 2.3% 2.6% $410.9 2.3% 2% $401.8 1% 350 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Operating Budget Growth Rate

Figure 6.3: Total Operating Budget ($Millions) and AGR, FY 1999-2009 * Faculty Practice Plan Added to Operating Budget Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget

Howard University Operating Revenues and Expenses, FY 2004–2008

$600 547.9 $550 511.3 506.5 518 $500 469.3 474 504.4

$ Millions 483.3 $450 454.4 450.3 $400 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Operating Budget Operating Expenses

Figure 6.4: Operating Revenues and Expenses, FY 2004-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget the growth of operating expenses exceeded University’s operating expenditures spent that of operating revenues, resulting in an directly on academics and students. operating deficit of $29.9 million. Howard, on a consolidated basis, reported Total Assets of $1.4 billion as of June 30, Operating Expenses 2008, which is a decrease of $83.2 million Financial resources are deployed in support from the $1.5 billion reported the prior of a number of critical university functions. year. The decrease was due mainly to a Figure 6.5 depicts operating expenses for FY decline in the University’s investments and 2008. These expenses reflect the University’s a reduction in the prepaid pension cost. The emphasis on outstanding academic prepa- total asset decrease, coupled with a small ration and student-centered priorities; with increase in liabilities, meant that the com- nearly three-fifths ($312 million) of the bined entity of the University and Hospital

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 35 Chapter 6

Operating Expenses ($Millions), FY 2008

$201.3 (36.9%) $49.0 (9.0%)

$38.7 (7.1%)

$69.8 (12.8%) $11.9 (2.2%) $37.9 (6.9%) $28.0 (5.1%) $109.3 (20.0%)

Instruction (36.9%) Institutional Support (20.0%) Academic Support (6.9%) Student Services (5.1%) Public Service (2.2%) Faculty Practice Plan (9.0%) Research (7.1%) Auxiliary Enterprises (12.8%)

Figure 6.5: Operating Expenses ($Millions), FY 2008 Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget

Table 6.1: Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2008

Selected Balance Sheet Balance at June 30 Change Accounts ($ millions): 2008 2007 $ % Assets Cash & Cash Equivalents $19.6 $47.7 ($28.1) (58.9%) Receivables (Net) 109.5 103.4 6.1 5.9% Investments 518.6 564.7 (46.1) (8.2%) Property, Plant & Equipment (Net) 567.6 511.0 56.6 11.1% Prepaid Pension Cost 55.5 86.1 (30.6) (35.5%) Other 117.8 159.1 (41.3) (25.9%) Total Assets $1,388.7 $1,471.9 (83.2) (5.7%) Liabilities Accounts Payable & Accrued Expenses $118.2 $88.9 29.3 33.0% Accrued Post Retirement Benefits 119.5 122.7 (3.2) (2.6%) Bonds and Notes Payable 184.2 193.5 (9.3) (4.8%) Other 150.1 153.3 (3.2) (2.1%) Total Liabilities $572.0 $558.4 13.6 2.4% Net Assets Unrestricted $527.7 $611.8 (84.1) (13.7%) Temporarily Restricted Net Assets 191.7 206.4 (14.7) (7.1%) Permanently Restricted Net Assets 97.4 95.4 1.9 2.0% Total Net Assets $816.7 $913.6 (96.8) (10.6%) Total Liabilities and Net Assets $1,388.7 $1,471.9 (83.2) (5.7%)

Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget

36 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources saw its net assets decrease by $96.8 million Financial Planning Strategies or 10.6% during FY 2008. Information on The University is facing a structural defi- the FY 2008 balance sheet is depicted in cit, exacerbated by, rather than caused by Table 6.1. the current global financial crisis. Despite Impact of Current Market Conditions on these financial challenges, the institution University Portfolios continued to support priority areas (e.g., The unstable national and global econ- student facilities, classrooms, teaching labs, omy, and the unpredictability of finan- research facilities, and residence halls). In cial markets, will continue to impact the light of the $29.9 million operating defi- University’s operations and mission in the cit of FY 2008, the University has imple- near future. This is due both to the direct mented short-term initiatives to reduce effect on Howard’s investments, and on costs, which were outlined in President the ability of funders and donors to con- Ribeau’s letter to the Howard community, tinue their financial support. As illustrated dated December 3, 2008 (see Supporting in Figure 6.6, after a robust growth in FY Document 6.1). These short-term strategies 2007, the University’s endowment invest- included: ments began to decline in FY 2008, and n a hiring freeze; so far, in FY 2009 have shown further n a salary freeze until the end of the 2008- declines. 2009 academic year; Despite current year declines in endow- n the establishment of budget reduction ment market value, the University’s invest- targets for all university divisions; ment strategy is well-positioned for the n a substantial reduction in consulting fees future. Over the last two years, the invest- and professional services; ment strategy has been augmented to better n a substantial reduction in travel, overtime, position the endowment to take advantage and stipends; and of potential market swings, and to protect n a two-day furlough for faculty and staff purchasing power during recessionary and a four-day furlough for members of periods. The University’s liquidity posi- the President’s Cabinet. tion remains strong despite global market The University has developed a multi- conditions. year structural reform and cost reduction

Howard University Endowment Market Value

$600

$400

$524 $525 $498 $424 $ Millions $200 $388

$0 2006 2007 2007 2008 2009*

Figure 6.6: Endowment Market Value Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis and Budget *Endowment Market Value as of February 2009

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 37 Chapter 6 program. It includes four components: vice burden of only 2.3% of revenue, gives 1. Staff VSRIP—a voluntary retirement strength to the current rating. Management program which included 339 staff who should be able to also demonstrate contin- separated from the University on June 30, ued and reasonable progress toward achiev- 2009; ing operating stability over the next one to 2. Structural Reform—an organizational two years. and process redesign driven by mandatory division-based budget reduction targets of Assessment Procedures for Financials $43 million in FY 2010, to continue in fol- The University has several mechanisms lowing years; in place to ensure that its financial sta- 3. Academic Renewal—a carefully de- tus is reviewed and evaluated against its signed process of campus engagement, to mission, goals, and objectives. These significantly reduce the range of academic mechanisms include the approval of the programs, and redirect resources to strategic annual budget by the Board of Trustees, academic/health sciences program priorities, annual financial audits by external audi- and provide program support needed to attain tors, annual internal audits by the Office excellence (see section on Academic Renewal of Internal Audit, and periodic presenta- in Chapter 5); and tions to bond rating agencies. In addi- 4. Process Improvement—a systematic tion, the University reports annually to redesign of major campus processes to the U.S. Department of Education on a set reflect best practices, improve services and of measures (see section on Compliance reduce cost. with the Government Performance and Results Act in Chapter 10—Institutional Credit Rating Assessment). In June 2008, the University received credit ratings of A2 from Moody’s Investors Budget Forecasting Service and A+ from Standard and Poor’s The University engaged in a number of (S & P). During the most recent credit rat- activities to improve financial management ing review in June 2009, S & P affirmed and to more closely integrate budgeting and the current credit rating, but changed its strategic financial planning. In that regard, outlook from stable to negative. The rat- the Board of Trustees appointed an Ad Hoc ings agency’s analyst cited operating losses Committee on Long-Term Fiscal Health at the University and Howard University in 2007. The Board committee proposed a Hospital, declining unrestricted resources long-range model projecting University rev- and university endowment, and long-term enues and costs that engendered needed dis- strategic challenges for the University’s cussion on the difficult truth, that “business hospital as the main reasons for the outlook as usual” would not put Howard on the path change. S & P reported that although the to sustained excellence. Hospital has made great strides during the The University recently completed the 2009 fiscal year in reversing its operating implementation of an even more sophis- losses, the Hospital remains a key strategic ticated, interactive financial model that challenge, due to its relatively small size, unites all of the planning activities for the low acuity, and aging facility. Losses for University and Hospital into a single insti- the Hospital in FY 2009 are expected to tutional viewpoint, to analyze the financial be minimal, while the University has taken ramifications of operating and capital ini- steps to further reduce costs and enhance tiatives. The University also developed an revenues. enhanced budget implementation and track- Standard & Poor’s also reported that ing process, which leverages the power of University enrollment is stable with a good the PeopleSoft system. This process pro- demand profile. The successful comple- duces a series of monthly budget reports and tion of the University’s first major Capital forecasts by division to be used as part of a Campaign in FY 2008 was also noted, with more structured, regular review with cabinet a total of $276 million raised. These items, officers regarding their progress in achiev- along with the University’s low debt ser- ing financial and operational goals.

38 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources

Table 6.2: Technology Infrastructure Upgrades

Budgetary Item Description Spending

Campus wide underground Data Cabling upgrade. Building Cabling Infrastructure fiber network wiring infrastructure for students, faculty and $2,995,357 administration.

The capacities (server, bandwidth) of the University Computing Network infrastructure were strengthened and Net II/Net III $26,360,461 improved. The iLab ($5.3M), Student commuter Lab and E-Mail stations were built to facilitate student learning.

The current implementation of computer web-based People Soft Program Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) technology to replace $33,028,624 the old mainframe (financial and human resources) system.

42 existing classrooms/seminar rooms were renovated to house student-teacher interactive smart technology at Smart Classroom Technology $2,668,820 seating locations in all colleges. Faculty meeting rooms and conference rooms were also updated. In the ResNet program, all residence halls were upgraded ResNet Program $13,658,318 to include new voice, video and data technology.

Installed in hallways lobbies at the school of law, medical, Computer Integrated Visual and dental schools and in student activity centers at the $1,500,000 Communicating System Blackburn center and in student dining hall.

Source: Howard University Office of Information Services Technological Resources n FacNet II and FacNet III (the second and third rounds of distributing new comput- As a major component of SFA I and SFA II, ers to all full time faculty members); the University made significant investments n ResNet I and ResNet II, creation of the in its technology resources over the past ten Information Laboratory (iLab), implemen- years. These investments have resulted in the tation of wireless network access to all dor- dramatic expansion of the technological infra- mitory residents followed by the installa- structure, an enhanced university Web site, and tion of wired voice, data and cable video; the increased incorporation of technology into n Expansion of wireless network capability instruction. In addition, to fostering increased to various parts of the institution; access to technology by students, faculty, n Major upgrade of the wide area network and staff, this investment has supported and from Fiber Distributed Data Interface improved critical university functions, includ- (FDDI) to Fast Gigabit technology; ing admissions, enrollment, and communica- n Establishment of six eStop, electronic tions. Some of the technology infrastructure kiosks; upgrades are outlined in Table 6.2. n Construction of two digital libraries; n Creation of a digital auditorium and Information Technology Infrastructure smart classrooms with full network and Guided by SFA I and SFA II (see Supporting audio visual capabilities; and Documents 6.2 and 6.3), the University made n Technology upgrade of the Howard significant progress in building the informa- University Bookstore. tion technology (IT) infrastructure that sup- The Information System and Services ports academic instruction, student life and (ISAS) Office hosts the University infor- administration. The Report on the Infusion of mation network and operates all university Information Technology Supporting Academic computer labs. The University’s fiber optic Instruction and Student Life at Howard wide area network enables the delivery of University (January, 2005) (see Supporting IT services campus-wide and programs Document 6.4), summarizes the major IT and activities have been implemented to projects Howard has implemented as of that strengthen IT access. ISAS has developed time. These include: and published improved technical standards

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 39 Chapter 6

for wiring, networks, services, telecom- was used by 84% of the students. In addition, munications systems, and protocols. To faculty use of Blackboard’s many features alleviate the effects of increasing external has helped to facilitate the shift to on-line challenges to the University network from instruction at the University, an increasing spam, viruses, worms, and “Trojan Horse” trend in higher education. attacks, ISAS has been very proactive in the implementation of information security Technological Advances in Administrative measures. Functions New system upgrades and software recently Howard University Web site were implemented to increase the efficiency The Web site (www.howard.edu) was of university administration. The upgrades first launched in 1997 and in March 2007, included an industrial strength messaging a major redesign of the site was completed. system, secure remote access, and capacity In the site’s evolving role, it not only is a to support Howard’s Enterprise Resource repository of official information, but a key Planning (ERP) system, PeopleSoft that links academic resource with links to the library and integrates operating units through a com- The University system and electronic databases. Further, it mon database. Roll-out of the PeopleSoft now has 42 is a vital tool that facilitates many admin- Human Capital Management (HCM) modules smart classrooms istrative processes, including admissions, in 2007 provided a streamlined system for hir- enrollment management, and university ing, payroll and other critical personnel man- and each one communications. As evidence of the utility agement functions. Launch of the PeopleSoft contains high- and centrality to the community, in January Financial modules in 2008 improved effi- end, integrated 2009, the Web site registered 92,765 of ciency of the purchasing, accounts payable, page views per day. In the 2008 Self-Study and other financial functions. audio-visual surveys, 56% of students, 57% of faculty, presentation and 61% of senior administrators surveyed Facilities Resources and production responded “good” to “excellent” that the The University consists of five campuses, Web site effectively communicates infor- 115 buildings and 258 acres. This past capabilities, mation to all stakeholders (see Supporting decade, investment in the physical facilities including a Document 6.5). markedly increased – three new buildings, smart board, major building renovations, program space Technology in Instruction and Learning for research/teaching, building code confor- automated Technological resources are employed mance enhancements, and annual campus- instructor to enhance instruction and facilitate stu- wide maintenance repairs and renovations of station, and dent learning. In the 2008 Self-Study sur- residence halls, classrooms, and laboratories. veys, most students (53%) but fewer faculty In addition, the University has developed network capable (28%) reported that technology is used to a comprehensive plans to improve and main- student seating. good or excellent degree in the classrooms. tain the physical facilities. Sixty percent of faculty reported a “good” to More specifically, during this period, “excellent” level of success in introducing expenditures included over $60 million for cutting-edge technological programs into building code compliance renovations; $56 the curriculum (see Supporting Document million invested in new buildings; over $37 6.5). The University now has 42 smart million for major building renovations; and classrooms and each one contains high-end, $13.5 million in renovated space for research, integrated audio-visual presentation and teaching, and learning. Among these invest- production capabilities, including a smart ments were two new libraries, the Louis board, automated instructor station, and net- Stokes Health Sciences Library and the Law work capable student seating. Library, which opened in 2002. These facili- To complement the hardware investment ties added value to the University library sys- in instructional technology, all instructors tem, which is a member of the Association of have had access to Blackboard, a web-based Research Libraries. In addition, the Howard course management system, since 2001. University Research Building I (HURB I) Blackboard is used widely by faculty and opened in 2005, becoming the first cam- students across campus. In 2008, Blackboard pus building dedicated solely to research.

40 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources

Table 6.3: Student, Faculty, Senior Administrator, and Staff Perceptions of the University’s Facilities Senior Item Student Faculty Staff Admin.

1. Availability of physical facilities for conducting 28% 14% 4% – state-of-the-art research

2. Quality of physical facilities for conducting – 18% 5% – state-of-the-art research

3. Adequacy of facilities for optimal learning 29% – – –

4. Quality of classrooms for teaching – 24% – –

5. Adequacy of day-to-day maintenance of classrooms, 32% 12% – 25% offices, common building areas and campus grounds

6. Quality of physical facilities available on campus for 41% 29% 18% – meetings, seminars, conferences and workshops

7. Quality of on-campus residential facilities 20% – – –

Source: 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

Other facilities renovated included Tubman Maintenance Projects for Grounds; and Quadrangle Residence Halls, Meridian Hill 3) Deferred Maintenance for Life Safety dormitory, Howard Center, Carnegie, Armour and Regulatory Projects. The plan is ever- J. Blackburn University Center, and Wonder evolving and lists University facilities, con- Plaza Building, as well as 11 programmed ditions, costs of deficiencies, and replace- spaces for research and teaching/learning. ment values. Each year the University also Building code corrections included elevator identifies facilities needing urgent repairs or replacements, sprinkler system installations, renovations. HVAC system replacements, roof replace- The University is in the midst of a multi- ments, ADA compliance, restroom improve- year, $69 million deferred maintenance ments, doors/security systems, and building (DM) project largely funded by bonds issued structure integrity. in July 2006 to replace building systems Feedback from the 2008 Self-Study survey (HVAC, sprinklers and fire alarms) in 14 reflected a range of responses regarding- per academic buildings and to repair or replace ceptions of University facilities. Table 6.3 pres- elevators throughout the campus. Among ents student, faculty, senior administrator, and the capital and deferred maintenance proj- staff feedback expressed as the percentage of ects completed are: “good” to “excellent” responses elicited. The n Repaired or replaced 41 elevators; pattern of responses strongly indicates the need n Updated mechanical and fire safety sys- for continued improvement. tems in Just Hall (Biology), Mackey Building (Architecture), and Downing Facilities Maintenance Program Hall (Engineering); and To guide continued systematic investment n Renovation of the Blackburn Center in facilities resources, the Physical Facilities Sculpture pool and the Lower Quad Management (PFM) department has devel- fountain. oped a Deferred Maintenance Program, Other critical maintenance priorities in- which identifies additional renovations and/ clude facility and classroom projects re- or replacements over five years.T he plan has quested by the academic units. Some sched- three major areas: 1) Deferred Maintenance uled student impact projects included: Projects for Building Systems; 2) Deferred renovated/new labs, renovated/new class-

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 41 Chapter 6 rooms/study halls, renovation of adminis- These appointments occur in two major trative areas, and other general physical re- categories: (1) in the health sciences, clini- quirements. cal practitioners with practices outside the To reduce the University’s energy consump- University offer their services without com- tion and the environmental footprint, several pensation, and they are given temporary new initiatives have been launched, which tar- faculty appointments accordingly and (2) get the following goals: implementation of a appointments to the Graduate Faculty are comprehensive recycling program in place by without compensation above and beyond the December 31, 2009; reduction in university compensation that the faculty member earns energy consumption by 15% by June 2010; from his or her departmental salary. The rea- and the longer-term objective of becoming son for the WOC appointment is to create a climate neutral by the end of 2019. formal record of service for which the person is not compensated. The Faculty is discussed Human Resources in detail in Chapter 13—Faculty. Howard has demonstrated its commitment As of Fall 2008, Howard had 3,869 staff to professional development in a number of employees at the University (1,950) and the innovations. The Professional Development hospital (1,919) as well as1,520 faculty (full- and Leadership Academy, established in time 1,064; part-time 456). In addition, there 1997, offers training to all university employ- is an additional 128 faculty members (7 full- ees in new office technologies. It also pro- time and 121 part -time) without compen- vides workshops to enhance performance, sation (WOC) as authorized in the Faculty and expand employees’ technical and people Handbook (see Supporting Document 6.6). skills. In an effort to continually invest in fac-

42 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources ulty, the Center for Excellence in Teaching, for Health Sciences. Departments with a Learning and Assessment (CETLA), also significant number of separations include provides on-going instruction in a variety Enrollment Management, Financial Aid of instructional and assessment strategies as and Student Employment, the Moorland well as expanding faculty expertise in new Spingarn Research Center, Office of the content areas or methodological strategies. Dean of the Graduate School, Office of Results from the 2006 Senior Leadership the Dean of Medicine, Office of the Dean Development and Succession Assessment of Dentistry, Office of the Associate Dean Study revealed that the University has the of Pharmacy and Allied Health, Campus rudiments of human capital development in Police, Custodial Services, and Materials place, albeit uneven throughout the institu- Management. tion. Plans are being developed to establish Persons accepting the staff VSRIP are a more comprehensive applied program to not eligible for permanent re-hire. Subject reduce the unevenness. to the approval of the Cabinet, separating individuals can be re-hired on wages at Staff Voluntary Separation Retirement their last hourly salary for a period not to Incentive Program (VSRIP) exceed 90 days. During this re-hire period, The staff Voluntary Separation Retirement the focus is on transfer of knowledge, Incentive Program (VSRIP) was imple- rather than on solely continuity of services. mented for the purpose of reducing salary In addition, persons re-hired are involved costs to better align functions with the univer- in initiatives to implement the Budget sity’s mission and to assist in meeting budget Advisory Committee and McKinsey trans- reduction targets. Eligibility for participation formation initiative. To date, 117 persons was limited to university staff only. Faculty have been re-hired for periods ranging from and hospital staff members were not eligible one month to three months at a projected to participate. In addition, University staff cost of $764,000. had to meet one of two criteria: (1) retirement eligible or (2) vested with 10 or more years Performance Evaluation of service. Incentives included two weeks of The institution has two separate per- severance pay for each year of creditable ser- formance evaluation systems in place for vice up to a maximum of one year and cur- faculty and staff. Faculty performance rent annual leave balance. evaluation is discussed in detail in Chapter Overall, one thousand and sixteen uni- 13—Faculty. The Performance Evaluation versity staff members were eligible to par- Program (PEP) is the primary instrument ticipate: 733 by retirement and 283 vested. utilized at the University to manage staff Of that number, 339 employees (306 retired performance. This program covers all and 33 vested) accepted the VSRIP and sep- non-union, non-hospital, and non-faculty arated the University on June 30, 2009. The employees with at least ninety days of ser- total payroll of those participating in the vice and is designed for both supervisory program was $18,887,566. The total sever- and non-supervisory staff. The annual cycle ance paid out was $16,984,378. The annual starts in April or May with an assessment leave cost was $1,772,582. of the evaluation instrument. Decisions Separating staff included an Associate are made whether to maintain the present Provost, two Deans, the University’s performance appraisal form or make revi- Assistant Treasurer, the Vice President for sions. The forms are available for supervi- Alumni Affairs, the Associate Director sors in June. PEP information sessions are and Medical Officer of the Student Health conducted for supervisors in early July. Center, 12 Assistant and Associate Deans, Evaluations are conducted in August with an Assistant Vice President, a senior completed documents sent to the Office of Associate Vice President, and numerous Total Compensation (OTC) in mid-August. mid-level managers. Thirty-three percent The OTC evaluates documents for com- (33%) of the separating staff reported to pleteness and enters data into an Access the Provost, 29% reported to the CFO, and database. If individuals are eligible for a 20% reported to the Senior Vice President merit award, OTC prepares the notice of

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 43 Chapter 6 award letters and delivers them to the major deal with financial, administrative and aux- offices of the University. iliary operations. To assess its own controls The performance management process and establish best practices, the University consists of planning, managing, improving, operates under the Cost Accounting appraising, and rewarding performance. It Standards (CAS); Office of Management also includes objective setting for the fol- and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110: Uniform lowing year. This process engages both Administrative Requirements for Grants employees and supervisors in ongoing com- and Agreements with Institutions of Higher munication designed to assist employees to Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit perform successfully in their jobs through Organizations; and OMB Circular A-21: goal setting and reinforcement of behavior Cost Principles for Educational Institutions. that supports institutional, departmental, There are two oversight committees— and individual objectives. During the evalu- Audit and Legal Committee and Finance ation process, employees meet one-on-one Committee, which operate according to the with their supervisor to review and discuss By-laws of the Board of Trustees, 2007 (see the past year and develop plans for the Supporting Document 6.8). Several times upcoming year. during the year, the committees meet to dis- In the 2006 Senior Leadership Development cuss issues in relation to audit issues as well and Succession Assessment Study, results as fiscal, ethical, and legal requirements. revealed that the University has performance In addition to the two oversight commit- systems in place; however, they were not con- tees of the Board of Trustees, several uni- sistently implemented with the needed met- versity departments also play similar roles. rics, rigorous evaluation, and associated con- The Office of the Controller ensures that sequences (see Supporting Document 6.7). To adequate internal controls and best practices remedy this issue, in the 2007-2008 PEP, the are in place to manage university financial University implemented a revised approach resources as well as federal grants and con- to organizational performance review to tracts. The Office of Internal Audit performs include the element of feedback. Previously, audit investigations, departmental audits and all appraisals were on an individual basis follow-ups and provides advisory services. and supervisors have consistently rated most The Office of theV ice President for Research employees in the top two tiers of the PEP. The and Compliance initiates and reviews non- revised process begins with assessment feed- compliance reports in sponsored research. back regarding performance of the organiza- Some of the internal controls in place are tion relative to the standards set at the begin- contained within the following: ning of the cycle. Additionally, the rewards n Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) process is being revised to assure that perfor- System; mance compensation is given to employees n Research Policies; and who are the best performers. n Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual. Resource Management Further, there are several opportunities to review financial management practices. Responsible stewardship of university Annual independent audits confirming resources is a top priority. Great efforts are financial responsibilities are evident in the taken to ensure that the fiscal, facilities, tech- following reports: nological, and human resources are appropriately and efficiently employed in service n Howard University Financial Statements of the University’s mission and aspirations. and Report on Federal Awards, Year Both internal controls and external oversight ended June 30, 2008; have helped to facilitate this priority. n Howard University Financial Statements Internal university controls ensure the and Report on Federal Awards, Year effectiveness and efficiency of operations, ended June 30, 2007; and timely and accurate financial reporting, n Howard University Financial Statements and compliance with laws and regulations. and Report on Federal Awards, Year Adequate institutional controls are in place to ended June 30, 2006.

44 ❘ Howard University Institutional Resources

To strengthen operations and services, current global financial crisis. In the midst the University completed a major study of of these financial challenges, Howard con- its procurement operations and processes tinues to support priority areas, including and concluded that there are major areas investing in student facilities. Howard has of opportunities including professional used technological resources to signifi- services, telecommunications, and con- cantly improve instructional capabilities, tracts for repairs and maintenance, which student learning, and staff productivity. will benefit the University in two ways: Over the past decade, the University has (1) cost reduction or avoidance in line achieved some improvements in tech- items and (2) the opportunity to get “more nology resources and physical facilities for the money” in university departments. —new buildings, major building reno- Savings in the amount of $100,000 have vations, renovated program space for already been observed in the Physical research/teaching, building code confor- Facilities department because of a new mance enforcement, and annual campus- elevator maintenance contract. Through wide maintenance renovations, including strategic purchasing of future contracts residence halls, classrooms, lab repairs on natural gas, the University has been and renovations. able to avoid increases in utility costs for Significant improvements in the Univer- the next two years. sity’s physical infrastructure have also been made with major renovations completed or Summary, Findings and underway, although significant infrastructure needs remain. Short- and long-term strategies Recommendations have been implemented to combat financial The University is facing financial chal- challenges. Short-term strategies included lenges, made worse but not caused by the University-wide furloughs, salary and hiring

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 45 Chapter 6 freezes, while long-term measures included giving and other private donors and grow- a staff Voluntary Separation and Incentive ing the University endowment. Retirement program. 5. Intensify efforts to increase revenues In addition, in the 2006 Senior Leadership from non-government sources to comple- Development and Succession Assessment ment tuition and Federal support so that Study, the conclusion was that the University there are adequate resources to compete for has rudiments of human capital develop- and retain talent and to support the work of ment in place, albeit uneven throughout the leaders and distinguished faculty. institution. The following findings and rec- 6. Continue to invest in physical and ommendations for improvement emerged technological infrastructure to support aca- from review of the University’s status rela- demic, research and student life priorities. tive to MSCHE Standard 3: Supporting Documents Findings 6.1 President Ribeau’s Letter to 1. The University’s financial management Member of the Howard University and human resource management systems Community, December 3, 2008 are in need of improvement. 6.2 Strategic Framework for Action I 2. The University’s current budget is not ade- 6.3 Strategic Framework for Action II quately aligned with its academic priorities. 6.4 Report on the Infusion of 3. There is insufficient communication Information Technology Supporting or awareness within the University com- Academic Instruction and Student munity regarding its internal and external Life at Howard University, January, reviews of financial and human resource 2005 management systems. 6.5 Technical Report for the 2008 4. Human capital development across Howard University Self-Study university academic and administrative Surveys units is uneven. 6.6 Faculty Handbook, 1993 5. Assessment of resource allocation 6.7 2006 Senior Leadership shows that additional resources are needed Development and Succession to compete for and retain talent and sup- Assessment Report port the work of leaders and distinguished 6.8 Howard University By-laws of the faculty. Board of Trustees, 2007 6. There is insufficient diversification of the University’s revenue stream. 7. The University’s physical and technology infrastructure is in need of on-going enhancement and maintenance to remain competitive as a research university. Recommendations for Improvement 1. Align the University’s resources and budget with academic priorities resulting from program reviews and portfolio assessments. 2. Initiate procedures to communicate annually to the University community the results of various internal and external reviews of the University’s financial and human resource management systems. 3. Develop and implement a comprehensive program to address the unevenness of human capital development. 4. Increase the diversity of university revenues, which may include targeting alumni

46 ❘ Howard University 7 Leadership and Governance

7 Leadership and Governance

MSCHE Standard 4 The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decision-making. The governance structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and resource development, consistent with the mission of the institution.

Introduction by their respective constituencies. With the A sound governance system, competent exception of the President, constituents and leadership, and effective management are general members of the Board are selected regarded as critical to the University’s abil- by the Board following recommendations ity to confront complex challenges and to from its Trusteeship Committee as outlined produce sustainable results. The University in the Howard University By-laws of the …Howard is also recognizes the need for effective man- Board of Trustees (Amended January 27, governed by agement systems to advance and strengthen 2007). Also, the Board may designate as a Board of its mission, goals, and vision. This report members non-voting Trustees Emeriti or section addresses leadership, governance, Honorary. All new Board members partici- Trustees which policy development, and decision-making pate in an orientation at the beginning of has the ultimate at the University, including the concept of their terms. authority and shared governance. The Board’s membership comprises a governing body that is capable of assuring responsibility Leadership of the University that the body’s fiduciary responsibilities are for “controlling fulfilled (see Supporting Document 7.2). Board of Trustees Board members represent diverse fields of and directing In accordance with its charter and professional endeavor, including business, the affairs, By-laws, Howard is governed by a Board of law, higher education, medicine, and sci- property and Trustees (the Board), which has the ultimate entific research. The Trustees have actively authority and responsibility for “control- advanced the University’s cause by provid- interests of the ling and directing the affairs, property and ing leadership in the Capital Campaign with University.” interests of the University.” The Board con- personal contributions and by lending fund- ducts its work through eight standing com- raising assistance; working with govern- mittees: Academic Excellence, Audit and ment officials to continue theF ederal appro- Legal, Development, Finance, Executive, priation, an essential part of the University’s Medical Affairs, Trusteeship, and External annual budget; and encouraging an assess- Affairs. The functions and responsibilities ment of academic programs through a des- of these committees are delineated in the ignated Academic Excellence Committee. Howard University By-laws of the Board of Currently, the Board meets a minimum Trustees (Amended January 27, 2007) (see of four times each year. The January, April, Supporting Document 7.1). and September meetings are reserved for Addison Barry Rand was elected chair- Board action. The November meeting is uti- man of the Board of Trustees in 2006. The lized as an evaluative and planning retreat Board has 35 authorized voting members in odd years, when there is in-depth discus- (including the President of the University) sion. Even years are utilized as a forum of whom seven are designated “Constituent for in-depth analysis of issues of strategic Trustees.” Comprising the “Constituent importance. The Executive Committee acts Trustees” are three alumni, two faculty on behalf of the Board between meetings, members, and two students, each nominated as needed.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 47 Chapter 7

Assessment of the Board recently announced Select Commission Each year after the annual meeting in on Academic Renewal. April, the Board conducts a series of Faculty assessments. Beginning July 1, 2006, the Board enhanced its self-assessment proce- In addition to their teaching, research, dures. In September 2006, the Board iden- and service responsibilities, Faculty has tified the following focus areas based on the responsibility to assist Howard with the results of its November 2005 retreat: the fulfillment of its mission and vision Academic Excellence, Health Sciences through the development and implemen- Enterprise, Long-Term Fiscal Health, tation of policies that will advance the Board Effectiveness and Strategic Vision. University’s educational mission. Matters As part of the Board Effectiveness focus of exclusive concern to a single college/ area, the Chairman recommended that school are subject to deliberation and rec- Ultimate the Board of Trustees establish, as a high ommendation by its faculty through con- authority for priority, performance accountabilities for sultative bodies and procedures set forth in the By-laws of that individual unit. For governance of executive, academic, and administrative levels. policy initiatives impacting more than the University At the November 2006 meeting, the one school/college, the consultative pro- is vested in Board Chairman presented the Governance cess may involve the twelve faculty delib- erative bodies and the Faculty Senate. the Board and Effectiveness Management System, which set forth performance metrics for the Examples of the extent of faculty consul- delegated by Chairman, the President, Board Committees tation include the merit award process, the Board to and Committee Chairs, and Trustees. The faculty appointments, promotions and tenure recommendations, and the recent the President. system was approved and assessment tools were drafted and approved. proposal to implement a new performance assessment system. The Faculty Senate (“Senate”) is the inde- Governance of the University pendent organizational unit through which The University has a shared system of the University-wide Faculty (“University governance. Ultimate authority for gov- Faculty”) participates in the governance ernance of the University is vested in of the University. This body deliberates the Board and delegated by the Board and determines the faculty positions/ to the President. The President exer- decisions on issues of concern and makes cises that authority through the Provost/ recommendations to the President and Chief Academic Officer, Vice Presidents, the Board on matters within the Senate’s Deans, Directors, and other officials of jurisdiction. The Council of the Faculty the administration in consultation, as Senate is its legislative body, consisting necessary, with the units of the University of representatives from all schools/col- and with faculty, staff, and students. leges. It is governed by a Board-approved The University has experienced an constitution. Senate Officers and Council accelerated pattern of faculty engagement representatives are elected by the Faculty and collaboration with the administra- through a secret ballot. The Senate has tion in matters of governance. President responsibility for deliberating and making Ribeau embraced a shared approach to recommendations regarding educational governance. In his first year, he prioritized policies that are applicable to more than making information about the University’s one school or college. Faculty Trustees are operations more transparent and widely nominated to the Board through an election accessible to the university community. In process managed by the Senate. Members addition, Dr. Ribeau meets regularly with of the Senate actively participate on vari- Faculty Senate leadership, and encour- ous university committees, such as the ages involvement of faculty, students, Budget Advisory Committee, Tuition Rate and staff in major University initiatives, Advisory Committee, University Self- such as the Budget Advisory Committee, Study Steering Committee, and other ad the Students First Initiative, and the hoc committees and task forces. Although

48 ❘ Howard University Leadership and Governance the Faculty Senate actively participates in Committee. One student elected from and the University’s governance process, it has representing the undergraduate units of the expressed continuing concerns about the University, and one student, elected from administration of the University, its oper- and representing the graduate and profes- ations and shared system of governance sional divisions of the University, serve on (see Supporting Document 7.3). the Board of Trustees. Support Staff The Howard University Staff Organization Decision-Making at the (HUSO) is the official staff representa- University tive body. All non-faculty employees of the Under the University’s organizational University are eligible for HUSO member- structure, the President serves as the ship upon payment of a nominal fee. Under University’s Chief Executive Officer and By-laws approved in 2004, HUSO serves in exercises executive, supervisory, and an advisory capacity and facilitates com- management authority as delegated by munication between the staff and adminis- the Board. Because Board membership tration. As outlined in the HUSO constitu- includes the President and constituent tion, it provides input to the administration representatives (alumni, faculty, and stu- regarding university policies and procedures dents), all stakeholders are involved in the (see Supporting Document 7.4). University’s decision-making process. Students Faculty members are actively involved in the University’s decision-making pro- Student governance at Howard is carried cess and serve on search committees for out through three categories of student orga- academic administrators. The Board of nizations: the Howard University Student Trustees Search Committee that recently Association (HUSA); Undergraduate and recommended the appointment of President Graduate Student Assemblies; and School/ Ribeau included a faculty representative. College Student Councils. Representatives The Faculty shares responsibility with to these organizations are elected by the the University administration in matters appropriate student bodies. To be eligible related to academic programs, including for and maintain their positions, students faculty recruitment and development; fac- must maintain a 3.00 cumulative grade point ulty evaluation for reappointment, promo- average. Student government elections are tion and tenure; program development and held every Spring semester. The University- review; student advising; class schedule wide student association, HUSA, is the offi- planning; and general supervision of the cial representative of all students. HUSA research, teaching, and school and college operates according to its constitution and outreach activities. Faculty involvement in By-laws and consists of members of the these matters is outlined in the By-laws of undergraduate and graduate student assem- the respective schools and colleges. blies and representatives from each school Academic policy and program recom- /college student council (see Supporting mendations begin at the departmental level Document 7.5). Student government repre- and are submitted for consideration by the sentatives and other students actively par- school/college faculty. Following school ticipate on councils, task forces, and com- or college faculty consideration, the Dean mittees at the department, school/ college transmits recommendations to the Provost levels. The student governance bodies pro- and Chief Academic Officer or the Senior vide input in the formulation of policy and Vice President for Health Sciences for review advise students, faculty, and administrators and consideration. If approved, the recom- at the various levels of the University. Recent mendation is forwarded to the President for examples of student service on important consideration. Final authority for the estab- committees include the Presidential Search lishment of university policy rests with the Committee, University-wide Self-Study Board of Trustees. Board decisions related Steering Committee, Tuition and Rate to academic policies and programs are com- Advisory Committee, and Budget Advisory municated to the Faculty.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 49 Chapter 7

Faculty members are involved in decision- and student consultation, with appropriate making as it relates to the University’s oper- legal authority clearly vested in the Board ating budget and the setting of tuition rates. or delegated by it to the President. The Working with the Faculty Senate leadership, Board, the President, and the Provost and President Ribeau facilitated the Senate’s Chief Academic Officer refer to examples submission of FY 2010 budget development of shared governance in the By-laws and recommendations and participation on the Handbooks of each school. They note the University’s Budget Advisory Committee. crucial consultative role of the faculty in President Ribeau recognizes the Faculty admissions, in awarding degrees and in the Senate as a key constituency and works col- appointment, reappointment, promotion, laboratively with the Senate leadership to and tenure of faculty. However, a review of ensure that the University’s decision-making the Faculty Handbook revealed dated poli- process is transparent and inclusive. cies since the Handbook was published in 1993. Assessment of Leadership Some Senate leaders contend that the Faculty is not sufficiently involved in decision-making and Governance that affects them directly. Illustrative of their The assessment of leadership and gov- contention, Senate leaders point to the Board’s ernance at the University was conducted Academic Excellence Committee decision to in light of Middle States’ response to the meet with Senate leaders only once a year for 1999 Self-Study Report, which praised the thirty minutes. Also, the Senate disputed the University’s inclusive approach to deci- Board’ view that the search process for a new sion-making, but highlighted the need for President represented an inclusive process. In a balance between full policy deliberation some instances, administrative leaders and and implementation. Senate leaders have different views regarding The governance structure, established important university issues and approaches. by the Charter, By-laws, and regulations For example, during the presidential search, of the various University entities, pro- the search committee informed and updated vides substantial opportunities for faculty the Faculty about the search via letter. The

50 ❘ Howard University Leadership and Governance

Faculty Senate Chair, however, “. . . wanted budget process is designed to engage the better communication and a more open pro- entire university community and improve cess from the presidential search committee transparency and openness. The new budget . . . not a vaguely worded letter from the Chair process is detailed in Chapter 5: Planning, of the Search Committee that attempted to Resource Allocation and Institutional update and inform Faculty; the process was Renewal. more of a closed-door exercise” (Interview Under President Ribeau, the current uni- with Chair of Faculty Senate, May 2008). (A versity administration has worked assidu- more detailed discussion of Faculty Senate ously to engage faculty in a transparent concerns is set forth in a letter, which was sent and participatory process on most aca- to the Middle States Commission, dated April demic matters at the University, consistent 17, 2008) (see Supporting Document 7.6). with both Faculty Handbook and princi- Their feeling of a lack of commitment to the ples of good practice in higher education. concept of shared governance led the Senate Accordingly, the University administration Chair to propose the creation of an Office of has acknowledged the need for full faculty Ombudsman at Howard. The proposed office participation in the aforementioned faculty would be charged with improving commu- evaluation system and has (1) suspended nications and addressing grievances involv- implementation of the plans for one year ing the Faculty and university administrative until faculty voices can be heard and con- leaders. The University recognizes the need sidered and (2) sought explicit reactions to to adopt basic standards to resolve faculty the proposed plan, plus the submission of grievances and to revise the 1993 Faculty alternate plans, if desired, to the Office of Handbook, as well as to consider other issues the Provost. This input will be considered in pertaining to faculty life and governance dur- the preparation of the final plan. ing the revision process. In the Faculty Senate’s judgment, faculty Other governance concerns that have should have a role in many more University been expressed by the Faculty include: the processes as well as within their respective proposed Faculty Performance Evaluation colleges and schools. For instance, Faculty System (FPES); lack of integrity associ- Senate leaders criticized the appointment ated with faculty compensation; academic of a Senior Vice President for Health restructuring without faculty consultation; Sciences (SVPHS) because the reassign- the lack of inclusion in budget and budget- ment of oversight for the Health Sciences ary matters; and issues associated with the from the Provost’s authority occurred with- Faculty Handbook. Several of these con- out consultation with faculty of the respec- cerns emerged during the Self-Study inter- tive Schools and Colleges. The Board, views with the leadership of the Faculty during the Swygert administration, reorga- Senate and Deans. nized the offices of the Provost and Chief A common thread identified by the Chair Academic Officer (CAO) and the SVPHS and Vice Chair of the Faculty Senate was their with limited input from the University perception of a lack of transparency in the community. Under that reorganization only decision-making processes of upper admin- the nine colleges and schools in the aca- istration. They noted decisions regarding demic affairs division report to the Provost hiring, appointments, policy-development, and CAO, while the three colleges dealing evaluations, promotions, and information with health sciences (Medicine; Dentistry; sharing—particularly the budget even though Pharmacy, Nursing, and Allied Health the By-laws of the Faculty Senate require that Sciences) report to the SVPHS. the administration and Faculty have access to Nonetheless, the current administration budget information. regards this reorganization as an impera- Notably, the issue of faculty participation tive response to the need for closer over- in budget development was resolved with sight and heightened attention to the health implementation of a new budget develop- sciences and hospital. As the University’s ment process, which operates within the health-related functions and operations existing governance structure and explicitly improve, this direct reporting line to the recognizes the role of the faculty. The new President may be unnecessary.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 51 Chapter 7

Both Faculty Senate leadership and ship structure of the University to effec- some Deans complained that there is no tively and efficiently develop policies that shared governance with central adminis- can lead to significant change.T he current tration and that neither group had input in administration has been aggressively and major decisions and policy development. assiduously responding to many of these Of the Self-Study Survey respondents, concerns. The following findings and rec- 38% of students, 18% of faculty and 10% ommendations for improvement emerged of staff reported a “good” to “excellent” from the review of the university’s status level of opportunity for involvement in relative to MSCHE Standard 4: the decision-making that affected them. Moreover, perceptions of senior admin- Findings istrators regarding input by stakeholders 1. The recent reorganization of the in university decision-making also varied, University’s academic affairs and health yielding reports of good or excellent lev- sciences units was done without sufficient els of involvement by students (31%), by consultation with the faculty, deans, and faculty (35%) and by staff (14%). other stakeholders. President Ribeau is aware of these pre- 2. The 1993 Faculty Handbook does not existing Faculty Senate concerns and has reflect changes in academic policy, fac- The demonstrated his commitment to resolv- ulty participation in decision-making, and ing them. The President and Interim administrative organization. University’s Provost and CAO met with the Faculty 3. Despite significant efforts over the past governing Senate periodically during the 2008-2009 year, there remains a perception among documents academic year. In addition, the establish- some faculty of insufficient transparency in ment of the Budget Advisory Committee the University’s decision-making process. provide for a (BAC), comprised of students, faculty, structure, which and staff, represents a significant step Recommendations for Improvement toward more transparency and broader complies with involvement in decision-making. 1. Revisit the Provost and Chief Academic the leadership Officer /Senior Vice President for Health Summary, Findings and Sciences model in consultation with the and governance various faculty, deans, and other appropri- principles set Recommendations ate university stakeholders. forth in the The governance structure established 2. Revise the 1993 Faculty Handbook to Characteristics under the Charter, By-laws, and regula- reflect current policies and processes. tions of the various university entities pro- 3. Enhance policies and procedures on of Excellence vides substantial opportunities for faculty Board of Trustees and leadership succes- in Higher consultation and student input, with legal sion. Education. authority appropriately vested in the Board 4. Continue to build upon recent ini- or delegated to the President. This structure tiatives that are designed to enhance the has led to clear policies, and unambiguous transparency of the University’s decision- roles and responsibilities for the govern- making processes. ing Board, central administration, deans, department chairs, faculty, and students. The Supporting Documents University’s governing documents provide 7.1 Howard University By-laws of the for a structure, which complies with the lead- Board of Trustees, 2007 ership and governance principles set forth in 7.2 Board of Trustees 2009-2010 the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Membership List Education. The University also has a system 7.3 Faculty Senate Constitution, 2000 of shared governance. Still, Senate leaders 7.4 Howard University Staff Organization maintain that the members of the faculty By-laws, 2004 are not sufficiently involved in the decision- 7.5 Howard University 2009-2010 making processes that affect them. Student Handbook Concerns have been raised regarding the 7.6 Faculty Senate Letter to Middle States ability of the organizational and leader- Commission, April 2008

52 ❘ Howard University 8 Administration

8 Administration

MSCHE Standard 5 The institution’s administrative structure and services facilitate learning and research/scholarship, foster quality improvement, and support the institution’s organization and governance.

Introduction capacity. The presidential cabinet is com- Howard’s structure is organized into a prised of nine officers:U niversity Secretary, number of administrative and academic Provost and Chief Academic Officer (CAO), units which facilitate the efficiency and three Senior Vice Presidents, three Vice effectiveness of the day-to-day management Presidents, and a General Counsel. In addi- of the University. The University’s adminis- tion several other positions report directly trative services enhance instruction, learn- to the President, some of which are mem- ing, and research and support the institu- bers of the cabinet. As the Chief Executive tion in achieving its mission and goals. The Officer of the University, the President administrative structure of the University is has responsibility for the management reviewed and revised as new leadership is and supervision of all activities in accor- appointed and as needs dictate. dance with established policies and procedures. The President is responsible for the implementation of the University’s policies Overview of Administrative established by the Board of Trustees and Structure for recommending courses of action to the Board in coordination with faculty, staff, University Officers and other constituents in the University The organizational structure of the community. University is delineated in Figure 8.1. As In recent past, the University has under- decreed by the University Charter, the ulti- gone some administrative changes revis- mate authority is the Board of Trustees with ing the structure and creating new posi- the President as Chief Executive Officer. tions. Within administrative ranks, there The administrative structure over the past has been turnover either by resignation or decade has provided stability in leadership. retirement. Since the last Middle States H. Patrick Swygert served as president for 13 visit in 1999, there has been substantial years, the third longest tenure of a president turnover in the position of Provost and in the 142-year history of the University. In CAO with six individuals having served May 2007, President Swygert announced his in that position [Antoine Garibaldi, retirement as President of Howard, effective 1996-2000; Don Coleman (Interim), June 30, 2008. On May 7, 2008, the Board 2000-2001; Toy Caldwell-Colbert, 2001- of Trustees announced the appointment 2003; Richard English, 2003-2008; Kurt of Sidney A. Ribeau, Ph.D., president of Schmoke (Acting Senior Vice President for Bowling Green State University to the presi- Academic Matters), 06/2008-08/2008; and dency of Howard, effective August 1, 2008. Alvin Thornton (Interim), 2008-present]. During a short period of transition, July 1, Also several changes have occurred in the 2008 to July 31, 2008, Ms. Artis Hampshire- Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Cowan, J.D., Senior Vice President and Officer/Treasurer position, with four per- Secretary to the Board of Trustees, served sons having served since 1999 [Thomas as interim president. Elzey, 1995-2002; Henry Jackson (Interim), The President has a cabinet of adminis- 2002-2004; Sheila Roberts (Acting), 2005; trative officers who serve in an advisory Sidney Evans, Jr. 2005-present].

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 53 Chapter 8

Howard University Organizational Chart Functional

Board of Trustees

Executive Director Office of Communications and Marketing

Dean of the Chapel Chapel President Assistant Vice President Office of the President Office of Protocol and Events

Senior Vice President & Senior Vice President & Secretary of the Board of Chief Information Officer Trustees Office of the SVP Office of the SVP for External Affairs, & Secretary Operations & Strategic Planning and ISAS

General Counsel Vice President Office of the Office of the VP for General Counsel Development & Alumni Relations

Provost and Chief Senior Vice President Senior Vice President & CFO Academic Officer Vice President Vice President Office of the SVP Human Capitol Office of the SVP and Office of the Provost & Research & Compliance for Health Sciences Management CFO-Treasurer Chief Academic Officer

Deans for Schools/Colleges Deans for Schools/Colleges Director Associate Vice Associate Vice President President Deputy Chief Medicine, Dentistry Arts & Science, Benefits, Counseling, & Financial Officer & Pharmacy Nursing and Business, Engineering Sponsored Programs Materials Retirement Services & Controller Allied Health Sciences Architecture and Management Computer Sciences, Communications, Divinity, Education, Law, Social Work, Graduate Director CEO Associate Vice President School Human Resource Chief of Campus Police Assistant Treasurer HU Hospital Research Compliance Information Systems Campus Police

Director Academic Support Units Associate Vice Director Director President Financial Analysis & Vice Provost Employee Relations & EEO Administrative Budget Enrollment Management Services

Associate Vice Provost Director Vice President for Student Affairs Employment Auxillary Enterprise Student Affairs

Director Compensation & Performance Management

Figure 8.1: Organizational Chart Source: Office of the President

54 ❘ Howard University Administration

In the last two years, changes in respon- ties. Further, the SVPHS is responsible sibilities have shifted between the Provost for the educational, research, and service and Senior Vice President for Health programs in the Health Sciences. With Sciences (SVPHS). As stated in Chapter this administrative change, the University 7, the Faculty Senate believes there was needs to assure that there is proper align- insufficient engagement of the faculty ment and collaboration between the Office in this decision. The Provost and CAO of the SVPHS and the Provost and CAO. now has the responsibility for all under- Other important changes include the graduates and graduates in nine colleges creation of new cabinet level positions. and schools (excluding the Colleges of As a result of the NSF 2006 audit report, Medicine; Dentistry; and Pharmacy, the Board of Trustees approved posi- Nursing, and Allied Health Sciences), the tion of Vice President for Research and libraries (excluding the Health Sciences Compliance (VPRC) to provide oversight Library), and several academic support for administration of the research enter- units. Additionally, the Provost and CAO prise. With this cabinet level position, the has oversight for academic offerings, University needs to assure that there is space availability, personnel and facility proper alignment between the Office of resources, and expenditures of univer- the VPRC, which has responsibility for sity funds within budgets of units in the extramural research administration, and Academic Affairs Division. the Office of the Provost, which has gen- The SVPHS presides over the Hospital, eral responsibility for research, as well as Health Sciences Library, the Colleges for coordination with the SVPHS office of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmacy, In early 2006, President Swygert appointed Nursing and Allied Health Sciences Don Coleman, Ph.D. as the Interim VPRC. and possesses line authority from the Dr. Coleman’s tenure ended after a national President for the overall management of search and the appointment of Oliver G. the University’s clinical enterprise and McGee, Ph.D. as the University’s first per- dedicated health sciences segments of the manent VPRC on July 1, 2007. Dr. McGee academy including oversight of these enti- resigned after serving for one academic year,

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 55 Chapter 8 and Florence B. Bonner, Ph.D., Associate ing the vacancy of University Officers, the Vice President for Compliance was appointed President seeks approval from the Board of VPRC (Acting) in August 2008. Trustees. University Officers are recruited In July 2008, Ms. Elizabeth Stroud, through national searches that are coor- the Associate Vice President for Human dinated by a search committee, published Capital Management was promoted to Vice vacancy notices, and formal search com- President for Human Capital Management, mittee interviews. Position descriptions a newly created cabinet level position. Under and vacancy notices include the responsi- President Ribeau’s leadership, a new cabinet bilities and qualifications for prospective level position, Vice President for Presidential candidates. The roles and responsibilities Initiatives, was created to support the of the Officers are outlined in the Howard President, Provost and CAO, and the other University By-laws of the Board of Trustees, Vice Presidents in organizational renewal. 2007 (see Supporting Document 8.1); posi- Additionally, as part of the restructuring of the tion descriptions; and job announcements. Division of Communications and Marketing, Additionally, Officers in temporary (acting President Ribeau appointed an Interim or interim) positions do not have clearly Executive Director of Communications and defined written responsibilities but assume Marketing in May 2009 to report directly the role of the vacant position. to the Office of the President. This reorga- The executive officers of the University nization is part of a comprehensive plan to serve “at the will of ” the President. Those coordinate the University’s diverse commu- officers in “interim” roles may not serve in nication assets and to improve internal and excess of twelve months during any con- external communications. tinuous period of eighteen months (Howard University By-laws of the Board of Trustees, Recruitment and Hiring Process of 2007). Initial hires receive an individual ori- University Officers entation from Human Capital Management, A rigorous hiring process for senior in consultation with the President. At that executives ensures that individuals selected session, the Officer receives copies of the for these positions best meet the required Equal Employment Opportunity Policy; skills and qualifications. Prior to advertis- Sexual Harassment Policy; Code of Conduct Policy; Personnel Guideline and Statement of Current Benefits; and a Confidentiality Agreement (see Supporting Documents 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, and 8.6). Academic Administrative Officers The administration of academic units falls under the purview of the Provost and CAO and the SVPHS. They in turn, for their respective Divisions, delegate the responsibility of the schools/colleges and other units to the Deans and Directors. Academic deans are responsible for faculty recruitment and development; faculty evaluation; program development and review; student advising; collegiate budgeting and budget control; class scheduling/planning; general supervision of the research, teaching, and outreach activities of the school/college. As appropriate, the Deans consult with the faculty of the school/college (Faculty Handbook). Some of these responsibilities are delegated to the departmental chairs by the Deans. Departmental chairs are responsible

56 ❘ Howard University Administration

for overseeing the administration of aca- ation of several new senior administrative demic departments within schools/colleges. positions. Concerns were expressed about Directors are responsible for the administra- the division of academic responsibilities tion of units that are not schools/colleges between the Provost and the Senior Vice and may share such responsibility with fac- President for Health Sciences—an orga- ulty in the units. Additionally, directors con- nizational arrangement with implications sult with faculty who are part of their units for institutional operation and decision- (see Supporting Document 8.7). making. The Vice President for Research and Compliance position was created to Assessment of the enhance the administration of the research enterprise and a Vice President for Presi- Administration dential Initiatives was created to support There have been some inconsistencies the President, Provost and CAO, and other with the evaluation of university officers and Vice Presidents in organizational renewal. academic administrative officers in terms of As part of the restructuring of the Divi- its frequency. Additionally, there is no evi- sion of Communications and Marketing, an dence that additional training or leadership Executive Director of Communications and development is routinely available for deans, Marketing was created, reporting directly directors, and officers of the University to to the President. The following findings assist them to function at maximum capac- and recommendations emerged from the ity in their defined positions such that opera- review of the University’s status relative to tional effectiveness is achieved. MSCHE Standard 5:

Summary, Findings and Findings 1. There has not been stability in the posi- Recommendations tions of Provost and CAO and the Senior The organizational structure of the Uni- Vice President and Chief Financial Officer/ versity is hierarchical. In the recent past, Treasurer. the administrative structure has undergone 2. Strengths and weaknesses of the admin- several revisions, which include the cre- istrative structure are not currently reviewed

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 57 Chapter 8 periodically to maintain efficiency and abil- Supporting Documents ity to respond to evolving requirements. 8.1 Howard University By-laws of the 3. There is insufficient leadership Board of Trustees, 2007 training focusing on a broadening set of 8.2 Howard University Policy and responsibilities and opportunities that Procedure on Equal Opportunity in would strengthen the operational effec- Employment and Education Programs tiveness of deans, directors and depart- and Activities, 1999 mental chairs. 8.3 Howard University Policy Against Recommendations for Improvement Sexual Harassment and Gender- Based Discrimination in Education 1. The President should consider prac- Programs and Activities, 1999 tices and procedures that will lead to stabi- 8.4 Howard University Code of Ethics lization in senior level university officers. and Conduct Policy, 1998 2. Assess the strengths and weaknesses 8.5 Personnel Guideline and Statement of of the University’s administrative structure Current Benefits, 1999 periodically to maintain utmost efficiency 8.6 Howard University Employee and continuity. Financial, Personal and Private 3. Implement individual developmental Information Confidentiality plans focusing on operational effective- Agreement, 2008 ness for university officers, deans, direc- 8.7 Faculty Handbook, 1993 tors and departmental chairs as ongoing leadership development training.

58 ❘ Howard University 9 Integrity

9 Integrity

MSCHE Standard 6 In the conduct of its programs and activities involving the public and the constituencies it serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to ethical standards and its own stated policies, providing support for academic and intellectual freedom.

Introduction accordance with their respective profes- Integrity inevitably requires transpar- sional codes of ethics. ency, consistency, impartiality, fairness, University-wide policies are dissemi- clarity, accountability, effective and accu- nated to the various departments and are rate communication, academic freedom, made available to all faculty, staff, and and institutional honesty. The Howard students. Additionally, policies are inte- University Code of Ethics and Conduct grated into University communications was adopted by the Board of Trustees and publications. Academic policies are in June of 1998 and the opening state- found in the print or electronic versions of ment is very clear in addressing the fact the Howard University Faculty Handbook that integrity and honesty are required of (Section 2.3.1—Terms and Conditions every member of the University commu- of Faculty Employment) (see Supporting nity in all dealings and at all times (see Document 9.2); and the Howard University Supporting Document 9.1). Student Handbook, 2007-2008 (Section —Academic Policies, Page 16; Section— Policies and Regulations, Page 102) (see Academic Integrity Supporting Document 9.3). Academic reg- Howard affirms that the main purpose ulations are also available in the Student of an institution of higher education is Reference Manual, Howard University the discovery of new knowledge through Student Handbook, and Undergraduate scholarly teaching, research, and service to Bulletin (see Supporting Documents 9.4, the community. In pursuit of knowledge, 9.5, and 9.6). the Faculty and students must hold learn- Academic freedom is described in the ing and research at the highest level of Faculty Handbook as the freedom of faculty integrity. The overarching university pol- members and students to teach, study, and icy is to comply with the policies in place conduct research in pursuit of knowledge regarding ethical standards of integrity in without interference or restriction from the relationships within the University and all law or internal and external pressures. The related entities, business units, subsidiaries Howard University Academic Freedom pol- and affiliated organizations, including, but icy is outlined in Section 2.2.4 of the Faculty not limited to, Howard University Hospital Handbook (see Supporting Document 9.2). and the community, in support of academic Additional information pertaining to aca- and intellectual freedom. Information per- demic freedom is found in the Student Code taining to academic and intellectual integ- of Conduct (see Supporting Document 9.7) rity is well documented in Howard policies and the Howard University Code of Ethics and is made available to university con- and Conduct, Section IV: E (p. 7) (see stituencies. University policies that govern Supporting Document 9.1). each of the constituency groups reference Students at the University are held to a integrity and how it is the responsibility of high standard in pursuit of learning. The each entity to hold itself accountable and University prohibits any type of academic perform its functions with integrity and in dishonesty. As stated in the Academic

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 59 Chapter 9

Code of Conduct, which was adopted by all courses attempted, excluding courses the Board of Trustees in January 1987, repeated. To receive a Bachelor of Arts or students enrolled at the University may be Bachelor of Science degree, students must disciplined for academic infractions such have a cumulative GPA of at least 2.0 on as cheating and plagiarism. The minimum a 4.0 scale. Students graduate with honors disciplinary penalty for a violation of the under the following conditions: those with Code is that the student will not receive a quality GPA ranging from 3.20 through credit for the course assignment or exami- 3.49 will graduate cum laude; those with nation in which the infraction(s) occurred. a quality GPA ranging from 3.50 through A more severe penalty, such as failure in 3.79 will graduate magna cum laude; and the course involved or suspension from those with a quality GPA of 3.80 or higher the University, may be imposed depend- will graduate summa cum laude. ing upon the nature and extent of the Grievance procedures, which were infraction(s). The authority and responsi- approved by the Board of Trustees in 1994 bility for the imposition of any discipline and are detailed under the Policy on Student rests with the faculty of the school/ college Academic Procedures in the Student in which the student is enrolled. However, Reference Manual, Howard University Since 2008, it may be delegated by the faculty to Student Handbook, and other University the Dean of the school/college in which publications, are applicable in the case of the Graduate the student is enrolled (see Supporting challenges to academic decisions. School required Document 9.8). Integrity of Academic Programs all thesis and Through the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and Assessment Academic programs at Howard are dissertation (CETLA), the University subscribes to accredited by a number of national and authors to Turnitin.com, a research resource tool specialized agencies which are approved submit an that teaches the planning, organizational, by the U. S. Department of Education and and citation skills essential for producing other accrediting entities. At present, all electronic quality writing and research. One of the programs at the University are accredited. version of their assessment tools included is a plagiarism Within the last two years, the College document to detection service. Some professors at the of Medicine and Schools of Law and University now require students to submit Business, and several departments main- the Turnitin. their papers electronically to this site to tained accreditation with their respective com site and determine the originality of texts based on academic associations. Self-Study inter- generate a comparisons with the Turnitin.com internal views with six Deans resulted in a consen- database. Since 2008, the Graduate School sus that the integrity of academic programs Turnitin.com required all thesis and dissertation authors is challenged by issues arising from defi- Originality to submit an electronic version of their cient infrastructures; inadequate services; Report in order document to the Turnitin.com site and gen- inefficient administrative and manage- erate a Turnitin.com Originality Report, in ment systems; noncompetitive compensa- to safeguard order to safeguard the academic integrity of tion packages for new and current faculty, academic Howard theses and dissertations. This report and little organizational support. Concerns integrity. is submitted with the oral defense request expressed that also may threaten the integ- (see Supporting Document 9.9). Although rity of the academic program included an the penalty for plagiarizing theses and dis- aging faculty body with few who are pro- sertations is clear, the penalty is not so clear ductive in research. The Deans of the pro- with regard to other types of student writ- fessional schools found it problematic that ing—especially if a faculty member wants there was an apparent increase in faculty to go beyond what is in the Student Code that were lacking in expertise or scholar- of Conduct (i.e., a “0” for the plagiarized ship and demonstrated minimal profes- assignment). sional and scholarly growth. The University uses a grade point aver- Assessment is an important and integral age (GPA) system to evaluate the overall part of academic programs. At Howard, performance of the student at the end of most professional programs use national each semester. The GPA is computed for examinations as benchmarks for measur-

60 ❘ Howard University Integrity

ing the success of their students and grad- the Research Compliance Office provides uates. This information has led to program guidance to faculty in preparing protocols enhancements, including curricular modi- to submit to the relevant review commit- fications and the institution of supplemen- tees. The IRB reviews all research proto- tal initiatives to improve national exami- cols that involve humans, and requires the nation scores. highest standards of care to ensure privacy and informed consent and to reduce the Scientific Integrity risks to human research participation. The IACUC reviews protocols that involve Integrity in the conduct of research is a vertebrae subjects. key priority for the University. In 2003, the Graduate School implemented a required Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Workplace Integrity seminar for all graduate students. Attendance The University reaffirms its commit- at the workshop is a prerequisite for gradu- ment to equity and nondiscrimination in ate candidacy and is designed to ensure the workplace, consistent with federal that all students conducting research dem- mandates and D.C. laws. The Howard onstrate their understanding of the multiple University Code of Ethics and Conduct ways that integrity can be assured including provides the framework for ethical con- the role of the Institutional Review Board duct. The University strives to ensure fair- (IRB) and the Institutional Animal Care ness and equality in its hiring, evaluation, and Use Committee (IACUC), research and promotion practices with regards to guidelines, ethical reasoning, conflict of administration, faculty, staff, and students. interests, data management, authorship and Recruitment of staff and wage employees publication practices, and mentorship. are conducted through the new PeopleSoft The Research Compliance Office is Human Resource on-line application sys- charged with administering the review and tem, which was implemented in 2007. approval of the use of human participants Employment appointments are made by and vertebrae animal subjects in research the Office of Employment in accordance through the IRB and IACUC. In this role, with the AffirmativeA ction law.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 61 Chapter 9

The Office of Employment conducts ori- interest, conflicts or potential conflicts entation for all initial hires on or before of interest are required to be disclosed at their scheduled report date. In addition to least once a year and members with said receiving benefits information, new employ- conflicts are excused from participating in ees receive the Howard University Policy relevant decision making. Additionally, all and Procedure on Equal Opportunity in Deans sign conflict of interest forms every Employment and Education Programs and year, which are maintained in the Offices of Activities, 1999; Howard University Policy the Provost and General Counsel. Against Sexual Harassment and Gender- Policies regarding faculty conflicts of inter- Based Discrimination in Education Programs est and commitment apply to faculty on full- and Activities, 1999; Code of Ethics and time appointments. The conflict of commit- Conduct Policy, 1998; Personnel Guidelines ment policy requires faculty to limit outside and Statement of Current Benefits, 1999; employment and activities to one day per and ConfidentialityA greement, 2008. week so as to not interfere with the primary responsibilities of research, teaching, and ser- Conflict of Interest vice. Faculty members must discuss potential Conflict of interest statements and poli- conflicts of interest with theirD ean and avoid cies are outlined in the Howard University or withdraw from situations that may lead to Code of Ethics and Conduct, Faculty personal gain or advantage of any kind that Handbook, the Howard University By-laws conflict with the University’s interest and the of the Board of Trustees, and Sponsored member’s duty to serve them. Programs Conflict of Interest Policy, No. In terms of research, beginning April 600-002. At the Board level, duality of 2007, all Principal Investigators (PIs)

62 ❘ Howard University Integrity were required to submit a completed con- n Quest—a bi-annual research publica- flict of interest (COI) form as part of their tion that chronicles faculty and student application package for extramural funds research across the University. to the Office of Sponsored Programs/ Additionally, the on-line schedule of Research Administration. Prior to this new classes, bulletins, and catalogs via the University requirement, only PIs submit- University Web site provides students ting applications to the National Science with basic information pertaining to Foundation and the National Institutes of deadlines, examination schedule, finance, Health were required to submit the COI and academic rules and regulations. This The form as per Federal regulations. information is presented in a logical and University’s navigational format, which makes it easier standards of Integrity in Communication for the reader to follow through links. A and Media university on-line events calendar informs fairness and the community of campus activities, past, equity are in The University community is informed current, and forthcoming (http://www. many respects about important issues through the Office howard.edu/calendars/). of University Communications and undergirded Marketing, which is the central point for Summary, Findings and by a culture the dissemination of information regard- of compassion ing Howard to the community. This Recommendations office’s media operation disseminates University-wide ethical policies are dis- and a passion news in a variety of formats including seminated to the various departments and for excellence. e-newsletters (Capstone On-line), Web are shared with faculty, staff, and students. sites, e-mails, and periodicals (Howard As reinforcement, policies are integrated Magazine). Also, the University Web site into university communications and pub- is the main communication portal through lications. Academic policies are found which faculty, staff, students, alumni, and in the print or electronic versions of the the greater community can access a wide Howard University Faculty and Student array of information about the University. Handbooks. Academic regulations are also In addition to the aforementioned commu- available in the Student Reference Manual, nication media, the University’s student Howard University Student Handbook, newspaper, The Hilltop is published daily and Undergraduate Bulletin. under the direction of an advisor. The University’s standards of fairness Other major University publications and equity are in many respects under- include: girded by a culture of compassion and a n The Bison Yearbook—published annu- passion for excellence. However, practices ally by a student staff under the advise- of consistency and transparency are mixed, ment of the Office of StudentA ctivities. as in any institution of Howard’s size. Some n The H-Book—published by the Office professors at the University now require of Student Activities, provides informa- students to submit their papers electroni- tion on University policies, rules, codes cally to the Turnitin.com site to determine of conduct, campus services, campus the originality of texts based on compari- events, and annually observed events. sons with the Turnitin.com database. Since n Howard University Facts—a booklet of 2008, the Graduate School has required all information taken from several univer- thesis and dissertation authors to submit an sity databases published by the Office of electronic version of their document to the University Research and Planning. Turnitin.com site and generate a Turnitin. n Howard University Service—provides com Originality Report, in order to safe- city and community activities in which guard the academic integrity of Howard Howard faculty, staff, students, alumni theses and dissertations. This report is and relatives are engaged. submitted with the oral defense request. n Scholarship@howard—a searchable on- Additionally, ethics and integrity seminars line database of Howard faculty authors are now offered during orientation sessions published since 1995. for students, faculty, or staff. The follow-

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 63 Chapter 9

ing findings and recommendations for 3. Publish the University’s various official improvement emerged from the review of policies and procedures in a central location the University’s status relative to MSCHE on the University’s Web site. Standard 6: Supporting Documents Findings 9.1 Howard University Code of Ethics and 1. There is insufficient inclusion of eth- Conduct Policy, 1998 ics and integrity as core components in the 9.2 Faculty Handbook, 1993 orientation process for students, faculty, and 9.3 Howard University 2009-2010 Student staff. Handbook 2. There are insufficient procedures to 9.4 Howard University Fall 2009 Student ensure a systematic evaluation and moni- Reference Manual toring of compliance with university poli- 9.5 Undergraduate Bulletin* cies related to integrity. 9.6 Graduate Bulletin* 3. The University’s various official policies 9.7 Howard University Student Code of are not readily available in a single central Conduct, 2000 location. 9.8 Howard University Academic Code of Student Conduct, 1987 Recommendations for Improvement 9.9 Graduate School Thesis and 1. Develop integrity as a core component Dissertation Manual, 2008 for all orientations of students, faculty, and staff. *The Howard University Bulletins may be 2. Develop and implement effective assess- accessed through the University’s website: ment procedures to ensure a systematic www.howard.edu (Click Administration; evaluation and monitoring of compliance then click, Interim Provost and Chief with university policies related to integrity Academic Officer; then click, Publications/ at all levels. Policies and School Bulletins)

64 ❘ Howard University 10 Institutional Assessment

10 Institutional Assessment

MSCHE Standard 7 The institution has developed and implemented an assessment process that evaluates its overall effectiveness in achieving its mission and goals and its compliance with accreditation standards.

Introduction Institutional Assessment Institutional assessment and effective- Climate ness is discussed throughout this report. The University continues to incorpo- However, this chapter presents additional rate assessment across all its functions. assessment information to give an over- The creation of the Office of Institutional all portrait of institutional evaluation. Assessment and Evaluation (OIAE) in 2008 Assessment activities at Howard are is an indicator of the University’s continued designed to determine the level of confor- commitment to the assessment enterprise. mity of institutional practices to its mis- OIAE is in the process of working aggres- sion. The University has a long history sively to facilitate, coordinate and institu- of assessing institutional effectiveness, tionalize assessment activities across the including regular internal and external University. evaluations. Howard conducted its first The results of the Self-Study surveys University-wide Self-Study for Middle of faculty, senior administrators, and staff States accreditation in 1921, received reflect significant University challenges university-wide accreditation, and has in connecting the goal of incorporating successfully reaffirmed its accredita- assessment into institutional decision-mak- tion ever since. Additionally, more than ing, planning, and budgeting. Although 30 accrediting bodies currently review there is imbalance in the perception of the more than 60 academic programs at the quality and extent of the incorporation of University. School-specific assessments assessment across units, it was particu- are conducted on a periodic basis, typi- larly noteworthy that among respondents, cally for disciplinary accreditation. 51% of staff, 43% of faculty and 11% of The U. S. Department of Education’s assess- senior administrators reported unaware- ment of the University’s performance on key ness of their unit’s assessment plan, while indicators and congressional oversight of the 13% of senior administrators reported that University’s budget provide an additional there is no assessment plan. Among the layer of external accountability. Internally, small sample of faculty respondents, the University units conduct internal audits majority (86%) were aware of their depart- and provide annual reports. The system- ment’s policies and procedures to assess its atization of a formal internal University- programs and student learning outcomes. wide assessment function is a relatively However, almost half (43%) were unaware recent endeavor and continues to evolve. of their school or college’s written assess- To promote the University’s effectiveness ment plan. In general, the faculty’s rating of in achieving its mission, several major ini- school/college assessment functions indi- tiatives, including organizational restruc- cated considerable room for growth in that turing, financial planning, and academic very high percentages reported that they streamlining have continued, while new were either unaware or did not know of the initiatives have commenced that enhance assessment function. Among senior admin- the student experience and institutional istrators, perceptions regarding the integra- operations. tion of assessment into decision-making

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 65 Chapter 10

are mixed. Although over three-fourths Force was charged to propose a campus- (76%) are aware of their unit’s assessment wide organizational structure for the OAIE During the plan, a fifth (20%) did not know enough to initiative to develop guiding principles for rate its implementation. Further, while 61% the conduct of assessment activities; to past decade, endorsed the perception that their respec- outline the functions, roles, and responsi- to assess unit tive units have policies and procedures to bilities of individuals and units involved level progress effectively assess activities and programs, in assessing institutional effectiveness the majority ( 61%) negatively evaluated and educational outcomes for students; and plan the degree to which appropriate assessment to document current levels of assessment execution, the tools are used to determine if expected out- activities underway on campus; and to University has comes are being achieved (see Supporting develop a timeline for the implementation Document 10.1). of a fully coordinated program of insti- utilized internal Staff perceptions of assessment indicate tutional effectiveness measures and stu- and external the need for increased attention, with two- dent learning outcomes assessments. The assessment fifths of respondents consistently reporting Interim Task Force designed a committee lack of knowledge of their unit’s assessment structure and a set of guiding principles teams and plan. The level of awareness or lack thereof (see Supporting Document 10.3) that were consultants across the University community suggests consistent with the recommendations of to conduct that the profile of assessment functions the Middle States Association and pre- needs to be raised and although the strate- pared a draft framework for a centralized, feasibility gies undertaken by OIAE for communicat- coordinated University-wide assessment studies and ing assessment information and activities program at the University. To enhance the assess selected appear vital, they should be studied for their readiness of the University community to impact on the “assessment culture.” OIAE’s participate in assessment-related activi- University plans demonstrate that it will provide lead- ties, Howard supported participation in operations. ership to “cultivate a culture of assessment” national, regional, and discipline-based that enhances evidence-based decision-mak- assessment conferences; established ing and thus institutional effectiveness. in-service training; increased library resources on assessment; and arranged for site visits to model programs. University Assessment In March 2001, Howard submit- During the past decade, to assess unit ted its Follow-up Report on Progress in level progress and plan execution, the the Development and Implementation University has utilized internal and external of a Comprehensive Assessment Plan, assessment teams and consultants to con- which was accepted by the Middle States duct feasibility studies and assess selected Association. Several departments and University operations. Annual reports units developed assessment plans in 2003. from each school/college and department/ Since that time, schools and colleges have unit are compiled and reviewed annually engaged in a variety of assessment activi- by the individual departments/units and ties, some driven by accreditation require- University cabinet members. Additionally, ments and others by University expecta- the Office of University Research and tions. However, the implementation and Planning compiles and publishes summary related outcomes of the departments/units data annually in the University Facts Book assessment plans were not adequately coor- (see Supporting Document 10.2), which is dinated across the University. Institutional distributed internally and to external audi- assessment remained decentralized until ences. In January 2000, an Interim Task Fall 2008 when the Office of Institutional Force on University Outcomes Assessment Assessment and Evaluation (OIAE) was and Institutional Effectiveness (OAIE) established under the Office of theP rovost. was established in response to concerns From the outset, OIAE encountered practi- raised in the 1999 Self-Study Report. The cal challenges in fulfilling its agenda to iden- Interim Task Force was comprised of rep- tify, access, and compile various sources resentatives from the faculty, administra- of data across the University, apparently, tors, staff, and students. The Interim Task because there was not a clear division of

66 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment responsibility among OIAE and the Office on improving outcomes related to student for University Research and Planning, and learning and development, student advise- other offices with assessment responsibili- ment, faculty teaching and instruction, fac- ties. The lack of coordination complicated ulty development, research and scholarly the process of “completing the circle” productivity, and academic support ser- where data and assessment informs change vices. Supporting Document 10.5 provides a in approach, policy, and practice. detailed outline of the CSA Subcommittee’s structure and responsibilities. Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation Use of College/School Assessment At the onset of OIAE under the direction Information of Gerunda B. Hughes, Ph.D., a five-year Assessment of student learning has been (2008-2013) Strategic Plan was developed the main thrust of the University’s assess- (see Supporting Document 10.4). The Plan ment activity. The greatest progress in doc- took into consideration the current devel- umenting, organizing, and sustaining the opments and climate in higher education assessment process has been made in this with respect to outcomes assessment (e.g., domain. Recent findings of direct measures more emphasis on student learning), the of student learning are detailed in Chapter University’s culture and climate in relation 17, Assessment of Student Learning. to outcome assessment, the availability of Samples of assessments used for account- human, material, and financial resources— ability or evaluation purposes with the pri- especially resources to report and dis- mary focus on college/school assessment seminate results and findings pertaining are summarized as follows: to institutional assessment, research, and A. Case Studies evaluation. The following case studies describe how Organizational Structure for the OAIE individual units or several collaborating Committee units identified an area of interest or concern, collected data for analysis, reviewed Because assessment is fluid, the OAIE and reflected on the results, and used the Committee evolved both in organizational information to improve their programs, ser- structure and design. Originally formed vices, or student learning outcomes. in 2001, the OAIE was restructured in n “Using Survey Results to Improve the Spring 2009 under a different rubric (see Curriculum” (see Supporting Document Supporting Document 10.5). The OAIE 10.6) Committee is large because it includes n “Predicting Successful Matriculation primary stakeholders (faculty, staff, stu- through Basic Sciences” (see Supporting dents, administrators, and alumni) from all Document 10.7) University units. The University’s OAIE n “Improvements in Passage Rates: United is divided functionally into three sub- States Medical Licensure Examinations” committees—College/School Assessment (see Supporting Document 10.8) (CSA), Student Quality of Life (SQL), and n “Biology Department Review Leads to University Community Experience (UCE). Facilities Renovation and Improvement The Executive Committee, which consists in Academic Programs” (see Supporting of the chairpersons of the three subcom- Document 10.9) mittees and the OIAE Director, coordinates the activities of the University OAIE B. Indirect Measures of Student Learning Committee. using Locally-developed Instruments 1. 2008 HU Self-Study Surveys College/School Assessment (CSA) Subcommittee The purpose of the surveys was to collect data and information about the perceptions The CSA Subcommittee provides over- and opinions of samples of students, fac- sight of the assessment activities of col- ulty, administrators, and staff on key top- leges and schools with particular emphasis ics, such as the University’s mission, lead-

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 67 Chapter 10 ership and governance, resource allocation, responded that they were “Very Satisfied” technology, physical facilities, student sup- or “Satisfied” with the training or develop- port services, faculty concerns, and student ment are presented below. learning outcomes. Different surveys were n Preparation for leadership developed for different stakeholder groups; 92.1 % however, some topics appeared on multiple n Knowledge of African-American culture stakeholder surveys. 89.3 % Students (N=415) were asked, for exam- n Knowledge of the social sciences ple, to indicate on a 4-point Likert-type scale 86.8 % the extent to which they agreed with a set of n Knowledge of the sciences 13 statements (Items 55-67) about “student 86.4 % learning outcomes.” The scale values ranged n Critical thinking and analysis from 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 86.3 % = Agree, to 4 = Strongly Agree. Across the n Verbal communication set of 13 items, the mean and standard devia- 85.9 % tion M = 2.8 and SD = .012, respectively (see n Written communication Supporting Document 10.1). 82.8 % Faculty (N=72) were asked to indicate, n Knowledge of the humanities on a similar 4-point scale, the extent to 81.7 % which they agreed with a set of 6 state- n Knowledge of African culture ments (Items 54-59) about “student learn- 79.8 % ing outcomes.” Across the set of items, the n Research skills mean and standard deviation M = 2.9 and 79.6 % SD = .038, respectively (see Supporting n Knowledge of global policies & issues Document 10.1). 76.7 % n Preparation for employment in major 2. 2009 Undergraduate Graduating 72.2 % Students’ Exit Survey n Preparation for a tech world Graduating undergraduate students were 69.3 % asked to indicate the level of satisfaction n Knowledge of mathematics with training in or the development of cer- 67.0 % tain competencies while matriculating at n Computer applications the University (see Supporting Document 62.3 % 10.10). The Survey produced 866 respon- n Preparation for grad/professional school dents. The percentages of students who 60.5 % C. Indirect Measures of Student Learning using Standardized Instruments 1. College Student Needs Assessment Survey (CSNAS) One way to maximize the effectiveness of the University’s response to the personal and academic needs of its incoming freshmen and thereby increase rates of retention and levels of satisfaction with their university experience is to identify their perceived needs. The College Student Needs Assessment Survey (CSNAS), which evaluates the educational and personal needs of college students, was administered initially to the Howard University (HU) 2008 freshman class. The areas of greatest need reported by this class focused on finances for education and opportunities

68 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

Table 10.1: Overall Areas of Greatest Need*: Howard University Students and Normative Sample from Private Colleges

Description of Item: Area of Consideration HU National

Obtaining adequate funds to finance my education 85%* 75%*

Learning more about other sources of financial aid available 90% 78%

Obtaining work experience in career areas of my interest 93% 65%

Arranging to discuss my career interests with people in my planned 93% 87% career area

Learning about educational opportunities after graduation 88% 83%

*Note: Percentages include all levels of need (from a little to most) Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

Table 10.2: Perceived Student Need for Assistance* in Personal and Academic Areas

Description of Item: HU NATIONAL Area of Consideration

Deciding what to do with my life 59%* 71%*

Identifying career areas that fit my skills, 62% 72% abilities, and interests Needs in Learning how to handle stress and anxiety in Personal 63% 67% my life Areas

Learning how to solve personal problems 47% 53%

Managing my time more effectively 77% 69%

Obtaining remedial/tutorial assistance 44% 54%

Coping with academic difficulties 30% 42%

Improving my test-taking skills 81% 77% Needs in General Academic Improving my problem-solving abilities and 74% 72% Support Skills reasoning skills

Understanding and using computers 48% 70%

Learning how to make better use of library 69% 66% facilities

Increasing skills in mathematics 79% 75%

Expressing ideas in writing 70% 68%

Improving my understanding of what I read 64% 65% Needs in General Education Areas Increasing my reading speed 61% 66%

Improving my study skills and habits 84% 77%

Increasing understanding of art, literature, and 69% 69% culture

*Note: Percentages represent all levels of need (from least to most). Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 69 Chapter 10 for career or job placement (see Supporting 2. Results of Selected Accrediting Document 10.11). The data in Table 10.1 Agencies’ Visits compare the perceived needs of HU fresh- n Division of Architecture and Design men and a national norm group, while the (see Supporting Document 10.12) data in Table 10.2 compare the perceived n School of Law (see Supporting Docu- student need for assistance in personal and ment 10.13) academic areas. A comprehensive CSNAS summary Student Quality of Life (SQL) report was submitted to the Office of the Provost for use in institutional planning. Subcommittee Additionally, individual CSNAS reports The SQL Subcommittee provides over- were prepared for the deans of the College sight of and coordinates assessment activi- of Arts and Sciences and the School of ties related to improvement of student Business—the two largest undergraduate satisfaction and quality of life. The SQL schools/colleges—for use in planning pro- Subcommittee’s work concentrates on grams aimed at providing resources and activities of the following university depart- academic support for students who have ments—Student Life & Activity, Special particular needs. Student Services, Enrollment Management,

Table 10.3: Students Perceptions of Their Experiences with Student Support Services

Not Able to Excellent Good Fair Poor N Rate

Deans Office 22% 42% 17% 4% 16% 172

Faculty in Dept. 29% 43% 20% 6% 2% 129

Staff in Dept. 30% 38% 23% 9% 1% 151

Office of President 8% 13% 15% 8% 55% 193

Office of Provost 12% 22% 16% 5% 44% 171

Enroll Mgt. (Overall) 10% 41% 31% 9% 9% 648

Student Financial 7% 22% 36% 29% 6% 344 Services

University Library 16% 52% 23% 7% 2% 299

Career Services 11% 23% 13% 6% 46% 300

Campus Police 4% 19% 38% 31% 9% 300

Parking 4% 16% 13% 12% 55% 301

Bookstore 20% 51% 25% 4% 1% 295

Dining Services 6% 21% 33% 25% 15% 347

Student Health Center 6% 24% 30% 25% 15% 348

Office of Student Life 13% 37% 17% 6% 27% 350 and Activities

Special Student 9% 14% 8% 4% 65% 347 Services

University Counseling 11% 14% 8% 6% 61% 474 Service

Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

70 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

Table 10.4: Parent Ratings of “Quality of Information” Quality of Information Written/On-line HU Office Rated Excellent Good Fair Poor N

Admissions 32% 52% 11% 5% 297

Financial Aid 18% 46% 25% 12% 288

Student Accounts 22% 54% 16% 7% 270

Residence Life 27% 50% 18% 6% 292

Student Health Center 28% 44% 20% 9% 270

Campus Police 35% 55% 9% 1% 210

Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

Table 10.5: Parent Ratings of “Responsiveness of Personnel” Responsiveness of Personnel Phone/In Person HU Office Rated Excellent Good Fair Poor N

Admissions 23% 40% 21% 16% 283

Financial Aid 18% 35% 25% 22% 270

Student Accounts 24% 43% 19% 14% 252

Residence Life 29% 41% 18% 13% 278

Student Health Center 28% 37% 20% 15% 264

Campus Police 33% 56% 8% 3% 164

Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

Intercollegiate Athletics, Residence Life, riences with several offices, among which Career Services, University Counseling were those of the President and the Provost. Services, Student Health Services, Student 2. HU 101: Parent Survey of Selected Financial Services, and the University SQL Units Bookstore (see Supporting Document 10.5 for a detailed outline of the structure and The OIAE conducted a paper-based responsibilities of the SQL Subcommittee). survey of parents who participated in Howard University 101: 2008 New Student Use of Student Quality of Life (SQL) Orientation on August 20, 2008. The pur- Assessment Information pose of the survey was to elicit ratings of This section presents examples of assess- the effectiveness of key University offices ments that were used for accountability or that parents were likely to encounter during evaluation purposes within student quality the college selection and admissions pro- of life areas. cesses. Using a 4-point scale, parents rated 1. 2008 HU Self-Study Surveys “the quality of information provided on-line Students rated the perceptions of their or in written form” and “the responsive- experiences with each of the offices inT able ness of University personnel on the phone 10.3. A greater proportion of student respon- or in-person.” Survey results were shared dents rated their overall experiences with the with the units in order to facilitate planning, various offices as favorable. Sizeable pro- staff development, and improved customer portions of respondents reported no expe- service. The data in Tables 10.4 and 10.5

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 71 Chapter 10 show parental ratings of quality of informa- gain efficiencies in administrative services tion and responsiveness of personnel (see and processes. UCE units conducted assess- Supporting Document 10.14). ment activities to determine the satisfaction The results of these surveys were dis- of all members of the Howard community. tributed to the administrators of President Use of University Community Ribeau’s newly created Students First Experience Assessment Information Campaign for initial use in targeting the focus of immediate and projected efforts Presented in this section are examples of to improve student support services during evaluations used for accountability or evalu- phase one of this Campaign. ation purposes with the primary focus on the University community experience. 3. Case Studies 1. 2008 HU Self-Study Surveys n “Evaluations of Counseling Center Services” (see Supporting Document n Physical Facilities 10.15). Students, faculty, staff, and senior admin- n “A Review of Operating Procedures to istrators rated the availability, quality, and Increase Effectiveness of Student Services” adequacy of “physical facilities” at the (see Supporting Document 10.16). University for various purposes. The scale ranged from excellent to poor and included University Community “don’t know.” As indicated in Table 10.6, Experience (UCE) moderately high proportions of students Subcommittee rated the quality of physical facilities available on campus for meetings, seminars, con- The UCE Subcommittee provides over- ferences, and workshops as “fair” or “poor”, sight and coordination of assessment activi- with similar ratings for the adequacy of ties of all units not covered by the CSA or physical facilities for learning and the ade- SQL Subcommittees. This Subcommittee quacy of physical facilities for conducting utilizes assessment results to improve and state-of-the-art research. Similarly, high pro-

Table 10.6: Availability, Quality, and Adequacy of “Physical Facilities” at the University

Quality of physical facilities available on campus for meetings, seminars, conferences, workshops

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Students N=172 6% 35% 39% 17% 3%

Faculty N=79 5% 24% 38% 32% 1%

Staff N= 326 4% 22% 42% 27% 4%

Senior Administrators N=65 3% 15% 46% 34% 2%

Adequacy of physical facilities for…

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Students N= 646 …learning 5% 24% 33% 32% 6%

Faculty N= 71 …teaching 6% 18% 34% 42% 0%

Adequacy of physical facilities for conducting state-of-the-art research (e.g., labs, studios)

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Students N=648 8% 20% 30% 34% 8%

Faculty N=148 3% 11% 24% 57% 4%

Senior Administrators N=64 2% 2% 36% 53% 8%

Note: Percentage may not sum to 100, due to rounding. Source: 2008 HU Self-Study Surveys, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008

72 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

Table 10.7: Quality and Adequacy of “Technology” at the University

Quality of computer-supported services by the University

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Students N=154 14% 30% 31% 22% 3%

Faculty N=79 14% 30% 28% 28% 0%

Staff N= 325 8% 25% 38% 27% 1%

Senior Administrators N=66 3% 17% 41% 17% 21%

Adequacy of technology resources provided by the University

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Faculty N=150 9% 27% 30% 33% 1%

Staff N= 326 7% 23% 40% 28% 2%

Senior Administrators N=66 2% 26% 47% 26% 0%

Impact of the condition of computer technology on student learning

Excellent Good Fair Poor DK

Students N=195 17% 35% 25% 21% 8%

Faculty N=79 6% 27% 28% 25% 14%

Senior Administrators N=64 2% 29% 36% 17% 17%

Note: Percentage may not sum to 100, due to rounding. Source: 2008 HU Self-Study Surveys, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation portions of faculty rated the quality of physi- respond favorably to each of the items focused cal facilities available on campus for meet- on overall satisfaction with University systems ings, seminars, conferences, and workshops (see Supporting Document 10.10). Similarly, as “fair” or “poor”, with similar ratings for Table 10.9 shows that high proportions of 2009 the adequacy of physical facilities for teach- graduate and professional graduating students ing and the adequacy of physical facilities respond favorably to each of the items focused for conducting state-of-the-art research. on overall satisfaction with University systems Students, faculty, staff, and senior admin- (see Supporting Document 10.17). istrators rated the quality and adequacy of “technology” at the University for various Ongoing Institutional purposes, using the same response scale Assessment Activities employed for the physical facilities assess- Compliance with the Government ments. As shown in Table 10.7, students’ Performance and Results Act opinions were widely divergent on the rating of quality of computer-supported services Each year Howard provides the U.S. provided by the University, with slightly more Department of Education with updated than half rating the quality as “fair” or “poor”. performance indicators measuring the Faculty and senior administrators were highly University’s ability to meet targets relative critical of the quality and adequacy of tech- to the quality of incoming students’ aca- nology resources at the University. demic records, student academic achieve- 2. 2009 Undergraduate and Graduate/ ment (as measured by retention and gradu- Professional Graduating Students’ Exit ation rates), faculty research, fundraising Surveys initiatives, and the University’s teaching hospital. This institutional assessment is Table 10.8 indicates that high proportions in compliance with a directive set forth by of 2009 undergraduate graduating students the Congress and is transmitted through

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 73 Chapter 10

Table 10.8: Overall Satisfaction with University Systems: Undergraduate Graduating Students

Please indicate your level of overall satisfaction with the following systems:

Very Very Don’t Satisfied Dissatisfied N/A Satisfied Dissatisfied Know %(n)

BANNER Registration 17.6% (154) 65.6% (573) 11.2% (98) 2.9% (25) 1.3% (11) 1.5% (13) System

iLab and Campus 15.5% (135) 59.5% (519) 18.4% (161) 5.0% (44) 0.5% (4) 1.1% (10) Computer Laboratories

University Libraries 13.1% (114) 62.7% (547) 15.7% (137) 4.9% (43) 1.9% (17) 1.7% (15)

Note: Percentage may not sum to 100, due to rounding. Graduating students probably experienced a positive change in the functioning of these systems since their freshman year. Source: 2009 HU Undergraduate Graduating Student Exit Survey, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

Table 10.9: Overall Satisfaction with University Systems: Graduate/ Professional Graduating Students

Please indicate your level of overall satisfaction with the following systems:

Very Very Don’t Satisfied Dissatisfied N/A Satisfied Dissatisfied Know %(n)

BANNER Registration 16.7% (95) 61.1% (347) 9.0% (51) 4.8% (27) 4.2% (24) 4.2% (24) System

iLab and Campus 14.6% (83) 53.0% (301) 13.4% (76) 6.3% (36) 5.3% (30) 7.4% (42) Computer Laboratories

University Libraries 16.7% (95) 58.5% (332) 13.0% (74) 6.9% (39) 2.1% (12) 2.8% (16)

Note: Percentage may not sum to 100, due to rounding. Source: 2009 HU Graduate/ Professional (GP) Graduating Student Exit Survey, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation completion of a report as prescribed in Research and Compliance. The Department the Government Performance and Results of Education uses the data to prepare a Act (GPRA) of 1993. GPRA requires the report to the Congress on the University’s University to set targets for performance; performance pursuant to the GPRA format measure progress toward those targets; (see Supporting Document 10.18, p. 9-15). report on whether or not the targets have Through the GPRA process and the annual been met; and describe future strategies testimony of the University President to the for continued progress toward those tar- House Appropriations Sub-Committee, the gets. This process is designed to improve University demonstrates its accountability, program management as well as to help the effectiveness, and efficiency to Congress. Congress, Howard University, the Office of Management and Budget, and others review Cooperative Institution Research Project programs’ progress toward their goals. Data (CIRP) for this initiative are compiled and analyzed Howard University has participated in the by the Office of University Research and Cooperative Institution Research Project Planning in collaboration with the offices of (CIRP) for 36 years and plans to continue the Provost, Enrollment Management, and this method of evaluation. The CIRP sur-

74 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

vey is administered to incoming University continue utilizing this method of assessment freshmen during orientation and registra- in the future. Data from the NSSE will not tion. The survey covers a wide range of be available until around mid-August 2009. student characteristics such as parental The survey items on this instrument reflect income and education, ethnicity, and other behaviors by students and institutions that demographic items; financial aid; second- are associated with desired undergraduate ary school achievement and activities; edu- educational outcomes. The University is cational and career plans; values, attitudes, able to use the NSSE survey results to assess beliefs, and self-concept. The results of and evaluate students’ undergraduate expe- this survey, which are published annually riences. in “The American Freshman,” provide a Faculty Survey of Student Engagement comprehensive snapshot of the changing character of entering students at the vari- The Faculty Survey of Student Engagement ous participating institutions. Supporting (FSSE) was designed to complement the document 10.19 provides the results of the National Survey of Student Engagement 2008 CIRP. (NSSE) and is coordinated by the Indiana University Center for Postsecondary National Survey of Student Engagement Research. FSSE measures faculty expec- (NSSE) tations for and observations of student Howard is among more than 1200 colleges engagement in educational practices that and universities in the U.S. and Canada which are known to be empirically linked with have participated in the National Survey of high levels of learning and development. Student Engagement (NSSE). Annually, the Additionally, the survey collects informa- NSSE obtains information from hundreds of tion pertaining to how faculty members four-year colleges and universities nation- spend their time on professional activities, wide regarding student participation in pro- including teaching and scholarship, and the grams and activities that institutions provide types of learning experiences their institu- for their learning and personal development. tions emphasize. The University partici- In 2009, the University again participated in pated in FSSE for the first time in 2009 as NSSE for the first time since 2003 as part of part of its institutional assessment and will its overall institutional assessment and will continue to use this method of evaluation.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 75 Chapter 10

Table 10.10: A Description of Institutional Assessment for the AY 2008-2009

Assessment Instrument Purpose Target Population

To gather information about expectations Cooperative Institutional Research Program of the college experience, secondary Freshman students (Census) (CIRP) (survey) school experiences, reasons for attending college, and other issues

Freshman undergraduate To assess and evaluate the self-perceived College Students Needs Assessment Survey students (Census) and a sample educational and personal needs of college (CSNAS) (survey) of grad/professional students and students sophomores

To identify and rate the importance of factors from a list of those deemed to Prospective Student and Parent Survey 2008 Prospective students and students be likely for consideration in the college selection process

To assess students’ level of proficiency Assessment of General Education Competency: Mostly Freshmen (and some with writing skills development in English Written Communication sophomores) 003

To assess students’ level of proficiency Assessment of General Education Competency: with the development of quantitative All students Quantitative Reasoning reasoning in College Algebra I, College Algebra II and Pre-calculus

To assess students’ level of proficiency in Senior Comprehensive Examinations (sample) their major course of study at or near the Seniors (some juniors) point of graduation

To obtain information about students’ Howard University Undergraduate (UG) undergraduate educational experiences Prospective candidates for graduation Graduating Students’ Exit Survey 2009 at Howard University and your post- in undergraduate programs graduation plans

To obtain information about students’ Howard University Graduate/Prof (GP) educational experiences at Howard Prospective candidates for graduation Graduating Students’ Exit Survey 2009 University in graduate and professional in graduate and professional programs programs and their post-graduation plans

National Survey of Student Engagement 2009 To measure student engagement in their Freshmen and Seniors (Random (NSSE) academic careers sample from each population)

Faculty Survey of Student Engagement 2009 The FSSE surveys faculty perceptions of Random sample of faculty who teach (FSSE) student engagement undergraduate students

Source: Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation, 2008-2009

76 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

When Does Type of Who Assesses Use of Assessment Results Assessment Take Place Administration

To build a profile of the expectations and aspirations of the freshman class and establish trend data on During Orientation and Fall Paper-based The Howard University incoming students Semester of first year (centralized) Counseling Center To provide normative data for comparisons among peer institutions and aspirational peer institutions

During Orientation for Office of Institutional To help university personnel identify, recommend incoming student; during the Paper-based Assessment and Evaluation or develop programs and services to address the first few weeks of semester (centralized) (Office of the Provost) students’ needs for sophomores

To inform recruitment strategies implemented by the Office of Admissions and university schools Office of Institutional Early September Fall and colleges, and for the development of related Paper-based Assessment and Evaluation Semester 2008 materials. Administrators and faculty should also (Office of the Provost) use this information for their planning and evaluation purposes

Paper-based To provide feedback to the English Department Final examination period: Essay English Department about student performance so that changes can be Spring Semester 2009 Rubric scored made at the course-level, where necessary Two raters

Paper-based To provide feedback to the Mathematics Department Final examination period: Constructed Mathematics Department about student performance so that changes can be Spring Semester 2009 Response made at the course-level, where necessary Key scored

Departments – Theatre Arts – Classics – English Senior Comprehensive Variety of modalities – Biology -To use for program review and improvement Exams: Fall Semester 2008 – Chemistry – Mathematics – Physics & Astronomy – Political Science

To improve programs and services for current and April 15-May 15 Spring Office of Institutional Web-based future students at Howard and measure the extent to Semester Assessment and Evaluation which Howard is accomplishing its mission

To determine the “value-added” experience of Options Office of Institutional attending Howard University—includes measures Spring Semester Paper-based Assessment and Evaluation of the quality of academic advising, acquisition Web-based (Office of the Provost) of knowledge, skills and personal development, amount of reading and writing, etc.

Office of Institutional To inform practice and faculty interactions with Spring Semester Web-based Assessment and Evaluation students (Office of the Provost)

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 77 Chapter 10

Data from FSSE will not be available until knowledge, skills, sensitivities, expecta- approximately mid-August 2009. FSSE tions, and values related to the collection results can be utilized to identify areas of and use of empirical evidence for institu- institutional strength and aspects of the tional improvement and accountability. undergraduate experience that may warrant Individuals representing all constituent attention. The information will be a chan- groups should be clear about what assess- nel for productive discussions related to ment is, why we assess and evaluate, their teaching, learning, and the quality of stu- own assessment responsibilities, and how dents’ educational experiences. to use results. Potential Solution: Use all possible ave- Summary of Assessment nues to provide all University constituen- Data Collected by OIAE, AY cies more assessment information that promotes professional growth and develops 2008-2009 assessing/evaluative habits of thought and In addition to assessments conducted in behavior. These avenues will include utili- the different departments/units, Table 10.10 zation of local and campus media (televi- presents a description of institutional assess- sion, radio, newspapers, Web sites, etc.), ments conducted during AY 2008-2009. other publications, personal presentations and academic interactions. OIAE will col- Challenges in Institutional laboratively set and inform the community Assessment at the University on the University’s assessment agenda and related schedules and encourage, promote Development and Maintenance of a and reward participation in assessment Culture of Evidence activities. University-wide assessment Challenge: To produce across the breadth committees and “Assessment Fellows” of the University community enhanced positions will be established.

78 ❘ Howard University Institutional Assessment

Managing and Coordinating Assessment these resources being sufficient to test the Activities with Other Units effects of certain incentives on participa- Challenge: Many assessment and evaluation. Further, regular, coordinated, and tion activities (e.g., surveys, focus groups) well-conceived assessment activity sched- are conducted individually by units (e.g., ules that are less burdensome to subjects administrative and student services units) should be developed, thereby leading the across the University. These activities University community to expect the peri- (e.g., surveys) often overlap, are redun- odic occurrence of assessment-related dant, and occur at conflicting times.T hese activities/events. conditions negatively affect response rates and create “silos” or isolated pockets of Summary, Findings and limited data that are neither effectively nor Recommendations efficiently utilized at institutional or other levels. Assessing the effective functioning of the Potential Solution: Share OIAE Strategic University is a top priority. Much progress Plan and master schedule of assessment has been made, including establishment of activities with all schools, colleges, and the organizational assessment infrastruc- units, and, in turn, have all University units ture, development of an assessment strategic share their schedules of assessment/evalu- plan, and increasingly, the use of assessment ation activities, instrumentation, and pro- findings for institutional decision-making. cedures with OIAE. OIAE will collaborate Since 2001, Howard has developed and with its subcommittees to align and stream- worked towards implementing an institu- line instruments and procedures, and coor- tion-wide program utilizing assessment for dinate assessment activities, in order to planning and decision-making. The program eliminate redundancy, misalignment (e.g., involved design of an underlying infrastruc- with the mission, unit goals, and objec- ture, establishment of an effective leadership tives), and counterproductive schedul- team, advancement of the University assessing conflicts. Achieving this will require ment culture, and development of processes educating many stakeholders university- for reporting and using information gathered wide on these considerations, and adopting for strategic planning. The College/School related policy changes. Assessment (CSAC), Student Quality of Life (SQL), and University Community Response Rates Experience (UCE) Subcommittees were Challenge: Obtaining high response rates created. In 2008, building on this structure, in voluntary surveys is recognized widely the University established the Office of as a pervasive and perennial problem. OIAE Institutional Assessment and Evaluation. is challenged to change the culture around In addition, there has been a fundamental assessment, such that stakeholders (i.e., shift in the focus of Howard’s assessments administrators, faculty, staff, and students) of educational, co-curricular, and student increasingly will willingly and reliably partic- services. The shift has been from primary ipate in assessment activities such as complet- emphasis on “input” measures (e.g., student ing surveys, and expect to do so periodically. qualifications, services, activities) to “out- Potential Solution: Consistent, clear and come” measures designed to assess impact prominent communications that explain (e.g., student learning). The following find- the value/importance of assessment and ings and recommendations for improvement related expectations should be gener- emerged from review of the university’s sta- ated by the President and the Provost and tus relative to this Standard: Chief Academic Officer. Strong top-down endorsements should translate into greater Findings stakeholder buy-in and stimulate the gen- 1. There is not a clear division of respon- eration of more effective strategies and gar- sibility for assessment between the Office of ner support. Additional resources should Institutional Assessment and Effectiveness be provided to publicize assessment data (OIAE) and the Office for University collection efforts more extensively with Research and Planning.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 79 Chapter 10

2. The appropriateness and effectiveness 10.3 Howard University Guiding of Assessment Committee and College/ Principles for Assessment, 2001 School Assessment (CSAC), Student Quality 10.4 Strategic Plan for the Office of of Life (SQL) and University Community Institutional Assessment and Experience (UCE) subcommittees should be Evaluation assessed periodically. 10.5 Outcome Assessment and Institutional 3. There is insufficient access to and trans- Effectiveness Report, July 2009 parency of institutional data in a number of 10.6 Case Study: Using Survey Results to areas at the University that could enhance the Improve the Curriculum effectiveness of academic and administrative 10.7 Case Study: Predicting Successful decision-making. Matriculation through Basic Sciences 4. Howard University has developed and 10.8 Case Study: Improvements in Passage is implementing an assessment process that Rates: United States Medical evaluates its overall effectiveness in achieving Licensure Examinations its mission and goals and its compliance with 10.9 Case Study: Biology Department accreditation standards; however, there is room Review leads to Facilities Renovation for improvement as the following recommen- and Improvement in Academic dations suggests. Programs 10.10 2009 Undergraduate Graduating Recommendations for Improvement Students’ Exit Survey Report 1. Consider an option of organizational 10.11 Technical Report for the 2009 restructuring that would consolidate the func- Howard University College Students’ tions of the Office of Institutional Assessment Needs Assessment Survey and Evaluation (OIAE) with those of the 10.12 College of Engineering, Architecture Office for University Research and Planning and Computer Sciences, Division of into one office that is an autonomous direct Architecture and Design, National report to the President, which would receive, Architectural Accrediting Board maintain, and secure assessment data from all Report, 2006 academic and institutional offices, including 10.13 School of Law 2008 Self-Study the Cabinet, Office of the President and the Report Board of Trustees. 10.14 HU 101: Parent Survey of Selected 2. Invigorate the College/School Assessment SQL Units (CSAC), Student Quality of Life (SQL), and 10.15 Case Study—Evaluations of University Community Experience (UCE) Counseling Center Services subcommittees in order to accelerate the full 10.16 Case Study—A Review of Operating implementation of the assessment visions Procedures to Increase Effectiveness and plans of the University, and as resources of Student Services permit, establish and incorporate Assessment 10.17 2009 Graduate and Professional Fellows campus-wide. Graduating Students’ Exit Survey 3. Provide adequate resources for a more Report aggressive execution of the assessment 10.18 Howard University Fiscal Year 2010 agenda. Budget Request to the Department of 4. Authorize access to university assessment Education data by appropriate University stakeholders; 10.19 2008 Howard University Cooperative revisit/update policies and procedures related Institutional Research Project (CIRP) to data management (including storing/main- Results taining, securing, and sharing information). Supporting Documents 10.1 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys 10.2 FACTS 2009—Howard University

80 ❘ Howard University The Howard Experience

Student Admissions and 11 Retention

MSCHE Standard 8 The institution seeks to admit students whose interests, goals, and abilities are con- gruent with its mission and seeks to retain them through the pursuit of the student’s educational goals. Introduction n Open House for prospective and admitted students This section of the Self-Study examines and n High school and community college assesses issues related to undergraduate, grad- luncheon and information sessions uate, and professional student recruitment and n Direct mail campaigns admission, student retention, and graduation The on-line application process, staff rates and recent changes in the University’s realignment, and other technological modifi- enrollment function. The goal of this section is cations have expedited the application process. to assess whether the University is recruiting, Additionally, increased communication with admitting, retaining, and graduating students prospective students has become a priority whose interests, goals, and academic skills are and includes earlier notifications and creation aligned with its mission. of the electronic information request program, Ask Admissions. Recruitment Effort Over the past seven years, the University has increased its competitiveness as demonstrated Undergraduate by more undergraduate students applying to The Office ofE nrollment Management pro- the University; fewer undergraduate students vides leadership for University undergraduate offered admission; and the increased percent- recruitment efforts, with a particular empha- age of admitted undergraduate students who sis on first-time-in-college undergraduate stu- enrolled (see Supporting Document 11.1). dents. Recruitment officers, admissions repre- Graduate and Professional sentatives, and alumni from schools/colleges pursue these efforts through participation in The Graduate and Professional schools college and community fairs, and visits to also participate in aggressive recruitment high schools and community colleges. For the efforts. In addition to a presence at relevant period 2003-2008, more than 186 college fairs, national conferences and recruitment fairs, 31 community college and 250 high school vis- the Graduate School is engaged in recruit- its were conducted (see Supporting Document ment efforts targeted at high-achieving 11.1). The Office of Admissions hosts more undergraduate students who are interested in than 10,000 visitors annually for information research and graduate study. The Graduate sessions and campus tours. In addition, the School sponsors the Ronald E. McNair Post Office of Admissions has launched several Baccalaureate Achievement program—for special initiatives which include: new and continuing first generation, low- n Recruitment sessions in cities around income, college students pursuing a Ph.D.; the the country in conjunction with the Alliance for Graduate Education (AGEP) in Campaign for Howard the Professorate—for Social and Behavioral n “Virtual tours” accessed on-line Economic Sciences (SBES) and the Science, n Specialized recruitment events, includ- Technology, Engineering and Mathematics ing luncheons and overnight or weekend (STEM) program, to mention a few. events The Professional Schools also recruit at n Targeted recruitment for high achievers college fairs, college classroom settings, and African-American males panel discussions, and health fairs. Students

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 81 Chapter 11

Howard University Total Enrollment, AY 1998-2008

12,000 11,574 11,579 11,500 11,211 11,227 11,126 11,433 10,976 11,256 11,308 11,000 10,690 10,500 10,581

10,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 11.1: Total Enrollment, AY 1998-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

Howard University Graduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008 3,000

2,434 2,500 2,249 2,273 2,297 2,280 2,173 2,323 2,256 2,182 2,314 2,222 2,000

1,500 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 11.2: Graduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management interested in the Colleges of Medicine and enrolled 1,574 students in Academic Year Dentistry must apply through the respective 2008-2009. professional organization clearinghouse and Enrollment in Howard’s graduate and selected students may be invited to interview. other professional programs has decreased by 10.7%, or 261 students, over the past Recent Changes in ten years, to a total of 2,173 as shown Enrollment Management in Figure 11.2, contrary to the strategic goal of increasing enrollment by 700 As depicted in Figure 11.1, Howard’s students. Figure 11.3 shows that under- student enrollment has remained stable. graduate enrollment remains strong, hav- Over the past ten years, total headcount ing increased by 6.9% during the period enrollment has grown slightly (2.2 per- 1999-2008, to a total headcount of 7,480 cent), to 11,227 in academic year 2007- in academic year 2008-2009. 2008. Enrollment has decreased slightly Howard received 9,750 applications for its in the past three years but the University is Fall 2008 undergraduate programs (Figure following this issue assiduously. 11.4). The overall application trend enabled Over this ten-year period, enrollment in the the University to become more selective, four main professional programs (Dentistry, increasing and then stabilizing in achiev- Law, Medicine and Pharmacy) has remained ing the targeted freshman class size. For essentially stable. This is as planned, as the Fall 2008, 49% of applicants were offered Colleges of Dentistry and Medicine, and admission to Howard, in comparison to 68% School of Law have agreed to remain at for Fall 2001. Yield rates remain stable, at capacity. The four professional programs approximately 32%.

82 ❘ Howard University Student Admissions and Retention

Consistent with its mission, the creden- undergraduate students graduate. Table 11.1 tials of incoming undergraduate students presents the retention and graduation rates remain strong as depicted in Figure 11.5. for all undergraduate schools/colleges from The University achieved its target of an aver- 1996 to 2008. The four-year graduation rate age entering freshman SATC score of 1080 has increased since 1996 moving from 30.8% in 2002, although it fell just slightly short of in 1992 to 47.2% in 2004. the target in the past two years, which may Howard’s retention rate was bench- be attributed to the change in SAT format. marked against those of the peer institutions (Figure 11.6) selected for this study, using Retention and Graduation data reported to US News & World Report. Rates Relative to its national peers, Howard’s freshmen retention rate was better than that Undergraduate Retention and Graduation obtained by only three of the seven compari- Student retention and graduation rates are son institutions; acceptable but signaling the critical measures for the University. Howard need for improvement. Howard’s freshman continues to have concern about its under- retention rate is certainly respectable rela- graduate retention and graduation rates. As a tive to its local peers, but as shown in Figure result, an important strategic student matric- 11.7, it is the lowest, again a stimulus for ulation goal is to increase the rate at which more effort and improvement.

Howard University Undergraduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008 8,000 7,595 7,419 7,480 7,500

7,537 7,517 7,514 6,996 7,368 7,328 7,000 6,968 6,702 6,500

6,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 11.3: Undergraduate Enrollment, AY 1998-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

Howard University Applications for Admission and Matriculation, AY 2002-2008

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

# of Applications # of Applicants offered Admission # of Applicants Matriculated

Figure 11.4: Application for Undergraduate Admission and Matriculation, AY 2002-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 83 Chapter 11

Howard University Average SATC Scores of FTIC Applicants, AY 2002-2008

1,150

1,100

1,050

1,000

950 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Average SATC of All Applicants Average SATC of Accepted Applicants

Figure 11.5: Average SATC Scores of FTIC Applicants, AY 2002-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

Table 11.1: Retention and Graduation Rates for Undergraduate School/Colleges: Cohort Years 1996-2008

Retention Rates Graduation Rates Cohort Head Year Count % Cont’d % Cont’d % Cont’d % Cont’d % Graduated % Graduated % Graduated to 2nd Yr to 3rd Yr to 4th Yr to 5th Yr in 4 Yrs in 5 Yrs in 6 Yrs

1996 1,290 80.4% 66.5% 62.0% 32.2% 30.8% 45.1% 50.2%

1997 1,259 82.4% 73.3% 69.7% 34.9% 32.4% 51.4% 56.6%

1998 1,325 84.0% 73.1% 68.3% 34.1% 35.4% 51.6% 56.2%

1999 994 84.9% 79.9% 74.8% 35.3% 40.6% 59.4% 63.3%

2000 1,438 87.0% 78.2% 73.9% 32.1% 43.5% 59.3% 64.0%

2001 1,524 85.1% 75.9% 71.4% 29.6% 43.2% 59.7% 64.0%

2002 1,375 84.8% 77.3% 73.9% 29.2% 45.2% 60.1% 65.0%

2003 1,459 87.2% 78.1% 73.5% 27.7% 46.2% 61.5% N/A

2004 1,453 85.9% 79.7% 74.4% 27.5% 47.2% N/A N/A

2005 1,415 84.2% 75.9% 70.3% N/A N/A N/A N/A

2006 1,520 82.6% 76.5% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

2007 1,460 84.5% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

2008 1,500 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Note: N/A refers to not applicable as of March 2009; Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

84 ❘ Howard University Student Admissions and Retention

Graduate and Professional Student for students at the beginning, middle, and end Retention and Graduation of completing their degrees. A number of initiatives are underway to The University has witnessed some posi- increase retention and reduce doctoral attrition tive results in graduate student matriculation. in the Science and Engineering fields, as well as During the three-year period from 2005-2007, to provide a supportive and supplementary role the mean time-to-degree for completion of the in the training of undergraduate and graduate Ph.D. decreased from 7.8 years (in 2005) to students. These initiatives include the Graduate 5.5 years (in 2007) as shown in Figure 11.8. School’s Alliance for Graduate Education and In 2008 and 2009, it took 5.7 and 6.3 years, re- the Professorate (AGEP); the Louis Stokes spectively, for students to complete their doc- Alliances for Minority Participants; the toral degrees. Howard University Science, Engineering and As shown in Figure 11.9, the highest per- Mathematics Program (HUSEM); the Ronald centage of doctoral graduates in each cohort E. McNair Post-baccalaureate Program; and year was in the fifth year across all disci- the Frederick Douglass Scholars Fellowship plines. Among masters’ degree recipients, Program. The Graduate School’s Retention, the highest percentage receiving the degree Mentoring and Support Program was estab- was two years across all fields of study as lished in 1999 to reduce attrition, reduce time depicted in Figure 11.10. to degree, provide opportunities for fellowships and internships, and enhance Howard University Freshman Retention Rate vs. Non-Local Peers, career and professional AY 2004-2007 development. 100% Howard is among 21 university research partners 95% engaged in the Council of Graduate Schools’ Ph.D. 90% Completion Project. This three-year study creates 85% and evaluates intervention strategies to enhance doc- 80% toral completion. 2004 2005 2006 2007 At Howard, eight de- Howard U. Case Western Reserve Emory U. partments are identified Saint Louis U. Temple U. Tulane U. as program partners: Bi- Vanderbilt U. Washington U. in St. Louis ology, Chemistry, Com- Figure 11.6: Freshman Retention Rate vs. Non-Local Peers, AY 2004-2007 munication and Culture, Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management Communication Science and Disorders, Electri- cal Engineering, History, Howard University Freshman Retention Rate vs. Local Peers, Mathematics, and Phys- AY 2004-2007 ics. Soon, Mechanical 100% Engineering and the interdisciplinary programs 95% in Atmospheric Science 90% and Materials Science will become partners. 85% Project activities include seminars and workshops 80% 2004 2005 2006 2007 specifically designed for Howard U. George Washington

Ph.D. students, and strate- Georgetown U. University of MD-College Park gies implemented by faculty to increase retention Figure 11.7: Freshman Retention Rate vs. Local Peers, AY 2004-2007 and reduce attrition rates Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 85 Chapter 11 Howard University Graduate School PhD Recipients Time to Degree, AY 2005 - AY 2009 Earlier this decade, Howard increased its tuition discount 8 rate by increasing merit- based aid for undergradu- 6

ears ate students in response to increased competition from 4 7.8 5.7 6.3 other institutions for highly 4.7 5.5 credentialed Black students. 2 University-funded student aid is largely merit based. Number of Y 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Data for total financial aid disbursed to students raise Completion Year interesting strategic questions. During AY 2007-2008, Figure 11.8: Graduate School Ph.D. Recipients Time to Degree, AY 2005-2009 Source: Graduate School Office of Retention, Mentoring, and Support Services the Financial Aid Office reported a total of $201.8 million in student aid disbursed (Table 11.2). During that year, the Cost of College University’s gross revenue from tuition and The cost of attendance is a critical factor in fees was only $163 million. admissions at any university. Howard’s tuition strategy traditionally was close to that of pub- Planning and Assessment lic institutions (Figure 11.11). During the past Strategic Enrollment Plan ten years, Howard engaged in substantive planning around its tuition pricing and aid lever- The University has made important steps in aging strategies through its Tuition and Rate developing a strategic approach to enrollment Advisory Committee (TRAC). The arrival of management. In 2002, a five-year enrollment President Ribeau in August 2008 heralded a plan was developed to provide a systematic more aggressive tuition strategy, consistent evaluation of current enrollment trends, and with his vision and which was reflected in the design strategies to achieve enrollment goals multi-year tuition strategy approved by the within each school and college. Trustees in January 2009. The enrollment projections for the schools Strategic discussions occurred over the and colleges within the plan are tied to the past several years about whether Howard University’s Strategic Framework for Action II, should change pricing strategies, charging which articulated the goal of increasing total higher tuition, but also increasing financial enrollment to 12,000 students within five years, aid. Over the past five years, the University including a 1,400 FTIC student ceiling, with a increased its tuition rates to levels more con- ratio of 40% undergraduate to 60% graduate sistent with national averages. In 2007-2008, Table 11.2: Total Student Aid Disbursed, by as reflected inF igure 11.12, Howard’s average Type, Academic Year 2007-2008 tuition increase was 8.0%, while the average increases at the other categories of institutions Type of Aid Amount Percent were as follows: private 4-year (6.3%), public Grants and $52,353,959 25.9% 4-year out of state (5.5%), and public 4-year Scholarships in state (5.5%). Howard’s increase occurred Loans 138,402,473 68.6% in large part because the University’s Federal appropriation had remained flat, and addi- Tuition Remission 8,617,220 4.3% tional tuition revenue was needed to sustain State-Funded 346,909 0.2% current programs. During this period, stu- Assistance dent aid budgets increased commensurately, with the result that the tuition discount rate Employment 2,045,883 1.0% (the percentage of gross tuition revenue the Total $201,766,444 100%

University gives back in the form of student Source: Howard University Office of Financial Analysis aid) remained stable at 26–28%. and Budget

86 ❘ Howard University Student Admissions and Retention

Howard University Ph.D. Graduate Rate (Year-to-Degree), Cohorts Fall 1999-Fall 2005

60% 8+ years 4.8% 7.8% 7 years 50% 9.8% 12.5% 9.7% 6 years 40% 13.8% 6.7% 14.1% 5 years 10.7% 30% 14.4% 4 years 16.3% 12.1% 18.5% 20% 13.6% 3 years 9.6% 9.1% 6.5.%9.1% 7.3% 2 years 10% 8.7% 7.6% 5.8% 4.1% 7.1% 5.3% 7.9%5.3% 2.9% 1.0% 2.2% 3.3% 0% 1.9% 1.1% 1.5% 0.7% 1.3% 1999 (8 yrs) 2000 (8 yrs) 2001 (7 yrs) 2002 (6 yrs) 2003 (5 yrs) 2004 (4 yrs) 2005 (3 yrs)

Figure 11.9: Ph.D. Graduate Rate (Year-to-Degree), Cohorts Fall 1999-Fall 2005 Source: Graduate School Office of Retention, Mentoring, and Support Services

Howard University Master’s Degree Graduation Rates* for Graduate School (GS) Cohorts, Fall 1999 - Fall 2007

80% 7 years 9% 9% 14% 60% 6% 6 years 7% 3% 22% 23% 28% 22% 5 years 16% 24% 40% 16% 4 years

39% 3 years 20% 31% 36% 31% 29% 38% 34% 26% 2 years

0% 1 years 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

*It includes Master’s degrees awarded by other (non-GS) graduate academic units due to matriculation shifts from the GS into such other units.

Figure 11.10: Masters Graduate Rate Year-to-Degree, Cohorts Fall 1999-Fall 2007 and professional students. Additionally, over student enrollment and retention into the five-year planning horizon, the University its planning. Interviews with individual would increase student aid, particularly for Deans confirmed that they are concerned graduate students; achieve improvements in about success in student retention and academic programs and administrative effi- incorporate retention data into their efforts ciency; increase faculty research grant and to identify the factors that promote or hin- instructional productivity; and improve facili- der student success. ties and technological resources. The University did not achieve the A review of current plans revealed that planned change in its enrollment makeup, a each school and college incorporates population where graduate and professional

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 87 Chapter 11

students comprised 40% of the student body. FY 2008, to increase the number and level In fact, the percentage of graduate and pro- of graduate assistantships. Stipends remain fessional students declined over the past 10 below market. Existing resources were not years, from 36 to 33% in AY 2009. reallocated to support research and graduate The expected restructuring of University education, and no significant new resources programs and reallocation of budget funds were generated. The expected increase in to new priorities did not occur. In the externally-funded research did not mate- absence of restructured University pro- rialize, so there were fewer than expected grams, available financial aid was not real- new research projects to engage and sup- located from undergraduate to graduate and port additional graduate students. Howard’s professional students. The University was, major funder, the Federal government, is however, able to identify limited additional also experiencing fiscal constraints and budget funds ($1.5 million), beginning in has not appropriated additional funding for

Undergraduate Tuition Rate Increases Howard and National Averages

15%

12%

1998-99 1998-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Howard Private Institutions Public Institutions Inflation*

Figure 11.11: Undergraduate Tuition Rate Increases Howard and National Averages Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment Management

Average Percentage of Tuition and Fees Increase for Howard University and Institution Types for AY 2007-2008

Private 4-Year Institutions 23,712 (6.3% increase)

Public 4-Year Institutions (Out of State) 16,640 (5.5% increase)

Howard University 14,020 (8.0% increase)

Public 4-Year Institutions (Resident) 6,185 (5.5% increase)

$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000

Figure 11.12: Average Percentage of Tuition and Fees Increase for Howard University and Institution Types for AY 2007-2008 Source: Howard University Office of Enrollment

88 ❘ Howard University Student Admissions and Retention major capital projects; in particular, funding Communication with Prospective Students: for the planned Interdisciplinary Science Web Site Analysis and Engineering Center. The Campaign A leading consulting firm in higher educa- for Howard, while very successful, did not tion enrollment management was commis- raise significant “bricks and mortar” gifts sioned in 2008 to examine how effectively for improvements in facilities and technol- Howard communicates with its poten- ogy, especially critical to graduate educa- tial students and provides the information tion and research. The Campaign raised needed to make an informed enrollment additional funding for student support, but decision. The results confirmed the impor- not at a transformative level. Ninety percent tance of the Web site as a communications of university-funded student aid awarded tool. Prospective students are clearly inter- is from unrestricted sources. In summary, ested in using the Web as a research tool to these were the environmental factors that assist them in making their enrollment deci- mitigated against the changed student body sions and work through the admissions pro- composition envisioned under SFA II. cess. Fewer than 3% of undergraduate prospects and only 1% of graduate prospects Assessment of Admissions Measures and surveyed indicated that the Internet plays Enrollment Data “little or no role” for them in their decision- Howard utilizes an on-line application making process. The Web Opportunities process for admission. The 2008 Self-Study Analysis for Howard University Report survey revealed that overall, students felt contains a substantive discussion of the re- that the following aspects of the applica- sults of the study, and recommendations for tion process were good or excellent: prompt how the Web site can better serve Howard’s responses to requests for information and student recruitment efforts (see Supporting materials (34%); prompt processing of appli- Document 11.3). Other conclusions of note cations for admission (45%); and the will- include the following: ingness of Howard staff to answer questions n Howard can increase market share (36%) (see Supporting Document 11.2). among competitors if it enhances the The student application process involves quality of the experience delivered to an interface with a number of departments prospective students through its Web within the Office ofE nrollment Management; site. namely, Admissions, Recruitment, Records, n For prospective undergraduate students, and Student Financial Services. Together, the largest gaps between their priorities these offices are the first line of communi- and expectations and their experience cation with incoming students. Staff evalu- with Howard’s Web site came in the ations of the effectiveness of these offices form of navigation and search, and in were also captured in the Self-Study survey, their ability to connect or communicate the results of which are listed in Table 11.3. with individuals through the Web site. An ongoing challenge has been the pro- n Resources spent to create a financial portion of female-to-male undergraduate aid/scholarship calculator and blogging student enrollment, as is found in many other program could pay strong dividends, colleges and universities. This widening and are relatively easy to implement. gap gave rise to a strategic initiative aimed Graduate students are less satisfied with at recruiting and retaining more African- Howard’s Web site than are undergraduate American male students to the University. students. The quality of content on a college Dr. Leslie Fenwick (Dean, School of or University site is of highest importance Education) was charged with developing to graduate students, followed by ease of an urban education and leadership develop- navigation. Howard could improve service ment concept, which includes an African- to graduate students by improving content American male achievement component. quality and navigation (including search The goal of the African-American Male features), and by building more interactive Initiative is to increase the number of first- resources for students to complete transac- time-in-college African-American male stu- tions and make direct connections with fac- dents in Howard’s undergraduate programs. ulty, admissions staff, and current students.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 89 Chapter 11

Table 11.3: Staff Evaluations of Offices of Enrollment Management

Areas Excellent Good Fair Poor No Experience

Overall 11% 36% 21% 6% 26%

Admissions 11% 29% 20% 8% 32%

Recruitment 8% 24% 19% 5% 44%

Records 11% 34% 18% 5% 32%

Financial Aid 9% 30% 16% 8% 36%

Source: 2008 Self-Study Surveys, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

Summary, Findings and for improvement emerged from the review Recommendations of the University’s status relative to MSCHE Standard 8: Demand for a Howard education remains strong, particularly at the undergraduate Findings level. However, the need to attract and retain 1. The University has not achieved its stra- talented students in an increasingly com- tegic goal of adjusting its student enrollment petitive and financially constrained envi- mix to 60% undergraduate and 40% gradu- ronment will require continued attention. ate/professional students. Over the past seven years, the University 2. The University needs to increase funding has increased its competitiveness in recruit- that is available for need-based financial aid. ing first-time-in-college undergraduate stu- 3. The University should continue to review dents, and strengthened the effort in recruit- its admissions index across schools and col- ing graduate and professional students. At leges to assure alignment with its mission. the undergraduate level, more students have applied to the University, the number of stu- Recommendations for Improvement dents offered admission has decreased, and 1. Develop an explicit University-wide the percentage of students who enrolled has strategy, with supporting budgetary and infra- increased. Among peer institutions, Howard structure priorities, to achieve the desired maintains a good retention rate for under- undergraduate to graduate/professional stu- graduate students. dent mix. In addition, Howard’s effort to increase 2. Develop, implement, and assess a more its reputation as a research university over structured approach to student retention the past 10 years has necessarily focused through enhanced monitoring of the quality of on growing Ph.D. programs. This effort the student experience across all schools and has been very successful. For example, the colleges. number of Ph.D.s awarded annually has 3. Enhance access to a Howard education by increased almost 35% since 1999—from increasing need-based student aid. approximately 75 per year to approximately 4. Focus on continuous evaluation and 100 per year. In May of 2009, the University improvement of Howard’s Web site, acknowl- awarded 97 Ph.D. degrees. In 2008, the edging its primacy as an information source University graduated its largest Ph.D. class for prospective and continuing students. ever – 101 students. The University must address tuition rates Supporting Documents and student financial aid, communication with and outreach to potential students, and 11.1 Summary of First-Time-in-College the quality of student advisement and men- Undergraduate Recruitment and toring. Additionally, the nature of the student Enrollment Activities (February 2008) body, specifically, the gender imbalance and 11.2 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard the mix of graduate to undergraduate stu- University Self-Study Surveys dents, remain areas that require attention. The 11.3 The Web Opportunities Analysis for following findings and recommendations Howard University Report

90 ❘ Howard University 12 Student Support Services

12 Student Support Services

MSCHE Standard 9 The institution provides student support services reasonably necessary to enable each student to achieve the institution’s goals for students. Introduction At the undergraduate level, the University Within the scope of its mission, the also maintains two Educational Advisory University provides a continuum of preven- Centers, one located in the College of Arts tive, developmental, remedial, and support and Sciences, the other in the John H. services and activities designed to increase Johnson School of Communications, which the probability that each student will achieve are staffed by professionals who provide academic success and personal develop- counseling and advisory assistance to stu- ment. These activities include residential, dents in these areas. recreational, academic, health care (includ- There is anecdotal evidence that the stu- ing mental health care), spiritual, and social dent advisement process does not always support services. meet student expectations. In the Self- Study student focus group, students recalled Academic Support instances when miscommunication between the advisor and advisee resulted in the Academic Advisement postponement of graduation. Additionally, Academic advisement is a key element to some students reported that communica- the progress and success of each student. tion between the academic counselors and Howard University is fully committed to departmental advisors was sometimes inef- the belief that fundamental to successful ficient and inconsistent. academic advisement is an ongoing one-to- one advisor-advisee relationship, where the Center for Academic Reinforcement student actively participates in the decision- The Center for Academic Reinforcement making process. (CAR) is an academic support unit that pro- All newly enrolled students at Howard are vides a variety of services to Howard students. assigned a faculty or staff academic advisor Freshmen receive assistance to bridge the and are encouraged to schedule appoint- gap between high school and college, rein- ments to discuss their matriculation. Prior force basic skills (Chapter 16), and enhance to or during the general registration period, performance. Continuing students partici- some schools/colleges require students pate in CAR’s auxiliary programs such as to report to their advisors for guidance in tutoring, assessment, and workshops on spe- course selection and to receive an alternate cial topics. Additionally, students utilize the “PIN” to register for courses. Generally, stu- CAR’s instructional program which includes dents are provided assistance in becoming courses in basic mathematics, study skills familiar with academic policies, procedures, (Chapter 16), and reading improvement. and program requirements. Although advisors are available to assist and guide stu- Student Academic Computing dents, the student has ultimate responsibility The Office of Academic Computing for reaching his/her educational goals. Services provides University-wide com- To supplement the faculty advisement puting facilities, consulting support, and process, academic, and other counsel- training services on the use of informa- ing are provided in each of the schools/ tion technologies for students and faculty colleges by Assistant and/or Associate (see Supporting Document 12.1). The cen- Deans for Academic or Student Affairs. tral computer facility, which includes an

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 91 Chapter 12

academic computing help desk, is located is a world-class research facility for stu- at the iLab (Information Lab). There are dents and health professionals in Medicine, also 11 ResNet (Residential Network) Dentistry, Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied computer labs located in University resi- Health Sciences, and staff of the Howard dence halls. All matriculated students University Hospital. Located on the West The library are assigned account numbers to access Campus, the Law Library is a state-of-the art system has computer resources. Additional informa- facility supporting legal research and instruction regarding technology is in Chapter tion in the Law School on the West Campus. comprehensive 6—Institutional Resources. The mission of the University Libraries resources is to provide innovative, effective informa- incorporating Libraries tion services and products that support, strengthen, and advance teaching/learning virtually every The University Libraries System con- and research in the University community. discipline, sists of a central library complex, which The library system has comprehensive includes the Founders Library, the contigu- supported by resources incorporating virtually every ous Undergraduate Library building, and discipline, supported by information spe- information branch units in the Schools of Engineering, cialists and technical personnel. Holdings specialists Architecture and Computer Science, include more than 2 million volumes, more Business, Divinity, and Social Work. Other and technical than 12,000 current serial titles, 3.4 million campus information and resource facilities microforms, and a multimedia collection. personnel. include the Louis Stokes Health Sciences The libraries’ collections of traditional Library, the Law Library, the Moorland- materials are complemented by a strong Spingarn Research Center, the Afro- and continually updated digital compo- American Studies Resource Center, and the nent. On-line Web-based catalogs provide International Affairs Center Reading Room. quick access to library holdings. The Web The Louis Stokes Health Sciences Library site is a virtual library of local and global networked resources, with full-text journal articles, bibliographic databases, reference books, e-reserves, data files and multimedia accessible 24/7 from the library, dormitory, office, and home. Onsite electronic facilities include a fiber infrastructure, more than 150 fully networked worksta- tions, laser printers, and a 22-desktop digital learning classroom. The University is a member of the Association of Research Libraries, the Chesapeake Information and Research Library Alliance (CIRLA), as well as a number of regional and national organizations. The library has effectively increased access to materials through its membership in CIRLA, which offers faculty and graduate students direct reciprocal bor- rowing privileges at CIRLA’s academic members libraries—George Washington, Georgetown, University of Maryland, Johns Hopkins, and the University of Delaware. The University library system has significantly advanced its technological capacity. Founders Library, the center of the system, has implemented electronic reserves and expanded access to online databases. However, the continued development of

92 ❘ Howard University Student Support Services resources remains a major challenge. Main Library Group Strategic Planning & Staffing and funding needs hinder its ability Assessment Program to operate effectively. The Law library man- ages its own digital resources, whereas the Strategic Planning Health Sciences Library digital resources The Main Library Group has in place a are integrated with those of the general strategic plan (see Supporting Document library. Despite improvement in resources, 12.2) and an assessment plan (see Howard lags behind its peers. For instance, Supporting Document 12.3). In addi- although two new state-of-the art libraries tion, a University-wide Library Advisory have been built, Howard still lags behind its Committee, appointed by the Provost and peers in its expenditures (see Figure 12.1). Chief Academic Officer, on which the four The Office of University Research and library directors sit as ex-officio members, Planning compiled data from 1994-2005 has analyzed all aspects of operations and from the Association of Research Libraries developed a set of six strategic goals for (Library Investment Index, 108-114 mem- University consideration, which together bers) to compare the rank of the Howard would bring the libraries up to the stan- University Library System with that of dards of a Research I institution. This com- Howard’s congressionally-designated peers mittee was comprised primarily of faculty, (Georgetown, Maryland, Vanderbilt, and but also included administrators and student the University of Virginia). The ranking representatives. is based on five factors: Volumes in the Library, Volumes Added, Current Serials, Library Assessment Initiatives Permanent Staff, and Total Expenditures. The Main Library Group has a two-prong The findings indicate that Howard’s hold- approach to outcomes assessment: (1) an ings, professional staff, and total expen- annual user Customer Satisfaction Survey ditures are in critical need of increased (CSS) and (2) an assessment of student investment for effective student learning learning outcomes for its library instruction and faculty research. activities.

Libarary Expenditures at Howard Peer University Research Libraries, 2006-07

Howard University 9.9

Case Western Reserve 13.4

Tulane University 14.0

Temple University 21.3

George Washington 23.2

Georgetown University 24.3 University of Maryland 24.1

Vanderbilt University 24.7

Washington University 27.4

Emory University 33.7

0510 15 20 25 30 35 40 Millions

Figure 12.1: Library Expenditures at Howard Peer University Research Libraries, 2006-2007 Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education, August 29, 2008, Volume LV, Number 1

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 93 Chapter 12

Student Learning Outcomes (Recent Reports) During the 2006-2007 academic year, 707 students completed quizzes in all three modules of The Information Literacy Tutorial (TILT). The mean scores for each of the quizzes were above 91%. The majority of the students were in English 002 and English 003; however, TILT was also used in the courses Communications Orientation (COMC 101) and MCMC 590. The library’s freshmen challenge page contains information about the information cycle, the information explosion, and library resources, plus quizzes to test comprehension and recall. Students in the Communications Orientation class and a few other classes completed the mandatory quiz and one or more optional quizzes for extra credit. In 2007-2008, connectivity issues plagued assessment efforts during the first semester and server glitches played havoc with the Customer Satisfaction Survey and The ability to obtain sufficient cases and reliable Information Literacy Tutorial results for TILT scores. During the year, The CSS is an annual exercise con- 868 students registered for the Information ducted by eight units of Howard University Literacy Test. The students in COMC 101 Libraries—namely, Architecture, Business, were encouraged to complete a battery of Divinity, Founders, Media Center, Pollock library quizzes. Overall, assessment of Theatre Collection, Social Work, and the information literacy was a challenge, given Undergraduate Library. (In addition to the the absence of an assessment tool that is an Library’s annual Spring User Satisfaction integral part of faculty student learning out- Survey, the Social Work Library was comes assessment. Therefore, the capacity assessed by the May 2008 School of Social to assess whether students were able to nav- Work graduating MSW students in an exit igate, critically evaluate and communicate survey). CSS results showed general sat- information following library instruction is isfaction with the resources, services and limited. A solution is to incorporate, in col- facilities of the library. Ninety percent laboration with faculty, information literacy found the collection adequate, 98.8% found assessment as an integral part of required the staff of the library knowledgeable and courses. The Library submitted a proposal helpful most of the time. There were some that, if implemented, would facilitate the areas of dissatisfaction and those are being assessment of the degree to which reference addressed to improve services. and information literacy skills are reflected The overall number of students participat- in student’s research papers and assigning in library instruction classes decreased ments (see Supporting Document 12.4). by 8.9%, while there was a marginal The results of the annual Customer increase in the number of students seeking Satisfaction Survey and the library initia- individual consultation. Class instruction tives in assessing improvements in student with faculty support and collaboration is information skills as a result of library the method found to be most effective in instruction formed the basis for several teaching information literacy. A pre- and strategic goal recommendations contained post-test typically is used to assess what is in the Provost’s December 2008 Library learned by participants in classes offered System Advisory Committee’s Report (see by library professionals. Supporting Document 12.5).

94 ❘ Howard University Student Support Services

Housing and Dining Services 6—Institutional Resources for more details on the Deferred Maintenance Plan). Housing The University operates 10 residence halls, Dining Services which house approximately 4,000 students. The University provides dining services Students have a choice of their preferred to students through a contract process. All housing based on availability. Housing pat- students are eligible to participate in the terns over the past four academic years have dining services provided at the University. shown an increased need for additional hous- However, students living in 4 of the 10 resi- ing. The population is comprised primarily dence halls (Bethune Annex, Cook Hall, of female residents. Since 2002, the percent- Drew Hall, and Tubman Quadrangle) are age of students who attained a 3.0 GPA or required to purchase a meal plan. There are better while residing in University housing four types of meal plans offered to students, has increased from 50.4% to 53.3%. Some namely: residence halls offer special-category floors, 1. Traditional 19 is designated for resi- such as an honors floor and graduate and dents and provides the maximum number of professional floor. Beyond university hous- meals (19) served during the week. ing, the Office of Residence Life maintains 2. Traditional 14 is designated for the a listing of off-campus rental properties with resident student who will leave the campus the various amenities and contact informa- occasionally. This plan allows any 14 meals tion on their Web sites. provided during the week. According to the 2008 Self-Study Survey, 3. On The Go 10 is designed for the resi- 37% of Howard students judged the on-cam- dent student who will frequently be off campus residential services as “fair”, while 20% pus. This plan provides any 10 meals served indicated that they were “good” to excel- during the week. lent as shown in Figure 12.2. Further, stu- 4. On The Go 5 is designed for the off- dents reported that some dormitories (e.g., campus student and provides any 5 meals Tubman Quadrangle, Drew Hall) needed per week, Monday through Friday. renovations. In addition to renovations, stu- In addition to the meal plans, all students dents indicated that more residence halls can purchase “dining dollars,” which is a should be constructed. Physical Facilities declining debit account that allows students Maintenance has identified and sched- cash-free and tax-free access to all of the uled needed dormitory renovations in their dining facilities, thereby providing added Deferred Maintenance Projects (see Chapter security and a savings of 10% with every

Quality of On-campus Residential Facilities

169 (26%) 242 (37%)

Excellent (4) Good (3) Fair (2) Poor (1) Don't Know (No Weight)

Mean=2.0

Std. Deviation=0.81 109 (17%) 113 (17%) 18 (3%) Number of Students*=651

*The calculation of the mean and the std. deviation does not include the category of "Don't Know" (which is assigned no weight). Figure 12.2: Quality of On-Campus Residential Facilities Source: 2008 Self-Study Survey

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 95 Chapter 12 purchase. Students on the mandatory meal compliant emergency call station system plan can purchase both “dining dollars” was installed. and their mandatory meal plan. The mini- The University regularly posts Safety mum buy-in for “dining dollars” is $100 Alerts and Tips to inform the University per semester. Unused “dining dollars” at the community via HU Communications e-mail end of the semester are forfeited. The dining alerts. University Police Chief, Leroy James services are evaluated through a voluntary developed a strategic plan for campus police, customer satisfaction form which is avail- which includes prevention and reduction in able daily. Results from the customer satis- university-wide crime, the professionaliza- faction forms are used to improve services tion of the workforce, the incorporation in the dining areas. of technology into security operations and implementation of the recommendations of University Safety and the 2008 Security Assessment. Student responses to the 2008 Self-Study Security survey also indicated some concerns about The safety and security of students, faculty, campus security. Thirty-eight percent of and staff are top the priorities at Howard. As students rated the Campus Police/Security an urban campus, the University is vulner- Services as “fair” and 31% rated them as able to the crime patterns that plague large “poor”. A specific concern raised was the metropolitan areas and the Administration is response time of campus police in crisis sit- aggressively addressing this issue. In light uations. Howard University Campus Police of various tragedies, which have occurred in have taken a proactive approach to address- recent years on American college campuses ing this and other concerns (see Supporting and in an effort to consistently improve Document 12.6). emergency response procedures, Howard implemented an Emergency Response Student Services Plan in conjunction with the District of Columbia’s Response Plan in January 2008. Student Financial Services This plan was tested in September 2008, The Offices ofF inancial Aid, Scholarships, during Tropical Storm Hanna by the open- and Student Employment and Student ing of the Emergency Operations Center Accounts, Collections, Student Loans, and that effectively managed an emergency team Financial Accounting, under the auspice of and coordinated with key internal stakehold- the Office of StudentF inancial Services, are ers, city officials, and emergency officials at responsible for all aspects of student finan- local universities. cial support. Financial aid at Howard refers In addition, a University-wide emergency to scholarships, loans, grants, and part- notification system (AlertHU) was imple- time employment from Federal, university, mented in 2006. This system allows the and private sources. To support their edu- University to send time-sensitive notifica- cation, many Howard students depend on tions via voice, e-mail, and text messaging Federal monies, primarily through the U.S. during an emergency on or near campus. Department of Education Student Financial Students are encouraged to register via the Assistance (SFA) programs such as Federal Bison web at www.howard.edu/bisonweb Pell Grants, Stafford Loans, Perkins Loans, in order to receive emergency notifica- PLUS loans, Consolidation Loans, Federal tions. Emergency notifications are limited to Supplemental Educational Opportunity severe weather alerts, emergency building Grants, and Federal Work Study initiatives. concerns, intruders or potential epidemics. To make the application process easier, the In January 2008, an external security University utilizes the Free Application for consultant firm commenced a comprehen- Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form. sive safety and security assessment of the Emergency loans are also available to University’s multiple campus locations, assist students with financial hardships. which identified several areas for improve- The University administers short-term low ment. As a result of the external evalua- interest loan funds, from which students tion, an integrated state-of-the-art ADA may borrow if they experience temporary

96 ❘ Howard University Student Support Services cash flow problems related to emergency University Student Health Center educational expenses such as rent, food, After more than three decades in a tempo- and books. Students are usually approved rary facility, the University Student Health for amounts up to $800, depending on the Center was relocated in 2003 to a permanent availability of funds and loan repayment home in the Medical Arts Building near the provisions. University Hospital. The Student Health As indicated in Table 12.1, results for the Center occupies two floors for a total of Self-Study Student Survey items regarding 7,700 square feet and was designed based financial assistance revealed that 25% of on feedback from staff and students. The the sampled students rated the University’s Center provides full- and part-time students financial assistance as “good” (25%) and with access to care for acute sickness and “poor” (31%). injuries, chronic disease management, spe- Participants in the student focus group cialty referrals, health promotion, and dis- reported there had been noticeable improve- ease prevention education. ment in services in the Administration Building over AY 2007-2008. Nevertheless, Howard University Hospital (HUH) students stated that the most common Howard University Hospital (HUH) was complaint regarding the Financial Aid established in 1862 as Freedmen’s Hospital Department was poor customer service. and was incorporated into Howard University Students commented on very long wait by Congress in 1962. As a private, nonprofit times and noted their accounts sometimes institution, HUH is the nation’s only teach- are not credited in a timely manner, even ing hospital located on the campus of a when payments are on-line bank transfers. Historically Black University. The hospital In recognition of the pervasive challenges is a Level 1 Trauma Center and has become in customer service that preceded his ten- one of the most comprehensive health care ure, President Ribeau launched the Students facilities in the Washington, D.C. metropoli- First Campaign (SFC) in January 2009, tan area. administered by the Office of the Provost. Today, HUH serves as a major acute and This initiative “is designed to improve all ambulatory care center for the inner city dimensions of the Howard University stu- of Washington, DC, receiving over 13,000 dent experience from recruitment through admissions and 47,000 emergency room vis- graduation. The major goals of the SFC are its annually. During the non-operational hours to (1) initiate immediate University-wide of the University’s Student Health Center and improvements in the delivery of student ser- in cases of emergency, students are advised to vices, (2) generate and sustain an environ- seek medical assistance at HUH. ment of continuous quality improvement, Hospital operations are financed through and (3) enhance customer service across the a combination of Federal funds, hospital- academy to students, faculty and staff ” (see ization insurance and Medicare payments, Supporting Document 12.10). and contractual agreements for patient care

Table 12.1: Students’ Responses to Items Related to Financial Assistance (n=302)

Item Excellent Good Fair Poor NA

QUALITY OF: % % % % %

Process for obtaining financial 5 27 33 32 2 assistance information

Application Processing 4 24 37 30 5

Administration of financial assistance 9 25 32 30 5 after awarded

Source: 2008 Self-Study Student Survey, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 97 Chapter 12 services with the Washington, DC govern- procedures for responding to and adjudicat- ment, and other local jurisdictions. ing such issues. The Hospital is also a major teaching and International Student Services training facility for nurses, pharmacists, para- medics, and physicians, providing training In 2008, the student body at Howard confor approximately 450 medical school stu- sists of individuals from 67 countries with dents and 300 dentistry students annually. In different cultural and ethnic needs. The April 2007, the Hospital ranked number one Office of International Student Services among selected area hospitals on 19 quality (ISS) provides guidance and support to ease measures published by the U.S. Health and adjustment to life in a new country. This Human Services Department. guidance begins with a specialized orientation program for approximately 600 new Special Student Services and transfer international students at the The Office of Special Student Services beginning of the Fall and Spring semesters. (OSSS) administers disabled student ser- Individual orientation sessions are also pro- vices, Veterans Affairs benefits, judicial, vided to international faculty and staff. and new special student orientation pro- ISS provides several support services to grams. In accordance with the Americans Howard’s international community. These with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, Section include visa and immigration assistance, per- 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and sonal counseling, and orientation to academic other pertinent Federal, state, and D.C. dis- and social life in the U.S. ISS also facilitates ability and antidiscrimination laws, Howard the integration of international students and reaffirms its commitment through OSSS to scholars into the Howard community and provide access and reasonable accommoda- promotes awareness of this group’s important tion to students with documented disabilities contributions to the mission and international and assistance in their academic programs character of the University. ISS serves as a of study. During the 2006-2007 and 2007- resource center for information often needed 2008 academic years, 483 and 360 students, by the international and university commu- respectively, requested assistance. nities and functions as an advocate for inter- Through OSSS, the University is national students, staff, and scholars. The approved by the District of Columbia State Office publishes a newsletter four times a Approving Agency to file for benefits for year, organizes informational meetings with students who are deemed eligible to receive non-University resource people, and main- funds from Veterans Affairs. Upon valida- tains information on international student tion each semester, eligible students report financial aid sources. ISS sponsors and par- to OSSS to initiate the filing of required ticipates in activities to increase awareness documentation. of the international and intercultural nature The University through OSSS conducts the of Howard University, including Global New Student Orientation Program, which is Community Week and projects of regional held each Fall semester. The orientation pro- student organizations. gram facilitates a smooth transition for new and transfer students into their academic Career Services Office and community life at Howard. The program The University Career Services Office includes academic advising, course registra- (CSO) provides an array of career develop- tion, workshops, and seminars, as well as ment services to the entire student commu- social and spiritual experiences. nity, Howard alumni, academic units, and OSSS also ensures that all students enrolled recruiting partners. Career professionals pro- at the University are aware of the expecta- vide guidance to students as they chart their tion that they are to adhere to and uphold academic and career paths that lead to gradu- the Code of Ethics and Conduct, 1998. ation, employment, careers and life experi- Students found in violation may be subject ences. The programs and services offered to the rules as outlined in the Student Code by CSO include individualized career coach- of Conduct and Judiciaries, 2000. These two ing, training workshops and seminars, com- documents outline prohibited behaviors and prehensive on-line and in-house job search

98 ❘ Howard University Student Support Services resources, Fall and Spring career fairs, on- campus interviewing and employer information sessions. These offerings significantly augment the educational experience by helping reduce anxiety associated with career and major selection, thus contributing to improved academic performance, retention, graduation, and job placement rates. During the 2007-2008 academic year, the CSO measured its effectiveness using a number of key performance indicators. The results on some of the key performance indicators are presented below. n Students reported job placement rate of 67% after graduation. n Over 96,000 students and alumni accessed CSO on-line platforms for the reporting period. n A total of 515 students signed into the career resources library for usage. n Between 23% and 25% of graduates indicated that they would pursue graduate or professional degrees. n Employers’ ratings were consistently high, reflecting almost complete satis- n 191 employers scheduled structured on-campus interviews, information ses- faction with the services and programs sions and corporate presentations. offered by the CSO. Ratings were 4.5 on a 5-point scale with 5 being “Completely n 352 employers participated in the Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 career fairs. Satisfied.” n 15 career education training sessions were coordinated between staff and University Counseling Service employer partners. The University Counseling Service offers n 74 graduate and professional schools a wide range of counseling and psychologi- attended the 2007-2008 Graduate & cal services to assist students and psychi- Professional Schools’ (GAPS) Fair atric services are available upon referral. (October 3-4, 2007). The clinical staff of the Counseling Center n Over 4800 students attended the com- is comprised of licensed mental health pro- bined Fall and Spring Career Fairs fessionals and professionals in training. (October 3-4, 2007, and February 20, Confidential individual and group coun- 2008, respectively). seling and psychotherapy are available to n 550 student and alumni consultations students who report a broad range of con- were conducted through walk-in and cerns. In addition, the Counseling Center scheduled appointments with Career also offers University community educa- Services staff. tion and campus group consultation. n 435 students attended the GAPS Fair. n Student registration with on-line job Student Activities search and career development services remained strong; 4866 students and Student Clubs and Organizations alumni registered with the office. The Office of StudentA ctivities facilitates n Student surveys for career fairs, on- the student organization recognition process campus recruitment services, and on- and maintains updated contact information line survey were consistent in reports of for all approved student groups in the fol- high levels of satisfactions with a rating lowing areas: academic and professional; of 4 on a 5-point scale (5 = Completely religious; student government; cultural and Satisfied). social; honor societies; and state and regional

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 99 Chapter 12 organizations. There are over 200 student well-rounded student. However, major find- organizations on campus. Each academic ings indicate that there is a need to strengthen year, during one of the University’s Chapel services in areas such as student advise- worship services, all student leaders from the ment, library services, and campus security. various organizations are commissioned to For example, Howard’s library system has serve in their elected or appointed positions. large and comprehensive resources incorporating virtually every discipline, supported Athletics by information specialists and technical Howard University supports 19 varsity personnel. The University library system athletic programs, including Division 1-AA has significantly advanced its technological football; seven programs (basketball, cross capacity. Despite these advances, it still lags country, soccer, swimming and diving, ten- behind its peers. To address the challenges in nis, indoor track and field, and outdoor track student services, in 2009 President Ribeau and field) for men and women; and four launched the Students First Campaign to programs (bowling, lacrosse, volleyball, improve service delivery by making process softball) in which only women participate. improvements in critical areas that influence Howard is a member of the Mid-Eastern the student experience. The following find- Athletic Conference (MEAC) and National ings and recommendations for improvement Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). All emerged from the review of the University’s student athletes must be medically and aca- status relative to MSCHE Standard 9: demically cleared before participating on any Findings intercollegiate athletic team. Additionally, 1. Unevenness is reported in student athletes are required to register and maintain advising across schools, colleges, and the minimum number of course credit hours. departments. From 2002-2006, Howard student athletes 2. The University’s library resources are led the MEAC All Academic Team with a 3.0 insufficient for a research university. and above grade point average. 3. Despite considerable progress in student services in recent years, some areas remain Summary, Findings and that require attention by the University. Recommendations Recommendations for Improvement Howard’s concern for the overall quality 1. Provide support for and expansion of the of student life is evidenced by the myriad Students First Campaign to all departments services and activities that are available to and student support functions, including enhance and facilitate the development of a space utilization. 2. Continue to enhance the quality of student services offered by the University. 3. Implement the recommendations promulgated by a recent task force on library resources. Supporting Documents 12.1 Howard University 2009-2010 Student Handbook 12.2 Howard University Libraries Strategic Plan for the Main Library Group 12.3 Library Assessment Plan 12.4 Referencing Rubrics 12.5 Library Advisory Committee Report, 2008 12.6 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys 12.7 Students First Campaign

100 ❘ Howard University 13 Faculty

13 Faculty

MSCHE Standard 10 The institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are devised, developed, monitored, and supported by qualified professionals. Introduction percent (70%) of the Faculty is full-time. During the 2008-2009 academic year, the The University’s mission recognizes the number of full-time faculty members did not importance of having a distinguished fac- change from the previous year when there ulty that is committed to student develop- were 1068 full-time faculty members at the ment, scholarly productivity, and service. University. During the 2006-2007 academic Howard’s faculty members perform a variety year, there were 1083. During the 2007-2008 of instructional, research, service and pro- academic year, the number of part-time fac- fessional development activities as part of ulty members increased substantially from their contributions to the realization of the 162 to 573. University’s mission. This chapter provides a Figures 13.1, 13.2, and 13.3, display profile of the faculty, reviews theU niversity’s Howard’s 1520 faculty members based on faculty recruitment and development efforts, rank and gender, ethnicity, and their distri- and summarizes the faculty’s research and bution among the University’s schools and scholarship achievements. Issues related to colleges, and ethnicity as of Fall 2008. As faculty compensation, evaluation, and their illustrated in Figure 13.1, 57% of Howard roles in the governance of the University are faculty members are males and 43% are also addressed. females. Women are 25% of the Professors, 42% of the Associate Professors, 50% of the Profile of Faculty Assistant Professors, and 49% of Instructors, Currently, Howard has 1064 full-time and Lecturers, Adjuncts, and Others as depicted 456 part-time faculty members. Seventy- in Figure 13.1.

Howard University Faculty (FT & PT) by Rank and Gender, Fall 2008

500

400

214 300 156 77

200

71 234 212 213 83 100 27 91 21 61 54 6 0 Professor Associate Assistant Instructor LecturerAdjunct Other Prof. Prof. Male Female

Figure 13.1: Faculty (FT & PT) by Rank and Gender, Fall 2008 Source: Office of University Research and Planning

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 101 Chapter 13

Figure 13.2 shows that the College of Arts (FPD), or both, as do over 69% of the part- and Sciences has the highest number of fac- time faculty (and thus about 81% of the over- ulty followed by the College of Medicine. all faculty). Two percent hold the Bachelors, Although the Faculty is predominantly 6% hold the MSW or MFA, and about 11% African American (71%), it has a significant hold other Master’s Degrees, with most of number of White (19%) and Asian/Pacific these faculty members appointed as instruc- Islander (8%) members. This level of factors, lecturer, adjuncts, and technicians. ulty diversity contributes to an environment in which Howard students are exposed to Faculty Recruitment and differing perspectives in the acquisition of an education. Retention Of the full-time faculty, over 86% hold The University’s commitment to excel- the Ph.D. or their First Professional Degree lence in teaching, research scholarship, and

Howard University Faculty (FT & PT) by School, Fall 2008

500 438 404

400 291 300 131 200 108 91 78 77 60 57 51 100 25

0 Arts & Sciences Medicin e Graduate School CPNAHS Dentistry Communications CEACS Business Educatio n La w rk Social Wo Divinity

Figure 13.2: Faculty (FT & PT) by School/College, Fall 2008 FigurSource:e Offi 13.3:ce of Faculty University Distribution Research and Planning by Ethnicity, Fall 2008

Howard University Faculty (FT & PT) by Ethnicity, Fall 2008

1073 (71%)

121 (8%)

22 (1%) 4 (0.3%) 287 (19%) 2 (0.1%) 11 (1%) Black Non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Hispanic White Non-Hispanic American Indian Non-Resident Alien Not Ascertained

Figure 13.3: Faculty Distribution by Ethnicity, Fall 2008 Source: Office of University Research and Planning

102 ❘ Howard University Faculty service begins with the recruitment and A general faculty workload policy was retention of quality faculty members. developed in 2002 to establish the prin- The general policy and requirements for ciples of consistency, equity, and flex- faculty appointments are described in the ibility, together with a uniform process Faculty Handbook (1993) (see Supporting for determining workload responsibilities Document 13.1). However, schools and col- across schools and colleges. This policy leges may have additional requirements or established a university-wide framework procedures regarding the search and appoint- for individual effort in each of the three ment process. Most faculty positions require workload categories, while allowing for a terminal degree, with the doctorate con- variation in an individual faculty member’s sidered the terminal degree in most fields proportion of effort within this context. of study. Howard follows relatively conven- The policy allowed each college/school tional procedures for faculty recruitment, to establish minimum expectations for its which begins at the departmental level. Once entire faculty across the three domains of approval is given to hire, job announcements work responsibility. are posted to various Internet or publication Teaching sites. Also, faculty members may contact pro- …Howard spective applicants at relevant professional The delivery of instruction at Howard is meetings where colleagues with knowledge conducted by faculty, who utilize a vari- competes of promising candidates are requested to ety of approaches and teaching methods with other spread the word about open positions within to enhance student learning. Instructional institutions their professional networks. methods commonly include lecture, discus- Howard competes with other institu- sion, group work, case studies, laboratory in a very tions in a very competitive market to hire work, field work and guided self-instruc- competitive and retain excellent faculty. Many factors tion, both mediated and not. Prominent market to hire influence its ability to be competitive in among the teaching methods is widespread this regard, including the competitiveness use of the Blackboard system as a support and retain of its compensation and benefits, program for instruction. Usage varies among faculty excellent and degree offerings, quality of students, members, but includes posting of course faculty. and support for research and professional syllabi, assignments and other pertinent development. Although in recent years the course information, grading and assess- University has lost a number of very pro- ment, presentation of course content, and ductive faculty members, it has also been dialog and information exchange opportuni- able to recruit many very qualified faculty. ties between the instructor and students, and The goal going forward is to recruit, hire among students themselves. Several smart and retain faculty in areas that align with the classrooms have been installed throughout University’s revised mission and strategic the campuses that give students real-time goals and objectives. During the 2006-2007 access to the internet during class periods academic year, in part to retain highly quali- and to other distance learning opportuni- fied faculty, the University implemented a ties. In some cases, students can enrich major salary adjustment for faculty to bring their classroom experience through service faculty to 90% of the median by rank and learning. A Center for the Advancement of discipline. Service Learning has been established on campus, which develops and promotes ini- Faculty Responsibilities tiatives that integrate service learning into The responsibilities of the faculty are pre- existing courses and curricula throughout sented in the Faculty Workload Policy (see the University. Supporting Document 13.2) and Faculty Courses are assigned to faculty at the Handbook (1993). The primary foci of the department level. Under the supervision faculty are dedication to instruction, schol- of a faculty member, graduate students, arly research, and service to the community apprenticing as teaching assistants, provide in promotion of the University’s and depart- instruction for some courses. The current mental missions, goals, objectives, and stra- policy allows the chairperson (or the Dean) tegic plans. discretion in allocating teaching workload

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 103 Chapter 13 responsibilities with consideration for in the arts, humanities, and sciences and research and service activities of the unit health sciences (Table 13.2). Howard’s fac- (see Supporting Document 13.3). However, ulty work to enhance student scholarship perhaps a more systematic approach to and collaborate with them in research and allocating workload is warranted, given the publication activity. perception by the majority (60%) of faculty In addition to dissertation and thesis proj- surveyed that the workload in their depart- ects, faculty mentored student research is ment is not fair (see Supporting Document presented annually during school and col- 13.4). lege research days. Faculty members indicate that “commitment to their students” is the strongest con- Service tributor to their job satisfaction. Evidence The faculty’s commitment to professional for this strong positive impact of faculty and university service is evidenced by their on students is observed in both the fac- participation on numerous university com- ulty and student survey results. According mittees and involvement in local commu- to the Self-Study Survey, students’ overall nity service, and national service initiatives responses regarding the quality of faculty corresponding to their respective fields. instruction and availability were positive Faculty serve on national boards, as editors (Table 13.1). and reviewers for peer-reviewed journals, as reviewers for public and private grant appli- Research and Scholarship cations, as site visitors to other campuses, In addition to maintaining excellence in and hold leadership roles in their profes- teaching, Howard’s faculty members have sional organizations. Also, faculty members distinguished themselves in research and lead or participate in centers on campus, scholarly work. Faculty productivity levels that, in addition to research activities, have are noteworthy in terms of extramural and prominent service functions. intramural funded projects and published articles, despite unevenness in the levels Faculty Development among faculty, departments, and colleges. The concept of professional develop- A detailed summary of research productiv- ment is reflected in the activities of all three ity as reflected by extramural and intramural components of faculty responsibility. The funded projects is provided in the research University administration recognizes that emphasis section. Other evidence of schol- effective faculty development is essential arly productivity includes the significant to strong academic programs. Through the numbers of publications in refereed journals Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning

Table 13.1: Summary of Selected Student Responses to Faculty Instruction Don’t Item Excellent Good Fair Poor Know

Professor’s ability to stimulate critical 31% 42% 21% 6% 1% thinking

Quality of student-faculty interactions in 26% 38% 23% 11% 1% your Department

Availability of your professors to provide students with additional help beyond 26% 39% 26% 7% 2% classroom and office hours

Availability of faculty for academic advising 23% 46% 21% 9% 2% during scheduled office hours

Availability of opportunities in your Department to collaborate with your 14% 29% 21% 18% 18% professors on projects

Source: 2008 Self-Study Student Survey, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

104 ❘ Howard University Faculty

Table 13.2: Howard University Faculty Authors and Student Co-author, 1999-2009

Unit 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009*

All Schools 656 782 717 744 893 1,110 915 880 942 852 269

Business 33 20 28 26 36 33 13 21 22 22 3

CEACS 37 49 27 32 47 91 98 35 43 50 11

Dentistry 9 18 9 20 9 15 25 21 27 10 10

Medicine 137 177 181 216 324 420 337 260 305 325 93

CPNAHS 46 59 72 64 91 99 74 46 38 54 19

Communications 15 15 26 13 17 12 21 14 12 10 10

Divinity 19 24 20 22 15 18 13 30 18 17 5

Education 36 27 22 9 18 25 21 20 17 24 7

Law 39 43 37 44 39 31 19 30 3 3 0

Social Work 4 11 16 19 26 24 13 16 42 22 9

Arts & Sciences 269 303 256 263 253 318 255 362 399 315 108

Note: Numbers include joint authors duplicate entries *Publications as of May 12, 2009 Source: Office of University Libraries and Assessment (CETLA), the Professional the University research community with Development and Leadership Academy, the training to more successfully obtain and Office of Research Education and Technical manage sponsored research projects. RETA Assistance, the Fund for Academic promoted the understanding of institutional Excellence Initiative, the sabbatical leave policies and procedures, sponsor require- program, the Intramural Research Program ments, and federal regulations to ensure (Research Section), and with modest sup- financial, program, and regulatory compli- port at the departmental level to attend pro- ance. Through its certification program, fessional conferences, the faculty can hone RETA offered courses that cover the life- their skills and enhance their professional cycle of an award (see Research Education development. and Technical Assistance in Chapter 18). From its inception CETLA has been an invaluable resource to University faculty Faculty Recognition and is playing an increasing role in fac- In order to support and advance excellence ulty professional development. CETLA in teaching and scholarship, recognition is offers workshops throughout the year in given for outstanding instruction by Howard two broad areas—teaching with technol- faculty. Annually, the Faculty Senate pres- ogy and teaching strategies and classroom ents the Exemplary Teaching Award to a teaching assessment. CETLA’s Summer selected faculty member, judged by a com- Institute offers an opportunity to earn mittee of peers to have demonstrated notable certification for professional develop- instructional accomplishment. Additionally, ment that will enhance teaching, learning, CETLA features on its Web site teachers and assessment. CETLA also maintains who exhibited noteworthy achievements in a repository of course syllabi for archi- teaching. Since 1997, the University has val purposes and for information sharing held a Faculty Authors Appreciation Day, among colleagues. at which published authors during the pre- To increase extramural funding and vious academic year receive a certificate of enhance compliance, the Office of Research recognition signed by both the President and and Technical Assistance (RETA) provided Provost and Chief Academic Officer.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 105 Chapter 13

private research institutions and local peers. In 2007, former President Swygert and the Board of Trustees began to examine faculty salaries with the aim of making market adjustments an important component of faculty compensation. This initiative promises to close the gap between faculty salaries at the University and those of its local and national peer institutions, and to alleviate the perception and the reality of salary compression among the faculty. Despite these efforts, faculty members continue to express concerns related to the Faculty Performance Award Program. An ad hoc faculty committee has proposed a model for compensating faculty in a manner competitive with peer Curricular Development and regional institutions. These recommendations are under review in light of Each school/college has oversight of its budgetary realities. program offerings, curricular development standards, and faculty involvement as Variable Salary Component described in the By-laws of that school/col- A faculty member’s salary for a given lege. The schools/colleges, departments/ academic year is comprised of two factors: programs have an Academic Curriculum the current base salary and a variable sal- Committee that is elected by faculty ary component. Together they encompass members, consistent with the By-laws of a faculty member’s institutional base sal- that particular entity. These Committees ary. The variable salary component, insti- ensure that curricula and learning out- tuted in 2007, acknowledges and offers comes are properly aligned. Additionally, rewards to faculty members who have to assist with achieving this alignment, been productive in securing funded grants CETLA’s syllabus development initiative and contracts in a given academic year. emphasizes the importance of articulating The dollar amount comprising the variable appropriate learning outcomes. salary component is determined through a relatively complex formula. This formula takes into account the total number of Faculty Compensation funding dollars a faculty member accrued Despite significant efforts over the last in the previous academic year; whether the decade in addressing the issues of salary person served as PI (principal investiga- compression, equity and competitiveness, tor), Co-PI, or participant on a given grant lack of faculty salary parity relative to insti- or project in that time span; the total num- tutional peers remains a concern for faculty ber of research/contract dollars brought in and university administration. During fiscal by the faculty as a whole for that given years 2002 and 2004-2008, the University year; and the amount of monies set aside provided across-the-board faculty sal- by the University for this compensation ary increases for eligible faculty, ranging program. This variable amount, by defini- between 2.0-3.0% of base salaries per year. tion, will fluctuate from year to year for a While no across-the-board salary adjust- given faculty member depending on fac- ments were made for FYs 2000, 2001, and ulty productivity for the previous year. 2003, eligible faculty received merit-based This plan to properly compensate faculty salary adjustments during those periods. for their extramural research productivity Although these increases resulted in sig- is noteworthy; however, an assessment of nificant progress, some individual salaries variable salary component revealed that remain below those of counterparts at other this effort did not significantly increase the

106 ❘ Howard University Faculty number of extramurally funded research- purpose of this evaluation is to (1) pro- ers. The initiative has been suspended. vide a basis for rewarding merit pay; (2) Benefits establish a basis for making decisions concerning reappointment, promotion, The University offers a comprehensive and tenure; and (3) provide a basis for fac- benefits program which includes medical, ulty development. The department chair prescription, dental, and vision coverage and the department’s APT or Executive provided through a select network of pro- Committee reviews the faculty member’s viders. Benefits also include workers com- documented performance. Student input is pensation, unemployment compensation, also required in this process. There have and a retirement plan supplementing Social been some inconsistencies with the fre- Security. In 2001, an Employee Assistance quency of faculty evaluation. The Faculty (HU-HELPS) and a commuter assistance Handbook prescribes that evaluation program (Smart Benefits) were initiated. In should occur at least every two years for addition to comprehensive benefits, full-time each faculty member. To ensure that the faculty members, as well as their dependent reviews occur, the Deans must submit a ...The Faculty children, are eligible for remission of tuition written notice certifying completion of Performance within the University. Generally, the benefits the review to the Provost or Senior Vice package offered to faculty is typical of uni- President for Health Sciences. There has Award versities of comparable size in the region. been discussion of the need to create more Program is the uniformity in the University faculty teach- Faculty Promotion University’s ing performance system, including the sole method for The Faculty Handbook (1993) and the procedures that are used to distribute the By-laws of each school/college, clearly state results of the evaluations. faculty salary the policies and procedures for appointment, The faculty performance evaluation adjustments renewal, promotion, tenure, and dismissal. system (FPES) is currently under review. that are Appointment, promotion, and tenure criteria During the 2007-2008 academic year, a are discussed at the New Faculty Orientation committee chaired by Dr. Leslie T. Fenwick premised on conducted by the Office of the Provost. (Dean, School of Education) consisting of performance. faculty members, chairs, deans, and other Faculty Evaluation representatives, reviewed the University’s existing faculty performance evaluation Faculty Performance Award Program process and developed baseline criteria The Faculty Performance Award Program for evaluating faculty performance. In is the University’s sole method for faculty February 2008, the Committee submit- salary adjustments that are premised on ted its report recommending the proposed performance. The decision to grant per- FPES through the Provost to the President. formance-based monetary awards depends FPES, which will complement the policies on the availability of funds in each fiscal outlined in the Faculty Handbook and the year. The program is intended to provide Faculty Workload Policy, has two goals: a clear and distinct link between pay strat- n To develop a general rubric for use in egy and exceptional performance of the assessing and evaluating faculty per- faculty. Awards are determined based on formance in the areas of instruction, annual performance evaluations by faculty research, and service commensurate Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure (APT) with the University’s mission and the Committees and administrators. goals and objectives of each school and college. Faculty Performance-Based Evaluation n To ensure accountability and trans- System parency in a context of mutual com- As outlined in the Faculty Handbook, mitment to the ideals of a healthy and 1993, each member of the faculty hold- productive academic environment. ing a temporary, probationary, or tenured During the Spring 2008 semester, the pro- appointment, whether full- or part-time, posed FPES was reviewed by faculty mem- is evaluated at least every two years. The bers, who submitted individual feedback

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 107 Chapter 13 on-line, and reviewed at the school/college these challenges are underway and should be level during regularly scheduled faculty a priority. The following findings and recom- meetings. Each school/college was asked mendations for improvement emerged from to develop specific faculty evaluation scor- the review of the University’s status relative ing rubrics and procedures within the FPES to MSCHE Standard 10: Committee’s framework. The framework recommends that the faculty in the respec- Findings tive schools/colleges define performance 1. There is a continuing perception by the expectations in the categories of instruction, majority of the faculty that the implemen- research, and service relative to academic tation of the workload policy is not fair. discipline, rank and the workload of individ- 2.There is unevenness within and across ual faculty members. departments, schools, and colleges regarding faculty productivity, notwithstanding Faculty Governance the noteworthy productivity of many fac- Faculty participation in the governance at ulty. Howard University is recognized as a central 3. Faculty salary parity relative to insti- value both by the faculty and University’s lead- tutional peers continues to be a significant ership. As discussed in Chapter 7- Leadership issue for most faculty members, despite and Governance, numerous efforts have begun recent improvements. under the leadership of President Ribeau to 4. Howard does not have a dedicated pool engage the faculty in decision-making on such of funds to attract and retain additional topics as budget, compensation, and the aca- nationally-known scholars and faculty. demic future of the University. With respect to 5. Departmental-level staffing and infra- faculty governance, there is a need to revise the structure to support faculty research is Faculty Handbook. insufficient.

Summary, Findings and Recommendations for Improvement Recommendations 1.Review the University’s faculty work- University faculty members are particularly load policy as part of an effort to address committed to the student-centered focus of the perception by the majority of faculty the university’s mission. They are dedicated who believe the implementation of the fac- to quality teaching, productive research, ulty workload policy is not fair. service, and professional development. A 2. Refine and enhance the structure of the number of factors, including staffing levels, University’s faculty development program. unevenness of workload, lack of competi- 3. Increase faculty salaries to be more tive salaries, and inadequate support for new competitive with peers at other research faculty recruitment and new faculty-start up universities in the context of enhanced uni- funds, have compromised faculty effective- versity revenue from diverse sources. ness. Recent efforts to revisit the workload 4. Establish a dedicated recruitment and and evaluation policies to address some of retention fund to attract additional nationally-recognized scholars, retain the strongest current faculty, and promote the development and retention of the University’s young and promising faculty.

Supporting Documents 13.1 Faculty Handbook, 1993 13.2 Faculty Workload Policy, 2000 13.3 Academic Affairs Strategic Planning and Budgeting Updates, 2007 13.4 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard University Self-Study Surveys

108 ❘ Howard University 14 Educational Offerings

14 Educational Offerings

MSCHE Standard 11 The institution’s educational offerings display academic content, rigor, and coherence appropriate to its higher education mission. The institution identifies student learning goals and objectives, including knowledge and skills, for its educational offerings.

Introduction reaffirmation of accreditation of academic The University’s academic programs, programs. Additionally, “the quest for solu- most of which are more than 100 years old, tions to human and social problems in the emanate from Howard’s mission of being a United States and throughout the world” is comprehensive research-oriented university. evident in the foci of most schools and aca- The University strives to respond to evolv- demic programs, and particularly so in the ing societal needs and prepare students for professional programs that are deeply rooted leadership and service to the nation and the in a tradition of service. In fact, a survey of global community. Howard addresses these senior university administrators found that challenges by providing a high quality aca- 73% believed that the educational offerings demic experience of great breadth and depth at Howard are aligned with the University’s across its five colleges (Arts and Science; mission. Dentistry; Engineering, Architecture, Led by its faculty, the University has and Computer Sciences; Medicine; and engaged in curriculum reform that is Pharmacy, Nursing, and Allied Health designed to respond to changes in academic Sciences) and seven schools (Business, disciplines and national and international Communications, Divinity, Education, environments. A few new degree programs Graduate, Law, and Social Work). Howard’s and certificates have been added. Various colleges and schools have a strong tradition special programs, centers, publications, and of academic excellence, offering under- school and college academic initiatives sup- graduate degrees in 80 disciplines, master’s plement the University’s educational oppor- degrees in 63 disciplines, Ph.D. degrees in tunities and sustain its service legacy. 29 disciplines, other doctorates in 4 areas, first professional degree in 5 disciplines, and Curricular Development and professional certification in 5 areas.I n addition, the University offers 5 dual degrees New Programs (see Supporting Document 14.1). Curricular development and new programs Over the past 10 years, 51 academic pro- are the major responsibility of the faculty. grams have been accredited. One program (Curricular development is discussed in has not been reviewed, one program closed, Chapter 13 – Faculty). A few new courses, and one program is seeking first-time accred- degree programs, and certificate programs itation. Between 2008 and 2009, there were have been created in response to significant 29 programs in 8 schools/colleges under- employment and development opportuni- going self-studies and external reviews for ties. Proposals for new curricula undergo reaccreditation. an extensive planning and review process All schools and colleges have adopted that addresses need, quality, student learn- mission statements consistent with the ing outcomes, assessment, and institutional emphasis of providing an “educational fiscal resources. After completing the plan- experience of exceptional quality,” which ning and review process, proposals for new has been demonstrated by the continued programs are recommended to the Provost

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 109 Chapter 14

n Graduate Certificate in Women’s Studies (see Supporting Document 14.6), n Graduate Certificate in International Affairs (see Supporting Document 14.7), and n Graduate Certificate in Migration Studies (proposal approved Spring 2008). In addition, three interdisciplinary doctoral programs have been launched. These include new Ph.D. programs in Atmospheric Sciences, Materials Science, and Mass Communications and Media Studies. Program Reviews The schools and colleges conduct program reviews, generally rotating among departments, in order to accomplish periodic reviews. Many of these reviews are associated with periodic accreditation reaffirma- tions such as in the professional schools. Typically, a review committee is established and Chief Academic Officer or Senior Vice consisting of faculty, students, and some- President for Health Sciences. A few of times alumni and faculty from other schools these innovative programs added recently and colleges. Site visits by external review- are highlighted below: ers are sometimes a part of the program n The School of Business established a review process. Final reports are submitted Bachelor of Business Administration to the Dean and the Provost or Senior Vice degree program in Supply Chain President for Health Sciences as appropri- Management (SCM), which was ate, for review. approved by the Board of Trustees in Enhanced academic program reviews August 2007 (see Supporting Document will be an important component of the 14.2). University’s academic renewal process that n An introductory, freshman-level, inter- President Ribeau has initiated. The program disciplinary research course was offered reviews will facilitate the realignment of in Spring 2007 to broaden undergradu- program and curricular offerings and more ate perspectives on research, foster con- strategic and efficient use of resources in sideration of alternative career paths, the realization of the University’s mission. and institutionalize interdisciplinary During the 2009-2010 academic year, a research in the College of Arts and Select Commission on Academic Renewal, Sciences (see Supporting Document appointed by President Ribeau, will lead a 14.3). review of undergraduate, graduate and pro- n A master of Public Health program was fessional programs and make recommen- created in 2004 but was discontinued in dations for changes to the President. The 2008. President will consider the recommenda- The Graduate School has developed tions and present to the Board of Trustees a graduate-level certificate programs; to plan for academic renewal (see the section on date, four are offered and a fifth has been Academic Renewal in Chapter 5 – Planning, approved: Resource Allocation and Institutional n Graduate Certificate in Computer Renewal). Following the implementation of Security (see Supporting Document the University’s Strategic Frameworks for 14.4), Action I and II, the University embarked on n Graduate Certificate in University and a next phase of strategic academic planning Faculty Preparation (see Supporting involving school and college-level program Document 14.5), reviews. After he assumed his position,

110 ❘ Howard University Educational Offerings

President Ribeau asked the Provost and requirements in the undergraduate programs Senior Vice President for Health Sciences to are described by each department. Also, assess their respective academic portfolios major and minor requirements are gener- and make recommendations for changes, ally well-articulated. Graduate and profes- taking into consideration program perfor- sional programs have well-defined and doc- mance and national standing, disciplinary umented curricula with associated learning trends, and student and societal demands. outcomes. He also asked each dean to offer short-and Undergraduate departments prepare com- long-term recommendations for changes prehensive examinations in the major fields in their academic program. The President that are aligned with the learning objectives will make this information available to the presented in the respective departmental/ Commission as a baseline for its work. programmatic curriculum. Graduate depart- ...Graduate ments also augment the course-based assess- and professional Learning Goals and ments with comprehensive exams, usually in programs have Objectives for Academic the core and field areas within a discipline. In addition, for theses and dissertations, well-defined Offerings a formal process for assessing the quality and documented The range, relevance, and rigor of edu- of proposals exists in all departments, and cational offerings at the University are the student must successfully complete the curricula grounded in the development of and adher- proposal before proceeding to candidacy, with associated ence to learning goals and objectives. and publically defend the dissertation upon learning Articulation and documentation of learn- completion. ing outcomes occurs across university aca- For professional programs, there are exter- outcomes. demic units and at different levels. At the nal certification exams (such as NCLEX in level of the individual course, the syllabus Nursing or Bar Exams in Law) that demon- articulates the expected learning outcomes. strate progress toward meeting the learning Usually, syllabi include summary statements objectives of these programs. Faculty and of the course goals for student learning by academic administrators regularly review expressing what a student should be able to academic programs and curricula to ensure do after completing the course successfully. that there is appropriate alignment with the This general goal is often supplemented by knowledge and skills measured on certi- specific objectives, articulating particular fication and licensure examinations. Over activities and the knowledge and skills that the past ten years, the University has made a student should be able to demonstrate at significant strides in enhancing resources the end of the course. to support instruction. In the area of infor- The University has, through its Center mation literacy and access, the University for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and has made substantial progress in providing Assessment (CETLA), institutionalized the appropriate resources for students. In partic- University’s commitment to enhancing the ular, the central student technology labora- quality of academic offerings with emphasis tory (the “iLab”) was a major development on improving faculty teaching and student that included ample computing, printing, learning. To ensure that course syllabi con- and software power for students. Similarly, sistently meet these criteria, CETLA, estab- all dormitories are wired for Internet access lished a course in syllabus development that (T3 and wireless) and all but one has com- emphasizes the importance of articulating puter labs. Further, most University build- learning outcomes and the ways they are ings are also equipped with wireless Internet measured. CETLA began a “syllabus com- access. petition” in 2006, with detailed feedback All students have access to Blackboard, an provided to submitters, intended to enhance electronic course management platform used the ability of syllabi to clearly communicate to support course instruction. The library learning outcomes and measurements. has increasingly moved to a digital format At the program level, learning objectives by subscribing to a variety of on-line schol- are generally presented in well-documented arly resources, and supports remote off-cam- program descriptions. General Education pus access. Several colleges, schools, and

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 111 Chapter 14 departments have created smart-rooms that improvement emerged from the review of provide multi-media and technology infused the University’s status relative to MSCHE classrooms, computer labs, and specialty Standard 11: labs for their particular disciplines (i.e., mathematics, economics, biology, engineer- Findings ing, and sociology/anthropology). 1. The University’s academic programs In addition to the strides in technology and offerings are not sufficiently inter- and resources for information access and disciplinary and experientially based. literacy, the University has invested in other 2.Student performance on licensure critical academic support resources. Over examinations is uneven within and across the last decade, two new libraries (Law schools/colleges and requires continued and Health Sciences) were constructed. In attention. addition, a building dedicated to research (HURB1) was completed. Recommendations for Improvement 1. Evaluate academic offerings and Summary, Findings and streamline, modify, or augment offer- Recommendations ings in response to changing times with special emphasis on expanding interdis- The quality of the University’s educational ciplinary and experiential learning offer- offerings is assessed through a diverse system ings, especially in international studies of external site visits and internal program and community development. reviews. Each of the University’s academic 2. Increase external examination pas- programs that are eligible for accreditation sage rates by providing more student sup- participates in the accreditation review pro- port, curricular reform, and related fac- cess. Schools and colleges conduct regular ulty development. internal program reviews, generally rotating such reviews among departments to ensure that each program and department housing Supporting Documents the program is reviewed regularly. A com- 14.1 FACTS 2009 – Howard University prehensive academic portfolio assessment 14.2 Supply Chain Management (SCM) is underway at the University, as part of the Program academic renewal process. The academic 14.3 Undergraduate Interdisciplinary renewal process will result in the strategic Research Course realignment of the University’s academic 14.4 Graduate Certificate in Computer programs consistent with its mission. Security The University, through its Center for 14.5 Graduate Certificate in College and Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and University Faculty Preparation Assessment (CETLA), has institutional- 14.6 Graduate Certificate in Women’s ized its commitment to enhance the qual- Studies ity of academic offerings through CETLA’s 14.7 Graduate Certificate in International emphasis on improving faculty teaching and Studies student learning. CETLA provides a course in syllabus development that emphasizes the importance of articulating learning outcomes and measuring outcomes. Finally, all students have access to Blackboard, an electronic course management platform used to support course instruction. Several colleges, schools, and departments have created “smart-rooms” that provide multi-media and technology infused classrooms, computer labs, and specialty labs for their particular disciplines. The following findings and recommendations for

112 ❘ Howard University 15 General Education

15 General Education

MSCHE Standard 12 The institution’s curricula are designed so that students acquire and demonstrate college-level proficiency in general education and essential skills, including at least oral and written communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and reasoning and technological competency. Introduction demonstrate college-level proficiency in General Education at Howard is designed oral and written communication; scientific so that undergraduate students can acquire and quantitative reasoning; and technol- and demonstrate college-level proficiency ogy. This curriculum is consistent with the competency areas outlined by the Middle in essential skills: (1) oral and written com- Undergraduate munication, (2) scientific and quantitative States Commission on Higher Education. reasoning, (3) critical analysis and reason- Schools/ colleges with specific core and students should ing, and (4) technological competency. To general education requirements have aug- be enabled mented these for compatibility with the that end, a Core Curriculum Committee “to become was appointed in 1996-1997 by the Provost University-wide Core Curriculum guide- and Chief Academic Officer, consisting of lines (see Supporting Document 15.1). The productive faculty and students to make recommenda- Dean’s office of each undergraduate school/ members of college maintains the listing of courses that tions pertaining to college level proficiency society who in General Education. This committee was fulfill the University-wide Undergraduate charged with devising a common set of Core Curriculum. can analyze, experiences for all undergraduate students, The General Education program require- think critically, ments are disseminated to students through enabling them “to become productive mem- understand bers of society who can analyze, think criti- a variety of modalities, including the cally, understand justice, and the importance Howard University Bulletins, department justice, and of service to humanity.” In 2000, the Board Web sites, and materials developed by vari- the importance ous departments. During advisement ses- of Trustees approved the Core Curriculum of service to for undergraduate students. sions, new and transfer students receive an The University-wide Core Curriculum orientation concerning the curriculum and humanity.” was initiated in Fall 2001 as part of the graduation requirements. Transfer students Strategic Framework for Action II. The are required to take courses in the core General Education requirement is imple- curriculum unless these requirements were mented in the undergraduate schools otherwise satisfied through transfer credits and colleges through a Core Curriculum from previous institution(s). coordinated by the Office of the Provost. A faculty advisory committee from the University-Wide Core undergraduate schools and colleges is Curriculum being contemplated to monitor its implementation and assessment of the General Written Communication Education requirement. The Freshman Composition Sequence is The General Education curriculum designed to ensure high levels of literacy, reflects six overarching themes: intellec- proficiency in analytic skills, and knowl- tual openness and cultural diversity; his- edge of various discourses. All students torical awareness; empirical analysis; lit- must enroll in the two-semester English 002 eracy and statistical reasoning; social and and English 003 sequence (or an equivalent human relations; and health and physical year-long Honors sequence 075 and 076). education. It also requires that students Exemptions are granted because of stellar

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 113 Chapter 15

AP scores on the College Board examina- dent proficiency through 2013; afterwards, tions. Students are placed in the appropri- written communication will be assessed on ate level of English (English 002 or Car- an annual basis. Verbal [remedial English] based on scores Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC), from the verbal section of the SAT II exam- established in 1991, is an interdepartmen- ination. Students who need additional help tal, “interdisciplinary” program. This pro- are referred to the Writing Center, which gram, which is located in the Center for is staffed by faculty from the Department Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and of English and graduate/teaching assis- Assessment (CETLA), is another method of tants. Writing proficiency is assessed for achieving written competency, but within a English 002 and 003 through in-class and particular field.I nstructors in various disci- out-of-class essays, student portfolios, and plines are certified as AW C teachers so that course grades. At the end of the sequence, they can offer writing-intensive courses students are required to take a departmental within their own fields.T he WAC program examination that is scored by at least two is assessed at both the faculty and student faculty members who use a departmen- levels on a regular basis and has many tally-developed holistic rubric. Supporting strategies for gauging its effectiveness. Document 15.2 presents student learning Data show that most students indicated that data results on written communication for WAC courses were worthwhile, especially the Spring 2009 English 003 final exami- as a tool for learning the subject matter of nation. Although data have always been the disciplines. However, despite its cur- collected at the classroom level, Spring ricular innovation, the impact of WAC on 2009 was the first opportunity to aggre- undergraduate writing proficiency remains gate data across written communication limited, as participation is voluntary. courses, thereby, providing institutional level outcomes. Results indicate that 70% Oral Communication of students whose scores were reported To fulfill the oral communication require- were deemed proficient. The Office of ment in the general education curriculum, Institutional Assessment and Evaluation students in Arts and Sciences; Business; is collaborating with the Department of Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied Health; and English to develop an analytical descriptive Communications are required to enroll in rubric which provides evidence of student Principles of Speech (COMC 101). For performance on all aspects of written com- undergraduate students in the College of munication. Written communication will be Engineering Architecture and Computer assessed every semester to determine stu- Science, the oral communication requirement is met through the infusion of oral communication components into the regular disciplinary classes. The Principles of Speech course facilitates effective oral communication in a variety of speech situations, familiarizing students with com- municative processes and their effect on human interactions. Assessments of verbal communication competence are achieved at the classroom level. However, beginning Spring 2010, data will be aggregated across oral communication courses to enable the assessment of institutional level outcomes. In addition to the single required speech class, there are supplemental opportunities for students to develop and demonstrate proficiency in oral communication. Other courses in the General Education program require students to conduct oral presentations. However,

114 ❘ Howard University General Education there is no clear articulation of the metrics level outcomes. Evaluation of scientific used at the departmental or course level. reasoning is scheduled for Fall 2010. Additionally, all undergraduate students have Supporting Document 15.3 shows quan- the opportunity to participate in two annual titative reasoning student learning data undergraduate research symposia sponsored for Spring 2009 College Algebra I, II, and by the College of Arts and Sciences and the Pre-Calculus departmental final exami- Graduate School. These symposia not only nations by school/college. Items which help students increase research competence represented a specific aspect of quanti- and technological fluency; but also demon- tative reasoning were identified on each strate proficiency of oral communication. of the aforementioned final examinations Students are evaluated based on research and student performance on those items competence and oral competence, including was recorded. One aspect of quantitative articulation, verbal coherence, maintaining reasoning, defined by the Mathematical eye contact, and responsiveness to questions. Association of America, states that students should be able to “use arithmeti- Scientific and Quantitative Reasoning cal, algebraic, geometric and statistical Undergraduate students in the College methods to solve problems.” Results for of Arts and Sciences and the School of this aspect of quantitative reasoning indi- Business are required to complete two cate that the percentage of students who semesters of college-level mathemat- demonstrated proficiency (i.e., scored ics courses. Students in the School of 60.0% or better on the item) was 63.6% Engineering, Architecture and Computer for College Algebra I, 54.1% for College Sciences are required to complete four Algebra II, and 77.0% for Pre-Calculus. semesters of college- level mathematics The overall proficiency rate for quanti- courses (Calculus I, II, III, and Differential tative reasoning across the three courses Equations). Students in the School of in Spring 2009 was 61.7%. Quantitative Pharmacy, Nursing and Allied Health reasoning will be assessed every semester Sciences (Basic Nursing Program) are through 2013 to determine student profi- required to complete one semester of col- ciency; after 2013, quantitative reasoning lege-level mathematics (College Algebra will be assessed on an annual basis. I) and one course in Elementary Statistics, and Sociology. Students in the School of Critical Analysis and Reasoning Education who are pursuing teacher edu- Several courses satisfy the critical anal- cation take the same general education ysis and reasoning requirement. These courses as the COAS students; therefore, include several Philosophy courses, the they complete two college-level math- Afro-American Core Cluster, and other ematics courses. Except for Journalism courses specifically designed to teach criti- students in the John H. Johnson School of cal thinking. All students in the College of Communications who must complete two Arts and Sciences, the School of Business, college-level mathematics courses, com- and Human Development majors in the munications students complete one semes- School of Education are required to take ter of college-level mathematics—College one of the following Philosophy courses to algebra 1 (Math 006). Natural Science fulfill this general education requirement: courses are taught under Division “D” in PHIL 051 Principles of Reasoning; PHIL the College of Arts and Sciences. In this 053 Introduction to Philosophy of Science; division, students are provided a wide array PHIL 055 Introduction to Philosophy; of courses that provide competencies in PHIL 057 Introduction to Ethics; and PHIL scientific and quantitative reasoning. 159 Philosophy of Economics. Further, stu- Although student performance in sci- dents in all schools/colleges must enroll in entific and quantitative reasoning has a sequence of courses to demonstrate com- always been assessed at the classroom petencies in critical analysis and reason- level, in Spring 2009 student learning data ing in the Social Sciences, Fine Arts, and for qualitative reasoning was aggregated the Humanities. Although assessment has across courses to provide institutional always been conducted at the classroom

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 115 Chapter 15

level, effective Spring 2011, data will be every aspect of the University experience. aggregated across classes for critical anal- Standards such as that involving technolog- ysis and reasoning to provide institutional ical competency are assessed at the class- level outcomes. room level, but this competency would be All students must enroll in the University- more effectively assessed at a “higher” Wide Afro-American Core Cluster. Critical and broader level, given the importance of analysis and reasoning are central to the technology to today’s educated student. multidisciplinary study of African and African-American history and culture. The Assessment of General Afro-American Core Cluster was instituted over thirty years ago in response to the need Education to diversify the University’s undergraduate The majority of assessments within the curriculum and more adequately reflect in it General Education program are at the the legacy mission of the University. It has classroom level, as was indicated earlier not been assessed since its implementation. in each competency section. Since the A clear articulation of its continuing pur- establishment of OIAE, a more founda- pose and objectives should be developed. tional approach has been undertaken to aggregate data across classes for the core Technological Competence competencies in order to provide insti- Students are afforded a variety of expe- tutional level outcome information (see riences that build competency in infor- Supporting Document 15.4). OIAE has mational technology. In addition to meet- done substantial work with the College of ing quantitative and scientific reasoning Arts and Sciences to review and improve requirements, Division “D” courses also assessment instruments and procedures in integrate technological competency into General Education areas, including quanti- the curriculum. Further, for those with tative reasoning (Mathematics) and written less exposure to technology, a number of communication (English 003). courses that target computer competence The 2008 Self-Study Survey of students, are offered. faculty, and senior administrators regard- Technological Over the past decade, with an increased ing their perceptions of various aspects of fluency is a skill campus-wide capacity in the technologi- the university found that the majority of cal infrastructure, the use of technology students and faculty agreed that the general required by all in administration, instruction, scholarship, education program was meeting its goals. students in communication, and literature, and for Approximately 69% of faculty and 82% searching has become ubiquitous. All stu- of students found that the general educa- negotiating dents are given e-mail accounts when they tion academic program enhanced students’ every aspect of first enroll and access is required for course abilities to form independent judgments; the University registration and navigation of the official approximately three-fourths of both stu- university information. In addition, students (74%) and faculty (72%) indicated experience. dents are provided access to Blackboard, that it enhanced student’s abilities to a web-based course management platform understand fundamental theory; and 81% which is used to facilitate information dis- of faculty and 65% of students reported semination, communication, and assess- that the ability to interact in a culturally ment in courses. All matriculated students diverse world was developed more fully. have access to electronic databases, on- Further, 71% of students reported that the line information, and resources via the general education program enhanced their library system. Further, numerous faculty knowledge of African-Americans and other members have incorporated technologi- people of color; while nearly three-fourths cal innovation in instruction and course (73%) reported an enhanced ability to assignments (i.e., presentation and mul- stimulate students to think critically; and timedia software, simulcasts, e-learning, three-fifths (59%) affirmed theU niversity’s Blackboard, blogs, electronic databases, success in introducing technological pro- and podcasts). Technological fluency is a grams into the curriculum. Approximately skill required by all students in negotiating two-fifths (41%) of senior administrators

116 ❘ Howard University General Education

endorsed the view that there was alignment At Howard University, all undergradu- between general education policies and stu- ate schools require students to take first- dent learning (see Supporting Document year freshman composition. In addition, 15.5). although almost all undergraduates must complete a year-long sequence in math- Challenges of the University- ematics, the School of Communication requires only one semester of college-level Wide Core Curriculum mathematics for majors in four of its pro- Although a number of policies exist on grams. Students in Journalism, however, required courses, there is no uniform state- must complete a year-long mathematics ment concerning the purpose and value sequence. Further, only students in four of Howard’s General Education curricu- colleges/schools are required to complete a lum, or a uniform statement that explains formal speech course. clearly how the program is articulated The School of Engineering, Architecture across all of the undergraduate programs. and Computer Science effectively integrates Undergraduate schools and colleges require most core curriculum competencies into its their students to enroll in general education major program. As excellent role models, courses with the expectation that they will the Departments of Systems and Computer acquire competencies recommended by the Science and Electrical Engineering core curriculum. Nevertheless, there is not have implemented the University Core a single uniform General Education Core Curriculum into their course curricula, Curriculum that is required across all the making reference to the themes of the University’s undergraduate programs. University-Wide Core Curriculum and the Most schools and colleges already have “core” experiences—events and service incorporated within their curricula the basic programs. skills required by the “Core.” Therefore, The core curriculum panel suggested that it would appear that the core curriculum there might be challenges associated with has been fully implemented throughout implementation of the core curriculum; for the University. However, with lack of clear example, some schools and departments would articulation, questions have arisen concern- have to undertake additional course design ing what actually constitutes a University- activities and identify additional “human and wide Core Curriculum, as opposed to material resources.” However, despite the departmental (divisional) requirements. challenges, the schools/colleges have taken

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 117 Chapter 15 steps toward fulfilling the recommendations improvement emerged from the review of of the Core Curriculum Committee by iden- the University’s status relative to MSCHE tifying existing courses and experiences that Standard 12: could be appropriately integrated into the Core Curriculum. What remains, however, is the Findings task of consolidation and refinement so that, 1. There is insufficient assessment of core across schools and colleges, all undergradu- competencies outside of the classroom, ates are bonded by a universal core of learning including summative assessment. and experiences. 2. There is unevenness of articulation, implementation, and assessment of the Summary, Findings and University’s core competencies across all Recommendations undergraduate schools/colleges. General Education at Howard is designed Recommendations for Improvement so that undergraduate students acquire and 1. Appoint a body of faculty, students, demonstrate college-level proficiency in and staff to review the current University- essential skills: (1) oral and written com- wide core competencies and to recommend munication, (2) scientific and quantitative strategies to schools and colleges for revis- reasoning, (3) critical analysis and reasoning, updating, and assessing the curriculum, ing, and (4) technological competency. The in order to insure effective implementation General Education curriculum reflects six of the program designed to develop those overarching values: intellectual openness competencies in all Howard students. and cultural diversity; historical aware- 2. Refine the General Education curricu- ness; empirical analysis; literacy and sta- lum in all undergraduate schools and col- tistical reasoning; social and human rela- leges to best advance the University-wide tions; and health and physical education. core competencies. The University has established a core 3. Refine the delivery of core competen- curriculum that speaks to core competencies in all departments and schools such cies for all undergraduates. However, the that there is a recognized interconnection precise General Education course arrange- between general education and academic ments need to be specified further across program requirements. schools and colleges to develop a more 4. Continue to involve the Office of distinctive Howard University experience Institutional Assessment and Evaluation which also will allow improved, uniform (OIAE) in the review, revision and devel- and reliable assessment of student learn- opment of instruments and procedures for ing outcomes and core competencies. A assessment of general education/core-cur- clear commitment to General Education at ricular areas. Howard is well established, as are effective strategies to achieve the core competencies. Nevertheless, the implementation of a Supporting Documents university-wide core curriculum across all 15.1 General Education Grid: Fulfillment undergraduate programs remains incom- of Competencies plete. Whereas the English, Mathematics, 15.2 Spring 2009 Assessment of General and African-American cluster classes are Education Outcomes in Written required of all students, there is significant Communication variation in other required student courses 15.3 Spring 2009 Assessment of General and experiences (i.e., courses in Speech, Education Outcomes in Quantitative the Sciences, Physical Education, and spe- Reasoning cial University events, e.g., Convocation 15.4 Outcomes Assessment and and Charter Day). Because of this decen- Institutional Effectiveness Report, July tralized implementation, common data on 2009 the effectiveness of the Core Curriculum 15.5 Technical Report for the 2008 Howard are limited or difficult to access. The fol- University Self-Study Surveys lowing findings and recommendations for

118 ❘ Howard University Related Educational 16 Activities

Related Educational 16 Activities

MSCHE Standard 13 The institution’s programs or activities that are characterized by particular content, focus, location, mode of delivery, or sponsorship meet appropriate standards.

Introduction The effectiveness of CAR-Mathematics The University offers related educational classes and Mathematics Lab support has opportunities for its students, which supple- been demonstrated. A study was conducted ment their regular academic coursework that compared the performance of students and activities, and enhance their learning who successfully completed CAR’s Basic and personal development. These educa- Mathematics II courses from Fall 2003 to tional opportunities include internships, Fall 2005 compared with the performance undergraduate honors programs, study of all other students in College Algebra I abroad, academic enrichment, co-op pro- from Spring 2004 to Summer 2006. The grams, on-line instruction, and certificate study revealed that students in College Howard programs, all of which adhere to academic Algebra I who had successfully completed University is Basic Math II generally performed better and professional standards and align with committed the University’s mission. This Standard than the overall population of students in examines the University’s efforts to pro- College Algebra I (Figure 16.1). to ensuring vide a range of opportunities for students the academic to supplement and enrich their educational English Proficiency and success of each experiences. Graduate Expository Writing of its students, The Department of English does not especially those Academic Reinforcement administer a placement examination to Initiatives undergraduate students. All new entrants students who Howard is committed to the academic are required to register for the first col- need some form success of each of its students, especially lege-level English course. Based on the of academic those students who need some form of aca- results of their first in-class essay (the demic reinforcement. The University offers “Diagnostic Exam”), faculty may elect reinforcement. academic enrichment opportunities to eli- to send students to the CAR-Verbal pro- gible students in Mathematics, English, and gram, which is dedicated to preparing college study skills, through its Center for them to succeed in English 002. However, Academic Reinforcement (CAR), which is when students are identified as underpre- housed in the School of Education. pared, most of them do not drop English 002 and enroll in the CAR-Verbal course, Mathematics as shown in Table 16.1. In response to the Undergraduate students who are accepted at Self-Study Committee’s findings, effective Howard take a Mathematics Placement Exam- Fall 2009, the University will use writing ination (MPE) via the Blackboard course man- scores from the SAT or ACT for placement agement system. The MPE results are used for into the appropriate English course. placement in Mathematics courses (see Sup- Undergraduate students who need to porting Document 16.1). Voluntary support strengthen their writing skills may vol- is provided to all students via the Mathemat- untarily avail themselves of the Writing ics Lab located in the Center for Academic Center. In Fall 2007, the Self-Study Reinforcement (CAR). The Mathematics Lab Committee observed that the Center did not is staffed by the department of Mathematics have enough operating hours or tutors. The and CAR faculty, as well as student tutors. Committee also noted a growing need for

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 119 Chapter 16 assistance in English as a second language administered to all incoming graduate stu- (ESOL). As a result of the Committee’s dents and serves as an instructional vehicle assessment, the University provided funds for implementing the Board of Trustees’ to hire enough tutors (including an ESOL 1976 mandate that all graduate students specialist) to staff the Center weekdays demonstrate proficiency in academic or during business hours and to pilot-test an expository writing as a prerequisite to can- on-line Writing Center to increase evening didacy. Students who do not satisfy the min- and weekend access. Currently, neither imum proficiency are required to complete the English Department nor CAR tracks a course in “Academic Communication,” the performance of ESOL or other under- which focuses on scientific writing. prepared students in subsequent English classes. College Study Skills On the graduate level, all master’s and Beginning in 1974, all undergraduate doctoral students enrolled in the Graduate students who enrolled in CAR courses School are required to demonstrate writ- were required to take a study skills course. ing proficiency. The Graduate Expository In 1980, this course was no longer manda- Writing Examination (GEWE) is tory for CAR-referred students, which has

Grade Distribution for CAR-Math vs.Non-CAR Students in College Algebra I 30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00% centage of Students

Per 5.00%

0.00% ABCD FW Grades CAR-Math Non-CAR

Figure 16.1: Grade Distribution for CAR-Math vs.Non-CAR Students in College Algebra I Source: Howard University Office of Academic Reinforcement

Table 16.1: Number of Freshmen Scoring Below the English 002 Cut-Score Compared to CAR- Verbal Enrollment Semester/Year Below 002 Cut-off Enrolled in CAR % Enrolled in CAR

Fall 2005 296 13 4.39%

Spring 2006 55 4 7.27%

Fall 2006 155 26 16.77%

Spring 2007 24 2 8.33%

Fall 2007 88 13 14.77%

Source: Department of English and the Center for Academic Reinforcement, Howard University

120 ❘ Howard University Related Educational Activities

resulted in declining participation among demonstrate competence in a specialized the students who are, most in need. Further, field. They may also fulfill prerequisites when students are accepted with the condi- for Board examinations. tion of enrolling in a college study skills course, there is no penalty for not adhering Strengths of Certificate Programs at to these admissions requirements. Howard University The strengths of Howard’s certificate Certificate Programs programs include the following: Howard offers 52 undergraduate, gradu- n The accessibility of certificate pro- ate, and professional certificate programs, grams in terms of tuition cost, loca- but only 18 are for credit (see Supporting tions where courses are offered, and Document 16.2). Between 1997 and day and time of class meetings. 2007, Howard awarded more than 600 n The revenue-generating capacity of credit-based certificates (see Supporting short-term certificate programs —rev- Document 16.3). By comparison, Howard’s enue which may be used for regular ten peer institutions offer an average of 46 academic programs or underfunded certificate programs, and most of these student educational enrichment activi- carry academic credit (see Supporting ties. Allied Health’s certificate pro- Document 16.4). gram in Phlebotomy is a case in point: The University offers two types of Clinical Lab Science program has used certificate programs: (1) Certificate of some of the $1 million in revenues it Completion programs and (2) Certificate earned between 1996 and 2004 to hire of Competence programs (see Supporting a part-time lab assistant and upgrade Document 16.2). Certificate of Completion equipment for on-site students. programs do not require a college degree n The clearance of Certificate of or college enrollment status for admission Competence programs through a cur- and continuing education units (CEU’s) riculum review process that is at the may be earned. Certificate of Competence departmental, school/college and programs require a college degree or Provost levels. enrollment in an undergraduate or graduate n The inclusion of courses that are a part program for admission and are designed to of Certificate of Competence programs

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 121 Chapter 16

in the accreditation process of the n Inadequate marketing, public informa- departments in which these courses tion, and advertising support. reside. n Inadequate staff support and operational funding. Challenges for the Certificate Programs n The need for main-campus certificate Despite these strengths, there are a num- courses to be offered in more accessible ber of obstacles to the effective opera- locations to better serve the community, tion of certificate programs. They are as for instance, at sites such as the Howard follows: University Hospital and Howard Center. n The paucity of credit programs. Research as well as anecdotal evidence indicates Experiential Learning that there are missed opportunities in In several programs within the University, many areas, including computer science students are involved in practicum, co- (e.g., various software and hardware ops, internships, fieldwork and community certifications as well as help desk- cer service as part of their program or field tification), health sciences (e.g., prac- of study. These activities are designed to tical nursing, geriatric care, hospice enable students to grasp the concepts and care), biomedical science, construction theories of their discipline and how to apply management, project management, lan- them in a professional setting under super- guage programs, cultural programs, and vision. Most of the experential learning the popular arts. activities are in the professional programs in n The absence of a clear process for devel- the Health Sciences. Other programs reside oping and implementing Certificate of in the Schools of Education, Business, Completion programs and non-credit Communications, and Social Work, among courses. others. Students are assigned to sites where n Administrative processes that do not facil- faculty advisors work closely with site itate the implementation of contract-based supervisors to assess their progress. In some revenue-generating certificate programs programs, students maintain a log which is in partnership with an external entity. submitted as part of their final evaluation.

122 ❘ Howard University Related Educational Activities

The Center for Urban Progress provides honors theses or projects. Through the students community learning and service Office of the Provost, the University has opportunities through the Community recently implemented a University-wide Development Leadership Program, the honors program that will include campus- Community Development Work Study and wide honors programming under the direc- the Center for Advancement for Service tion of an Honors Advisory Council. Learning. Each year, 6-8 students receive Study Abroad Programs financial support through the Community Development Support Collaborative. These Through its Study Abroad Office, located students obtain hands-on experience and in the Ralph Bunche International Affairs networking opportunities through intern- Center, and its undergraduate schools and ships with partner organizations. colleges, the University offers students a diverse array of study abroad opportuni- Internships ties. Typically, students study abroad for Through Numerous internship opportunities are one semester, and have the earned credits its Study made available to undergraduate, gradu- applied to their Howard University tran- Abroad Office, ate, and professional students through scripts. The College of Arts and Sciences, located in the their academic departments. Students the School of Law, and the School of typically register for academic credits for Business have well-organized and effec- Ralph Bunche these internships under faculty direction tive study abroad programs. In addition, International in accordance with regulations governing the Graduate School offers students a Affairs Center, degree requirements, and are assigned to number of academic and research interna- internship positions at appropriate pub- tional experiences related to their degree and its lic and private agencies and facilities. program. Several are funded from extra- undergraduate Students are required to devote a des- mural sources. ignated number of hours to the intern- schools and colleges, the ship and are often required to complete Distance-Learning a research component or a formal paper University related to the internship. Internship course The University does not have a well devel- faculty coordinators and internship site oped centralized distance learning program. offers its supervisors collaborate in the evaluation Distance learning is offered through five students a of students. academic units at the University. Below is diverse array a brief description of the University’s dis- Undergraduate Honors Programs tance learning programs. of study abroad Undergraduate honors level study is opportunities. offered to students through the University’s Division of Pharmacy various honors programs. Undergraduate The Division of Pharmacy’s Non-traditional honors programs exist in the College of Doctor of Pharmacy (NTDP) program Arts and Sciences, the School of Business provides working pharmacy profession- and the John H. Johnson School of als on-line, self-paced courses that can Communication. be accessed via the Internet. Students are As entering freshman, students may required to visit the campus twice dur- qualify for admission to an honors pro- ing the program. This format has resulted gram based on high school cumulative in national and international enrollment. grade point average, SAT/ACT scores, NTDP curriculum is learner- and com- statements of interest and extracurricu- petency-based and incorporates commu- lar activities. Following their initial year nication, problem solving, and critical of enrollment, students who meet the thinking in all program phases (http:// required cumulative grade point aver- www.ntdp.howard.edu). All course con- age may be invited to join an honors tent is developed and delivered (via Web program. Board) by an outside vendor and Howard Honors program participants are required faculty serve as preceptors, meeting to take prescribed courses, participate in weekly with students on-line to discuss designated honors activities and complete clinical cases.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 123 Chapter 16

Clinical Laboratory Science School of Business The Department of Clinical Laboratory In 1997, the School of Business launched Science (CLS) offers an on-line B.S. program an on-line MBA program with the aid of a to certified Clinical Laboratory Technicians grant from e-College. However, the on-line and Medical Laboratory Technicians. The MBA program expired in 2003 because program prepares students for professional of low enrollment. Currently, the School certification examinations at the technolo- of Business offers a few distance learn- gist level. ing courses, mainly in the Department of Information Systems and Decision Howard University Continuing Education Sciences. Compared to the enrollment in (HUCE) courses taught on campus by the same Established to maximize educational instructors, enrollment in these courses access for professional and personal devel- has increased, while student attrition has opment, Howard University Continuing decreased. Education (HUCE) provided educational English Department opportunities for individuals and organizations in a variety of formats. The Since 2003, the Department of English University recently decided to discontinue has offered one or more sections of its Continuing Education program in its Freshman Composition, Technical Writing, present form, effective November 1, 2009. or Pre-Law Writing on-line. Some of these Decisions are being made regarding organi- on-line courses are very popular and often zational locations for its on-line offerings, oversubscribed, enrolling more than 30 grants and Language Institute. recently, students instead of the official maximum HUCE significantly increased its self- of 20. paced and instructor-led on-line offerings Opportunities for Enhanced Development and now offers eight certificate programs of Distance Education on-line in paralegal studies, technology, There are opportunities for the management, and small business. Most University to further develop its distance HUCE distance learning instruction is education offerings and infrastructure. designed and delivered by vendors, rather Overall, Howard’s DL offerings account than by Howard faculty (see Supporting both for less than 1% of the University’s Document 16.5). course offerings and 6% of enrollment (see Supporting Document 16.9). Howard currently offers only two on-line degrees (a Nontraditional Doctorate in Pharmacy and a new Bachelor’s of Science in Clinical Laboratory Science), along with on-line certificates in paralegal studies, management, small business, and technology. There is a robust market of students for on-line education, especially among African Americans, the primary service population for Howard. The market is very competitive and the University will have to take aggressive steps within the context of its academic renewal initiative and program restructuring to take advantage of distance learning opportunities. Most of the universities that graduate more African Americans with master’s degrees than Howard offer at least 7 master’s degrees on-line (see Supporting Document 16.6). Nova Southeastern University, the

124 ❘ Howard University Related Educational Activities

overall top producer of African-American Committee’s findings, the Department of doctoral degrees, offers 15 doctorates Communication Sciences and Disorders on-line http://www.diverseeducation.com/ began working with CETLA to acceler- Top100GraduateDegreeProducers2007. ate its development of an on-line graduate asp. Several HBCUs offer at least five program. on-line degrees, including the master’s and doctorate (see Supporting Document Distance Learning Infrastructure 16.7). Among Howard’s local peer insti- The administration of Distance Learning tutions, George Washington offers seven offerings is decentralized. The Distance on-line master’s degrees (see Supporting Education Policy designates the responsi- Document 16.8). bilities for technical support to the central Despite its limited offerings, Howard administration (Blackboard course man- can still attract more students seeking agement system and a help desk) via ISAS, higher education. Supporting Document with scheduling and oversight to the aca- 16.10 and 16.11 revealed two noteworthy demic departments. trends. First, the DL courses have attracted The central administration also provides a larger percentage of students over the age on-line library services, registration and a of 24, specifically those aged 45 or older. Distance Learning Orientation for faculty Second, its graduate and professional and students offered by CETLA, but there is Distance Learning students have lower insufficient administrative support for stu- Drop/Withdrawal/Failure (DWF) rates dent advising, tutoring and other services. than undergraduate Distance Learning Although CETLA offers Blackboard and students. Together, these trends suggest Distance Learning certification programs, that the University has the potential to most department chairpersons do not attract and retain more nontraditional stu- require faculty to demonstrate proficiency dents through Distance Learning. In Fall in the use of Distance Learning technolo- 2008, after learning about the Self-Study gies, course design, or management.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 125 Chapter 16

Summary, Findings and and target audiences. Create a strategy to Recommendations increase public relations, marketing, and advertising certificate programs. The University is engaged in several sup- 3. Establish a single point of contact to plemental activities that enhance the edu- provide administrative support for dis- cational experience of its students. Through tance education in order to (a) assist on- placement or diagnostic testing, Howard line students with services such as regis- identifies and places students who require tration, financial aid, and graduation, and additional academic support and reinforce- (b) assist departments proctoring exams ment in appropriate courses. The University and marketing their distance learning has increased revenue from its continuing programs. education and distance learning programs, 4. Offer incentives to enhance faculty but has missed some opportunities. Many proficiency in utilizing new strategies of for-credit programs could be offered and delivery systems in support of teaching and aggressively marketed. Additional adminis- learning. trative support should be provided to identify market needs in the area of continuing education and expeditiously develop curri- Supporting Documents cula or partnerships to meet those needs. 16.1 Enrollment in CAR, Fall 2005-Spring Faculty and departments should be encour- 2008 aged to develop more Distance Learning 16.2 Howard University Certificate courses, and additional support should be Programs by School/College provided for existing efforts in this area. 16.3 Credit Certificates Awarded at The following findings and recommen- Howard University, 1997-2007 dations for improvement emerged from the 16.4 Certificate Programs at Howard review of the University’s status relative to University and Peer Institutions MSCHE Standard 13: 16.5 Howard University’s Distance Education Vendors Findings 16.6 Top Producers of African-American 1. Student academic placement data are Master’s Degrees, Including On-line not adequately coordinated and used to Degrees support student matriculation. 16.7 Directory of HBCU DL Programs Certificate program offerings and market 16.8 Number and Types of DL Programs value are not adequately evaluated. at Howard and Its Peer Institutions 2. There is inadequate administrative 16.9 Howard University On-line Courses, support for distance education. August 2005-January 2008 3. There is an under utilization of new aca- 16.10 Comparison of DL vs. On-Site demic delivery and organizational arrange- Enrollment, AY 2003-2004 to AY ments and systems for teaching and learn- 2006-2007 ing, e.g., distance learning and learning 16.11 Howard University Student communities. Performance by Level for On-line Courses, January 2003- August 2007 Recommendations for Improvement 1. Establish a central placement office within Enrollment Management to administer placement tests, enforce the University’s placement policy, and track student progress. 2. Establish a process to determine what certificate programs should be offered that includes priorities from assessments of industry and federal sector training needs, occupational trends, and demographics of the University’s contiguous communities

126 ❘ Howard University Assessment of Student 17 Learning

Assessment of Student 17 Learning

MSCHE Standard 14 Assessment of student learning demonstrates that, at graduation, or other appropriate points, the institution’s students have knowledge, skills, and competencies consistent with institutional and appropriate higher education goals.

Introduction institutional, degree/program, and course Howard promotes successful student levels. At the institutional level, although learning as a critical institutional outcome. more general, expected student learning All university units, directly or indirectly, outcomes, are stated in various docu- provide experiences that support student ments, including the Strategic Framework learning. A comprehensive and coordinated for Action II (see Supporting Document approach to the assessment of learning 17.1), the Student Reference Manual outcomes reflects the complexity required (see Supporting Document 17.2), annual to capture its multifaceted nature. Student reports, and the strategic plans of vari- learning is a fundamental component of ous units. Expected student learning out- Howard’s mission. Thus, the clear articula- comes at the school/college and depart- tion of expected student learning outcomes ment/program levels are consistent with at all levels and there assessment is neces- the University’s mission and appropriate sary to achievement of the University’s mis- higher education and relevant disciplines. sion and goals. Student learning outcomes An example, articulating the relationship assessment at Howard is mission-driven among the University’s mission, college/ (Chapter 4), student-centered (Chapter 17), program instructional goals, and learn- broadly defined (Chapter 14), collaborative ing objectives, is found in the College of (Chapter 10), and results-oriented. Engineering, Architecture and Computer This Chapter summarizes the progress Science (see Supporting Document 17.3). that has been made in student learning out- Typically, expected student learning comes assessment since the 1999 reaffirma- outcomes are available on the school/col- tion of accreditation by the Commission on lege and department/program Web sites, Higher Education. In particular, this Chapter in assessment plans, annual reports, and provides updates on outcomes assessment other relevant documents (e.g., Self- related to university programs, support sys- Study reports for accrediting bodies). tems, plans, activities, and measures. Data Additionally, learning outcomes are com- emerging from the assessments of student municated to students through course learning (direct and indirect) document- descriptions and syllabi, lectures, pre- ing outcomes achievement are highlighted. sentations, assignments, Blackboard and Additionally, case examples from various other web postings, and Faculty-student units are reported and recommendations for interactive discussions. strengthening the collection and use of stu- The placement of explicit statements dent learning assessment data are offered. of expected student learning outcomes in course syllabi is uneven as evidenced by Statements of Expected examination of the course syllabi database, which is located on the CETLA Web site. Student Learning Some course syllabi list clear and measur- Statements of expected student learn- able expected learning outcomes, while ing outcomes for Howard’s students are others fall short in this area (see Supporting articulated at various levels, including the Documents 17.4, 17.5, 17.6, and 17.7).

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 127 Chapter 17

CETLA maintains an on-line syllabus Committee implemented a University-wide tutorial for faculty use and sponsors an professional development training course, Exemplary Syllabus Award program with “Writing an Effective Assessment Plan,” winning syllabi posted on CETLA’s Web for deans, department chairs, directors of site for all faculty to review as needed. graduate studies, and assessment represen- The University-wide Core Curriculum tatives from each school/college. During was initiated in 2001 as part of the SFA II this training, a campus-wide assessment to ensure that all Howard undergraduates plan template was discussed and distrib- acquire effective skills in language, mathe- uted for use by administrators, faculty, and matics, the use of computers, critical think- staff. Many units now have formal mecha- ing, and communication. Detailed informa- nisms for assessment processes. Illustrated tion on the General Education curriculum in Figure 17.1 is the School of Business and its expected learning outcomes is pro- student learning assessment framework, vided in Chapter 15. which shows the involvement of faculty, students, administrators and alumni in the Documented, Organized, School’s assessment process. and Sustained Assessment All units at the University submitted Process assessment plans and processes to the Office of the Provost. The Work Group’s After the 1999 Middle States site visit, examination of the units’ assessment plans the University established a system to bet- (Office of the Provost’s restricted Web ter ensure a documented, organized, and site https://www.howard.edu/assessment/ sustained assessment process for evaluat- restricted/plans/index.htm) revealed that ing student learning. In 2001, a Task Force the plans varied in their scope and depth. (of administrators, faculty, staff, and stu- The examination also found that the pro- dents) was appointed. In 2003, the Office of cess of assessment of student learning out- the Provost and the Outcomes Assessment comes is primarily decentralized, usually and Institutional Effectiveness (OAIE) under the purview of individual programs,

Structure for the Assessment of Student Learning

Office of the Dean Board of Visitors

Student Focus Associate Dean Groups Academic Exellence Commitee Department Chairpersons

Board of Commitee on Assessmant & Assurance of Learning

Department Core Departmental Adv. Boards Coordinators Curriculum Committees

SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Undergraduate Academic Planning Committee Graduate Programs Committee

MEMBERSHIP: Department ACCT Faculty Representative Faculty FINA Faculty Representative INFO Faculty Representative MGMT Faculty Representative MKTGF Faculty Representative

Figure 17.1: School of Business Structure for the Assessment of Student Learning Source: School of Business

128 ❘ Howard University Assessment of Student Learning departments, and schools/colleges. Further, utilized to facilitate placement in math- it was clear that some units, particularly ematics courses (e.g., Basic Mathematics, those focusing on preparation for profes- College Algebra). sional practice such as dentistry, divinity, The Freshman Writing Program collects engineering, architecture, law, medicine, post-test assessments (in English 002 and allied health sciences, nursing, pharmacy, English 003) to gauge student learning. social work, and teacher education, have The two-semester sequence of Freshman well-defined plans and procedures of gath- Composition is designed to fulfill, in part, ering data on student outcomes and using the component of the University-wide Core the results for improvement. This is driven Curriculum related to proficiency in lan- by university expectations and external guage and communication skills. The post- accreditation requirements. test results reported for AY 2005-2006 were The depth of assessment data collected is quite encouraging (Table 17.1) with the over- uneven across the non-professional units, whelming majority of students successfully such as College of Arts and Sciences, passing the department’s post-test assess- the largest academic unit on campus. ment in English 002 and English 003. Significant progress in outcomes assess- The Writing Across the Curriculum ment planning and implementation, how- (WAC) program, an interdepartmental, ever, has been made in these units over the interdisciplinary program, aims to assist past decade. students to “learn to write” and “write to learn” through promoting writing across the Student Achievement of Key disciplines. WAC courses seek to ensure that students master the professional con- Learning Outcomes ventions of a particular discipline, while Assessment of key student learning out- reinforcing skills learned in Freshman comes occurs at all levels of the University English. The courses foster active learning (vertical) and at different points of the within a discipline since writing encour- students experience (horizontal). Howard ages careful reading, observing, listening, collects and/or uses assessment data from and thinking. Coordinated by the English incoming students, in part, to assist in Department, the WAC Program originated placing students in appropriate courses in in the College of Arts and Sciences in 1991. their first year of matriculation. Likewise, However, since merging with the Center incoming undergraduate students’ verbal for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and and mathematical skills are assessed in Assessment (CETLA) in 2003, the WAC order to place them in appropriate courses program has served the entire university. of these types during their first year of The WAC program has both faculty and stu- matriculation. New entrants and trans- dent support, as revealed by the results of a fer students who have not received col- survey of nearly 2,000 students who com- lege credit for mathematics must take the pleted WAC courses at Howard University. Mathematics Placement Exam, which is Results indicated that more than 90% of the on-line. The results of this examination are students rated the courses highly, especially

Table 17.1: Department of English Post-test Assessments Results in English 002 and English 003: Fall 2005 and Spring 2006

Course and Semester %/Number Students Passed %/Number Students Failed

English 002 (Fall 2005) 93.9% (1,221) 6.1% (79)

English 003 (Fall 2005) 84.4% (135) 15.6% (25)

English 002 (Spring 2006) 95.0% (133) 5.0% (7)

English 003 (Spring 2006) 91.5% (985) 8.5% (62)

Source: Howard University Department of English

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 129 Chapter 17 as a tool for careful reading and critical Student learning outcomes also are thinking. directly measured in many undergradu- One sustained measure of student learning ate, graduate, and professional programs outcomes is grades, which are subsequently through use of standardized tests of dis- translated into cumulative grade point aver- ciplinary knowledge and tests of general age (GPA). While at one level, grades pro- educational performance. An example of vide a measure of how much students have a standardized test used to assess student learned, it must also be recognized that the outcomes at the undergraduate level is the fidelity of grades, as a valid learning out- ETS Major Field Test in Business, utilized comes assessment measure, depends upon by the School of Business. Business stu- the rigor of the examinations and assign- dents took this standardized examination ments that are utilized as evidence of stu- for the first time inA pril 2005. The Dean of dent learning and the systematic nature of the School reported that although student the grading system employed. performance at that time did not meet the Howard requires its undergraduate stu- School’s expectations, the results provided dents to earn and maintain a cumulative valuable perspectives on student achieve- minimum GPA of 2.0 for good academic ment. Students who had been exposed to a standing. However, some professional pro- greater number of comprehensive examina- grams (e.g., Divisions of Pharmacy and tions throughout their course of study (i.e., Allied Health Sciences) require a higher students with academic concentrations in overall or major GPA. Graduate students are Accounting and Finance) performed at a required to earn a minimum GPA of 3.0 for higher level on the examination. good standing. Table 17.2 illustrates Spring At the professional school level, the met- 2008 GPA by school/college, level, and gen- ric that has been the primary focus of the der. The results indicate that undergraduate School of Law’s strategic planning is first and graduate students’ cumulative GPA is time bar passage rate (72% for Howard law well above the minimum requirements. students vs. 75% first time national average).

Table 17.2: Average Cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) by School/College, Level, and Gender: Spring 2008 Undergraduate Grad/Prof Total SCHOOLS/COLLEGES M F T M F T M F T

Arts and Sciences 2.77 2.91 2.86 3.77 3.65 3.71 2.78 2.91 2.87

Business 2.79 3.02 2.92 3.60 3.59 3.59 2.88 3.06 2.98

Communications 2.76 2.99 2.93 3.17 3.22 3.20 2.78 3.00 2.94

Dentistry 2.59 3.05 3.02 2.85 2.97 2.91 2.84 2.98 2.92

Divinity N/A N/A N/A 3.25 3.40 3.33 3.25 3.40 3.33

Education 3.03 2.92 2.93 3.55 3.60 3.59 3.42 3.23 3.28

Engineering/Architecture/ 2.64 2.89 2.73 - - - 2.64 2.89 2.73 Computer Science

Graduate School N/A N/A N/A 3.55 3.66 3.62 3.55 3.66 3.62

Pharmacy/Nursing/Allied 2.93 2.93 2.93 3.11 3.23 3.19 3.02 3.02 3.02 Health Sciences

Social Work N/A N/A N/A 3.51 3.59 3.57 3.51 3.59 3.57

Note: Table excludes data for students enrolled in the College of Medicine and School of Law since their GPA is calculated on a different metric than students in other schools/colleges at the University.

Source: Howard University Department of Enrollment Management

130 ❘ Howard University Assessment of Student Learning

The College of Medicine requires students college and program/course is widespread to pass the United States Medical Licensing and the methodologies diverse. There exist Examination (USMLE) Step 1 (mastery of examples of assessing: (a) cognitive out- sciences basic to the practice of medicine) comes, or those involving the learning of as a prerequisite for promotion from the knowledge of the discipline, including key sophomore to junior class. Further, medical theories, concepts, and applications (e.g., students must pass USMLE Step 2 (clinical senior comprehensives); (b) behavioral knowledge and skills) in order to graduate. learning outcomes, or those involving the As a private research university, Howard is ability to demonstrate a specific set of iden- the leading producer of on-campus African- tified skills or abilities, usually within a spe- American Ph.D. recipients. Time-to-degree cific domain-related context (e.g., perfor- for doctoral level students is another set of mances in fine arts, observations of student student outcome data routinely collected and teaching, internship/practicum evaluations); monitored. The University has witnessed and (c) affective outcomes, or those involv- some positive results in this area. During ing the development of students’ attitudes, the three year period from 2005-2007, the beliefs, and values (e.g., student surveys). mean time-to-degree for completion of the Assessment of student learning outcomes at Ph.D. decreased from 7.8 years (in 2005) the school/college and program/course level to 5.5 years (in 2007). Since 1999, the is widespread and the methodologies uti- majority of completers in each cohort year lized are diverse. Despite variations across obtained a Ph.D. degree in five years across disciplines, there are some commonalities all disciplines. Other indicators of student among various programs in the types of outcomes include retention and graduation student assessment utilized (e.g., course- rates (see Chapter 11—Student Admission embedded assessments such as tests, student and Retention for a detailed discussion of portfolios, comprehensive exams, capstone retention and graduation rates). experiences) (see Supporting Document While assessment planning, timing, met- 17.8). rics for documenting student learning, In the senior year, all students in the and use of assessment results in program College of Arts and Sciences must pass a improvement operates at multiple levels, comprehensive examination or approved responsibility falls on individual programs, option in their major field as a requirement departments, schools/colleges. Assessment for graduation. Student outcomes on the of student learning outcomes at the school/ senior comprehensive examination for AY

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 131 Chapter 17

Table 17.3: Students’ Perceptions of the Learning Environment at Howard University: Spring 2008

“Good” & Selected Survey Question “Excellent”

Providing Opportunities to Achieve Learning Outcomes

Howard University is achieving its mission by “providing an educational experience of exceptional quality to students of high academic potential with particular emphasis on 89% the provision of educational opportunities to promising Black students”

Ability of Howard to meet the educational needs of its entering students 67%

Degree to which teaching/learning atmosphere at HU is conducive to students’ 64% intellectual development Degree to which academic programs in your School/College prepare students for life 70% in the 21st century

Availability of physical facilities for conducting state-of-the-art research 28%

Adequacy of physical facilities for optimal learning 29%

Communicating Expected Learning Outcomes

Adequacy of communication to you about course goals and objectives (e.g., course 76% syllabus, assignments), in general

Adequacy of communication to you about course grading policies 72%

Using Outcomes Results for Improvement

Extent to which student evaluations are used in your School or College to improve 36% instruction

N=651 Source: 2008 Self-Study Student Survey, Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation

Table 17.4: Placement Reports of Howard University Graduating Seniors: Class of 2007

Placement Type % Students Placed

Job placement reported at graduation (May 2007) 57%

Job placement by October 2007 67%

Pursuit of graduate and professional degrees (reported May 2007) 26%

Source: Howard University Office of Career Services

2007-2008 indicate that the majority of tudes, are other ways to assess student out- students pass the senior comprehensive comes particular to their attitudes and val- examination (see Supporting Document ues. Here, students are often asked to reflect 17.9). In Fall 2008 Senior Undergraduate upon their learning and other benefits as a Comprehensive Examinations sample, (direct or indirect) result of their educa- student outcomes show that the passing tional experiences at Howard University. rate was high in all disciplines except in In Spring 2008, the Office of Institutional Chemistry (see Supporting Document Assessment and Evaluation conducted a 17.10). survey of students, faculty, administrators, Exit interviews and surveys of students, and staff. The student survey participants as well as alumni perceptions and atti- were 651 Howard University students.

132 ❘ Howard University Assessment of Student Learning

Their responses to the items on the student n During the AY 2004-2005, the Office survey, except for questions about facilities of the Provost, in conjunction with and the utilization of student feedback, were the University’s Academic Excellence fairly to extremely favorable. Results from Program, awarded a grant to the chair- selected items are provided in Table 17.3. person of the School of Business’s The University’s Career Services Office Academic Planning Committee to collects student outcomes data on job place- evaluate the skill sets of seniors comments for graduating seniors. Based on data pleting the undergraduate program. collected through an on-site survey at grad- The Committee recommended to the uation, year-round on-line survey, and to a faculty that the School administer the limited extent employer reported data, the ETS Major Field Test in Business, a vast majority of Howard’s graduates either standardized examination designed to have job placement or graduate school measure students’ comprehension and acceptance upon graduation (Table 17.6). retention of fundamental business concepts. Students took the examination for the first time inA pril 2005. A focus Communication of Learning group was held whereby students pro- Assessment Information vided feedback on the content of the There is evidence at various levels that ETS Major Field Test, their individual student learning information is shared and, and group performance, as well as other in many instances, acted upon to make academic matters. As a result of student improvements aimed at enhancing teaching learning outcome data, as well as other and learning. Administrators disseminate student feedback, curricula enhance- student outcome data in documents such ments were implemented. The specific as Self-Study reports, annual reports, unit strategies to enhance student learn- strategic plans, and on program Web sites. ing in core courses vary across depart- In terms of the explicit and specific use of ments. For example, the Department student outcome data for making curricula of Marketing has revised both the improvements, the evidence was mixed. Principles of Marketing and Business While the documents reviewed often made Communication courses by substantially very general statements of using assessment increasing the number of writing assign- data for improvement; listed below are some ments and oral presentations required more illustrative specific examples: of students, whereas the Department of n Based upon longitudinal student out- Accounting has increased the number of comes data related to retention and problem-based exercises used in class graduation rates, an important strategic and instituted mandatory study ses- goal of the University is to increase the sions in Accounting I and Accounting graduation rate so that it exceeds the II courses. In the Spring 2008 semester, national graduation average. To accom- the Business Law faculty sponsored dis- plish this goal, undergraduate schools cussion groups comprised of students and colleges were charged with assess- from different sections in which they ing barriers to student retention and provided extended feedback on exami- graduation and developing interven- nation issues and discussed successful tion strategies. Increased attention was learning strategies and techniques. Since given to student placement and remedi- these changes, increases in student per- ation through the Center for Academic formance on the ETS Major Field Test Reinforcement. have been evident. n Based upon assessment data (i.e., bar n Based upon student outcomes from pass rates), a major effort is aimed at the PRAXIS I examination, in 2002, improving law students first time pass the School of Education created new rates, including the hiring of a visit- courses, taught by faculty in the Center ing professor to teach a bar prepara- of Academic Reinforcement (CAR) enti- tion course entitled Maryland Law in tled Basic Math I PRAXIS, CAR Verbal National Perspective. PRAXIS, and CAR Reading PRAXIS.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 133 Chapter 17

n In the College of Dentistry, assessments to participate in the second phase of the serve as an analytical and advisory grant extending to 2009. tool to all departments and programs. n Students on probation in the School of Assessments are proactively utilized Communication are required to attend to: (a) assess and provide guidance a minimum of four workshop sessions in the revision of the academic mis- designed to strengthen their study skills sion and goals of the College; (b) ana- and provide counseling services, as lyze academic programs and recom- needed. mend changes based on requirements n After CETLA assisted the Department by accreditation agencies and student of Clinical Laboratory Science in solic- and program director self-evaluations; iting students’ opinions about the cur- (c) evaluate student didactic, clinic, riculum, CETLA conducted a series of and laboratory learning experiences instructional design workshops for the and influence positive change; and (d) entire Clinical Laboratory Science fac- examine instructional/teaching methods ulty to address the issues that emerged and practices and recommend changes. in the curriculum survey. Data obtained from assessment efforts n CETLA advised the School of Pharmacy have been used in the development of about adopting the IDEA Center’s probability-based models to measure course evaluation instruments, which the effectiveness of operations in the it subsequently did. After reviewing College. the IDEA survey results, the School of n Given national and university stu- Pharmacy requested CETLA to develop dent outcomes data related to time-to- a training agenda that would strengthen degree for completion of the Ph.D., the teaching in the areas where the IDEA Graduate School has undertaken con- surveys revealed a need for improve- certed efforts aimed at improvements ment. As requested, CETLA tailored in this area. In 2005, the Graduate instructional design and technology School was selected to join 21 major workshops to the faculty’s needs. In U.S. and Canadian research universities response, the faculty organizer wrote, to participate in a $2.6 million three- “Overall, thank you very much for two year Ph.D. Completion Project. In May successful workshops for our faculty. We 2007, the Council of Graduate Schools now have another piece of evidence to announced that Howard was continuing demonstrate application of our assessment data. I will follow up with faculty at the end of the Spring semester to determine how many have incorporated some of these principles.” Professional Development Opportunities Information obtained from interviews with the Provost and Chief Academic Officer (CAO) and the Chair of the Board of Trustees’ Academic Excellence Committee indicated that senior-level University officials recognize the importance of student learning assessment data and the need for such data to be part of the total structure for promoting institutional effectiveness. Since its 1999 Middle States reaffirmation, Howard University has supported a number of units and activities for faculty members to improve their knowledge and

134 ❘ Howard University Assessment of Student Learning skills related to assessing student learning, sponsored a two day course on “Outcomes to improve their curricula, and improve their Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness.” teaching. Some activities previously cited The workshop, which was offered four times, in this report include: development and was taught by a School of Education faculty maintenance of an Outcomes Assessment member within the School of Education Web site, under the Office of the Provost experienced in outcomes assessment. This and CAO, which includes a variety of links workshop was discontinued after the imple- to general resources, handbooks, guides, mentation of outcomes assessment work- and review articles; and implementation shops in CETLA. of a University-wide professional development training program in 2003 on “Writing Summary, Findings and an Effective Assessment Plan” designed for deans, department chairs, directors of grad- Recommendations uate studies, and assessment representatives Howard has made substantial improve- from each school/college. ments in the assessment of student out- One of the most widespread and sustained comes and the use of data for improvement. campus-wide strategies to systematically It is evident that assessment of key student assist departments and faculty in improving learning outcomes occurs at all levels of student learning and implementing and utiliz- the University and at different points of the ing student learning assessment is through the student’s experience. Assessment of student work of the Center for Excellence in Teaching, learning outcomes is largely decentralized, Learning, and Assessment (CETLA). CETLA mostly under the purview of individual pro- strives to empower the faculty to teach more grams, departments, and schools/colleges. effectively, especially with technology, and to Despite variations across disciplines, some utilize more effective techniques for evalu- commonalities exist among various pro- ating their teaching. Faculty participation in grams in the types of student assessments CETLA’s workshops has been strong, sug- that are utilized. Some units, particularly gesting faculty support of the student learn- those focusing on preparation for profes- ing assessment process and their desire to sional practice, have well-defined plans and strengthen their skills in the area. Faculty procedures of gathering data on student out- evaluations of these teaching and learning comes and using the results for improvement. workshops have been favorable. This is driven by university expectations and The recently created Office ofI nstitutional the external accreditation requirements for Assessment and Evaluation (OIAE) is pro- these professions. viding added support to faculty, staff, and Howard collects and uses assessment data students regarding student outcomes assess- of incoming students, in part, to assist in ment. The OIAE is expected to provide pro- placing students in appropriate courses in grams and services that: (a) elicit faculty, their first year. There is evidence at various staff, and student involvement in the devel- levels that student learning information is opment of assessment techniques, strate- shared and acted upon to make improvements gies, methods and tools to enhance learning, aimed at enhancing teaching and learning. teaching and scholarly productivity; (b) pro- Administrators disseminate student out- vide information that is used to improve pro- come data in documents such as Self-Study gram quality, efficiency and effectiveness; reports, annual reports, unit strategic plans and (c) provide feedback to units to enhance and program Web sites. In addition, Howard effectiveness of the University’s programs has supported workshops, web resources, and services. and mini-grants for faculty to improve their The University’s Professional Development knowledge and skills related to assessing stu- and Leadership Academy also provides pro- dent learning, to improve their curricula and fessional development for faculty, staff, to improve their teaching. and administrators around a variety of Based upon the review of assessment of issues, including assessing student learn- student learning outcomes at the University ing outcomes. In Fall 2000, the Professional and within various schools/colleges and Development and Leadership Academy departments/programs, the collection and use

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 135 Chapter 17 of student assessment data at the University, 5. Create a more deliberate link between while growing, can be strengthened. The student learning outcomes assessment data following findings and recommendations and institutional planning and communi- for improvement emerged from the review cate this in such key documents as strategic of the University’s status relative to MSCHE plans and annual reports. Standard 14: Findings Supporting Documents 1. Despite many improvements in 17.1 Strategic Framework for Action II assessing student learning outcomes, the 17.2 Howard University Fall 2009 Student University has not comprehensively imple- Reference Manual mented a university-wide strategy for 17.3 College of Engineering, Architecture assessing undergraduate student learning and Computer Science (EACS) in each of its schools and colleges. Mission, Goals, Objectives, and 2. There is insufficient institutional bud- Expected Student Outcomes in getary and personnel support to ensure a Relation to University’s Mission continuous, systematic, and coordinated 17.4 Example of a Course Syllabus from process for conducting student outcomes the Humanities assessments across all units within the 17.5 Example of a Course Syllabus from University. the Natural Sciences 3. There is unevenness in the databases 17.6 Example of a Course Syllabus from related to student learning outcomes. the Social Sciences 4. There is insufficient linkage between 17.7 Example of a Course Syllabus from student outcomes assessment data and the Health Sciences institutional planning. 17.8 Assessment Measures Utilized in the University’s Academic Programs Recommendations for Improvement 17.9 Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 1. Appoint a task force, consisting of Sample of Results for the Senior faculty, students, administrators, and staff Comprehensive Examinations for charged with drafting a coherent set of Departments in the College of Arts University-wide learning outcomes that and Sciences - Pass/Fail Scores all undergraduate students are expected to 17.10 Fall 2008 Sample of Results demonstrate by the time they graduate from for the Senior Undergraduate Howard University and a methodology for Comprehensive Examinations for their assessment. Departments in the College of Arts 2. Ensure more systematic and coor- and Sciences dinated collecting, reporting, and usage of student learning outcomes assessment data related to general education and the implementation of university-wide Core Competencies beyond individual course- level assessments. 3. Maintain ongoing institutional budgetary and human support and leadership to ensure a continuous, systematic, and coordinated process for conducting student learning outcomes assessment across all undergraduate schools/colleges. 4. Ensure that all academic units maintain an up-to-date database related to student learning outcomes and that this be subsequently collected, housed, and maintained centrally in the Office of Institutional Assessment and Evaluation.

136 ❘ Howard University 18 Research

18 Research

Introduction Extramural Research In 1988, the Carnegie Foundation for the The University recognizes the importance Advancement of Teaching in its Classification of extramural research and has given it prior- of Institutions of Higher Education desig- ity in the recently revised mission statement. nated Howard University for the first time as a President Ribeau has articulated his goals of Research I University. With this designation, restructuring the University to facilitate addi- Howard joined 88 other universities, only 25 tional graduate and professional education and of which were private like Howard University. sponsored research. Achieving the extramural In 1988, Howard was the only Historically research goals will not be done at the expense Black College/University (HBCU) with that of general research among faculty and gradu- designation. ate and undergraduate students. In 2000, when Carnegie revised its rank- During the past decade, faculty submitted ing system, Howard was classified as a an average of 425 extramural research pro- Doctoral/Research Extensive University, its posals annually. The average number of pro- highest classification for research universi- posal that were funded annually during the ties. The classification was based upon the past decade was 278. Approximately 65% University’s level of extramural research of the proposals submitted were funded. The funding, the level of its Ph.D. production, yearly proposal and award statistics are pre- and the overall size and range of its under- sented in Figure 18.1. graduate and graduate instructional pro- The number of proposals submitted peaked grams. Howard was 1 of 151 universities at 569 in 2003 and declined until 2008 when classified in this category, and again was the there was an increase. Awards have also only HBCU to be so classified. decreased steadily since a high of 361 in 2004. In 2005, the Carnegie Foundation for the The most recent FY 2008 figures reflect the Advancement of Teaching substantially fewest number of awards received over the past revised its classifications. Howard is now 10 years attributable perhaps partially to the classified as aH igh Research Activity (RU/H) decline in Federal funding. Figure 18.2 shows university, the second tier classification, and the total amount of funds received during the joins 103 other private and public universi- period between FY 2003 and FY 2008. ties so designated. Universities with this clas- As shown in Table 18.1, sponsored activ- sification must award at least 20 doctorates ity at Howard is concentrated in six schools/ annually and perform at the required level in colleges. In percentage terms, over a six- terms of extramural research activity. year period (FY 2003-2008), the largest This chapter discusses the following issues total funds awarded was in the College of related to research at Howard University: Medicine. extramural and intramural research, under- The University’s largest supporter of graduate and graduate research, research extramural research is the Federal govern- infrastructure and facilities, institutional sup- ment, which accounts for approximately port for research and publications. 90% of the total amount of extramural funds During the last decade, Howard University received from FY 2003-2008. As Table 18.2 has given focused attention to its research shows, Federal research dollars declined agenda and made a number of organiza- every year since 2004, after reaching a peak tional, personnel and facilities adjustments of $68,162,522. to enhance its research profile. Many chal- Historically, the largest provider of Federal lenges remain as faculty continues to express funding to the University has been the strongly the need for more investments in the National Institutes of Health (NIH), followed University’s research enterprise. by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 137 Chapter 18

Number of Proposals Submitted and Awarded, FY 1999-2008 600

569 467 461 470 508 487 410 463 392 400 382 298 361 343 254 235 234 310 317 242 200 181

0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Number of Proposals Number of Awards Figure 18.1: Number of Proposals Submitted and Awarded, FY 1999-2008 Source: Office of Sponsored Program/Research Administration

Table 18.1: Total Funds Awarded by School/College for FY 2003-2008

Total % of School/College/Other FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY03-08 Total

Medicine $27,901,166 $34,026,445 $25,094,310 $21,978,194 $27,615,260 $22,660,471 $159,275,846 43%

Graduate School 9,644,930 12,170,157 8,194,911 6,939,237 7,383,712 4,709,474 49,042,421 13%

Engineering , Architecture, & 8,792,460 8,116,667 9,552,753 6,898,578 4,600,106 4,535,251 42,495,815 12% Computer Science

Arts & Sciences 3,238,490 3,409,845 2,650,418 8,482,740 2,593,897 $3,548,468 23,923,858 7%

Education 4,055,006 8,829,656 4,113,285 2,209,765 2,471,543 2,240,077 23,919,332 6%

Pharmacy, Nursing, & 5,099,511 3,092,398 4,395,822 4,038,701 $1,819,906 2,107,136 20,553,474 6% Allied Health

Other (WHUT-TV, Ralph Bunche International 1,245,757 1,817,039 4,330,878 1,156,555 4,261,230 557,750 13,369,209 4% Affairs Center, etc)

Office of the Provost 2,350,001 0 4,465,224 1,652,128 1,830,500 1,519,493 11,817,346 3%

Business 856,019 3,843,528 543,200 511,995 50,000 1,155,100 6,959,842 2%

Dentistry 247,434 79,449 222,169 2,447,910 295,910 1,931,826 5,224,698 1%

Law 5,000 1,129,713 1,749,954 0 149,474 3,034,141 1%

Continuing Education 15,000 40,000 826,292 677,375 591,924 390,000 2,540,591 1%

Social Work 966,975 358,336 25,000 114,142 277,200 96,350 1,838,003 1%

Communications 718,191 245,279 20,000 161,797 551,509 115,030 1,811,806 <1%

Office of the VP for 692,433 0 0 0 0 125,000 817,433 <1% Health Sciences

Divinity 0 0 0 500,000 0 0 500,000 <1%

Total $65,823,373 76,033,799 $65,563,975 $59,519,071 $54,342,697 $45,840,900 $367,123,815 100%

Source: Office of Sponsored Programs/Research Administration

138 ❘ Howard University Research

Table 18.2: Total Funds Awarded by Sponsor Type for FY 2003-2008 Corporate / Total Fiscal Year Federal Foundation State/Local Other Private Amount

FY 2003 $61,123,126 $2,278,880 $1,235,253 $1,087,592 $98,522 $65,823,373

FY 2004 68,162,522 1,141,942 4,543,945 616,803 1,568,587 76,033,799

FY 2005 59,755,819 3,063,938 659,190 1,334,679 750,349 65,563,975

FY 2006 52,196,669 1,282,628 3,431,582 598,058 2,010,134 59,519,071

FY 2007 48,708,787 636,173 1,345,388 1,142,731 2,509,618 54,342,697

FY 2008 40,725,744 2,514,131 1,517,254 874,096 209,675 45,840,900

Total FY 03-08 $330,672,667 $10,917,692 $12,732,612 $5,653,959 $7,146,885 $367,123,815

% of Total Funds 90% 3% 3% 2% 2% 100%

Source: Office of Sponsored Programs/Research Administration

Total Amounts of Funds Received During FY 2003-2009

Millions 40 76.0 65.8 65.6 59.5 54.3 45.8 44.4 20

0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009*

Figure 18.2: Total Amounts of Funds Received During FY 2003-2009 Source: Office of Sponsored Programs/Research Administration *Funds received through April 30, 2009

The slight decreases in NIH and NSF fund- from year-to-year. The Office of the Provost ing in FY 2008 are noteworthy, especially receives $1.56 million to assist with four intra- when contrasted with the growth in funding mural programs. Of the funds awarded by the observed in earlier years during the decade Office of theP rovost, $150,000 per year is for (Figure 18.3). A continuation of this decrease the University-Sponsored Faculty Research over time will prove especially challenging Program in the Social Sciences, Humanities, for the University as it seeks to strengthen its and Education; $400,000 is earmarked for the research productivity and enhance its reputa- Mordecai Wyatt Johnson Awards, $400,000 tion as a research university. For 2009, the is designated for the New Faculty Research trend is distinctly upward in both the number Start-up Fund, and $606,000 is allotted for of proposals and the dollars. the Fund for Academic Excellence Grants. The Health Sciences support for intramu- Intramural Research ral research is provided to each of the Health The University administers seven intramu- Sciences colleges based upon specific requests ral grant programs through the Offices of the by the Dean. For AY 2008-2009, the funds Provost and Senior Vice President for Health awarded were as follows: Medicine - $2,128,145; Sciences. The total amount of funds available Dentistry—$127,500; Pharmacy, Nursing and for these intramural research programs varies Allied Health Sciences—$162,393.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 139 Chapter 18

Howard University Total Award Amount from NIH' and NSF², FY 1999-2008

$50 40 40 $40 34 35 28 36 34 $30 25 23 22 22 24 27 24 28 Millions $20 18 16 17 $10

$0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

NIH (total) NSF (Federal Financed)

Figure 18.3: Total Award Amount from NIH' and NSF², FY 1999-2008 Source: ¹National Institutes of Health-awards include funds for fellowships, training grants, research grants, and research and development contracts. ²National Science Foundation-awards include funds for research support, education and human resources, and major research equipment.

Over the past five years, the Provost and lack of start-up and other intramural research the Senior Vice President for Health Sciences funding is a serious impediment and disincen- intensified their efforts to assist departments tive for faculty research productivity. and schools in providing start-up funds for new faculty, particularly in the STEM areas. Undergraduate Research These two-year-long start-up packages range Undergraduate research is a valuable and from $25-50,000. integral component of the undergraduate aca- The University’s pool of discretionary funds demic experience at Howard. Undergraduate available for faculty start-ups, particularly in students in several departments are heavily the STEM areas, pales in comparison to the involved in research activities even though level typically provided at peer and aspira- most of these activities are not extramurally tional research universities. The relatively funded. Some support for undergraduate low level of faculty start-up funds is a major research is funded from Federal grants, and source of discord among new faculty mem- some departments and schools designate bers, who generally need access to special- small allocations for undergraduate research. ized and expensive facilities and equipment. In some cases, faculty members reportedly Continuing faculty who are between research support undergraduate research with their grants or who are in need of funds to jump personal funds. Unfunded student research start new research initiatives have few inter- activities are located prominently in humani- nal sources of support, aside from the Fund ties, social sciences, and fine arts programs in for Academic Excellence, the Mordecai Wyatt the College of Arts and Sciences, though they Johnson Research Fund (typically for interdis- are common throughout the other schools ciplinary research efforts) and the University- and colleges. Sponsored Faculty Research Program in the The recently established Program in Social Sciences, Humanities, and Education. Undergraduate Research (PUR) is a valu- Each of these initiatives offers a limited number able component of the undergraduate aca- of small awards ranging from $ 5,000-$50,000 demic experience at Howard. Sponsored by annually, but because of limited resources only the Office of theP rovost, this initiative was a small number of faculty can be supported established in the Fall of 2005 and recog- annually. During the past two to three years, nizes not only the overall benefit of engag- the Mordecai Wyatt Johnson Awards program ing the entire campus in higher order think- has been dormant and the funds have been ing activities, but also has the advantage of unofficially transferred into the New Faculty preparing highly competitive undergradu- Research Start-up Fund, in order to provide ate students to become successful graduate greater research incentives for new hires. The students.

140 ❘ Howard University Research

The quintessential activity of the Office for n NSF-Undergraduate Mentoring in Undergraduate Research is the annual under- Environmental Biology provides stipends graduate research symposium, Posters on the and research support to early undergradu- Hilltop. Modest awards are distributed for ate biology majors to encourage more most outstanding presentations. The Office participation in careers in environmental of Undergraduate Research, through a few biology. external funding mechanisms, also provides n NSF-Howard University Undergraduate travel awards to national and regional confer- Social, Behavioral and Economic ences for Howard University undergraduates Sciences (SBES) Awards promotes and who have participated in original research. expands experiential learning opportuni- Other activities provided by this Office ties for undergraduate students in these include workshops on developing PowerPoint disciplines at Howard and prepares under- poster presentations and providing large for- graduate students for successful applica- mat poster printing services—at no cost to tion and admission into Ph.D. programs in the student. the SBES disciplines. In addition to Posters on the Hilltop, n The MARC-HURT behavioral program in the College of Arts and Sciences is host- psychology has received continuous NIH ing for the fourth year the Symposium on funding for 26 years and represents a most Undergraduate Research. This two-day event distinguished undergraduate research pro- gives undergraduate students in the College’s gram. four Divisions—Fine Arts, Humanities, n The Howard Hughes Medical Research Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences – an Scholars program is in its second year and opportunity to present their research findings focuses on the early introduction of fresh- through poster and oral presentations. man and sophomore students to research It is noteworthy to mention that among and training at off-campus research- the Howard undergraduate students who intensive universities during the summer. participated in the National Conference on A senior in the Howard Hughes program Undergraduate Research (NCUR), 28 and was one of five recipients nationwide of 29 of the participating students’ essays were the prestigious Gilliam Fellowship for accepted for publication, respectively, in the Advanced Study ($250,000 over 4years) faculty refereed NCUR Journal for 2008 to pursue graduate study at any university and 2009, respectively. The University has in the world—a first for Howard. been the most published academic institu- n The former MBRS, now Support for tion in the journal for two years in a row (see Continuous Research and Excellence Supporting Document 18.1). The University (SCORE), program has historically pro- currently houses several funded extramu- vided more research training for under- ral undergraduate programs, which provide graduates than any other program at the tuition and stipends to undergraduate stu- University. dents. Highlighted below are some of the n The former Fogarty Minority International undergraduate research programs: Research Program (MIRT), now Minority n NSF-Howard University Science, Health International Research Training Engineering and Mathematics Program Program in Health Disparities (MHIRT), (HUSEM) is a multidisciplinary pro- has provided global research opportunities gram involving nine departments in the studying tropical and infectious diseases College of Engineering, Architecture, and for students from Howard and universities Computer Sciences and the College of throughout the world. Arts and Sciences. Additionally, several undergraduate sum- n NSF-Washington/Baltimore/Hampton mer programs are in existence, which pre- Roads Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority pare students for graduate school, namely: Participation (LS-AMP) focuses on seek- n McNair Program offers undergraduate ing to increase the number of underrep- students an opportunity to participate in a resented minorities who choose careers 6-week summer research program. in science, technology, engineering, and n The Howard University Amgen Scholars mathematics fields. Program (HUSAP) offers students

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 141 Chapter 18

enrolled in four-year colleges and uni- University encourages global research experi- versities throughout the United States, ences that enhance the cultural and academic Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, the growth of students. In addition, Howard pro- chance to participate in a science and bio- motes the early introduction of students to technology summer program at Howard research and the integration of research into University. interdisciplinary programs. n Howard University NOAA Center for In addition to the laboratory and major Atmospheric Sciences (NCAS) offers an research centers throughout the University, 8-week summer research internships to graduate and professional students are outstanding students who are motivated involved in research as an integral part of for future graduate study in the physical their academic experience. Through several sciences, mathematics, or engineering. federally funded training programs, a number n Leadership Alliance, an academic consor- of graduate students are actively engaged in tium of 33 institutions of higher learning research in many fields. One such program including leading research universities is the Alliance for Graduate Education and and minority serving institutions, develops the Professoriate (AGEP) in which Howard underrepresented students into outstanding has joined with the University of Texas–El leaders and role models in academia, busi- Paso (UTEP) to form a unique partnership ness and the public sector, with an empha- committed to increasing underrepresented, sis on providing them with an intensive minority doctoral students in STEM fields. summer research experience as a mecha- With a $2.5 million grant from the National nism to prepare them for future graduate Science Foundation, the partnership rep- and professional school enrollment. resents the first major endeavor in gradu- An initial Strengths, Weaknesses, Oppor- ate education to join a Research-Extensive tunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis, exam- Historically Black College and University ining the feasibility of a campus-wide PUR, (HBCU) with a Research-Intensive Hispanic revealed the following strengths: access to a Serving Institution (HSI) to address the cadre of talented, underrepresented minor- severe underrepresentation of African- ity students; a university-wide commitment Americans and Hispanics in STEM doctoral to research excellence; a plethora of exter- education. The combined strengths of the nally-funded training programs that featured two institutions are a particular advantage undergraduate research; and an administra- of the partnership. This alliance expands tive commitment to developing an all-inclu- the range of doctoral disciplines offered sive program in undergraduate research for by Howard’s AGEP program to include the the campus. Weaknesses of particular concern STEM disciplines of computer engineering, included a high mentee to mentor ratio and a environmental science and engineering, and paucity of financial and technical support and geological sciences offered at UTEP. incentives for faculty mentors. The Howard University Atmospheric Sciences Cooperative Science Center (CSC) Graduate Research was established to study some of the critical In 2008, Howard celebrated its 50th year of national and global environmental issues. The doctoral production. Through its 29 Ph.D. pro- University was one of four Minority Serving grams, Howard continues to be the largest on- Institutions (MSIs) awarded a combined campus producer of African-American Ph.D. grant of $15 million by the U.S. Department recipients in the United States. The University of Commerce in 2001. In 2006, Howard was has a stated goal of developing a culture of awarded an additional $12.5 million by the research that has its underpinning in (a) one- U.S. Department of Commerce to continue on-one mentoring by committed and funded its research and training efforts. The NOAA faculty, (b) partnerships with research inten- Center for Atmospheric Sciences (NCAS) sive universities nationwide and institutions consortium consists of: Jackson State in the Washington metropolitan area, and (c) University, the University of Texas at El Paso, opportunities to participate in research work- the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, the shops and interact with distinguished seminar University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, speakers from universities and industry. The and the State University of New York at

142 ❘ Howard University Research

Albany. Atmospheric Sciences is a relatively sibility for research overall. The creation of new and growing program. Enrollment in the this position provides the University with a Ph.D. program has increased from 2 in 1999 single cabinet-level executive having full to 20 in 2009; Master’s level enrollment has accountability for the University’s research decreased since 2000, reflecting an emphasis administrative infrastructure. The establish- on the Ph.D. program. Student/faculty ratios ment of this cabinet-level position represents approach 3.5:1. Since the inception of the the University’s commitment to promot- program, 10 students have graduated from ing and fostering research activities for the the program. The seven-year graduation rate University community while maintaining for Ph.D. students of approximately 50% is compliance with Federal, state, local, and typical for the department. Currently, the pro- University regulations governing research. gram has 20 graduate students who are fully In the structure approved by President funded through extramural funds. Swygert in 2006, the VPRC has two direct Despite recent increases, stipend levels for reports—Associate Vice President for graduate students at Howard remain non- Research Compliance and Associate Vice competitive. While Johns Hopkins University, President for Sponsored Programs. The Harvard University, and the University of Associate Vice President for Research Maryland, College Park, for example, pro- Compliance oversees the new Research vide tuition and graduate stipend support Compliance Office, consisting of admin- from $25,000−$35,000, Howard provides istrative support for institutional commit- graduate stipends of $16,000−$18,000, with tees such as the Institutional Review Board a limited number of stipend/tuition pack- (IRB), the Institutional Biosafety Committee ages in the $30,000-$35,000 range. The (IBC), and the Institutional Animal Care and low stipend level places serious hardships Use Committee (IACUC). The Associate on graduate students living in the high cost Vice President for Sponsored Programs Washington metropolitan area. oversees the following units: (1) Research Administration, responsible for all extra- Research Infrastructure mural pre-award and non-financial post- award functions; (2) Post Award Services, Reorganization of Research responsible for facilitating travel transac- Administration tions, human resources, and purchasing in During the last decade, research adminis- relation to research and sponsored programs; tration at the University has undergone two and (3) Research Education and Technical major restructurings. In 2003, the University Assistance, a new office at Howard, which reorganized the responsibilities for research provides training and technical expertise to administration and created the Office of the the research community (abolished June 30, Vice Provost for Research. Graduate School 2009). It is important to note that this new Dean Orlando L. Taylor, Ph.D. was appointed structure approved by the President, called as the Vice Provost for Research to provide for Grants and Contracts Accounting (a oversight and coordinate all aspects of uni- fourth department), which was to encompass versity research policies, priorities, and Restricted Fund Accounting—to be estab- administration. These responsibilities resided lished not under the Office of Sponsored under this Office until 2006 when the second Programs, but to remain under the Office of restructuring commenced. the Controller. The University is considering Responding to the National Science the merits of moving the functions of Grants Foundation (NSF) audit report of 2006, the and Contracts Accounting to Sponsored University improved internal controls over Programs. management of NSF funds. In June 2006, The streamlining of the functions was the University’s Board of Trustees approved intended to move the University forward in a new cabinet level position of Vice President its research enterprise and to realize greater for Research and Compliance (VPRC) and a efficiencies. While this was an important new organizational structure for extramural action, there are still many details in the research administration. The VPRC works structure below the VPRC position that need with the Provost, who retains primary respon- to be more fully developed to create the

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 143 Chapter 18 robust infrastructure needed to support the The Special Neurosciences Research University’s current and projected volume of Program (SNRP) (Physiology Department) research activity. and the Howard Hughes Collaborative Core In early 2006, former President Swygert Lab (Biology) represent the only two man- appointed Don Coleman, Ph.D. as the Interim aged Collaborative Core Units (CCUs). These Vice President for Research and Compliance. facilities provide instrumentation not available The University engaged a consulting firm to in stand-alone research labs and in these high assist with the implementation of the new tech equipment is manned and managed by organizational model for research. The con- specially trained technicians. CCUs enhance sultant team also assisted with the develop- collaboration between faculty and students, ment and implementation of new policies and allow quality control of research output, and procedures for sponsored programs. From provide hands-on training activities for under- Dr. Coleman’s effective appointment date graduate and graduate students. Also CCUs through the end of Fiscal Year 2006–2007, are expensive and costs must be met jointly Dr. Coleman led implementation of the new by faculty extramural research grants and research and compliance structure and vet- the University’s own funds. Several millions ted 37 new policies to govern all aspects of were spent in 2005−2007 to upgrade instruc- extramural research administration, which tional laboratories in the biology, chemistry, are available at http://ovprc.howard.edu/. Two and physics departments. Upgrades included off-campus retreats involving over 500 faculty the replacement of lab tables and benches, and staff were conducted during the summer and installation of a sprinkler system, and a of 2006 to lay a comprehensive foundation for self-controlled heating/AC system. The reno- compliance. Speakers at the retreats covered vated facilities are adequate for instructional the University’s strategic intent and addressed purposes, but are largely inadequate for state- all phases in the “life cycle” of a sponsored of-the-art STEM research. While science award. Dr. Coleman’s tenure ended after the research laboratories and facilities generally appointment of Oliver G. McGee, Ph.D. as are in need of major renovation or replace- the University’s first permanentV ice President ment, the situation is equally severe in build- for Research and Compliance on July 1, ings housing the arts, humanities, and social 2007. Dr. McGee resigned his position after sciences. Many of the buildings housing the serving for one academic year, and Florence STEM disciplines are more than 60 years old B. Bonner, Ph.D. Associate Vice President and are not suitable for today’s cutting-edge for Compliance, was appointed Acting Vice research. High-tech instrumentation is not on President for Research and Compliance in par with leading research universities. The August 2008. University is planning its capital budget to begin to address these kinds of infrastructure Facilities to Support issues. Research Research Centers and Institutes Research infrastructural excellence is A wide array of centers and institutes engage apparent at several University sites. Excep- faculty and students across the University in tional standards are found in the Materials research. Additionally, academic departments Science Research Center of Excellence ($1 sponsor numerous other research labs and million per year), the CREST Nanotechnol- programs to advance the University’s research ogy labs ($1 million per year), and the High mission. Table 18.3 provides examples of some Energy Electrical Engineering labs ($500,000 of the research centers currently in operation. per year) in the College of Engineering, Archi- tecture, and Computer Science. Underpinning Institutional Support for these labs is a constant source of extramural Research and intramural funding. In these facilities Office of Sponsored Programs “clean” labs, high-tech instrumentation and service maintenance contracts support state- The Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP), of-the-art research infrastructure comparable under the auspices of the Office of the Vice to any RU/H university nationally. President for Research and Compliance,

144 ❘ Howard University Research encompasses the departments of Research Administration (RA), Research Education & Technical Assistance (RETA), and the Post Award Services Unit (PASU). The Research Education & Technical Assistance department was abolished in June of 2009. OSP provides both pre- and post-award non-financial administrative as well as training services for sponsored research to the University community. Research Administration It is recognized that research projects and other sponsored programs are crucial for the success of academic disciplines while through research the University extends the frontiers of knowledge in all disciplines. Additionally, tification sessions was provided in face-to-face extramural funding is a potential source of format, while in Spring 2008 the certification significant revenue for the University. The program was made available both in classroom Office of Sponsored Programs/Research format and via Blackboard. The classroom ses- Administration (OSP-RA) provides essen- sions were discontinued in August 2008 and tial support that enables the University and training remained available through Blackboard its individual researchers to manage the con- until December 2008. Table 18.4 presents the duct of research at the University. The main total number of faculty and staff who partici- purpose of OSP-RA is to assist faculty in pated in seminars, workshops, and the certifica- obtaining extramural funds, provide them tion program conducted by OSP/RETA during administrative assistance in the pre-award the period January 2007-August 2008. and post-award stages of the grant process. To disseminate information to the research community regarding funding opportunities, Research Education and Technical certification classes, workshops, and semi- Assistance nars, the following media proved successful: The Office of Research Education and OSP/RETA list-serv, HU Communications, Technical Assistance (RETA) established Interdepartmental/Campus mail, and email mes- in October 2006, under the auspices of the sages from the Provost‘s office. Office of Sponsored Programs, was charged with assessing and addressing the education Post Award Services Unit and information needs of central office staff, Post Award Services is responsible for moni- Principal Investigators, Project Directors, toring post-award expenditures, sub-recipient departmental personnel, and others in the monitoring, and facilitating Human Resource University’s research community who are transactions as they relate to sponsored awards. involved with sponsored programs activities. This office was abolished June 30, 2009, and Research Compliance Office the responsibilities were restructured into the The Research Compliance Office (RCO), Research Compliance Office. a division of the Office of the Vice President The Office of Sponsored Programs/RETA for Research and Compliance is responsible developed and implemented the Sponsored for maintaining regulatory compliance for the Research Internal Certification program, University. The RCO ensures compliance with entitled Research Education and Compliance sponsored research and training programs. This Training (REACT), which covered the life- includes compliance with the A-21 and A-133 cycle of an award; created education resources circulars, as well as internal and external audits and materials for both internal and external of sponsored research. The following regulatory awards; and conducted education sessions, committees operate under RCO: seminars, and workshops for the research n The Institutional Review Board (IRB) for community. In Spring 2007, classroom cer- research involving human participants;

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 145 Chapter 18

Table 18.3: Examples of Research Centers

Centers/Programs Purpose Location

The AAHPC is a linkage study of hereditary prostate cancer. The aim is to enroll 100 African American families with prostate cancer in which at least four men are affected in each family Hereditary Prostate Howard University and there are four other (unaffected) relatives are available for the study. DNA from Cancer (AAHPC) Study Cancer Center these families will be studied to determine if there is linkage to a known hereditary Network prostate cancer locus on chromosome 1 or other locations.

The Howard University Atmospheric Sciences Cooperative Science Center (CSC) was established to research some of the critical environmental conditions occurring nationally and globally. The Center has developed a primary research theme: Atmospheric Sciences “Improving our Understanding of Climate Variability and Weather Prediction through Beltsville Research Cooperative Science Integrated Observations, Models and Data Analyses.” Underneath this theme the Campus Center Center defines core activities that largely demonstrate integrated efforts involving multiple partner institutions in the areas of observations, modeling, and data analysis.

The mission of the Howard University Cancer Center (HUCC) is to reduce cancer morbidity and mortality in the local and underserved community, primarily African- Howard University Cancer Center Americans, and to have a positive impact on malignant diseases in the population. Hospital Several projects underpin the research objectives of the HUCC.

The Center for Drug and Alcohol Research strives to increase the participation of Howard University faculty and students in drug abuse research. The Family Life Center uses Howard University students to serve as volunteer-mentors for Center for Drug and Howard University elementary school students who are at risk of being perpetrators or victims of Alcohol Research College of Medicine antisocial behaviors. Their goal is to enhance the social skills and the academic abilities of these students through the implementation of Youth Empowerment Program components.

The Center for Drug Abuse Research was established to increase the involvement of HBCUs in federally supported research and other programs of high priority in Center for Drug Abuse the federal government. CDAR strives to increase the participation of faculty and Howard University Research students in drug abuse research at Howard University and at the Region 1 HBCUs. College of Medicine In addition to faculty investigators, a multidisciplinary team of researchers, graduate research assistants, and administrators staff CDAR.

The Center for Urban Progress (CUP) is an interdisciplinary center comprised of Howard University faculty, staff, and students that mobilizes the Howard University community to College of Arts & address urban crises—locally, nationally, and globally—through the development of Sciences academic programs and community leadership training.

Center for Urban Launched in 1995, the Center’s goal is to advance the urban research and Progress community development agenda of Howard University. The Center leads University efforts to install a community development content in the curriculum, directs several Howard University urban research activities, operates five community service programs, directs several Department of other funded projects, publishes a formal working paper series for community Economics development research, provides technical support to Washington, D.C. government organizations, and collaborates extensively with other units of the University in achieving its mission.

The Frazier Center for Social Work Research fosters collaborative research projects with community agencies such as the U.S. Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Education, and Health and Human Services. Past research has spanned multiple disciplines, from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome to violence prevention E. Franklin Frazier Howard University and its effect on the cost of public health care. The Center also supports leadership Center for Social Work School of Social training for young women, assists homeless families with children in need of shelter Research Work in the Washington D.C. area, and studies the resettlement of Afghan refugee families in Afghanistan. Through its emphasis on excellence in inquiry, the Center promotes theory building, prevention, treatment, and policy research, as well as program evaluation.

146 ❘ Howard University Research

Centers/Programs Purpose Location

The University of Michigan and Howard University along with Lucent Technologies have formed a collaborative access team. Its goal is to develop a sector for real- Michigan/Howard time X-ray studies at Argonne National laboratory’s Advanced Photon Source. This University AT&T theme encompasses a range of topics that lend themselves well to the unique Collaborative Access characteristics of high brilliance, high transverse-coherence, and favorable timing Team structures in single bunch mode. It is envisioned that the sector developing into an international gathering point for scientists and engineers with strong interests in time-resolved structural studies.

MAAETC DCLPS at Howard University was established to provide HIV/AIDS- related training in the Washington, D.C. area. MAAETC DCLPS is a part of a multistate consortium of academic institutions and health care agencies. This consortium is one of fifteen AIDS Education and Training Centers (ETCs) established through a cooperative agreement program of the Health Resources and Services Mid-Atlantic AIDS Administration (HRSA) of the US Public Health Services, Department of Health and Howard University Education and Training Human Services. College of Medicine Center MAAETC DCLPS is responsible for providing multi disciplinary HIV/AIDS education programs for targeted health care providers in the District of Columbia and surrounding areas. The MAAETC DCLPS is also working closely with metropolitan area hospitals, clinics, public health agencies, and local HIV/AIDS organizations to provide a variety of educational opportunities.

The Moorland-Spingarn Research Center (MSR

Its collections include more than 175,000 bound volumes and tens of thousands of journals, periodicals, and newspapers; more than 17,000 feet of manuscript Moorland-Spingarn and archival collections; nearly 1000 audio tapes; hundreds of artifacts; 100,000 Howard University Research Center prints, photographs, maps, and other graphic items. Scholars, museums, students, Founder’s Library and other researchers from Howard University and throughout the world use the collections. Information provided by the MSRC is regularly used in exhibitions, video productions, news programming, and a wide range of publications. For the arts, humanities and social sciences, Moorland-Spingarn is a most valuable resource for research and analyses in these fields.

Howard University Materials Science Research Center of The Nanotechnology and nanoscience programs probe novel molecular building Excellence; CREST blocs for nanoscience, examine electrical field dependence of quantum efficiencies Nanotechnology Nanotechnology and of silicon composites in the infrared at room temperature, cancer therapies based Labs; and the High Nanoscience on surface modified magnetic nanoparticles and degradable stealth polymeric Energy Electrical nanoparticles for the fabrication of targetable drug delivery systems, among other Engineering Labs systems. in the School of Engineering, Architecture, and Computer Science.

The National Human Genome Center at Howard University is a comprehensive resource for genomic research on African Americans and other African Diaspora populations, distinguished by a diverse social context for framing biology as well National Human Howard University as the ethical, legal, and social implications of knowledge gained from the human Genome Center Cancer Center genome project and research on genome variation. The vision for the NHGC is founded upon Howard University’s history of providing leadership for America and the global community in the critical areas of education, health, and social justice.

The Specialized Neuroscience Research Program focuses on cutting-edge research dealing with the cellular and molecular mechanisms responsible for aging, Specialized Alzheimer’s disease, and neurorespiratory problems. This interdisciplinary program Howard University Neuroscience Research has helped to enhance the quality and quantity of research, the interdisciplinary College of Medicine Program collaboration between faculty and students, and training of graduate students in this field at Howard.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 147 Chapter 18

Table 18.4: Participants in the Seminars, Workshops, and Certification Program tained under humane conditions. The Howard IACUC has maintained continuous accredi- Total # of Total # of Staff Items Faculty or PIs or Other tation by the Association for Assessment. If necessary, investigators contemplating the Total # Sessions Conducted 53 41 use of laboratory animals in research, test- Total # Session Registrants 220 226 ing, or teaching must undergo prerequisite training and acquire a copy of the IACUC Total # Session Attendees 283 294 Information and Guidelines for Investigators # React Modules Conducted 18 19 Using Animals in Research or Teaching from the Animal Care Office. # React Module Registrants 36 79 It is University policy to comply with all # React Module Attendees 96 166 Federal and local regulations, and Howard’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) # Exams Passed 43 84 approved license when ordering, receiving, # Certifications Completed 4 16 storing, handling, transferring, or disposing of any radioactive material (RAM). Any activ- # Seminars or Workshops Conducted 35 22 ity involving RAM must comply with NRC # Seminar or Workshop Registrants 184 147 regulations, the authorized user’s guide, and the University’s policy. All investigators using # Seminar or Workshop Attendees 187 128 radioactive materials in their research must

Source: Office of Sponsored Programs/Research Education and Technical Assistance enroll in a Radiation Safety course that is taught biannually. Office of the Controller n The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) for research involv- The Office of the Controller provides an ing vertebrate animals; and accounting of all University transactions n The Institutional BioSafety Committee and ensures timely and accurate payments to (IBC) for research involving hazardous employees and vendors as well as performs materials, select agents or recombinant financial reporting, to include consolidation DNA. of Hospital financial results. University Regulatory Committees Restricted Fund Accounting Howard is committed to protecting the rights Restricted Fund Accounting (RFA) is located and welfare of human research participants within the Controller’s Office. It is primar- and to complying with Federal and local regu- ily responsible for the financial management lations governing human participant research. of sponsored project funds. Responsibilities The University’s IRB reviews and approves include controlling, processing, accounting, all research protocols involving use of human preparing and filing financial reports, billing participants or analysis of data gathered from for awards, and coordinating the annual A-133 humans. Engaging in research activity involv- audit. RFA also establishes and administers ing human participants without prior approval financial policies and procedures that will may result in disciplinary action up to and ensure compliance with government regula- including the termination of research privileges tions. Additionally, RFA prepares, submits, and/or academic appointment. and negotiates the University’s facilities and Howard demands the highest standards administrative (indirect cost) and fringe ben- of humane care in the use of laboratory ani- efit rates with the Federal government. mals and assures compliance with Federal and Restricted Fund Accounting office reviews local regulations and accreditation guidelines. restricted funds on a monthly basis for actual Animals may not be used in research, testing, to budget comparisons, for grants expiring or or teaching without prior approval from the being extended, for the drawdown of govern- IACUC. The University Animal Care Facilities ment funding under Letters of Credit, and the are monitored regularly by a licensed veteri- collection of payments on behalf of the research narian who, jointly with the IACUC, deter- community to ensure receipt of payments. The mines that all vertebrate animals are main- RFA staff is organized into teams assigned

148 ❘ Howard University Research to support specific schools and departments. Table 18.5: Peer and Aspirational Peer Universities The teams work closely with the appropriate No. University Research Classification Research Administrators to improve service to Principal Investigators, faculty, and extramural 1 Case Western Reserve University RU/VH research administration staff. Each accountant 2 Emory University RU/H is responsible for the financial management 3 George Washington University RU/H of assigned awards as they move through the grant’s life cycle, for managing work load, for 4 Georgetown University RU/H complying with requirements, and for meet- 5 St. Louis University RU/H ing the specific financial reporting terms of 6 Tufts University RU/H the agreement. The supervisory and management authority for RFA is not currently within 7 Tulane University RU/VH the Office of the Vice President for Research 8 Vanderbilt University RU/VH and Compliance. However, the University is 9 University of Miami RU/H reviewing the merits of moving supervisory authority from the Controller’s Office to better 10 Washington University of St. Louis RU/VH serve faculty conducting extramural research. shows the 10 peer and aspirational universities Materials Management – Purchasing utilized for comparison with Howard. The University operates a central Purchasing Howard University has consistently gen- Activity which procures all materials and erated $20-$40 million annually in Federal services to include certain professional ser- research funding. This performance places vices for the University. The responsibilities Howard, along with St Louis University in and authorities of the Materials Management the lowest tier among the peer and aspira- Department (MMD) are defined in a manual tional peer universities. The predominant that sets forth purchasing policies and prac- faculty perception is that Howard’s adminis- tices to be followed by all University depart- tration is not cognizant of the requirements ments. Like RFA, supervisory and manage- for state-of-the-art research and consequently ment authority for the MMD is not currently does little to facilitate or enhance grant writ- found within the Office of the Vice President ing. However, the Administration has, in fact, for Research and Compliance. The University made significant allocations in the FY 2010 is also reviewing the merits of moving super- budget to address these issues. For example, visory authority for the MMD to better serve the FY 2010 budget includes targeted profes- research faculty. sorships, enhanced research funding in academic affairs and health sciences, enhanced Publications funding for research laboratories, and During the 2007-2008 academic year, fac- enhanced funding for research equipment. ulty and mentored students have demonstrated productivity and remarkable creativity in the Assessment of the Research advancement of new knowledge. Evidence of research productivity is provided by the signif- Enterprise icant number of publications in refereed jour- Until 2006, the University held the Carnegie nals in the natural and social sciences, arts, and Foundation’s designation as a “Doctoral/ humanities. Faculty publications are discussed Research University-Extensive,” 1 of only 151 in Chapter 13 - Faculty. such universities in the nation and the only Historically Black University so designated in Comparison with Peer and the top tier. Today, Howard is classified as a “RU/H: Research University (High Research “Aspirational” Universities Activity),” 1 of 103 universities so designated Subsequent to a critical review and assess- and 1 of 4 Historically Black Universities in ment of the research program at Howard this tier, which represents a decline from the University, an evaluation was conducted to first to the second tier of research universities. examine Howard’s programs relative to peer This present designation was based on data and “aspirational” institutions. Table 18.5 from 2003-2004.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 149 Chapter 18

Table 18.6: Federally Financed R&D Expenditures at Universities and Colleges, Ranked by Expenditures FY 1999-2007 – Dollars in millions

Rank Institution 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

18 Wash Univ. 219 254 285 303 357 371 401 408 424

36 Vanderbilt 117 130 146 173 222 262 282 300 312

37 Emory 133 145 170 186 228 243 267 268 271

41 Case 140 151 159 182 205 196 212 307 305

81 U Miami 102 107 112 121 131 143 156 150 148

110 Tulane 51 52 56 65 82 88 95 84 98

113 Georgetown 84 99 94 75 88 96 100 92 102

114 Tufts 63 65 72 73 79 93 98 96 91

116 GWU 50 50 52 59 69 78 79 75 88

164 St Louis U 24 26 28 41 37 37 45 45 48

186 Howard 22 25 28 34 36 40 40 35 34

Note: Rank based on All R&D expenditures in 2007. Source: National Science Foundation

Howard has undertaken various initiatives grant funds in accordance with Federal and over recent years to enhance its research enter- agency grant requirements. Hence, the Board prise. A variable pay program for extramurally of Trustees approved the aforementioned new funded researchers was instituted recently as organizational structure for administering the one element of a compensation plan to encour- research enterprise, which not only includes age faculty to seek extramural funding (see the pre-award office but all post-award func- Chapter 13—Faculty for discussion on vari- tions. To date, the new organizational struc- able salary). ture has not been fully established because of In 2003, the Office of theV ice Provost for remaining issues for resolution, including the Research, as described earlier in this chapter, complete integration of the Post Award Service was established to oversee and coordinate the Unit and Grant and Contract Accounting various dimensions of university research pol- departments. icy, priorities, and administration, which then A recent examination of the University’s included only pre- and post-award non-finan- trends in extramural research productivity cial administration. The University recognizes (i.e., number of proposals submitted, num- the inextricable relationship between research ber and dollar amounts of awards received) and graduate education. Responsibility for within schools/colleges revealed that only a extramural research administration and gradu- few schools/colleges could be characterized ate education thus was situated under the lead- accurately as actively involved in extramu- ership of the Office of the Vice Provost for ral research and that most schools/colleges Research. The Vice Provost for Research also failed to meet their established extramural served as Dean of the Graduate School. Under research targets. This finding may account, this structure, actions were taken to minimize in part, for why the University failed to reach or eliminate administrative barriers in process- its established goal of $100 million in extra- ing research applications and post-award fund- mural research funding by 2007. ing drawing input from an informal 13-person Howard’s research activity, quality, and pro- Faculty Research Advisory Council. ductivity qualify it for designation as a RU/H As previously mentioned in this discussion, University. However, continuing challenges the audit initiated by NSF in 2005 concluded in its research infrastructure and administra- that the University needed to do more to estab- tion have no doubt contributed to the lack of lish and maintain a system of sound internal robustness of faculty and unit efforts in apply- controls to manage, account for, and monitor ing for and obtaining extramural funds to

150 ❘ Howard University Research support research activity. In the Fall of 2007, Table 18.7: Impediments to the Conduct of Sponsored Programs the Office of Sponsored Programs/Research Education and Technical Assistance con- Reason Number Percent ducted two surveys (Faculty Research Survey Getting the paperwork through the system 138 78.0% and a Research Needs Assessment Survey) to Obtaining the appropriate signatures 117 65.7% identify the issues that affect faculty research productivity, gain a better understanding of Purchasing equipment and supplies 117 64.2% the immediate needs of the research com- Space to conduct research 100 56.5% munity, and design more customer-oriented Monitoring the expenditures 89 50.9% services and solutions. Hiring personnel to work on the project 87 49.7% Results obtained from 230 faculty members responding to the 2007 Faculty Research Paying personnel who worked on the project 116 66.7% Survey showed that 17.20% of faculty indi- Bureaucracy 142 80.7% cated that their interests lie “very heavily in Lack of administrative personnel in my department 124 71.7% research;” while 45.8% indicated that their interests lie in both teaching and research, Submitting financial reports on time 66 37.9% “but leaning towards research.” Although Submitting technical reports on time 62 36.3% taken together this suggests a high level of Getting my subcontract agreement executed 73 42.7% faculty interest in research, faculty members Support from central offices 113 65.7% also identified the challenges that impede their research productivity. Most faculty Having to perform administrative duties 115 66.9% (79.7%) reported that their departments did Source: 2007 Facalty Research Survey not grant release time to prepare proposals for externally funded projects, although over half (53.7%) of faculty surveyed reported Table 18.8: Faculty Reasons for Not Applying for Research Awards this as a very important activity for grant Reason Number Percent seeking (see Supporting Document 18.2). In addition, faculty expressed high lev- Too many horror stories from current PIs 36 31.3% els of dissatisfaction with several central Too many administrative duties 53 44.5% administration units in managing funded research projects in FY 2007: these units Lack of financial incentives 48 41.7% included Accounts Payable (36.7%); Lack of support from the University’s central offices 60 50.8% Employment (29.0%); Human Resources (27.9%); Material Management Department Too time consuming 49 41.5% (31.3%); Payroll (38.6%); Physical Inadequate university facilities 57 50.9% Facilities Management (42.3%); Restricted Fund Accounting (34.6%); Office of the Source: 2007 Facalty Research Survey Controller (30.9%); and Purchasing (34.0%). Specifically, the Faculty reported several internal barriers to the conduct of sponsored programs. Table 18.7 lists the reasons identified by faculty as internal impediments. Faculty who did not apply for external funds noted several reasons for not applying for external funds (Table 18.8). Summary, Findings and Recommendations Research is a major commitment and component of Howard. Funded from a variety of extramural and internal sources, research by the University’s faculty and its undergraduate and graduate students are a critical attribute

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 151 Chapter 18 in Howard’s quest for elevation into the top Findings ranks of the nation’s research universities. 1. There are insufficient funds for new The University continues to have an active faculty startups, particularly in the natu- sponsored research portfolio, with its high- ral sciences, and for the internal support est extramural support coming primarily of research for continuing faculty, gradu- from the Department of Health and Human ate student stipends, and undergraduate Services (HHS), including the National research. Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National 2. The Office of Sponsored Programs/ Science Foundation (NSF). At the same time, Research Administration (OSP/RA) does the robustness of the sponsored research port- not have sufficient resources, inclusive of folio lags significantly behind those peer and staff, to meet the needs and expectations of aspirational research universities that also faculty members who are engaged in spon- have medical and engineering schools, and sored research. universities with the full array of STEM disci- 3. Despite recent improvements and plines, such as Howard. To increase its spon- administrative reorganization in research sored research portfolio, a key component of administration, a significant percentage of any research university’s reputation, Howard faculty researchers report continued chal- will have to significantly enhance its research lenges in conducting sponsored research, infrastructure and improve administrative particularly with respect to issues associated and financial support of faculty research, as with accounting, personnel, and materials well as graduate assistantship stipends. The management. University is now devoting increased and 4. There has been insufficient investment focused attention to these matters. in technological and physical infrastructure Based on extramural support, primarily to support research. from NIH and NSF, the University presently is classified by the Carnegie Foundation for Recommendations for Improvement the Advancement of Teaching as a Research 1. Provide increased internal support for University with High Research Activity new faculty startups, particularly in the (RU/H), the second highest research classifi- natural sciences and for investigators who cation. Our examination found that the trend wish to develop interdisciplinary research. over the last four years was a decrease in pro- 2. Increase internal support for under- posals and dollars though this now appears to graduate research, graduate student sti- have been reversed. A variable pay program pends, and for postdoctoral appointments. for extramurally funded researchers was insti- 3. Reconsider the desirability of placing tuted recently as one element of the plan to all sponsored research administration func- encourage faculty extramural funding activ- tions, including accounting, personnel, ity. Support for extramural research at the and purchasing, under a single, seamless University is a high priority within the aca- administrative unit, the OVPRC. demic portfolio assessment initiative and the 4. Provide the necessary resources to new Budget Advisory Committee process. enhance a customer responsive climate During the last decade, extramural research within the Office of Sponsored Programs administration at the University has been that meets the needs and expectations of reorganized twice. In 2003, the University faculty members who are engaged in spon- reorganized the responsibilities for extramu- sored research. ral research administration and created the 5. Provide sufficient resources to enhance Office of the Vice Provost for Research. In University-wide technological and physical June 2006, the Board of Trustees approved a infrastructure to support research. new cabinet-level position of Vice President for Research and Compliance (VPRC) and a new organizational structure for extramu- Supporting Documents ral research administration. The following 18.1 Summary of the National Conference major findings and recommendations for on Undergraduate Research improvement emerged from the review of 18.2 2007 Faculty Research Survey this area of special emphasis for Howard: Summary

152 ❘ Howard University 19 Conclusion

19 Conclusion

This Self-Study has provided a can- in teaching and research. It recognizes the did look at the progress made by the need to launch new academic initiatives as University over the past ten years, where an element of its continuing academic port- the institution stands today, and more folio assessment. importantly, where new journeys and The Self-Study sought to address several pathways can and will lead in the future. issues attendant to the MSCHE standards It has also provided major findings and with the goal being to enhance the quality of recommendations for enhancing institu- its administrative functions and especially tional and educational effectiveness. its academic and research programs. Some The Self-Study reveals that Howard is of these issues were: Does the University’s in compliance with the Characteristics existing mission statement accurately reflect of Excellence as defined by the Middle who we are? Does the existing vision state- States Association of Schools and ment accurately capture our aspirations? Colleges and is eligible, therefore, for How does the University wish to be perceived reaffirmation of its accreditation. The in the external world and to the national aca- Self-Study has revealed further that the demic community? What kind of students University has made considerable prog- do we want to attract in view of the institu- ress in addressing the issues raised in the tion’s mission, vision, core values, and leg- 1999 MSCHE reaffirmation of accredi- acy? How can we institutionalize a culture of tation and the concerns raised in the assessment in such a way as to consistently 2004 Periodic Review Report (PRR). use outcome measures to improve programs At the same time, the University, like leading to enhanced student learning and virtually all other similar institutions institutional effectiveness? The Self-Study in the United States, faces significant process has contributed to the dialogue on challenges, many of which are associ- these and many other such issues and will ated with rising costs in the midst of the continue to do so in the future. current domestic and global economic The Self-Study coincided in part with the downturn which has affected virtually search for and appointment of a new presi- all aspects of its operations, including dent to replace H. Patrick Swygert, who faculty/staff salaries, the maintenance presided over the institution during nine of of physical facilities, and the academic/ the ten years since the last reaffirmation of research infrastructure. Despite this, the accreditation. President Ribeau has sought University is poised to pursue aggres- to build upon Howard’s history and legacy sively its aspiration to climb system- to advance the institution to even greater atically into the top echelon of research heights by focusing on student services and universities in the United States. building an enhanced sense of community Somewhat independent of a focused with all of the university’s constituent ele- attention on fiscal issues, the Self-Study ments, particularly the faculty. President was conducted at the same time that the Ribeau has ushered in a new era of trans- Board of Trustees and the University’s parency and participation by all segments leadership was engaged in a review of the University community on many of the quality, breadth, and depth of issues, including the University’s budget, Howard’s academic programs with an plans and performance. Early signs suggest eye toward streamlining those offer- a strengthened collegial atmosphere within ings, enhancing quality and determin- the community which can enable progres- ing niche areas where the University can sive change and help the University pursue assume national and international stature its priorities.

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 153 Chapter 19

The assessment of the institution, through Officer, building on the work done by the the lens of the 14 MSCHE Standards and Blue Ribbon Task Force on Long Range the additional Research Emphasis section, Financial Planning. The University’s new has provided a framework through which budget process is designed to assure that the University examined itself, confronted Howard’s financial resources are properly its assumptions and evaluated its plans aligned with its academic, research and ser- for its future. The Self-Study helped the vice priorities. University focus on such critical areas as In the midst of these advances, the planning, resource allocation and institu- University continues to respond to concerns tional renewal; leadership and governance; raised by the university’s Faculty Senate institutional effectiveness; student services; with respect to its role in university gov- and assessment of student learning and aca- ernance. President Ribeau has made sig- demic offerings – all of which translate our nificant efforts to reach out to the Faculty mission and goals into meaningful realities Senate, as well as to the faculty across all for our students, faculty and the wider uni- the Schools and Colleges, in an effort to versity community. engage the faculty meaningfully and trans- The University’s The University’s mission was refined parently in University decision-making. mission was refined and approved by the Trustees to reflect its Faculty Senate members are a part of the classification as a research university and President’s newly formed Budget Advisory and approved by its commitments to global learning and Committee, and the Self-Study Steering and the Trustees internationalization, interdisciplinarity and Executive Committees. The President and to reflect its attracting both highly talented students Provost meet regularly with Faculty Senate and students with high potential for aca- leadership. There are positive signs that this classification demic achievement. It has also established effort and others will mitigate long standing as a research a long-term enrollment management goal tensions between the University’s adminis- university and for restructuring its mix of undergraduate, tration and its Faculty Senate. graduate, and professional students to bring Based on this current assessment, the its commitments the mix in line with its peer and aspirant institution faces a number of contemporary to global institutions. Enhanced attention has been challenges, which include: learning and given to the University’s core curriculum for n Increased expectations and require- undergraduates. The University has begun ments for Howard, like all institutions, internationalization... to implement a comprehensive university- to provide more documentation on stu- wide assessment plan. It established a cen- dent learning and institutional effective- tralized Office of Institutional Assessment ness through ongoing assessment, and and Evaluation to lead and coordinate the to use these assessments systematically University’s assessment agenda on student to guide program improvement. learning and institutional effectiveness, col- n Increased competition from Traditionally lecting and organizing data to inform deci- White Institutions (TWIs) and HBCUs sion makers regarding institutional policies, for the best and brightest of African- budget plans, curriculum and teaching/ American students—Howard’s core con- learning strategies. These efforts will constituency at the undergraduate, graduate tinue to be a focus of the University in the and professional student levels. years ahead. n Graying of the professoriate which The University has also significantly requires the development of succes- enhanced its research infrastructure and sion plans for the faculty—and the appointed a cabinet level officer to pro- University’s leadership—to attract new vide oversight for the research enterprise individuals to sustain institutional core with an eye toward significantly raising the values and legacy, while bringing new University’s level of extramural funding for ideas and perspectives to meet changing research. It has also stabilized its financial times and student needs. situation as reflected in its improved bond n Increasing tuition rates, partly linked rating and the creation of a presidentially to the University’s economic situation, appointed Budget Advisory Committee to keep pace with the cost of education chaired by the Provost and Chief Academic while simultaneously increasing need-

154 ❘ Howard University Conclusion

based financial aid to meet the require- Howard. The major recommendations pro- ments of talented students who are oth- mulgated herein include: erwise compromised in their ability to n Review and assess the impact of plan- enroll and remain at the University. ning, resource allocation and institu- n Evolving priorities in research funding tional renewal initiatives on a periodic at the national level, thereby requiring basis. a possible realignment of research and n Align the University’s resources and academic priorities in order to increase budget with academic priorities result- extramural support and indirect cost ing from program reviews and portfolio recovery. assessments and campus deliberations. The Self-Study process has resulted in n Continue to intensify efforts to increase a number of recommendations that are revenues from non-government sources designed to advance the University’s mis- to complement federal support. sion, legacy, core values and aspirations. n Revisit the Provost and Chief Academic In general, these recommendations will Officer/SeniorV ice President for Health continue Howard’s advancement into the Sciences administrative model in con- upper echelon of American research univer- sultation with the various University sities. They are also intended to strengthen constituencies. the curriculum, increase extramural fund- n Revise the 1993 Faculty Handbook to ing, produce a more data-driven decision reflect current policies and processes. making paradigm, improve faculty life n Develop an explicit university-wide and strengthen the student experience at strategy, with supporting budgetary and

2009 Self-Study Report ❘ 155 Chapter 19

infrastructure priorities, to achieve the recipients by a research university, as well desired undergraduate to graduate/pro- as the largest producer of African-American fessional student mix. undergraduates who go on to earn a Ph.D. n Enhance access to a Howard education Howard is among the nation’s leading pro- by increasing need-based student finan- ducers of African Americans in medicine, cial aid. the fine and performing arts, law, dentistry n Implement the recommendations pro- and many other professions. In an era where mulgated by a recent Task Force on the nation needs to replenish its workforce Library Resources to improve the qual- with new talent in order to remain a world ity of University Libraries. leader, Howard continues to be a major con- n Provide support and expansion of the tributor to preparing a multicultural group Students First Campaign to all depart- of men and women for the nation’s work- ments and student support functions at force and the professions. In the global and all levels, including space utilization. increasingly interconnected world of today, n Establish a dedicated faculty recruit- Howard’s strong international constituency ment and retention fund to attract and of students, faculty and alumni, as well as retain additional nationally recognized its connectivity with many countries in the scholars, and promote the development developing world, especially in Africa and and retention of the University’s young the Caribbean, positions it as a special place and promising faculty. with respect to addressing national and n Evaluate academic offerings and stream- international needs and goals. line, modify or augment offerings in Finally, this Self-Study was conducted response to changing times with special in a manner that allowed for a thorough emphasis on expanding interdisciplinary and candid look at where the institution and experiential learning. has been over the past ten years, where n Appoint a body of faculty, students the institution is today and, perhaps more and staff to review the current Board- importantly, where its new journeys and approved University-wide core compe- pathways will lead. tencies and to recommend strategies to schools and colleges for revising, updating and assessing curricula to implement the competencies. n Offer professional development and incentives to enhance faculty proficiency in utilizing new strategies and delivery systems in support of teaching and learning. n Appoint a University-wide task force to craft a coherent set of learning outcomes for all Howard undergraduates and a methodology for assessment. n Provide sufficient resources to enhance University-wide technological and physical infrastructure to support research. Howard University has been described by many as a national treasure and by others as being both unique and irreplaceable. At this stage in the history of the United States, Howard certainly remains an important institution for contributing to the national goal of fulfilling theA merican dream of full inclusion of all of its citizens into American life. Howard today continues to be the nation’s largest producer of African-American Ph.D.