University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez (UPRM) Final Self

Transcription

University of Puerto
Rico at Mayaguez
(UPRM) Final SelfStudy Design
Submitted to:
The Council of Higher Education
Middle States Commission on
Higher Education
3624 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-2680
2/14/2014
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Introduction
Glossary of Abbreviations
Nature and Scope of Self Study
Specific Goals and Objectives
Organizational Structure of the Steering Team and Task Forces
Charges to Task Forces
Inventory of Support Documents
Timetable
Editorial Style and Format
Organization of Final Self-Study Report
Profile of the Evaluation Team
Appendix
3
11
12
12
13
20
91
93
94
96
96
97
2
INTRODUCTION
HISTORICAL SKETCH – UPRM AS PART OF THE LARGER UNIVERSITY OF
PUERTO RICO SYSTEM
The University of Puerto Rico was created by an act of the Legislative Assembly on
March 12, 1903. It emerged as an outgrowth of the Normal School, which had been
established three years earlier with the purpose of training teachers for the Puerto Rican
school system. In 1908, the benefits of the Morill-Nelson Act were declared applicable to
the island, thus fostering the rapid growth of the University. Eloquent evidence of that
growth was the establishment of the College of Liberal Arts at Río Piedras in 1910 and
the College of Agriculture at Mayagüez in 1911.
It was in the College of Agriculture that the Mayagüez Campus as we know it today had
its origin. Credit for the establishment of the College is given to the joint effort of D. W.
May (Director of the Federal Experiment Station), José de Diego, and Carmelo Alemar.
A year later, the school received the name that it bore for 50 years: the College of
Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. The strengthening and diversification of the academic
programs at Mayagüez were recognized years later when, in 1942, as a result of the
university reform, the campus was organized with a considerable degree of autonomy
into the Colleges of Agriculture, Engineering, and Science under the direction of a vice
chancellor. The expansion continued through the 1950s, when many programs flourished
in the University. At Mayagüez, the College of Arts and Sciences and the Nuclear Center
were established. At Río Piedras, the Colleges of Humanities, Natural Sciences, Social
Sciences, and Business Administration emerged. At San Juan, the Schools of Medicine,
Odontology, and Tropical Medicine were established.
In 1966, the Legislative Assembly reorganized the University of Puerto Rico into a
system of autonomous campuses, each under the direction of a chancellor. The College
of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts became the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez
Campus.
Today, the Mayagüez Campus of the University of Puerto Rico continues its
development in the best tradition of a Land Grant institution. It is a coeducational,
bilingual, and nonsectarian school. It comprises the Colleges of Agricultural Sciences,
Arts and Sciences, Business Administration, Engineering, and the Division of Continuing
Education and Professional Studies. The College of Agricultural Sciences encompasses
the Agricultural Experiment Station and the Agricultural Extension Service. As of Fall
2013, the Campus had 684 instructional faculty (660 full-time and 24 part-time), which
includes those who are tenured, on tenure-track, and not on tenure-track. In terms of
student enrollment, a total of 11, 838 students were enrolled (10,944 undergraduates and
894 graduates).
3
UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO – MISSION STATEMENT
The University of Puerto Rico, as a public institution of higher education, is bound by
law to serve the people of Puerto Rico in accordance with the ideals of a democratic
society such as ours.
It is important to highlight that the vision and mission of the UPRM from 2004 until
December 2011 is slightly different from the current January 2012 vision and mission.
This change resulted from the approval of the new strategic plan by all constituents, and
the revision of the institution’s vision and mission.
The 2004-2011 vision was:
To become a leading institution of higher learning in Puerto Rico and
throughout the entire American hemisphere while responding to the needs
of a modern society within dynamic and diverse surroundings while
searching unceasingly for truth, knowledge, justice, and peace.
The mission was:
1. To form educated, cultivated citizens capable of critical thinking and
professionally prepared in the fields of agricultural sciences,
engineering, natural sciences, humanities, arts, and business
administration capable of contributing to the educational, cultural,
social, technological and economic development of Puerto Rico and
the international community within a democratic and collaborative
framework.
2. To promote research and creative endeavors to meet the needs of our
local and international society while preserving, transmitting, and
advancing knowledge.
3. To provide excellent service that will contribute to the sustainable and
balanced development of our society.
4. To share knowledge so that it becomes accessible to all.
The current UPRM’s vision is:
To be a leading institution in higher education and research, transforming
society through the pursuit of knowledge in an environment of ethics,
justice, and peace.
As of January, 2012 the mission is:
To excel in our service to Puerto Rico and the world by:
• Forming citizens who are well-educated, cultivated, and
critical thinkers, professionally prepared in the fields of
agricultural sciences, engineering, arts, sciences, and
business administration so they may contribute to the
4
•
educational, cultural, social, technological, and economic
development.
Performing creative work, research, and service to meet
society’s needs and to make available the results of these
activities to everyone.
We provide our students with the skills and sensitivity needed to effectively
address today’s problems and to exemplify the values and attitudes that
should prevail in a democratic society that treasures and respects diversity.
Different from our previous decennial visit, the UPRM’s strategic plan highlights seven
objectives which are:
• To institutionalize a culture of strategic planning and assessment.
• To lead higher education throughout Puerto Rico while guaranteeing the best
education for our students.
• To increase and diversify the Institution’s sources of revenue.
• To adopt efficient and expedient administrative procedures.
• To strengthen research and competitive creative endeavors.
• To impact our Puerto Rican society.
• To strengthen the UPRM’s sense of belonging and institutional pride
ORGANIZATION CHART AT UPRM
The Table on page ten shows the complete organizational chart of the University of Puerto Rico
at Mayaguez. All administrative units, as well as the academic units, are included in the chart.
ACADEMIC PROGRAMS WITHIN EACH ACADEMIC UNIT
The University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez has four colleges: College of Agricultural Sciences,
College of Arts & Sciences, College of Business Administration, and College of
Engineering. Each of these four colleges offers the following academic programs:
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
Bachelor of Agricultural Sciences
Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics, Agronomy, Soil Science, Animal Industry, Crop
Protection, Education in Agricultural Extension, General Agriculture, Horticulture,
Mechanical Agricultural Technology, and Agricultural Education. In addition, the college
offers a non-degree program of study in Pre- Veterinary Studies for those students who will
be pursuing studies in veterinary medicine.
5
Master of Science
Agronomy, Soils, Horticulture, Crop Protection, Animal Industry, Agricultural
Economics, Food Science & Technology, Agricultural Education, and Agricultural
Extension.
COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES
Bachelor of Science
Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Industrial Microbiology, Industrial Biotechnology,
Nursing, Physical Sciences, Pre-Medical Sciences, Theoretical Physics, Computer
Science, Pure Mathematics, and Mathematics Education.
Bachelor of Arts
English, Hispanic Studies, Philosophy, Comparative Literature, Plastic Arts, Theory of Art,
French Language and Literature, History, General Social Sciences, Sociology, Political
Science, Psychology, Economics, and Physical Education.
Master of Science
Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Pure Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, Statistics,
Computer Science, and Physics
Master of Marine Sciences
Master of Arts
Hispanic Studies, English Education, and Kinesiology
Doctor of Philosophy
Marine Sciences, Applied Chemistry
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration
Accounting, Computerized Information Systems, Finance, Industrial Management,
Marketing, Organizational Studies (Human Resources)
Bachelor in Office Administration
6
Master in Business Administration
Finance, General Program, Human Resources, Industrial Management
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Bachelor of Science
Civil Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical
Engineering, Computer Engineering, Industrial Engineering, and Surveying &
Topography, General Engineering
Master of Science
Civil Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering,
Computer Engineering, and Industrial Engineering
Master of Engineering
Computer Engineering, Industrial Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering
Doctor of Philosophy
Civil Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Computing and Information Sciences and
Engineering
Degrees in Progress
The following academic programs have been approved at the UPR level. These programs have
been submitted to CEPR and are waiting for approval to begin offering:
BS- Computer Science and Engineering
MS- Material Sciences and Engineering
MS and Ph.D.- Bioengineering
Ph.D.- Electrical Engineering
Ph.D.- Mechanical Engineering
MS- Precollege Mathematical Education
7
STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROFILE – FALL 2013
Male
Undergraduate
Students
5468
Graduate
Students
456
Total
5924
Full-Time
Female
Total
Male
Part-Time
Female Total
Male
Total
Female
Total
4751
10219
391
334
725
5859
5085
10944
382
838
28
28
56
484
410
894
5133
11057
419
362
781
6343
5495
11838
INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL - FALL 2013
The Tables below list Instructional Personnel labeled as “Primarily Instruction” and
“Instruction/Research/Public
Service”
in
the
Fall
2013
Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), and the number of faculty members
with doctoral degrees. The data used for this survey and for IPEDS is based on the
Faculty Academic Workloads available at the Office of the Dean of Academic Affairs.
Full-Time
Part-Time
Male
Total
FTE*
Full-Time
Part-Time
Female
Total
FTE*
Full-Time
Part-Time
Total
Total
FTE*
Tenure
Track
41
0
41
41.00
33
0
33
33.
74
0
74
74.00
FACULTY STATUS
Non-tenure
Track
Tenured
358
11
0
15
358
26
16.96
358.0
192
25
0
9
192
34
192.0
29.92
550
36
0
24
550
60
550.00
46.8
Total
410
15
425
415.96
250
9
259
254.92
660
24
684
670.88
*FTE refers to a Full Time Equivalent load of 12 credits
8
Faculty Members with Degrees Fall 2013
Instructional Faculty Highest Degree
As of November 1st, 2012
College
Bachelor
Master
Doctoral
Other
Unavailable
Total
Unavailable
0
3
0
0
0
3
Agricultural Sciences
5
18
49
0
30
102
Arts & Sciences- Arts
1
53
122
1
0
177
Arts & SciencesSciences
1
35
157
0
0
193
Engineering
2
19
147
0
1
169
Business Administration
1
23
16
0
0
40
Total
10
151
491
1
31
684
9
University of Puerto Rico
Mayaguez Campus
Organizational Structure
Governing Board
President’s Office
Administrative Board
Pre-school
Development
Center
Information
Technology
Center
Dean of
Administration
Natatorium
Dean of Academic
Affairs
Buildings and Grounds
Department
Admission Office
Historic Archive
Personnel Liaison Office
Purchasing Office
Finance Department
Equal Opportunities for
Employment
General Library
Center for Professional
Enhancement
Center for Resources in
General Education (CIVIS)
Military Sciences
Property Office
Human Resources
Environmental Health and
Safety Office
Office of Environmental
Management
Division of Continuing
Education and
Professional Studies
Aerospace Studies
Graduate Studies Office
Auxiliary Services
Registrar's Office
Traffic and Surveillance
Department
Continuous Improvement
and Assessment Office
University Enterprises
Printing
Office
Athletes
Residence
Campus
Bookstore
Secondary Education of
Teacher Preparation
Legal Advisor’s
Office
Dean of Students
Athletic Activities
Social and Cultural
Activities Alumni
Financial Aid
Band and Orchestra
Academic Senate
Chancellor’s Office
Institutional Research
and Planning Office
College of Business
Administration
Economic
Development
Center
Office
Administration
Research and Development Center
Press and
Publications
Budget Office
College of Arts and
Sciences
Industrial Biotechnology
Quality of Life
Office
Human Resources
Physical Education
Placement
Finance
Counseling and
Psychological
Services
Industrial
Management
Agricultural
Experiment
Station
College of
Engineering
Faculty of
Agricultural
Sciencies
Agricultural
Extension
Service
Civil Engineering
and Surveying
Electrical and
Computer
Engineering
General Agricultural
Material Sciences
and Engineering
Food and Science
Technology
Nursing
Industrial
Engineering
Agricultural Economics
and Rural Sociology
Hispanic Studies
Mechanical
Engineering
Agricultural Education
Physics
Geology
Chemical
Engineering
Animal Industry
Humanities
Computerized
Information
Systems
International
Programs
Office
Office of Academic
Senate, Administrative
Board and Faculty
Marine Sciences
Economics
Health Services
College of
Agricultural
Sciences
Social Sciences
Marketing
Water Resources and
Environmental Research
Institute
Biology
Accounting
Student Exchange
Programs and International Student
Services
Student
Ombudsman
Office
Agricultural and
Bio-systems Engineering
English
Mathematics
Crops and
Agroenvironmental
Sciences
Chemistry
Horticulture
Crop Protection
Agronomy and Soils
Revised August 2013
10
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
UPR
University of Puerto Rico
UPRM
University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus
OMCA
Office of Continuous Improvement and Assessment
MSCHE
Middle States Commission on Higher Education
OIIP
Office of Institutional Research and Planning
ABET
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
AACSB
Association to Advanced Collegiate Schools of Business
ADOF
Office Administration
NCATE
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
NLNAC
National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission
ACS
American Chemical Society
NCAA
National Collegiate Athletic Association
CID
Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo (Research & Development Center)
PRR
Periodic Review Report
CTI
Center of Information and Technology
CEPR
Puerto Rico Education Council
CGE
General Student Council
COE
Student Evaluations
IPEDS
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
GE
General Education
DECEP
Division of Continuing Education and Professional Studies
CITA
Food and Technology Science
SEA
Agricultural Extension
CEP
Centro de Enriquecimiento Professional (Professional Enrichment Center)
PRCHE
Puerto Rico Council of Higher Education
LAI
Liga Atlética Interuniversitaria (Intermural Athletic League)
11
NATURE AND SCOPE OF SELF-STUDY
During January, 2012, the new strategic plan was implemented. This strategic plan is
aligned with the fourteen standards of excellence (See Appendix). As an institution which
believes that all aspects of UPRM need to be assessed (Self Study: Creating a Useful
Process and Report, 2012), the steering committee decided that the self-evaluation
process for our institution would be most meaningful via The Comprehensive Report.
The rationale behind the selection of this model can be traced to the Final April 2005
MSCHE Report, which was submitted to the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez
on April 5, 2005. Although the report states that all 14 standards were met, many
suggestions were presented. The comprehensive report model will allow UPRM to assess
our progress within all fourteen standards of excellence and provide suggestions,
weaknesses, and strengths.
OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT
The University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez has experience in assessment in earlier
educational projects such as the Manufacturing Engineering Education Partnership
(MEEP) Learning Factory, which was funded by NSF in 1994; and Partnership for
Spatial and Computational Research (PaSCoR), which was funded by NASA in 1998.
Many of our programs have undergone or are currently in process of being accredited.
Examples of these accreditation agencies are : Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology (ABET), Accreditation Council for Business Schools (ACBSP), National
Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE/CAEP), National League for
Nursing Accrediting Commission (NLNAC), and the American Chemical Society (ACS).
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) publication, Designs for
Excellence – Handbook for Institutional Self-Study, refers to avoiding duplication and
encouraging the use of recent research, reports, and evaluations. In order to replicate
this experience on a campus-wide scale, we intend to draw upon the recent
experiences of the accredited programs mentioned above.
SPECIFIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The primary purpose of this self-study is to assess the strengths and weaknesses of this
institution and, through this process, determine the courses of action which will enable us
to sustain our academic excellence and better serve our constituents. Our main
constituents are: students, parents, faculty, administrative personnel, employees,
alumni, employers, and the external community. While it cannot be ignored that any
impending accreditation visit by an external agency tends to serve as a catalyst to drive
institutional self-assessment efforts, our ultimate purpose should be to independently
internalize this process with the goal of improving our services to our constituents.
12
The specific objectives of the self-study are:
a. Implementing and assessing the recent comprehensive institutional strategic
plan
b. Implementing a comprehensive outcomes assessment plan including student
learning outcomes
c. Educating the UPRM community about our mission and objectives.
d. Reviewing and acting upon student learning outcomes results to benefit our
students as well as the institution at large.
e. Improving campus-wide awareness of the benefits of continuous selfevaluation, and set in motion the institutionalization of an outcomes assessment
program to help in better decisionmaking and fulfillment of the needs of our
constituents.
f. Determining where we stand as UPRM and moving forward towards becoming
the institution of preference by the Puerto Rico citizens.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE STEERING TEAM AND
TASK FORCES
After much insistence by a 2005 steering committee member (now Accreditation Liaison
Officer- ALO) to the Dean of Academic Affairs, Dr. Darnyd Ortiz, the Chancellor of the
University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus, Dr. Jorge Rivera Santos, called for a
meeting on October 30, 2012. The members at this meeting were: the Chancellor, Dean
of Academic Affairs, Executive Assistant to the Chancellor, Professor Nilsa Velásquez,
the Director of the Institutional Research and Planning Office, Dr. Noel Artiles, and the
Director of Graduate Studies and now ALO, Dr. Betsy Morales, to discuss potential
members who would likely constitute the Institutional Steering Team. The Chancellor
offered and appointed Dr. Betsy Morales as the MSCHE Steering Committee
Coordinator and requested she recruit the members who would serve as Coordinators per
standard. Given Dr. Morales’ experience with the prior accreditation (2005), she invited
key members who had prior experience with accreditation.
The Team composition would represent all colleges and be responsible for developing the
Self-Study Design for the Self-Study Report in preparation for the MSCHE visit during
Spring 2016. The Steering Team, which would consist of multiple Task Forces to
address the fourteen (14) standards as outlined in The Characteristics of Excellence in
Higher Education, would be responsible for the development of relevant Charge
Questions to assist in the self-study process. This would require that a mechanism for
the campus-wide self-study be developed to assess all 14 standards. During the summer,
data collection instruments (questionnaires) were developed and numerous have been
administered during the first semester of the 2013-2014 academic year (first year students,
second/third, fourth/fifth students, directors, and faculty members). During the second
semester of 2013-2014, the remaining questionnaires will be administered (e.g. nonteaching personnel, deans, chancellor).
13
The UPRM-MSCHE Institutional Steering Team consists of the following twelve Task
Forces with their respective Coordinators.
Overall Team
Betsy Morales, Coordinator, ALO
Department of English- Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Task Force 1
Standard 1 – Mission, Goals and Objectives
Betsy Morales, Coordinator, Professor Department of English, Faculty of Arts and
Sciences
Silvestre Colón, Professor, M a t h e m a t i c a l S c i e n c e s , Associate Dean of
Academic Affairs
Nancy Méndez, Associate Director of the Office of Research and Institutional
Planning
MSCHE Steering Committee
Task Force 2
Standard 2 – Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal
Standard 3 – Institutional Resources
Mercedes Ferrer, Coordinator, Professor, Industrial Engineering Department
Candida González, Professor, Business Administration
Lucas Avilés, Interim Chancellor, Professor/Researcher, College of Agricultural Sciences
Mercedes Ferrer, Professor, Industrial Engineering
Wilson Crespo, Director, Budget Office
Darío Torres, Administrator, R&D Center
Rocío Zapata, Director, University Businesses Services “Empresas Universitarias de
Servicio”
Maria De Lourdes Conde, Human Resources Analyst
Zobeida López, Special Assistant to the Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
Task Force 3
Standard 4 – Leadership & Governance
Standard 5 – Administration
Noel Artiles, Professor, Industrial Engineering Department
Héctor Huyke, Professor, Department of Humanities
Héctor Santiago, Professor/Researcher, College of Agricultural Sciences
Miguel Seguí, Professor, College of Business Administration
Nilsa Velázquez, Professor, Department of Economics
Task Force 4
Standard 6 – Integrity
Halley Sánchez, Coordinator, Department of Humanities, College of Arts & Sciences
Linda Beaver, Professor, Agricultural Sciences
Jose A. Cruz, Professor, College of Business Administration
William J Frey, Professor, Business College of Administration (Ethicist)
Christopher Papadopoulos, Professor, Engineering School
14
Task Force 5
Standard 7 – Institutional Assessment
Cristina Pomales-Garcia, Coordinator, Professor, Industrial Engineering
David Suleiman, Professor, Chemical Engineering
Luz Gracia, Professor, College of Business Administration
Valerie Galarza, Undergraduate Student, Department of Social Sciences
Task Force 6
Standard 8 – Student Admissions
Sonia M. Bartolomei-Suárez, Coordinator, Professor Industrial Engineering
Madeline Rodríguez, Director of the Admissions Office
María Barbot, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs of the College of Arts and Sciences
Manuel Jimenez, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs of the College of Engineering
Lizzette González, Interim Assistant Dean of College of Agricultural Science
Lucyann Fernández, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, College of Business
Administration
Freya Toledo, Professor , General Engineering Department and Coordinator of the UPRM
Open House
María Almodóvar, Professional Counselor
Raúl Machiavelli, Professor, Agricultural Sciences, Interim Director of Graduate Studies
Task Force 7
Standard 9 – Student Support Services
Omell Pagán Parés, Coordinator, Industrial Engineering
Rosie Torres de Calderón, Health Services
Manuel E. Márquez, Student Council (CGE)
Griselys Rosado, Academic Advising
Yomarachaliff Luciano, Alumni
Jorge I. Frontera Rodríguez, Library
Xiomara Pratts Peña, Quality of Life
Margarita Carlo, Placement
Santos Torres, Band and Orchestra
Briseida Meléndez, Registrar
Yamil Negrón, Financial Aid
Pura Vincenty Pagán, Professional Counseling
Aileen Ramírez, Social and Cultural Activities
15
Task Force 8
Standard 10 – Faculty
Gayle W. Griggs, Coordinator, Professor, Department of English, College of Arts and
Sciences
Maribel Acosta Lugo, Professor, Department of Hispanic Studies, Interim Associate
Director of Graduate Studies
Lysa Chizmadia, Professor, Department of Geology
Aury Curbelo Ruiz, Professor, College of Business Administration
Saylisse Dávila, Professor, Industrial Engineering
Carlos Quiñones Padovani, Professor, Department of Physical Education
Enid Arcelay, Professor, Agricultural Sciences
Jordan McGee, student, Agricultural Sciences
Task Force 9
Standard 11 – Educational Offerings
Jorge A. Gonzalez, Coordinator, Professor of Agricultural Economics
Francisco Monroig Saltar, Professor, Agricultural Sciences
Rosario Ortiz Rodríguez, Professor, College of Business Administration
Jeffrey Valentín Mari, Professor, Economics
Raul Zapata, Professor, Civil Engineering
Irene Ocasio, Adminstrative Official 1- Office of the Dean of Academic Affairs.
Task Force 10
Standard 12 – General Education
Mabel Ortiz, Coordinator, Professor, Department of English, College of Arts & Sciences
Duane Kolterman, Professor, Department of Biology
Jeannette Santos, Professor, General Engineering
John Fernández, Professor, Agricultural Sciences
Noemí Maldonado, Professor, Department of Humanities
Mariela Ballester, student, Department of Social Sciences
Ricardo Méndez, student, Department of Geology
Task Force 11
Standard 13 – Related Educational Activities
Pedro Vásquez, Coordinator, Professor of Mathematical Sciences, College of Arts &
Sciences
José Ferrer López, Director, Division of Continuing Education and Professional Studies
José Cuevas, Director, Center of Information and Technology
Kevin Carroll, Professor, Department of English
Ellen Acarón, Coordinator, COOP Program
16
Task Force 12
Standard 14 – Assessment of Student Learning
Bernadette M. Delgado, Coordinator, Professor, Department of Social Sciences, College of
Arts and Sciences
Ivelisse Padilla, Professor, Department of Chemistry
Aidsa Santiago, Professor, General Engineering
Roberto Vargas, Professor, Crop and Agro-Environmental Science
Yolanda Ruiz, Professor, College of Business Administration
Irmarie Cruz, Student Representative, Psychology
Ex officio Members:
Dr. Jaime Seguel, Interim Dean of Academic Affairs
Dr. Héctor Jiménez, Interim Director of the Office of Institutional Research and Planning
17
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE INSTITUTIONAL STEERING TEAM
The roles and responsibilities of the institutional steering team include:
1.
Developing logistics and carrying out the self-study process for the accreditation
visit in 2015-16. This would include coordinating the evaluation visit and
preparing the institutional response.
2.
Meeting regularly, as often as necessary, to discuss and approve tasks assigned
to each Task Force, such as: the development of charge questions for each of the
14 Standards of Excellence, and the design the questionnaires to be distributed
campus- wide to obtain effective and comprehensive feedback.
3.
Administering t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c a m p u s -wide, a n a l y z i n g a l l
r e s p o n s e s , and recommending corrective actions, and if necessary, redesigning elements of the questionnaires to provide the most effective input as a
measure of our self-study and continuing improvement.
4.
Interviewing all external/internal community constituents as another means to
answer our self -study charge questions and to determine what is needed for our
continuing improvement.
5.
Providing campus-wide orientations to each of the four colleges as well as
other administrative units about the impending accreditation visit, but
more importantly, about the need to incorporate assessment methods for
continuous quality improvement.
This would include promoting active
participation from the academic community throughout the self-study process.
6.
Studying and developing plans for institutional assessment, and for student
learning outcomes assessment.
7.
Analyzing all received data for self study report
8.
Creating self study reports by standard, which includes findings, strengths, areas
needing improvement, and commendations
9.
Maintaining an updated website with accurate information on institutional selfstudy efforts for public access.
FORMATION OF THE TASK FORCES
Task Force Coordinators select the members at their own initiative, and exercise ultimate
discretion in the formation of their teams.
However, they make sure that key
administrative units (colleges) are well represented in the process.
18
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TASK FORCES
1. All Task Force Coordinators will call for meetings of their respective Task
Force as and when necessary for the proper functioning of the Task Force.
Proper minutes will be maintained by all Task Force Coordinators.
2. All Task Force members will familiarize themselves with Characteristics of
Excellence, previous self-study reports, their findings, changes in criteria, and
recommendations resulting from the 2005 Self Study.
3. All Task Forces will receive input from the various campus units on
questionnaires to be administered in October/November 2013, analyze their
results, and revise these questionnaires, if necessary, prior to administering
them again the following semester. These tasks would be carried out during
every semester and then reported in the individual Task Force Report. These
individual Task Force Reports would form the backbone of the campus SelfStudy Report that would be submitted to MSCHE.
4. If necessary, all task forces may interview any external/internal community
constituents as another means of answering the charge questions.
IV.
CHARGES TO TASK FORCES
This section lists the Charge Questions developed by each of the Task Forces. For the 2005
accreditation, charge questions were also utilized and facilitated in determining what
needed improvement. For the 2015 accreditation, the team will use the last report to
establish where we stand and where we need to advance.
19
CHARGES TO TASK FORCES
20
TASK FORCE I - STANDARD 1
Standard 1: Mission, Goals, and Objectives:
The institution’s mission clearly defines its purpose within the context of higher education and explains whom the institution serves and what it
intends to accomplish. The institution’s stated goals and objectives, consistent with the aspirations and expectations of higher education clearly
specify how the institution will fulfill its mission. The mission, goals, and objectives are developed and recognized by the institution with its members
and it’s governing body and are utilized to develop and shape its programs and practices and to evaluate its effectiveness.
Task Force Members: Betsy Morales Caro, Professor, Department of English (Coordinator); Silvestre Colón, Professor, M a t h e m a t i c a l
S c i e n c e s , Associate Dean of Academic Affairs; Nancy Méndez, Associate Director of the Office of Research and Institutional Planning;
MSCHE Steering Committee
Purpose:
The Mission Planning Task Force will examine UPRM’s process of development and implementation of a comprehensive institutional strategic plan. It
will examine the clarity of UPRM’s purpose, relevance, uses, and applications.
The mission of the UPRM is stated as follows (Certified by the Administrative Board, 11-12-137):
To provide excellent service to Puerto Rico and to the world:
• Forming educated, cultivated, capable, critical thinking citizens professionally prepared in the fields of agricultural sciences, engineering, arts, sciences,
and business administration so they may contribute to the educational, cultural, social, technological and economic development.
•
Performing creative work, research and service to meet society’s needs and to make available the results of these activities.
We provide our students with the skills and sensitivity needed to effectively resolve problems and to exemplify the values and attitudes that should prevail in a
democratic society that treasures and respects diversity.
Element Numbering System: Items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher
Education (2011) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional analysis item. The
bulleted items under the fundamental elements were designated as F1 [a], F1 [b] and so on. This system provided evidence of alignment
between the inquiry questions and the standards.
21
Fundamental & Optional Questions regarding Mission and Objectives
Inquiry Questions
1. What evidence is there that the mission and the strategic objectives
of the UPRM guide faculty, administration, staff, and governing
bodies in making decisions related to planning, resource allocation,
program and curriculum development, and definition of program
outcomes?*
2. What evidence is there that the mission and strategic objectives of
the UPRM include support of scholarly and creative activity, at
levels and of the kinds appropriate to the mission of the UPRM?
Sources of Data
Documents generated by UPRM Administrative
Board, UPR University Board, and UPR Board of
Governors.
New academic program proposals
Academic Senate proceedings/records
Annual reports (at different levels: department,
college and institution)
Annual reports from Dean of Agricultural
Extension Services and Agricultural Experimental
Stations
Master Plan for Infrastructure Development
OMCA Reports
Strategic Plans
Governors.
New academic program proposals
Academic Senate proceedings/records
CID Annual Reports
Annual reports (at different levels: department,
college, administrative, and institution)
Strategic Plans
Assessment Reports
OMCA Reports
Administrative Reports
Surveys
Elements
F1 [a]
F1[b]
22
Inquiry Questions
3. What evidence is there that the m i s s i o n a n d objectives of the
UPRM were developed through collaborative participation by those
who facilitate or are otherwise responsible for institutional
improvement and developments?
4. What evidence is there that the mission and objectives of the UPRM
are periodically evaluated and formally approved?
5. What evidence is there that the mission and the strategic objectives
of the UPRM have been publicized and widely known by the
institution’s members?
Sources of Data
Academic Senate certifications reviewing UPRM
Strategic Plan
Administrative Board certifications related to
UPRM goals and objectives.
Chancellor’s Initiative: Review of UPRM Strategic
Plan.
Work / minutes from colleges´ strategic planning
committees.
OIIP
Interviews
Annual Reports
Chancellor reports
Dean’s reports
Administrative Board Certifications
Department Strategic Plans
Faculty Strategic Plans
OIIP
Deployment of plan to all units
Minutes of strategic plan development meetings.
Governors.
UPRM Web pages
UPRM Catalogue
Surveys
OMCA Documents
Pamphlets and published documents
Elements
F1[c]
F1[d]
F1[e]
23
Inquiry Questions
6. What evidence is there to support that the mission and objectives are
discussed openly and frequently to respond to internal and external
contexts and constituencies?
7. What evidence is there to support that the institutional objectives are
consistent with the UPRM’s mission?
Sources of Data
goals
Plan.
Work / minutes from college planning committees
Accreditation Reports
goals
Plan.
Interviews
OIIP
Annual Reports
OMCA Reports
Interviews
Elements
F2
F3
24
Inquiry Questions
8. What evidence is there that the mission and objectives of the UPRM
focus on student learning, other outcomes**, and institutional
improvement?
Sources of Data
goals
Administrative Junta certifications related to
Plan.
Surveys
Focus Groups
OMCA Reports
OIIP
Exit Interviews
Dean of Academic Affairs
Elements
F4
* Two periods are included: From 2004 until 2011 the mission and goals were approved by the Academic Senate in September, 2004 and revised in 2007. As of
December, 2011, the mission and objectives were approved under the UPRM’s Strategic Plan 2012-2022.
** Other outcomes may include retention and graduation rates, research, and ventures.
25
STANDARD 2: PLANNING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION, AND INSTITUTIONAL RENEWAL
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.
Task Force Members: Mercedes Ferrer, Chair (Associate Professor); Candida González (Professor); Lucas Avilés (Professor/Researcher); Mercedes
Ferrer (Assistant Professor); Wilson Crespo (Director, Budget Office); Darío Torres (Administrator, R&D Center); Rocío Zapata (Director, University
Businesses Services “Empresas Universitarias de Servicio”); Ma. De Lourdes Conde (Human Resources Analyst); Zobeida López (Special Assistant to
the Dean, College of Arts and Sciences)
Element Numbering System: Items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education
(2011) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional analysis item. The bulleted items
under the fundamental elements were designated as F1 [a], F1 [b] and so on. This system provided evidence of alignment between the inquiry
questions and the standards.
Purpose: To evaluate the institutional planning process, its nature and quality, the interrelationship between planning and resource allocation, and their
influence on institutional renewal. This includes, but is not limited to, verification of current policies and processes, the distribution of decision making
authority within those processes, accountability allocation, and assessment.
26
Fundamental & Optional Questions regarding Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
1. Are there clearly stated goals and objectives, both institution–wide
and for individual units?
a. How are the assessment results reflected on the institution/unit
goals and objectives?
Budget Office
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deanships
Administrative Unit, Department and Program Directors
b. How are goals and objective linked to the institutional
Planning Committees
mission?
2. How are goals and objectives used for planning and resource
allocation at all levels?
Budget Office
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deanships
Planning Committees
Budget Office
OIIP
b. How are assessment results incorporated into the planning and
OMCA Documents
improvement process?
Deanships
Planning Committees
Elements
F1
F1
3. How are planning and improvement processes communicated?
a. How does the process allow for constituent participation?
F2
27
Inquiry Questions
4. Describe the decision making process and whether it facilitates or not
planning and renewal processes
5. Is authority over those processes well defined?
a. Define faculty roles in the planning process
b. Define administrators’ role in the planning process.
c. How does the institution evidence its commitment with
planning and institutional renewal processes effort?
Sources of Data
Regulations
Relevant Certifications
Circular Letters
Regulations
Circular Letters
Budget Office
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deanships
Planning Committees
6. Is there assurance of accountability over such processes?
a. How is the work done by the parties involved in planning and
budget activities assessed?
b. How is the work done by the parties involved in planning and
budget activities encouraged and recognized?
Regulations
Circular Letters
OIIP
OMCA Documents
7. How many institutional and unit improvement efforts and their results
have been documented?
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
Assessment Coordinators
Planning Committees
Elements
F3
F3, F4,
O2,
O3(b)
F4, O8
F5
28
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
8. How many programs have been reviewed in response to the
assessment process and accreditation efforts?
Deans
Accreditation Coordinators
9. How do external affiliations and partnerships impact institutional
operations?
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
10. How is the effectiveness of planning efforts assessed?
11. How is the effectiveness of resource allocation assessed?
12. How is the effectiveness of institutional renewal processes assessed?
13. What tools, techniques or methodologies have been implemented as
part of the improvement efforts?
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
Administrative Unit, Department and Program
Coordinators
Budget Office
OIIP
Deans
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
Elements
O5
O9
F6
F6
F6
O12
29
STANDARD 3: INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES
The human, financial, technical, 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.
Task Force Members:
Mercedes Ferrer, Chair (Associate Professor); Candida González (Professor); Lucas Avilés
(Professor/Researcher); Mercedes Ferrer (Assistant Professor); Wilson Crespo (Director, Budget Office); Darío Torres (Administrator,
R&D Center); Rocío Zapata (Director, University Businesses Services “Empresas Universitarias de Servicio”); Ma. De Lourdes
Conde (Human Resources Analyst); Zobeida López (Special Assistant to the Dean, College of Arts and Sciences)
Element Numbering System: Items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence
in Higher Education (2011) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable
optional analysis item. The bulleted items under the fundamental elements were designated as F1 [a], F1 [b] and so on.
This system provided evidence of alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
Purpose: To evaluate the institutional resources, its nature and quality, the interrelationship between planning and resource allocation,
and their influence on the institution. This includes, but is not limited to, verification of current policies and processes, the distribution
of decision making authority within those resources and processes, accountability allocation, and assessment.
30
Fundamental & Optional Questions regarding Institutional Resources
Inquiry Questions
1. What strategies and tools are used to measure and assess the level of
resources needed?
2. What strategies and tools are used to measure and assess the efficient
utilization of institutional resources?
3. What are the procedures and policies used to determine allocation of
assets?
4. What approach is used to ensure adequate faculty, staff, and
administrator allocation to support institutional needs?
Sources of Data
Elements
OIIP
Budget Office
Deans
OIIP
Budget Office
Deans
Board of Trustees
Central Budget Office
Budget Office
F1
Deans
F3
F1
F2
31
Inquiry Questions
Sources
of Data
OIIP
Budget Office
Deans
Elements
6. How are assessment documents and results used for allocating
resources?
OIIP
Budget Office
OMCA Documents
Deans
F4
7. How is the effectiveness of resource allocation assessed?
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
F4
OIIP
Permanent Improvement Plan
Dean of Administration (Planta Física)
F5
OIIP
Deans
F6
5. How are financial planning and budgeting processes aligned with
strategic planning?
8. Is there a comprehensive infrastructure and master plan for the
institution?
a. Does it include a life-cycle management plan for infrastructure?
b. Is there evidence of implementation?
9. Are support facilities (computer labs, library) recognized in the plan?
How are the personnel and budget needs of support facilities assessed
and fulfilled?
F4
32
Inquiry Questions
10. What is the plan for the renovation and replacement of educational and
technological equipment?
a. Are they appropriate for the educational programs?
b. Is there evidence of implementation?
11. What controls exists to deal with financial, administrative, and
auxiliary operations?
12. What policies and procedures exist to determine allocation of assets?
13. What is the schedule for future and past independent audits on financial
matters?
a. Is there evidence of follow-up of any cited concerns?
14. How is the effective and efficient use of institutional resources
assessed?
Sources
of Data
Elements
Technology Center
Dean of Students
Faculty Deans
OIIP
Budget Office
Finance
Internal Audit
Regulations
Certifications
Budget Office
Board of Trustees
Comptroller’s Office
Finance (Campus and Central Administration)
Internal Audit
F7
Chancellor
Budget Office
OIIP
OMCA Documents
Deans
F10
F8
F8
F9
33
Standards 4: Leadership and Governance
The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decisionmaking. 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.
Task Force Members:
•
•
•
•
•
Noel Artiles, Ph.D. Professor, Industrial Engineering Department.
Héctor Huyke,Ph.D. Professor, Humanities Department.
Héctor Santiago, Ph.D. Professor/Researcher, College of Agricultural Sciences
Miguel Seguí, LLM, Professor, College of Business Administration.
Nilsa Velázquez, J.D., Professor, Economics Department.
The MSCHE’s “Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education” states that “the primary goal of governance is to enable an educational entity to
realize fully its stated mission and goals and to achieve these in the most effective and efficient manner that benefits the institution and its students.
Institutional governance provides the means through which authority and responsibility are assigned, delegated, and shared in a climate of mutual
support and respect.” The UPRM academic community adheres to this objective.
(Online Version - Revised March 2009) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional
analysis item. This system provided evidence of alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
34
Fundamental & Optional Questions regarding
Leadership and Governance
Inquiry Questions
[Reference “Characteristics of Excellence”, p. 15 - 17]
1. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a well-defined system of collegial
governance including written policies outlining governance responsibilities of
faculty, administration, and governing boards (Governing Board, University Board,
and Administrative Board)? Where are these policies readily available to the campus
community?
2. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s written go verning document s t hat:
a. Delineate the governance structure and provide for collegial governance, the
structure’s composition, duties and responsibilities as well as the selection
process for the members of this structure.
b. Assign authority and accountability for policy development and decision
making, including a process for the involvement of appropriate institutional
constituencies in policy development and decision making.
c. Provide for the select ion process for governing body members.
Sources of Data
Elements
UPR law and bylaws. Certifications of
UPR Board of Regents, UPR University
Board, UPRM Administrative Board, and
Academic Senate
F1
UPR law and bylaws. Certifications of
Academic Senate
F2
UPR bylaws. Certifications of UPR
Board of Regents, UPR University
3. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M offers appropriate opportunities for student Board, UPRM Administrative Board, and
input regarding decisions that affect them.
Academic Senate. UPR and UPRM
General Student Regulations. Student
survey.
4. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a governing body capable of reflecting
UPR law and bylaws
constituent and public interest and of an appropriate size to fulfill all its
Bylaws, Certifications of UPR Board of
responsibilities, and which includes members with sufficient expertise to assure that
Regents. Deans’ survey.
the body’s fiduciary responsibilities can be fulfilled.
UPR law and bylaws
5. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a governing body not chaired by UPRM
Bylaws, Certifications
Chancellor or by UPR President.
UPR Board of Regents
F3
F4
F5
35
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
6. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a governing body that certifies to MSCHE
that the institution
Bylaws, Certifications of
a. Is in compliance with the eligibility requirements, accreditation standards and
UPR Board of Regents and UPRM
policies of the Commission.
Administrative Board.
b. Describes itself in identical terms to all its accrediting and regulatory agencies.
Communications of the Chancellor’s
c. Communicates any changes in its accredited status.
Office, Dean of Academic Affairs, and
d. Agrees to disclose information required by the Commission to carry out its
ALO to MSCHE.
accrediting responsibilities, including levels of governing body compensation,
if any.
7. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a conflict-of-interest policy for its
governing bodies (Board of Regents, University Board, UPRM Administrative Board,
PR Ethics Law and Regulations. Bylaws,
Academic Senate), which addresses matters such as remuneration, contractual
Certifications of
relationships, employment, family, financial or other interests that could pose conflicts
UPR Board of Regents and UPRM
of interest, and that assures that those interests are disclosed and that they do not
Administrative Board.
interfere with the impartiality of governing body members or outweigh the greater
duty to secure and ensure the academic and fiscal integrity of the institution.
UPR law
8. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a governing body that assists in generating
Board of Regents bylaws and
resources needed to sustain and improve the institution.
certifications. Deans’ survey
9. Provide evidence t h a t U P R M h a s a process for orienting new members and Academic Affairs (briefing for new faculty
providing continuing updates for current members of its governing bodies on the members). Minutes of Faculty meetings at
institution’s mission, organization, and academic programs and objectives?
both the college and departmental levels.
10. Describe the procedure that UPRM has in place for the periodic objective
assessment of the governing body in reaching its stated objectives.
UPRM Academic Senate Strategic Plans.
Elements
F6
F7
F8
F9
F10
36
Inquiry Questions
11. Describe the process of appointing the chief executive officer at UPRM, in
particular, which governing board appoints him/her, and what is his/her
primary responsibility.
Sources of Data
Elements
UPR Law and Regulations
F11
12. Describe UPRM’s process for the periodic assessment of the effectiveness of
institutional leadership and governance.
UPRM Academic Senate certifications.
13. Describe UPRM’s process for the review of its written policies (submit evidence of
implementation) that establish the processes for involvement of the governing
UPR Board of Regents, UPRM
body, administration, and faculty in policy development and decision making,
Administrative Board, and UPRM
specifically with respect to selection and evaluation of the chief executive officer or
Academic Senate certifications.
those in charge of operational/executive responsibilities; budgeting and resource
Recruitment plans from colleges and
development; oversight of the academic program; consultation regarding faculty
departments.
hiring, dismissal, promotion and tenure; and monitoring operations of the
institution.
UPRM Administrative Board and UPRM
14. Provide evidence that UPR and UPRM have plans for governing body orientation
and self-assessment.
15. Provide evidence that UPR and UPRM have written assessment from external
UPR Central Administration.
specialists invited to the institution for consultation on planning and selfChancellor’s Office.
assessment issues.
Faculty
F12
O1
O4
O5
37
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
16. Provide evidence that UPRM has
a. Written records to assess the carrying out of responsibilities by the
governing body and its committees consistent with the institutional mission
UPRM Administrative Board and UPRM
and its definition of appropriate participation by internal institutional bodies.
b. Faculty council/senate or similar body deliberation and recommendations on
Office of the Dean of Academic Affairs
matters such as the development of curriculum, standards for admission and
graduation, and personnel actions such as hiring, promotion, dismissal and
tenure of faculty.
Elements
O6
38
Standards 5: Administration
The institution’s administrative structure and services facilitate learning and research/scholarship, foster quality improvement, and
support the institution’s organization and governance.
Task Force Members:
•
•
•
•
•
Noel Artiles, Ph.D. Professor, Industrial Engineering Department.
Héctor Huyke,Ph.D. Professor, Humanities Department.
Héctor Santiago, Ph.D. Professor/Researcher, College of Agricultural Sciences
Miguel Seguí, LLM, Professor, College of Business Administration.
Nilsa Velázquez, J.D., Professor, Economics Department.
The MSCHE’s “Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education” states that “The administration should be organized with clearly defined roles and
responsibilities and should have a thorough understanding of institutional mission, goals, and objectives.” The UPRM academic community strives and
aspires to have an administrative structure whose members collectively contribute in guiding the institution to achieve its academic, operational and
financial goals.
(Online Version - Revised March 2009) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional
analysis item. This system provided evidence of alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
39
Administration
Inquiry Questions
1. Explain how the Chancellor carries out his primary responsibilities of (a) leading the
institution toward the achievement of its goals, and (b) administrating the institution.
2. Provide evidence that UPRM has a Chancellor with the combination of academic
background, professional training, and/or other qualities appropriate to an institution
of higher education and the institution’s mission.
3. Provide evidence that UPRM has administrative leaders with appropriate skills,
degrees and training to carry out their responsibilities and functions.
4. Provide evidence that UPRM has qualified staffing appropriate to the goals, type,
size, and complexity of the institution.
5. Provide evidence that UPRM has adequate information and decision-making systems
to support the work of administrative leaders.
6. Provide evidence that UPRM has clear documentation of the lines of organization
and authority.
Sources of Data
UPR law and bylaws. UPRM
Administrative Board Certifications.
Communications from the Chancellor’s
Office. Surveys to Academic Senate,
Administrative Board, and to faculty
Curriculum Vitae of UPRM’s
Chancellors during the last 10 years.
Surveys to Academic Senate,
Administrative Board, and to faculty
Curriculums Vitae of UPRM’s Deans
during the last 10 years. Survey to
directors and deans.
Human Resources data bases. Surveys
to Administrative Board, to students,
staff, deans, directors, and faculty
OIIP, CTI and Dean’s Offices. Survey
to Academic Senate, Deans, and
Directors.
UPR Law. UPR General Regulations.
Elements
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
40
Administration
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
UPR Law. UPR General Regulations.
Certifications of UPR Board of Regents,
7. Provide evidence that UPRM periodically carries assessment of the effectiveness of
UPR University Board, and UPRM
administrative structures and services.
Administrative Board. Chancellor’s,
deans’, and directors’ offices. Survey to
faculty.
8. Provide evidence that UPRM has regularly conducted review of the sufficiency and
Surveys to deans, directors, supervisors,
effectiveness of directors, supervisors and administrators to carry out the functions of
staff, and faculty.
the institution.
9. Provide evidence that UPRM has regularly conducted reviews of the adequacy of Surveys to deans, directors, supervisors,
clerical, technological, and other support for administrative personnel?
staff and faculty.
10. Provide evidence that UPRM, during the last 10 years, has carried out an analyses of
the organizational structure and charts clearly indicating reporting/responsibility
Surveys to deans and directors.
relationships to ensure that it is appropriately structured, and analysis of the
structure’s efficiency and effectiveness.
11. Provide evidence that UPRM has regularly conducted
a. Assessments of staff attitudes and satisfaction.
Surveys to deans, directors, supervisors,
b. Staff development programs, with recommendations for improvement as
and staff.
appropriate.
Elements
F7
O1
O2
O3
O4
41
Standard 6 – Integrity
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 states policies, providing support to academic and intellectual freedom.
Sub-committee members: Halley D. Sanchez, Professor, Humanities (coordinator), Linda Beaver, Professor, Agricultural Sciences, Jose A. Cruz, Professor, Business Administration
(and a computer Engineer), William J Frey, Business Administration (Ethicist), Christopher Papadopoulos, Assistant Professor, Engineering School
Purpose: To assess the institution’s adherence to ethical standards, its own stated policies, and its support of academic and intellectual freedom.
Fundamental Element Numbering System: Fundamental elements are referred to by the number used in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education (2006, twelfth ed.
revised). An “F” indicates a fundamental element; an “O” indicates an optional element.
Inquiry Question
Charge 1: Determine with appropriate evidence the extent to which the
institution complies with the right of its stakeholders to free and
informed consent and has been truthful in how it represents itself to
them. Some questions to be answered with appropriate data:
a.
Is the information disseminated by the university consistent with
its stated mission, goals, and objectives?
b.
Are any changes to its stated mission, goals, and objectives, and
other material changes, disclosed accurately and in a timely
fashion?
c.
Is intuitional information provided in a manner that ensures
student and public assess?
d.
Are catalogues readily available, and, if only available
electronically, does the university Webpage provide a guide or
index to catalog information?
e.
Are students provided with accurate information regarding
programs of study, the average real time taken by students to
complete their programs, their possibilities for success in their
studies, and prospects for future employment?
f.
Are students properly informed about assessment, grievance,
and disciplinary procedures?
Source of Data
Elements
University Law
General UPR Regulations
UPRM Catalog
Descriptive Pamphlets (Brochures)
Information packet sent or presented to students
Faculty Handbook
Student Regulations
Staff/Administrative Handbooks (exististent)
Academic Senate Certifications
Certifications from the Board of Governors
(formerly Board of Trustees)
 Other material sent to students and/or Faculty, as
provided by:
 Dean of Students
 Dean of Academic Affairs
 Dean of Administration
 Admission Office
 Questionnaires sent to:
 Deans
 Chairs
 Presidents of non-teaching unions
 Dialogue Committee
 Student Organizations
 Student Ombudsman
F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F8, F9, F10, F11,
F12, F13, F15, F16, F17 (details below)











F8
F8, F13
F16, F14, F15
F10, F11, F12
F9, F15, F16
F1
42
Inquiry Question
g.
Are faculty and non-teaching personnel duly informed about
regulations regarding student assessment, grievance and
disciplinary procedures?
h.
Are faculty provided with accurate information regarding what
is expected of them, requirements and procedures for tenure and
promotion, evaluation procedures, deadlines, discipline and
dismissal procedures?
i.
j.
k.
l.
Elements
Elements
Source of Da
F2, F4
Guidance Counselors
Surveys
Faculty
Randomly selected students
Randomly selected employees
Past reports sent to MSCHE,
ABET, CES
F2, F4
F8, F13, F14, F17
Are non-teaching employees provided with accurate information
regarding what is expected of them, evaluation procedures, and
discipline and dismissal procedures?
Are accreditation agencies, funding agencies, and the public in
general provided with accurate information regarding the
institution?
Are faculty, non-teaching personnel and students informed of
the rules and regulations dealing with intellectual property
rights?
F6
F3
Are faculty, non-teaching personnel and students informed of
the rules and regulations dealing with conflicts of interest?
Charge 2: Assess the extent to which the institution’s procedures and
practices exhibit fairness, due process, and respect for individuals. Some
questions to be answered with appropriate data:
a.
Are students, faculty, and employees treated with respect
by administration officials and other personnel in the
bureaucracy?
b.
Are the procedures used to recruit (i) faculty, and (ii) nonteaching personnel fair and non-discriminatory?
c.
Are the procedures used to recruit and admit students nondiscriminatory and in accord with ethical standards?
d.
Are the procedures and practices used to evaluate (assess)
and discipline students fair, respectful, and in accord with due
process?
e.
Source
Source of
of Data
Data






Are the required and elective courses offered sufficiently
available for students to graduate within the published program
length?













University Law
General UPR Regulations
Academic Senate Certifications
UPRM Catalog
Certifications from the Board of Governors
(formerly Board of Trustees)
Descriptive Pamphlets (Brochures)
Information packet sent or presented to students
Student Regulations
Student Handbook
Faculty Handbook
Staff/Administrative Handbooks (where they
exist)
Other materials sent to students and/or Faculty,
as provided by:
F1, F2, F3, F4, F6, F7, F9
(details below)
F3, F4
F2
F7
F1, F4
F9
F1
43
Inquiry Question
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
Is there an institutional policy for dealing with cheating
and plagiarism? If so, is it fair and in accord with due process?
Source
SourceofofData
Data

Is there an institutional procedure for dealing with student
grievances? If so, is this procedure fair and in accord with due
process? Are student grievances addressed promptly,
appropriately and equitably?
Are the procedures and practices used to evaluate, tenure,
promote, and discipline faculty fair and in accord with due
process and respect for the individual?
Is there an institutional procedure for dealing with faculty
grievances? If so, is this procedure fair and in accord with due
process?







 Admission Office
Questionnaires sent to:
 Deans
 Chairs
 Presidents of non-teaching unions
 Student Organizations
Guidance Counselors
Surveys
Faculty
Randomly selected students
Randomly selected employees
Past reports sent to MSCHE, ABET, C
University Counsel
Elements
Elements
Source of Da
F1
F2, F4
F2, F4
F2, F4
Are the procedures and practices used to evaluate,
promote, and discipline non-teaching personnel fair and in
accord with due process and respect for the individual?
F2, F4
Is there an institutional procedure for dealing with
grievances by non-teaching personnel? If so, is this procedure
fair and in accord with due process?
F2, F4
Are non-tenure track, adjunct, and part time faculty treated
fairly and with respect?
44
Inquiry Question
m.
n.
o.
Source
Source
of Data
of Data
Elements
Elements
Source of Da
Are the practices connected with compensation fair?
Is there an institutional policy for dealing with intellectual
property rights of faculty? If so, is it fair and in accord with due
F4
F6
Is there an institutional policy to avoid and deal with
conflicts of interest? If so, is it fair and in accord with due
p.
Is there an institutional policy for dealing with intellectual
honesty? If so, is it fair and in accord with due process?
q.
Is there an institutional policy for dealing with research
integrity? If so, is it fair and in accord with due process?
F3
F6
F6
Charge 3: In light of its stated mission, goals, and objectives, assess the
extent to which the institution carries out its policies in a consistent, fair,
respectful, and non-discriminatory manner. Some questions to be
answered with appropriate data:
a.
Does the institution carry out its policies and practices in a
manner that fosters a climate of adherence to ethical standards
and respect among individuals?
b.
manner that fosters a climate of academic inquiry and
intellectual and academic freedom?
c.
manner that avoids undue political influence?
Charge 4: Identify if there exists a procedure to assess institutional
integrity and to foster continuous improvement. Some questions to be
answered with appropriate data:
a.
Does the institution have a procedure for the periodic
assessment of institutional integrity as evidenced in
institutional policies, processes, practices, and the manner in
which these are implemented?

Questionnaires and Surveys sent to:
 Faculty
 Randomly selected students
 Randomly selected employees
 Student organizations
 Professorial organizations
 Employee organizations (unions)
F3, F5, F7
(detail below)
F3, F7
F5
F5

Questionnaires and Surveys sent to:
 Faculty
 Randomly selected employees
 Student organizations
 Professorial organizations
 Employee organizations (unions)
 Student Ombudsperson
F18, O1, O2, O3, O6, O7. O8
(details below)
F18
F18
45
Inquiry Question
b.
Source
SourceofofData
Data
accuracy and consistency of information reported in
faculty, staff and student handbooks, catalogues, and other
official notifications distributed to either faculty, staff, or
students?
ii.
news releases and public announcements in accord with
institutional integrity?
iii.
procedures for students to add, drop, and withdraw from
courses or programs?
iv.
conflicts of interest?
v.
intellectual property issues?
vi.
academic honesty?
vii.
research integrity?
viii.
promotions and tenure statistics?
ix.
student assessment and retention statistics?
x.
student grievance and disciplinary policy and procedures,
as well as resulting actions and outcomes?
Charge 5: Identify areas where policies and practices may be changed or
enforcement strengthened to better comply with the above notions of
fairness, truthfulness, due process, and respect for individuals.
Source of Da
O1
Does the institution have a procedure to periodically review
for integrity the policies and procedures related to:
i.
Elements
Elements
O1
O2, O3
O5
O6, O8
O7

Questionnaires or Surveys sent to (or, when
appropriate, interviews with):
 Chancellor
 Director, Office of Institutional Research and
Planning
 Other Administrators
 Faculty
 Professorial Organization
F1-F16
O1-O8
46
STANDARD 7
Institutional Assessment
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.
Task force members: Cristina Pomales-Garcia, Associate Professor, Industrial Engineering (Coordinator), Felix Zapata, Professor,
Humanities; David Suleiman, Professor, Chemical Engineering; Luz Gracia, Assistant Professor, Business Administration; Valerie
Galarza, Undergraduate Student, Social Sciences.
Purpose: To examine the process by which UPRM develops and implements an assessment process, derived in a manner appropriate
to the institution’s mission, goals and desired outcomes, and how it is made available to and used by those who develop institutional
goals and carry out strategies to achieve them. The Task Force will present a documented analysis and provide recommendations for
improvement.
Element Numbering System: items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher
Education (2011) and coded with an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional analysis item.
The bulleted items under the fundamental elements were designated as F1[a], F1[b] and so on. This system provided evidence of
alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
47
Inquiry Questions
1. How does the planning-assessment cycle work at the university and what methods are used
to document, organize and sustain the assessment process, improve services and programs,
and achieve accreditation standards?
a. How does the planning-assessment cycle work at the university? / How is the
University conducting the planning assessment cycle?
b. What methods are used to document, organize, and sustain the assessment processes
at the institution?
c. What methods are used to document, organize, and sustain the evaluation and
improvement of the total range of programs and services offered at the institution?
d. What methods are used to document, organize, and sustain the evaluation and
improvement in achieving institutional mission, goals, and plans?
e. How is the assessment process documented, organized, and sustained to evaluate
and improve compliance with accreditation standards?
f. How are academic programs, services, and initiatives integrated to serve the UPRM
mission?
g. How are program, services, and initiatives integrated to serve the unit-level goals?
h. What qualitative and/or quantitative measures are used in the assessment process?
i. How is assessment data perceived with respect to quality for effective decision
making?
Sources of Data
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Elements
OIIP
F1, F1[a],
F1[b]
OMCA
Chancellor
Budget office
Deans/Associate Deans
Department
Directors/Associate Directors
Office Directors
Faculty and department
assessment committee;
Assessment coordinators
Faculty members
Staff
Institutional Planning
Committee
Questionnaires and
Documents
Campus Website
Documents
Interviews and Questionnaires
48
Inquiry Questions
2. Strategic Planning:
a. What process was followed in the creation of the strategic plan?
b. Who participated in the development and implementation of the strategic plan?
How was the institutional community involved in the creation and implementation
of the strategic plan?
c. What is the current status of the strategic plan?
d. How accessible is the strategic plan of UPRM?
e. How is the strategic plan disseminated/shared amongst UPRM’s constituents
(students/faculty/staff /advisory board/central administration/local community)?
f. How were assessment results used/integrated/considered for institutional planning?
g. How are assessment results used in resource allocation and institutional renewal?
h. How are assessment results used to improve services and processes, including
activities specific to the institution’s mission (including research)?
3. Institutional, Faculty and Departmental goals:
a. How often are Institutional/Faculty/Departmental goals revised?
b. How are these goals integrated into the institutional mission?
c. Who is involved in the process?
d. Based on past program accreditations with recommendations for improvement,
what actions have been taken? What assessment documents are prepared for other
accrediting or regulatory agencies?
Sources of Data
Elements
F2, F3, O8,
O9
•
•
•
•
•
Documents
Interviews and
Questionnaires
OIIP
OMCA
Academic Senate
Deans
Department chairs
Planning Committee
Office Directors (Finance,
admissions, registrar, CTI)
Faculty
Students
Alumni and Employers
Staff
Campus Website
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Documents
OIIP
OMCA
Chancellor
Deans
Department heads
Faculty
Students
Planning Committee
F1, F1[a],
F1[c], O6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
49
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
Elements
(ABET, AASCB, ADOF
(NCATE), Medical
Services, Systems
information, National
Accrediting League for
Nursing (NLNAC),
Chemistry (ACS), TeacherPreparation Program
(NCATE), Library,
Orientation and Counseling.
50
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
4. System strategies to achieve goals:
a. How are assessment results used in the enhancement of services and programs?
b. How easy is it to find assessment results?
c. How is information about assessment made available to UPRM constituents?
d. How are institutional assessment results disseminated/shared amongst UPRM’s
constituents (students/faculty/staff /advisory board/central administration/local
community)?
e. What are the criteria used for determining whether key institutional goals and
objectives have been achieved?
f. How are assessment measures used to evaluate system achievement of goals?
g. Are there minimal indicators for achievement of system goals (i.e. minimal
acceptable performance targets, benchmarks, and metrics)?
h. How does each program and service at UPRM contribute toward achieving the
goals?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
5. Institutional Assessment
a. How reliable and valid are assessment results?
b. What measures are used for institutional assessment?
c. How do faculty support and collaborate in assessment activities related to student
learning?
d. How does the administration support and collaborate in assessing student learning?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
OIIP
OMCA Questionnaire
Chancellor
Deans
Department heads
Strategic plan committees
Assessment Committees/
Faculty
Staff
Students
Central Administration
Local Community
Campus Website
Documents
Operational Plan for Strategic
Plan
OIIP
OMCA
Chancellor
Deans
Department chairs
Elements
F2
O3, O4
F1[b],
F1[c]
51
Inquiry Questions
e. How does the administration respond to assessment results?
f. How are institutional resources used to support assessment activities? What
administrative, technical, and financial support systems exist for institutional
assessment activities?
g. How are institutional resources used to support UPRM’s mission?
h. How clear and realistic are assessment procedures/policies?
i. What are the deadlines for assessment activities? Do assessment activities have
clear and realistic timetables and deadlines?
j. Who maintains ownership of institutional assessment? How is the institutional
plan perceived with respect to detail of the plans, simplicity, practicality and
sustainability?
k. What is the role of UPR-Central Administration in the assessment process? What
factors influence changes in assessment policies and processes, and strategic
planning?
l. What professional development opportunities and resources are provided to
faculty and staff in the area of institutional assessment?
m. How are institutional assessment findings used to:
i. improve teaching and learning processes?
ii. review and improve programs and services?
iii. plan, conduct, and support professional development activities?
iv. assist in planning and budgeting for the provision of programs and
services?
v. support decisions about strategic goals, plans, and resource allocation?
vi. inform appropriate constituents about the institution and its programs?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Professor Contracts
Faculty
Students
CEP (Center for
Professional Enhancement)
Office Directors
Documents
Elements
F1[c],
F1[d],
F1[e],
F2,
O2[c,d],
O7
52
Inquiry Questions
6. Institutional culture for assessing institutional effectiveness.
a. What are the views of faculty and administrators on assessment?
b. What are faculty and administrators roles in assessing institutional
effectiveness?
c. What campus-wide efforts to encourage, recognize, and value the
effectiveness of institutional assessment to improve programs and services?
d. How are assessment results used to improve student learning and to advance
the institution?
e. How often are the institution’s assessment processes evaluated to determine
their effectiveness and comprehensiveness?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
OIIP
Chancellor
Deans
Department chairs
Faculty
Students
Elements
O1[a],
O1[b],
O1[c],
F1, F2,
F1[f]
53
Educational Effectiveness
Standard 8
Student Admissions and Retention
The institution seeks to admit students whose interests, goals, and abilities are congruent with its mission, and seeks to retain them
through the pursuit of the students’ educational goals.
Tasks Force Members: Sonia M. Bartolomei-Suárez, Ph.D., Professor of the Department of Industrial Engineering (Coordinator);
Madeline Rodríguez, M.A.E., Director of the Admission Office; María Barbot, M.A., Associate Dean of Academic Affairs of the
College of Arts and Science; Manuel Jimenez, Ph.D., Associate Dean of Academic Affairs of the College of Engineering; Lizzette
González, Ph.D., Interim Assistant Dean of the College of Agricultural Science; Lucyann Fernández, M.S., Interim Associate Dean of
Academic Affairs of the College of Business Administration, Freya Toledo, M.S.I.E., Professor of the General Engineering
Department and Coordinator of the UPRM Open House; María Almodóvar, Ph.D., Professional Counselor, Raúl Macchiavelli, Ph.D.,
Director of Graduate Studies; and one student to be invited from the General Student Council.
Purpose: The purpose of the Student Admissions and Retention Task Team is to examine if the university’s admissions and retention
policies, procedures, and practices are clearly stated, fully understood, widely communicated, consistently implemented, and
periodically reviewed. Also, the task team is going to establish the extent to which these policies, procedures, and practices are
consistent with, and contribute to the realization of, the university’s mission, goals, and objectives as part of an overall enrollment
strategy.
54
Inquiry Questions
1.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Undergraduate Admissions Policies
What are the current undergraduate admissions policies?
How are they developed?
How are they implemented?
Do they support and reflect the mission of UPRM?
Provide evidence.
2.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Graduate Admissions Policies
What are the current graduate admissions policies?
How are developed?
How are they implemented?
Do they support and reflect the mission of UPRM?
Provide evidence.
3. Prospective Undergraduate Students
a) Are admissions policies and criteria available to assist the
prospective undergraduate students in making informed
decisions?
b) How are prospective undergraduate students informed about the
academic program offerings?
Sources of Data
 Administrative Board
 Dean of Academic Affairs
 Director of the Office of
Admissions
 University mission statement and
goals
 Mission statement and goals for
individual programs
 Chair of the Academic
Departments
Elements
F1
 Academic Senate (Cert. 09-09)
 Director of Office of Graduate
Studies
goals
individual programs
Departments
F1
Admissions
 Dean of Students
 Undergraduate Catalog
 UPRM Web-page
F2
F4
55
Inquiry Questions
c) Which type of entrance, placement or other special testing is
required for prospective undergraduate students? What do these
results determine?
d) How are expected student learning outcomes and information on
institution-wide assessment results, as appropriate to the program
offered, available to prospective undergraduate students?
e) Does the university provide accurate and comprehensive
information, and advice where appropriate, regarding financial
aid, scholarships, grants, loans, and refunds?
Sources of Data
 UPR Web-page
 Undergraduate Application
Manual
 Orientation material
 Director of Financial Aid
 OIIP – Student Right to Know
Elements
F4
F5
Provide evidence.
F6
4. Prospective Graduate Students
a) Are admissions policies and criteria available to assist the
prospective graduate students in making informed decisions?
b) Are prospective graduate students informed about the
academic program offerings?
c) What type of entrance, placement or other special testing is
required for prospective graduate students? What do these
results determine?
Graduate Studies
 Graduate Catalog
 UPRM Web-page
 Graduate Application
Information
 Orientation material
F2
F4
F4
56
Inquiry Questions
d) How are expected student learning outcomes and information
on institution-wide assessment results, as appropriate to the
program offered, available to prospective graduate students?
e) Does the university provide accurate and comprehensive
information, and advice where appropriate, regarding
financial aid, scholarships, teaching and research
assistantships, grants, loans, and refunds?
Provide evidence.
Sources of Data
 Director of Financial Aid
Departments
 Graduate Programs Coordinators
 OIIP
 Academic Senate (Cert. 09-09)
Elements
F5
 Board of Trustees
F6
5. Transfer of credit
a) How does the university publish and implement policies and
procedures regarding transfer of credit?
b) How does the university publish and implement policies and
procedures regarding credit for extra-institutional college level
learning?
Provide evidence.
6. Assessment of Student Success
a) How does the university assess student success?
b) How does the university assess student retention?
 Academic Senate
 Dean of the Academic Affairs
Admissions
 Chairs of the Academic
Departments
 Registrar
 Undergraduate catalog
 University Web-page
F7
Admissions
F8
57
Inquiry Questions
c) To what extent does assessment match the attributes of the
admitted students and the institution’s mission and programs?
d) Does the assessment data reflect its findings in its admissions,
remediation, and other related policies?
Provide evidence.
7. Expected Learning Goals
a) Does the university provide programs and services to ensure that
admitted students, who marginally meet or do not meet the
institution’s qualifications, achieve expected learning goals and
higher education outcomes at appropriate points?
Provide evidence.
Sources of Data
Elements
Admissions
 Director of the Department of
Counseling and Psychological
Services
Departments
 Academic Counselors
F3
 Office of Institutional Research
and Planning
Departments
goals
individual programs
58
STANDARD 9-Student Support Services
The institution provides student support services reasonably necessary to enable each student to achieve the institution’s goals for
students.
Task Force Members: Omell Pagán Parés, Industrial Engineering (Coordinator); Rosie Torres de Calderón, (Health Services);
Manuel E. Márquez (CGE); Yolanda Pérez (Academic Advising); Maricarmen Brito (Alumni); Jorge I. Frontera Rodríguez (Library);
Xiomara Pratts Peña (Quality of Life); Margarita Carlo (Placements); Santos Torres (Band and Orchestra); Briseida Meléndez
(Registrar); Yamil Negrón (Financial Aid); Agnes Irizarry (Professional Counseling); Fernando Gaztambide (Athletics Activities and
Intramural Athletic Program );Yomarachaliff Luciano (Social and Cultural Activities)
Purpose:
The purpose of the student support services task force is to examine if the student support services at the University of Puerto RicoMayagüez Campus are: (1) complying with their purpose of the enrichment of student’s quality of life beyond the classroom; (2)
contributing to student development, educational process and learning outcomes; and (3) congruent with the university’s mission,
goals, and objectives.
Education (Twelfth Edition) and coded with an “F” to indicate a fundamental element or an “O” to indicate an applicable optional
analysis item. The bulleted items under the fundamental elements were designated as F1 [a], F1 [b] and so on. This system provided
evidence of alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
59
Inquiry Questions
1. Overview of student support services:
a. Which programs constitute student support services at the
university?
b. What evidence exists that the mission and objectives of the
support programs are aligned with the institutional mission and
objective statements?
c. What evidence exists that the programs are consistent with
student learning expectations?
d. What evidence exists that the programs are appropriate to
meeting the students’ personal, academic, and social strengths
and needs?
e. How effective are these programs in meeting these diverse
students’ strengths and needs? Provide evidence.
f. What evidence exists that the programs are readily available
regardless of place or method of delivery?
g. What evidence exists that the support services are frequently
reviewed, assessed and analyzed to their availability and
distinctions among physical sites or modes of delivery and the
particular support services those sites/modes require?
h. How do support service units review and analyze their printed
and electronic materials that provide information concerning
the explanation and availability of their services for students?
i. How often does this review occur?
j. In what ways are these services integrated and congruent with
each other?
k. What evidence exists that resource allocation is adequate in
order to meet the student support services?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Organization Chart
Units providing support services:
o Dean of Students
o Social and Cultural
Activities
o Registrar
o Placement- Career Office
o Library
o Medical Services
o Teaching/Learning Center
o Financial Aid
o Athletics Activities
o Counseling and
Psychological Services
o Academic Counseling
o Students’ Ombudsperson
o Computer Center (CTI)
o Student Exchange &
International Services
o Band and Orchestra
o Transit and Surveillance
o Child Care Network
•
Mission and objectives of the
above units
Institutional mission and
objectives, and value statements
Unit printed or electronic material
•
•
Elements
F1,F2,O1,O2,O3
60
Inquiry Questions
2. Student Support Service personnel:
a) What evidence shows that support service programs are
administered, supervised, and conducted by qualified
professionals?
b) How effective is the personnel in fulfilling their
responsibilities?
3. Student Support Services procedures:
a) What evidence exists that procedures are in places, which
address the diverse student population in their academic and
other needs?
b) What evidence exists that these procedures are conducted in an
equitable, supportive, and sensitive manner? Are those services
dealt with directly or by referral?
c) How are these procedures communicated to the students?
Provide evidence.
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
Student Surveys
General Student Council (CGE)
Student Focus Groups
Senior Exit Interviews
Unit Services Unit Assessment
Unit Responses
•
Unit Services descriptions and
job descriptions
Unit printed announcements
Self/Peer evaluations
Chair/Dean/Directors evaluations
Student surveys
Personnel credentials- resumes
Personnel training sessions
Unit printed or electronic
announcement
Internal Unit Surveys
Established procedures per unit
Printed and online procedures
available
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Elements
F2, O2
F3,O2
61
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
4. Advisement procedures and policies:
a) What evidence exists that all support programs provide
appropriate advisement procedures and policies?
b) How are these advisement procedures and policies delineated
and disseminated to students? Provide evidence.
c) How are students advised and mentored in their major academic
programs? Provide evidence.
d) How effective are these advisement and mentoring procedures
and policies?
5. Student complaints:
a) What evidence shows that procedures are in place for
addressing student complaints or grievances?
b) What evidence shows that these procedures are coordinated,
reasonable and equitable?
c) How are these procedures published and disseminated?
d) What evidence shows that accurate and complete records are
kept of student complaints or grievances?
e) How often are these records reviewed to determine where
noteworthy patterns exist?
•
•
announcements
Student Handbook
Student surveys
Deans and directors
Students’ Ombudsperson Office
Procedures
Governing Documents
6. Student Records
a) What evidence shows that policies and procedures are in place
for the safety and security of student records?
b) How are these policies and procedures concerning the release of
student information published and disseminated?
c) What evidence shows that implementation concerning the
release of student information is according to policies?
d) What evidence shows that appropriate access is available to
those who need such data while simultaneously preserving
student privacy?
e) What evidence shows that academic records are processed in a
timely and accurate manner?
•
•
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Student Handbook
Unit policies
Registrar response
Student survey
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
announcements
Unit evaluation
Student surveys
Deans and directors
Faculty reports
Academic Advisor Reports
Elements
F4,O6
F6, F7,O4
F8, F9
62
Inquiry Questions
7. Sport programs, Intercollegiate:
a) What evidence exists that the athletic programs are regulated by
the same academic administrative principles and procedures
that govern other institutional programs?
b) In what ways are the LAI standards for minimum expectations
of student athletes monitored, enforced, and systematically
reviewed?
c) In what ways are these expectations made known to student
athletes?
8. Sport Programs, Intramural:
a) What evidence exists that the institution offers a varied program
of intramural competition for all students based on their
interests/needs?
b) In what ways are program activities communicated to all
students?
c) What evidence exists that resource allocations (facilities,
equipment) are adequate to student needs?
9. Assessment:
a) In what ways do the support service units conduct ongoing
assessment?
b) How often does this assessment take place?
c) In what ways have the results of the assessment data analysis
been used to improve the varied support services for students?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Interview- Director of Athletic
Activities
LAI regulations
NCAA regulations
Student surveys
Activities
Student surveys
announcements
Elements
F5, O1, O3
F5, O1, O2
Unit assessment procedures
Unit responses
F10
63
STANDARD 9-Student Support Services
The institution provides student support services reasonably necessary to enable each student to achieve the institution’s goals for
students.
Task Force Members: Omell Pagán Parés, Industrial Engineering (Coordinator); Rosie Torres de Calderón, (Health Services);
Manuel E. Márquez (CGE); Yolanda Pérez (Academic Advising); Maricarmen Brito (Alumni); Jorge I. Frontera Rodríguez (Library);
Thyrzia Roura Cordero (Quality of Life); Margarita Carlo (Placements); Santos Torres (Band and Orchestra); Briseida Meléndez
(Registrar); Luis Galarza (Financial Aid); Agnes Irizarry (Professional Counseling); Fernando Gaztambide (Athletics Activities and
Intramural Athletic Program );Yomarachaliff Luciano (Social and Cultural Activities)
Purpose:
The purpose of the student support services task force is to examine if the student support services at the University of Puerto RicoMayagüez Campus are: (1) complying with their purpose of the enrichment of student’s quality of life beyond the classroom; (2)
contributing to student development, educational process and learning outcomes; and (3) congruent with the university’s mission,
goals, and objectives.
Education (Twelfth Edition) and coded with an “F” to indicate a fundamental element or an “O” to indicate an applicable optional
analysis item. The bulleted items under the fundamental elements were designated as F1 [a], F1 [b] and so on. This system provided
evidence of alignment between the inquiry questions and the standards.
59
Inquiry Questions
1. Overview of student support services:
a. Which programs constitute student support services at the
university?
b. What evidence exists that the mission and objectives of the
support programs are aligned with the institutional mission and
objective statements?
c. What evidence exists that the programs are consistent with
student learning expectations?
d. What evidence exists that the programs are appropriate to
meeting the students’ personal, academic, and social strengths
and needs?
e. How effective are these programs in meeting these diverse
students’ strengths and needs? Provide evidence.
f. What evidence exists that the programs are readily available
regardless of place or method of delivery?
g. What evidence exists that the support services are frequently
reviewed, assessed and analyzed to their availability and
distinctions among physical sites or modes of delivery and the
particular support services those sites/modes require?
h. How do support service units review and analyze their printed
and electronic materials that provide information concerning
the explanation and availability of their services for students?
i. How often does this review occur?
j. In what ways are these services integrated and congruent with
each other?
k. What evidence exists that resource allocation is adequate in
order to meet the student support services?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Organization Chart
Units providing support services:
o Dean of Students
o Social and Cultural
Activities
o Registrar
o Placement- Career Office
o Library
o Medical Services
o Teaching/Learning Center
o Financial Aid
o Athletics Activities
o Counseling and
Psychological Services
o Academic Counseling
o Students’ Ombudsperson
o Computer Center (CTI)
o Student Exchange &
International Services
o Band and Orchestra
o Transit and Surveillance
o Child Care Network
•
Mission and objectives of the
above units
Institutional mission and
objectives, and value statements
Unit printed or electronic material
•
•
Elements
F1,F2,O1,O2,O3
60
Inquiry Questions
2. Student Support Service personnel:
a) What evidence shows that support service programs are
administered, supervised, and conducted by qualified
professionals?
b) How effective is the personnel in fulfilling their
responsibilities?
3. Student Support Services procedures:
a) What evidence exists that procedures are in places, which
address the diverse student population in their academic and
other needs?
b) What evidence exists that these procedures are conducted in an
equitable, supportive, and sensitive manner? Are those services
dealt with directly or by referral?
c) How are these procedures communicated to the students?
Provide evidence.
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
Student Surveys
General Student Council (CGE)
Student Focus Groups
Senior Exit Interviews
Unit Services Unit Assessment
Unit Responses
•
Unit Services descriptions and
job descriptions
Unit printed announcements
Self/Peer evaluations
Chair/Dean/Directors evaluations
Student surveys
Personnel credentials- resumes
Personnel training sessions
announcement
Internal Unit Surveys
Established procedures per unit
Printed and online procedures
available
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Elements
F2, O2
F3,O2
61
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
4. Advisement procedures and policies:
a) What evidence exists that all support programs provide
appropriate advisement procedures and policies?
b) How are these advisement procedures and policies delineated
and disseminated to students? Provide evidence.
c) How are students advised and mentored in their major academic
d) How effective are these advisement and mentoring procedures
and policies?
5. Student complaints:
a) What evidence shows that procedures are in place for
addressing student complaints or grievances?
b) What evidence shows that these procedures are coordinated,
reasonable and equitable?
c) How are these procedures published and disseminated?
d) What evidence shows that accurate and complete records are
kept of student complaints or grievances?
e) How often are these records reviewed to determine where
noteworthy patterns exist?
•
•
announcements
Student Handbook
Student surveys
Deans and directors
Students’ Ombudsperson Office
Procedures
Governing Documents
6. Student Records
a) What evidence shows that policies and procedures are in place
for the safety and security of student records?
b) How are these policies and procedures concerning the release of
student information published and disseminated?
c) What evidence shows that implementation concerning the
release of student information is according to policies?
d) What evidence shows that appropriate access is available to
those who need such data while simultaneously preserving
student privacy?
e) What evidence shows that academic records are processed in a
timely and accurate manner?
•
•
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Student Handbook
Unit policies
Registrar response
Student survey
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
announcements
Unit evaluation
Student surveys
Deans and directors
Faculty reports
Academic Advisor Reports
Elements
F4,O6
F6, F7,O4
F8, F9
62
Inquiry Questions
7. Sport programs, Intercollegiate:
a) What evidence exists that the athletic programs are regulated by
the same academic administrative principles and procedures
that govern other institutional programs?
b) In what ways are the LAI standards for minimum expectations
of student athletes monitored, enforced, and systematically
reviewed?
c) In what ways are these expectations made known to student
athletes?
8. Sport Programs, Intramural:
a) What evidence exists that the institution offers a varied program
of intramural competition for all students based on their
interests/needs?
b) In what ways are program activities communicated to all
students?
c) What evidence exists that resource allocations (facilities,
equipment) are adequate to student needs?
9. Assessment:
a) In what ways do the support service units conduct ongoing
assessment?
b) How often does this assessment take place?
c) In what ways have the results of the assessment data analysis
been used to improve the varied support services for students?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Governing Documents
Activities
LAI regulations
NCAA regulations
Student surveys
Activities
Student surveys
announcements
Elements
F5, O1, O3
F5, O1, O2
Unit assessment procedures
Unit responses
F10
63
TASK FORCE VII – STANDARD 10
Faculty
The institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are devised, developed, monitored, and supported by qualified
professionals.
Task Force Members: Gayle W. Griggs, Associate Professor, English (Coordinator); Maribel Acosta Lugo, Associate Professor,
Hispanic Studies; Enid Arcelay, Assistant Professor, Agriculture; Lysa Chizmadia, Associate Professor, Geology; Aury Curbelo Ruiz,
Professor, Business Administration; Saylisse Dávila, Assistant Professor, Industrial Engineering; Carlos Quiñones Padovani,
Assistant Professor, Physical Education; Jordan McGee, Student, Agriculture.
Purpose: The purpose of the Faculty Team is to determine if the institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are
devised, developed, monitored, and supported by qualified professionals. The task force will present a document analysis of these
areas and provide recommendations for improvement.
Inquiry Questions
1. How effectively does UPRM communicate to the faculty its missions and goals
as well as expectations regarding teaching, research, advising, and service for
all levels of instructional personnel?
Sources of Data
Elements
• Reglamento General
• Professor’s Manual
• UPRM Catalogue
(Undergraduate and Graduate)
• Faculty Survey
• Strategic Plan 2012-2022
• Faculty Deans and Department
Directors
• Department, Administrative, &
Institutional Websites
F1, F4,
F6, F7,
F8
64
Inquiry Questions
2a. To what extent are the academic programs staffed by prepared and qualified
instructors, with roles, responsibilities, and criteria clearly defined, and
sufficiently numerous to fulfill those roles appropriately?
2b. What criteria and procedures exist for reviewing all individuals who have
responsibility for the educational program of the institution.
2c. To what extent are the criteria and procedures carefully articulated, equitable,
and implemented?
3. How are educational curricula designed, maintained, and updated by faculty
and other professionals who are academically prepared and qualified?
4a. How do faculty and other professionals, including teaching assistants,
demonstrate excellence in teaching and other activities, and continued
professional growth?
4b. What appropriate linkages are recognized among scholarship, teaching, student
learning, research, and service?
Sources of Data
• Institutional Review Board
• Docent Programs (Programas
Docentes)
• All relevant certifications
• Curriculum Vitae
• Reglamento General de la UPR
• Faculty Survey
• Faculty Deans and Department
Directors
• Office of Human Resources
•
•
•
•
Reglamento General de la UPR
All relevant certifications
Curricula & Course Syllabi
Department and Faculty
Curriculum Committee Reports
• Faculty Survey
• Student Evaluations (COE)
• Student Survey
• Faculty Deans and Directors
• Faculty Personnel Committees
• Faculty awards and recognitions
• OIIP
• Undergraduate/Graduate
Student Satisfaction surveys
• Professional Enrichment Center
(CEP)
Elements
F1, F2,
F3, F7,
O3, O7,
O8
F2, F9
F3, F5,
O2
65
Inquiry Questions
5. What processes exist for ensuring that the instructional personnel are
accountable for providing quality educational experiences for students?
6a. How are standards and procedures for all faculty and other professionals
published and implemented for actions such as appointment, promotion,
tenure, grievance, discipline, and dismissal?
6b. To what extent are these processes based on the principles of fairness with due
regard for the rights of all faculty and other professionals?
6c. What evidence is there that the criteria for the appointment, supervision, and
review of teaching effectiveness for part-time, adjunct, and other faculty are
consistent with those for full time-faculty?
7. How does UPRM provide appropriate institutional support for the
advancement and development of faculty, including teaching, research,
scholarship, and service?
Sources of Data
• Student Evaluations (COE)
• All relevant certifications
(Art. 35)
• Relevant Policies and
Procedures
• Faculty Survey
• Student Ombudsperson
• Institutional Appeals
Committee
• Research & Development
Center (CID)
• Professional Enrichment Center
(CEP)
• Conference travel and
publications data
• Faculty Survey
• Institutional Review Board
Elements
F2, F5,
O2, O3,
O4, O5,
O8
F6, F7,
F8, O3,
O6, O9
F3, F4,
F5
66
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
8. How are the procedures and criteria for reviewing all individuals who have
responsibility for the educational program of the institution published and
implemented?
•
8a. To what extent are the procedures and criteria for reviewing these individuals
carefully articulated, equitable, and implemented?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
9. How does UPRM adhere to the principles of academic freedom, within the
context of institutional mission?
•
Certifications & Institutional
Policies (Junta)
Reglamento General de la
UPR
OIIP Faculty Reports
Personnel Committees
Office of Human Resources
Faculty Surveys
Reglamento General de la UPR
Professor’s Manual
Dialog Committee
Faculty Survey
Grievance Process
Elements
F1, F6,
F7, F8,
F10, O3,
O4, O5,
O9
F9, O9
67
Standard 11- Educational Offerings
The institution’s educational offerings display academic content, rigor, and coherence that are appropriate to its higher
education mission. The institution identifies student learning goals and objectives, including knowledge and skills, for its
educational offerings. Teaching and learning are the primary purposes of any institution of higher education, whether at the
undergraduate or graduate level.
Task Force Members: Jorge A. Gonzalez, J.D., Ph.D., Professor of Agricultural Economics, Francisco Monroig Saltar, Ph.D.,
Professor, Agricultural Sciences, Rosario Ortiz Rodríguez, Ph.D. Business Administration Professor, Jeffrey Valentín Mari, Ph.D.
Economics Professor, Raul Zapata, Ph.D. Civil Engineering Professor, Irene Ocasio, Adminstrative Official 1- Office of the Dean
of Academic Affairs.
Education (2011) and coded with an “F” to indicate a fundamental element or an “O” to indicate an applicable optional analysis item.
alignment among inquiry questions and standards.
68
Inquiry Questions
1. How are the educational offerings congruent with the UPRM
mission, which include appropriate areas of academic study of
sufficient content, regarding the programs offered?
Sources of Data
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Coordinators
Academic Affairs (certifications)
F1
4. How are the formal undergraduate, graduate, or professional
programs, leading to a degree or other recognized higher education
credential, designed to foster a coherent student learning
experience?
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs (Senate and
Board certifications)
F2
6. How are the UPRM program goals stated in terms of student
learning outcomes?
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
F3
sufficient breadth and length, regarding the programs offered?
sufficient levels of rigor, regarding the programs offered?
5. How are the formal undergraduate, graduate, or professional
programs, leading to a degree or other recognized higher education
credential, promote synthesis of learning?
Elements
69
Inquiry Questions
7. Is there periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of any curricular,
co-curricular, and extra-curricular experiences that the institution
provides its students? Provide evidence.
8. Are the periodic evaluation results utilized as a basis for
improving student understanding of their own program? Provide
evidence.
9. To what extent are the periodic evaluation results utilized for
enabling students to understand their own educational progress?
Provide evidence.
10. How are the learning resources, facilities, instructional
equipment, library services, and professional library staff adequate
to support the institution’s educational programs?
11. Is there collaboration among professional library staff, faculty,
and administrators in fostering information literacy and
technological competency skills across the curriculum? Provide
evidence.
Sources of Data
Deans
Department Chairs
F4
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Professors
Library staff
Computer Center (CTI)
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Professors
Library staff
F5
Elements
Academic Affairs
F6
70
Inquiry Questions
12. How do academic programs promote student use of a variety of
information and learning resources?
13. How does the institution take provision of comparable quality
of teaching/instruction, academic rigor, and educational
effectiveness of the institution’s courses and programs regardless of
the location or delivery mode?
14. Where are the published and implemented policies and
procedures regarding transfer credit that describe the criteria
established by the institution regarding the transfer of credits
earned at another institution?
Sources of Data
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Professors
Library staff
Department Chairs
Certifications (Senate)
Professors
Certifications
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Registrar Office
F7
Elements
F8
F9
15. Is there consideration of transfer credit or recognition of
degrees that is not determined exclusively on the basis of the
accreditation of the sending institution of the mode of delivery but,
rather, considers course equivalencies and expected learning
outcomes with those of the receiving institution’s curricula and
standards? Provide evidence.
16. How is the criteria, regarding transfer credit, fair, consistently
applied, and publicly communicated?
17. How do the course syllabi incorporate expected learning
outcomes?
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Certifications
F 12
71
Inquiry Questions
18. Is the assessment of student learning and program outcomes,
relative to the objectives of the undergraduate programs, and are
the results used to improve student learning and program
effectiveness? Provide evidence.
19. How does the graduate curricula provide for the development of
research and independent thinking that the studies at the advanced
level presuppose?
20. Do the graduate faculty members comply with credentials
appropriate to the graduate curricula? Provide evidence.
21. Is the assessment of student learning and program outcomes
relative to the objectives of the graduate programs and the results
used to improve student learning and program effectiveness?
Provide evidence.
Sources of Data
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Graduate School
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Graduate School
Curriculum Vitae
Deans
Department Chairs
Academic Affairs
Graduate School
F 13
Elements
F 14
F 15
F 16
72
STANDARD 12- General Education
Task Force Members: Mabel Ortiz , MA, (Coordinator), Department of English; Duane Kolterman, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Biology;
Jeannette Santos, Ph.D., Professor, General Engineering, Noemí Maldonado, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Humanities, Ms. Mariela Ballester,
student, Department of Social Sciences, Mr. Ricardo Méndez, student, Department of Geology.
(2011) and coded with an “F” to indicate a fundamental element or an “O” to indicate an applicable optional analysis item. The bulleted items
under the fundamental elements were designated as F1[a], F1[b] and so on. This system provided evidence of alignment among inquiry questions
and standards.
Inquiry Questions
1. How many semester hours does each of your GE
programs include?
a. List the courses which constitute your
GE component.
b. List the activities that are part of your GE
requirements.
c. Besides course work, which other life experiences
and activities does your GE program include?
•
•
•
Sources of Data
Deans of Academic Colleges
Department Directors
Unit Coordinators
F-1
O-7
Elements
73
Inquiry Questions
2. Which skills and abilities developed through GE
courses are further developed in the major or
concentration?
a. How does your unit integrate GE courses with
experiences such as Senior Seminars,
interdisciplinary courses, exchanges, summer
programs?
b. Which skills and abilities acquired through GE
courses need further strengthening?
3. How are UPRM’s statements of institutional
mission, goals, and objectives linked to the core
knowledge or general skills of its students?
a. How does the UPRM GE program teach values?
b. How does the UPRM GE program teach ethics?
c. How is the UPRM GE program consistent with the
study of diverse perspectives?
d. How does the UPRM GE program teach social
responsibility?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
Unit Coordinators
Instructional Personnel
F-2
O-2
O-3
O-4
O-5
O-7
•
•
•
•
•
•
Deans of Academic Affairs
Unit Coordinators
Dean of Students
F-3
F-2
O-2
O-4
O-7
Elements
74
4.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
5.
Inquiry Questions
How does your GE program assure that, upon degree
completion, students achieve competency in the
following areas:
Oral communication
Written communication
Scientific reasoning
Quantitative reasoning
Critical analysis and reasoning
Technological competencies
Are GE requirements clearly and accurately
described in official UPRM publications?
a. Where are these publications located?
b. How are these publications shared with students,
advisors, faculty, and other constituencies?
c. Which publications list your GE student learning
outcomes?
6.
How are GE outcomes assessed in your faculty,
department or unit within the institution’s overall
plan for assessing student learning?
a. How frequently are GE assessments conducted?
b. What GE assessment evidence does your unit hold?
c. How are assessment results utilized?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dean of Students
Unit Coordinators
F-4
F-1
F-2
O-4
O-5
O-7
•
•
•
•
Program Coordinators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
IPEDS
Strategic Plans
Certifications
UPRM GE Assessment Plan
Unit Coordinators
F-5
F-1
F-2
F-3
F-4
O-4
O-5
O-6
F-6
F-3
F-4
O-3
O-4
O-6
O-7
Elements
75
STANDARD 13- Related Educational Activities
The institution’s program or activities that are characterized by particular content, focus, location, mode of delivery, or
sponsorship meet appropriate standards.
Task Force Members: Pedro Vásquez Urbano, Mathematical Science (Coordinator); José Ferrer López, (DECEP); José Cuevas
(CTI), Kevin Carroll (English), Ellen Acaron (COOP Program), Jean Carlo Ortiz (ICOM Student), Víctor Martínez (Biology Student)
Purpose:
The purpose of the Related Educational Activities team is to evaluate and examine all Basic Skills, Certificate Programs, Experiential
Learning, Non-Credit Offerings, Branch Campuses, Additional Location, and other Instructional Sites, Distance Education,
Distributed Learning and Correspondence Education, and Contractual Relationships and Affiliated Providers carried out by the
University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez (UPRM) by exploring its mission statements along with its objectives. This team will review
programs and courses to see if they are preparing students for success in achieving their educational goals. Also, the team will be
evaluating the existence of the appropriate assessment tools in order to perform the evaluation of the student learning outcomes, and if
they are designed, approved, administered and periodically evaluated in order to strengthen each program. The team will prepare a set
of questions to be answered by the different offices that are in charge of the programs listed above. Next, we will study the questions
submitted in order to prepare a documented analysis of all programs. Finally, we will provide recommendations to improve the actual
programs.
Questions
Based on the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education and based on the programs offered by UPRM the following questions
will be answered by the team with the support of the different offices to allow for the team to conduct its research.
Element Numbering System:
Items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education (2011) and coded with
an "F" to indicate a fundamental element or an "O" to indicate an applicable optional analysis item. The bulleted items under the
fundamental elements were designated as F1, F2, and so on. This system provided evidence of alignment between the inquiry
questions and the standards.
76
1. Basic Skills
Approximately 17 years, UPRM began to offer remedial non-credit courses in Mathematics and English to help students who are
accepted with deficiencies.
1.
Inquiry Questions
How are students who need remedial courses identified at UPRM?
2. What programs are available for students who need developmental
courses?
3. What evidence supports the effectiveness of the teaching and learning
centers for students with deficiencies?
4. How did UPRM decide that remedial courses do not carry academic
degree credit?
5. What evidence exists that the UNIV 0066 course is effective in
preparing students for college?
6. Have there been any studies at UPRM regarding the academic success
for those students who have completed the Math and English remedial
courses? What are the results?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chair of Math Department
Chair of English Department
Chair of Admissions office
Registrar’s Office
Computer Center
OIIP
Orientation Office
Students
Senate certifications
Elements
F1
F2
F2
F3
F2, O3
F2
7. What evidence exists to show the procedure for referring under-prepared
students into remedial courses is effective?
F2, O1
8. Which policy guides UPRM in allowing students in remedial courses to
register for regular courses?
F3
9. What evidence is there that the Mathematics and English remedial
courses are effectively preparing students for their first university
course? How is the impact of remedial/development programs assessed?
F2, O1, O2
77
2. Certificate Programs
These include a sequential program of study that leads to a professional license or certificate rather than a degree usually given for
credit. The programs and courses must follow UPRM’s development, approval, review, and assessment processes.
Inquiry Questions
1. How do certificate programs comply with the UPRM’s institutional
mission?
2. How do certificate programs clearly articulate program objectives and
expectations of student learning?
3. How are certificate programs designed, approved, administered, and
periodically evaluated under established institutional procedures?
4. How have the programs’ objectives, requirements, and curricular
sequences been published?
5. How do program learning goals compare with national criteria?
Sources of Data
Elements
F1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DECEP
Academic Deans
OIIP
Department Chairs and Program
Coordinators
Senate certifications
Catalogs
Revalidate programs
F1
F1
F2
F3
6. Does UPRM have available and effective support services for certificate
programs?
F4, O4
7. How does UPRM provide academic oversight that assures comparability
and appropriate transferability of courses taken within a certificate
program?
F5
8. How do you collect evidence of articulated student knowledge, skills,
and competency levels?
9. What evidence supports faculty involvement in the design, delivery, and
ongoing evaluation of the certificate programs?
O1
O2
78
3. Experiential Learning
Experience learning involves credit awarded for learning outside the university. At UPRM, all experiential learning occurs in
conjunction with programs, such as, internships, co-operative education, clinical practice.
Inquiry Questions
1. How does UPRM award credit for experiential learning?
Sources of Data
2. What evidence exists of the level, quality, and quantity of learning?
3. Has UPRM published and implemented policies and procedures defining
the methods by which prior learning can be evaluated?
4. Has UPRM published and implemented policies and procedures to evaluate
the level and amount of credits available for evaluation?
5. Has UPRM published and implemented policies and procedures regarding
the award of credits for prior learning?
Elements
F1
F1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DECEP
Registrar’s office
COOP office
Department Chairs
Teacher practicum supervisors
Community Program Coordinator
F2
F2
F3
6. How does UPRM define the acceptance of such credit based on the
institution’s curricula and standards?
F3
7. Has UPRM published and implemented procedures regarding the recording
of evaluated prior learning by the awarding institution?
F4
8. How does UPRM decide that credits awarded are appropriate to the subject
and the degree context into which it is accepted?
F5
9. How do knowledgeable evaluators (faculty) of experiential learning
participate on the subject?
F6, 06
10. Do evaluators (faculty) know the institution’s criteria for the granting of
college credit?
F6, 05, 07
11. How does UPRM consider the analysis of reports prepared by evaluators
(faculty) for further actions?
02
79
4. Non-credit Offerings
Non-credit offerings are available on-site and through distance learning and must meet standards of quality and mission that are
congruent with UPRM’s other programs. The team will identify non-credit offerings and work with their directors to evaluate the
program. Offerings could be internally or externally developed. It is important to evaluate those cases in which the non-credit courses
are used for credit-programs at UPRM.
Inquiry Questions
1. How do non-credit offerings comply with institutional mission and
goals?
2. Does UPRM have articulated program or course objectives and
expectations for student learning?
3. How does UPRM design, approve, administer, and periodically evaluate
program or course objectives and expectations of student learning under
established institutional procedures?
4. Does academic oversight assure the comparability and appropriate
transferability of such courses?
Sources of Data
Elements
F1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DECEP
Department Chairs
Agricultural Extension (SEA)
Food and Science Technology
(CITA)
Nursery Department
F2
F2
F3
5. Do courses completed within a non-credit or certificate program apply
to a degree program offered by UPRM?
F3
6. Does UPRM have periodic assessment of the impact of non-credit
F4
7. Does UPRM perform periodic assessment to analyze the non-credit
programs ability to fulfill its mission and goals?
F4, 04
80
5. Branch Campuses, Additional Locations and other Instructional Sites
These include educational offerings at branch campuses, additional locations, or other instructional sites. Programs should meet
standards comparable to those of other institutions.
A narrative will be presented explaining UPRM’s “campuses.”
81
6. Distance Education, Distributed Learning, and Correspondence Education
Distance education or distributed learning is a formal educational process in which some or all of the instruction occurs when the
learner and the instructor are not in the same place at the same time. Programs delivered through the internet, television, videoconference, or other means should meet academic and learning support standards, comparable to traditional university programs.
Inquiry Questions
1. How does UPRM offer courses via distance education or correspondence
education offerings?
2. How do UPRM courses via distance education or correspondence education
offerings meet institution-wide standards for quality of instruction,
articulated expectations of students learning, academic rigor, and
educational effectiveness?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
DECEP
Department Chairs
Certifications
Elements
F1
F1
3. How does UPRM provide parallel on-site offerings?
F1
4. Does UPRM have consistency with the offerings via distance education or
correspondence education with its mission and goals?
F2
5. Does UPRM consider legal and regulatory requirements?
F3
6. Does the distance education or distributed learning demonstrate coherence?
F4
7. How does the distance education or distributed learning consider the
program learning outcomes appropriate to the rigor and breath of the degree
or certificate awarded?
F4
8. How is UPRM committed to continue the offerings for a period sufficient
to enable admitted students to complete the degree or certificate in a
publicized time frame?
F5
82
Inquiry Questions
9. How does UPRM assure that the arrangements with partners or contractors
do not compromise its integrity or the educational offerings?
Sources of Data
Elements
F6
10. Does UPRM’s faculty validate any course material or technology based
resources developed outside UPRM?
F7
11. How does UPRM verify that students who participate in class or
coursework are the same as those registered and receiving credits?
F8
12. How does UPRM notify students at the time of registration or enrollment of
any additional students charges associated with the verification of student
identity?
13. Does UPRM have available, accessible, and adequate learning resources
(such as a library or other information resources) appropriate to the
offerings at a distance?
F8
F9, O3
14. Do UPRM have an ongoing program of appropriate orientation, training,
and support for faculty participating in electronically delivered offerings?
F10
15. Does UPRM have adequate technical and physical plant facilities to support
electronic offerings?
F11, O7
16. Does UPRM have appropriate staff and technical assistance to support
electronic offerings?
F11, 01
83
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
Elements
17. Does UPRM have a periodic assessment of the impact of distance
education on its resources (human, fiscal, etc.)?
F12
18. Does UPRM have a periodic assessment of the impact of distance
education on its mission and goals?
F12
The following questions are intended to be answered according to the Distance Education Programs Interregional Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Distance Education (Online Learning):
Inquiry Questions
1. Does UPRM have an online learning appropriate to the institution´s mission
and purposes?
2. Does UPRM have plans for developing, sustaining, and expanding online
learning offerings that are integrated into its regular planning and evaluation
processes?
3. How does UPRM incorporate online learning into the institution´s systems of
governance and academic oversight?
4. How does UPRM demonstrate that curricula for the institution´s online
learning offerings are coherent, cohesive, and comparable in academic rigor to
programs offered in traditional instructional formats?
5. How does the institution evaluate the effectiveness of its online learning use,
including the extent to which the online learning goals are achieved, and uses
the results of its evaluations to enhance the attainment of the goals?
6. How does UPRM involve the faculty in the responsibility of delivering the
online learning curricula and evaluating student success in achieving that the
learning goals are appropriately qualified and effectively supported?
7. Does the institution provide effective student and academic services to support
students enrolled in online learning offerings?
8. Does the institution provide sufficient resources to support and, if appropriate,
expand its online learning offerings?
9. Does the institution assure the integrity of its online offerings?
Sources of Data
Elements
DE1
DE2
•
•
•
•
•
DECEP
Department Chairs
Certifications
DE3
DE4
DE5
DE6
DE7
DE8
DE9
84
7. Contractual Relationships and Affiliated Providers
UPRM has agreements with other institutions and organizations to provide educational experience such as, faculty exchanges, student
recruitment, and course/program development. Our university is responsible for all activities implemented in the institution’s name,
including outcomes assessment, advertising, and recruitment. Contractual relations with non-profit firms or other institutions require
diligent care to protect the institution’s integrity.
Inquiry Questions
1. Does UPRM have contractual relationships with other institutions or
organizations to provide certain aspects of the educational experience?
2. Do the affiliated providers or institutions protect the accredited UPRM’s
integrity and assure that they have appropriate oversight of and
responsibility for all activities carried out in UPRM’s name?
3. Does UPRM have consistency for courses or programs offered via
contractual arrangement with its mission and goals?
Sources of Data
•
•
•
•
•
Chancellor’s office
Exchange’s office
OIIP
Department Chairs
Elements
F1
F1
F2, O12
4. Does UPRM realize an adequate and appropriate review and approval of
work performance by the contracted party in areas such as admissions
criteria, appointment of faculty, and content of courses/programs?
F3
5. Does UPRM perform an evaluation of the student work and outcome
assessment in the contracted institution?
F3, O10
6. Does UPRM have evidence of published public information that clearly
and accurately represents the contractual relationship between UPRM
and the other institution?
O4
85
STANDARD 14- Assessment of Student Learning
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.
Task force Members: Bernadette M. Delgado, Professor, Social Sciences (Coordinator); Ivelisse Padilla, Professor, Chemistry; Aidsa
Santiago, Assistant Professor, General Engineering; Roberto Vargas, Professor, Crop and Agro-Environmental Science; Yolanda
Ruiz, Professor, Business Administration; Irmarie Cruz, Student Representative, Psychology.
Purpose: To examine the process by which UPRM assesses (gathers information and evaluates) the learning outcomes of its courses
and programs to demonstrate that its students have knowledge, skills, and competencies consistent with the mission and goals of the
institution and the educational objectives of its programs and academic units. This will include a review of current programs and
processes, the degree to which UPRM uses the assessment results to make improvements in its programs, and the benefits derived
from such assessment activities. The Task Force will present a documented analysis and provide recommendations for improvement.
Element Numbering System: items were numbered consecutively in the order listed in the Characteristics of Excellence in Higher
Inquiry Questions
1. How are expectations of student learning outcomes clearly articulated at all
levels of the institution, faculties/schools, degrees/programs, and individual
courses? How are these consonant with the institution’s mission and with the
standards of higher education and of the relevant disciplines?
a. What evidence is there of written statements of expectations for student
learning assessment work at the institution, faculties/schools,
degrees/programs, and individual courses?
b. How have all academic programs clearly identified their student
learning outcomes (exit-level knowledge, skills, and competencies that
students must meet in order to complete the course or program
successfully)?
c. What evidence is there of intentional connections between learning
Sources of Data
Elements
•
•
F1 [a], F1 [b],
F1 [c]
•
Chairs of Academic Departments
•
Director Office of Graduate
Studies
•
Director of Teacher Preparation
Program
•
Program/Section Coordinators
•
Development (CEP)
•
Accreditation Self Studies
O1
O2
O3
86
Inquiry Questions
Sources of Data
outcomes at all levels (institution, faculties/schools, degrees/programs,
and courses)?
d. What evidence is there of collaboration in the development of
statements of expected student learning and assessment strategies?
Elements
(NCATE, ABET, AACSB,
NLNAC, ACS) and coordinators
•
Relevant Certifications (such as
Cert 09-07, 09-09, 07-28)
•
Budget Office
•
•
•
Chairs of Academic
Departments/Programs
O2
•
O8
c. What clear and realistic guidelines and a timetable supported by
appropriate investment of institutional resources are there?
•
Program
O9
d. How are assessment processes used across the institution?
•
Office Institutional Research
e. What direct evidence of student learning is there?
•
Registrar
f.
•
Development (CEP)
e. What policies and governance structures are there to support studentlearning assessment?
f.
What administrative, technical, and financial supports are there for
student learning assessment activities and for implementing changes
resulting from assessment?
g. What professional development opportunities and resources for faculty
are there to learn how to assess student learning, how to improve their
curricula, and how to improve their teaching?
2. How is the assessment process to evaluate and improve student learning
documented, organized, and sustained?
a. How is the assessment process clearly and purposefully related to the
learning outcomes?
b. How does the assessment process meet sufficient simplicity,
practicality, detail, and ownership to be sustainable?
What are the metrics? Benchmarks? Criteria for success?
g. How is the quality of the assessment process sufficient that results are
to be trusted and used with confidence to inform decisions?
F2 [a], F2 [b],
F2[c], F2 [d],
F2 [e]
O7
87
Inquiry Questions
h. How do assessment results support and collaboration of faculty and
administration in assessing student learning and responding to
assessment results is evidenced?
Sources of Data
•
Course Portfolios/Binders/Files
•
Grading (Rates/Stats+ Retention
Rates/Graduation Rates Student/
Elements
i.
How is the analysis of teaching evaluations, including identifications of
good practices evidenced?
•
j.
How is the use of student-learning assessments to improve student
retention evidenced?
Samples of Student Work (Exams,
Quizzes, Projects)
•
Alumni/Employer Surveys
•
License Exam Results/Stats
•
F3
•
O3
•
Chairs of Academic Departments
•
•
Director Teacher Preparation
Program
•
•
Registrar
•
Development (CEP)
•
Advisory Boards
k. How is the use of student attrition information to improve student
retention evidenced?
l.
How often is the assessment process evaluated for effectiveness and
comprehensiveness?
3. How do assessment results provide sufficient, convincing evidence that
students are achieving key institutional and program learning outcomes?
a. How do assessment measures demonstrate that students have achieved
the stated learning outcomes at all levels?
b. How do assessment measures demonstrate that actual learning
outcomes of our courses, programs, and activities are consistent with
the institution’s mission, and objectives?
c. How are assessment results used to improve student learning and to
achieve institutional and program learning outcomes?
d. How is information about assessment of student learning made
available to UPRM constituents?
e. How are the results of the assessment of student learning disseminated
and shared amongst UPRM’s constituents (students/faculty/staff
/advisory board/central administration/community)?
O4
O5
O6
88
Inquiry Questions
f.
Sources of Data
Elements
What are the views of faculty and administrators on assessment of
student learning?
g. How are faculty members’ understanding of their role in student
learning assessment evidenced?
4. How are the learning assessment findings used to improve student learning,
teaching, curricula, educational programs, and other instructional activities?
How is student learning assessment information made available to our principal
constituencies?
a. How are assessment findings used to assist students in improving their
learning?
b. How are assessment findings used to improve teaching methodologies,
curricula, and instructional activities?
c. How are assessment findings used to plan, conduct, and support
professional development activities?
d. How are assessment findings used to assist in planning and budgeting
for the provision of academic programs and services?
e. How are assessment findings used to support other institutional efforts
and decisions about strategic goals, plans, and resource allocation?
f. How are the results of the assessment of student learning
disseminated/shared amongst UPRM’s constituents
(students/faculty/staff /advisory board/central
administration/community)?
•
F4
•
O3
•
Chairs of Academic
Departments
O4
•
•
Director Teacher Preparation
Program
O6
•
•
Registrar
•
Development (CEP)
•
O5
g. How are campus-wide efforts to encourage, recognize, and value
efforts to assess student learning and to improve curricula and teaching
evidenced?
5. How are student learning assessment results used as part of institutional
assessment?
a. How are assessment findings used to support other institutional efforts
and decisions about strategic goals, plans, and resource allocation?
b. What improvements in teaching and curricula have occurred in
response to assessment results?
•
Chairs of Academic
Departments
•
F5
O4
O5
89
Inquiry Questions
c. What effects do student learning assessment findings have on
curricula?
Sources of Data
•
Program
•
•
Registrar
Elements
90
INVENTORY OF SUPPORT DOCUMENTS
The Institutional Steering Team will refer to the following documents in addition
to other documents, which may not be currently listed below to answer the charge
questions and fulfill the self-study process:
University Law
General UPR Regulations (“Reglamento de la Universidad de Puerto Rico”)
Certifications of the Academic Board
Certifications of the Academic Senate
Internal By- Laws of the Academic Board
Internal By- Laws of the Academic Senate
Financial Statements of UPRM
Annual Reports (departments, colleges, institution, CID Research Center)
University Catalogs, UPRM Websites
Regulations governing the Student Ombudsman
Descriptive Pamphlets (Brochures) of the University and Campus
Information packets sent or presented to students
Student Regulations (“Reglamento del Estudiante”)
Student and Faculty Handbooks
Master Plan for Infrastructure Development
Chancellor’s Initiative: Review of UPRM Strategic Plan
UPR and UPRM Mission Statements
Minutes of Academic Senate
Minutes of UPR Governing Board
Enrollment Management Plan
Technology Plan
Other materials sent to students and/or to Faculty, as provided by:
Dean of Students
Dean of Administration Admissions Office
Dialogue Committee Regulations
Assessment Tools & Strategies Package developed by the College of Engineering
ABET’s Engineering Criteria
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)
New Academic Program Proposals
Past reports sent to:
Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE)
Self-Study and Team Reports
Periodic Review Reports
Follow-up Reports
91
Puerto Rico Council of Education (CEPR)
National League for Nursing Accreditation Commission (NLN)
American Chemical Society (ACS)
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE, CAEP)
Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) Documents
Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education (2006) Designs
for Excellence (12th Edition)
Institutional History
Annual Institutional Profile
Handbook for Conducting and Hosting an Evaluation Team
Self-Study: Creating a Useful Process & Report
Verification of Compliance with Accreditation-Relevant Federal Regulations
Assessing Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness: Understanding
Middle States Expectations
TIMETABLE
This schedule serves as a control instrument to ensure that the self-study will be finished on
time.
During Spring 2014, MSCHE will select the chair and co-chair of the visiting team. They
will contact the Chancellor about their selection and schedule the dates of the visit. The visit
should occur before April 15, 2016. The visit should not be held during the institution’s
spring break, which is the week of March 21-25, 2016.
92
TASK
MSCHE TIMELINE 2015-2016
TIME
Create task forces for each standard
Create timeline for committee activities
Develop draft for the self-study design:
Questionnaire development
Begin
Polish self-study design and complete questionnaire
development
Submit the design for the self-study
Publish arrangement for Prep visit
Distribute questionnaires (Gather Data)
Attend Self-Study institute
Questionnaire follow-up
Work in Groups: Data analysis and reflection
MSCHE Visit to approve Self Study Design
MSCHE Evaluation Team Chair selected
Data analysis and reflection
Develop individual task-force Self Study Report (first
draft)
Committee completes final draft for task force reports
Submit Task Force Report to UPRM (June 30th)
Integrate Task Force Report into the Final Institutional
Report
Steering Committee edits report
Submit document to Professional Editor
Submit Institutional Self Study Report to Chancellor
Submit Final Report to MSCHE
Middle States Team Visit
MSCHE Response
Spring 2013
Summer 2013
Fall 2013
On Task
YES
NO
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√(Spring)
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Spring 2015
Summer 2015
Fall 2015
Spring 2016
Summer 2016
93
EDITORIAL STYLE AND FORMAT
The UPRM-MSCHE Institutional Steering Team agreed to utilize the following outline
for the individual Task Force reports. The reports will be written in Microsoft WORD
using Times New Roman font Size 12:
SELF-STUDY TASK FORCES REPORT
OUTLINE
Coversheet
Table of Contents
Task Force Membership
I.
Introduction
A.
Background
II.
A few paragraphs, which explain MSCHE
comments on the issue in earlier years, if
applicable, and describe the major events that
might have generated major changes.
B.
Purpose
Explain the reasons for conducting a self-study
in this area.
C.
Scope of work
The name, focus, and objectives of the task
force.
Methodology
A.
Process
A few paragraphs which describe how the task
force operated (timeline, major events, etc.)
B.
Data Sources
A few paragraphs, which describe in general
terms which sources of information were used by
the task force and why. A detailed list will be
included in Appendices.
C.
The Model
A few paragraphs which explain the approach
used by the task force in conducting their study.
As a whole, we are using the Comprehensive
Approach with Special Emphasis, which gave
way to the creation of task forces.
94
III.
IV.
V.
Findings
A.
Expectations
B.
Findings
A section which describes in general terms what
the task force actually found.
C.
Specific Findings
A list of positive, neutral, or negative findings
with graphs, charts, and tables to document each
finding. This section should be analytical. It
should not just include answers to the questions
asked.
Recommendations
A.
Observations
B.
Recommendations
C.
Commendations
A listing and discussion of the task force’s major
observations (recommendations for improvement
or commendations for excellence).
The
recommendations should be tied/referenced to
specific findings and major changes expected in
the future. Focus on the four or five most
important recommendations.
Summary
A.
VI.
A section which describes in general terms what
the Task Force anticipated finding.
Final Statement
A few paragraphs which serve as a final
summarizing statement.
Process Recommendations
A.
Appendices
A.
B.
C.
D.
Suggestions
A few paragraphs that critique the process we
followed and might be of value to the groups that
will be working in years beyond 2016.
Copies of the information gathering forms used in
the process.
Copies of any surveys/questionnaires used
including complete results.
A list of people interviewed and their roles.
A list of documents accessed.
95
ORGANIZATION OF FINAL SELF-STUDY REPORT
The UPRM-MSCHE Institutional Steering Team proposed the following the
guidelines provided in the Self Study: Creating a Useful Process and Report (2nd Edition,
2012) for the final Self-Study Report to be submitted to the Middle States Commission on
Higher Education’s reaccreditation visit in Spring 2016. The chapters in the final SelfStudy Report will be constituted by the fourteen standards of excellence.
PROFILE OF THE EVALUATION TEAM
We consider that the Chairperson and other committee members of the evaluation
team who will be visiting our Institution during Spring 2016 should be highly familiar
with the following characteristics:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Land Grant Colleges
Program offerings and enrollment size similar to ours.
a.
UPRM has a major College of Engineering with all of its programs
accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering &
Technology (ABET).
b.
UPRM offers Master’s degree programs in almost every
department and Ph.D. programs in Marine Sciences, Civil
Engineering, Chemical Engineering, and Computer Engineering.
c.
Our campus enrollment is around 12,000 students, with the largest
enrollment, at the undergraduate level,
in the College of
Engineering (approximately 37%).
Spanish and English knowledge (Bilingual and Bicultural).
Research emphasis balanced with a commitment to maintain a strong
instructional program.
96
Related Educational Activities
Assessment of Student Learning
Student Admissions and Retention
Student Support Services
Faculty
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Educational Offerings
General Education
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
6. To make evident our school pride throughout the country
5. To strengthen ties with alumni and surrounding communities sponsoring their participation as partners in academic endeavors
4. To provide adequate areas for extracurricular and co‐
curricular activities which promote healthy lifestyles
X
3. To encourage student participation in college student organizations
x
2. To enhance effective communication and trust among various sectors of the college community
Objective #6: To impact our Puerto Rican society
1. To provide excellent support and infrastructure services to our students and to the entire college community
5. To promote entrepreneurial and leadership approaches among our students throughout all fields of knowledge
4. To strengthen fundamental values such as ethics, justice, and honesty among our students
3. To promote student participation in community projects, providing opportunities for these activities within university curricula
2. To promote, to develop and to facilitate research, focused in the application and marketing of results to meet the country’s needs
Objective #5: To strengthen research and competitive creative endeavors
1. To promote the use of expertise within our university community to meet both our campus’ and our country’s needs
5. To strive to identify, among existing graduate programs, highly universally ranked niches of specialized research
4. To promote and to give relevancy to Graduate Studies
3. To develop assessment mechanisms to assure efficiency in research and creative endeavors
X
2. To support external funding opportunities for research and creative endeavors at our campus, while supporting efforts for securing external investigation income
Objective #4: To adopt efficient and expedient administrative procedures
1. To provide support and essential resources necessary for efficient research and creative endeavors
4. Promote and encourage an attitude of service and a sense of responsibility in all units by highlighting among all personnel the relevance and impact of their particular duties on the university community
3. Guarantee that personnel are adequately trained to perform assigned duties andresponsibilities with accountability
X
2. Reassert and strengthen management roles in decision‐making areas within our campus, as determined by University Regulations, thus decentralizing decision‐ making on solely local matters
Objetive #3: To increase and diversify the Institution’s sources
1. Devote human and fiscal resources to automation and streamlining of critical internal processes
3. Publish external funding opportunities for scholarships and student assistantships
2. Increase income generated by UPRM, withholding it completely for its particular needs
Objetive #2: To lead higher education throughout Puerto Rico by guaranteeing the best education for our students
1. Secure a budgetary allowance from the Board of Trustees that will take into consideration the strategic plans of each campus as well as student enrollment changes
4. To maintain adequate academic offerings
3. To provide an adequate and pleasing atmosphere to support teaching learning processes
X
2. To support and to acknowledge those professors who are committed to teaching, to the development of new professionals, and to excellence
4. To develop an assessment plan that examines the performance‐level of internal processes as well as the effectiveness of teahing‐learning process
X
1. To maintain, to update, and to strengthen our academic programs by streamlining processes to effect curricular changes and to create new courses and programs
3. To develop a system that allows to establish the relationship between the assignment of resources and the priorities stated in the Strategic Plan.
Mission and Goals
X
Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal
Institutional Resources
Administration
Integrity
Institutional Assessment
2. To develop a system that for the opportune updating or modification of the Strategic Plan, based on the assessment results
Institutional Mission
MSCHE Standards of Excellence
1. To maintain and publish updated institutional metrics
Objetive #1: To institutionalize a culture of strategic planning and assessment
Objective #7: To strengthen school spirit, pride and identity
X
X
97

University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez (UPRM) Final Self

Transcription

Similar documents

Computer Engineering and FemProf

March - Uprm

RFI Issues at the Arecibo Observatory

Campus Verde - Recinto Universitario de Mayagüez

Designing critical inquiry units for a thinking classroom: Part 2

Some facts about Biggest Roulette Win In Vegas

Inglês 2ª Fase

PDF

Improving results through improved relationships at Tauranga Boys