Committee Members

Holly Irwin-Chase (chair) – Professor of Psychology, Hadley Wood (liaison) – Vice Provost for Faculty Development; Dean of General Education; Professor of French and Literature, Maggie Bailey – Associate Professor of Business, Susan Bentley – Professor of Education, Don Burnard –  Associate Professor of Education; Director of PLNU, Bakersfield, Milton Karahadian – Director, Nicholson Commons, Jim McEliece – Professor of Economics, Michael Pitts – Vice President for Spiritual Development; University Chaplain and Lois Wagner – Associate Professor of Nursing

Committee Charge

Group Four will reference WASC Standards Two and Four and write a reflective essay following the guidelines found in the University’s Institutional Proposal.  This document states that evaluative benchmarks called Criteria for Review (CFR’s) will be reformatted into questions to be addressed in order to demonstrate that PLNU meets the Standards.  In the Proposal, the University assures the WASC Senior Commission that “Subcommittees of the faculty and staff will gather evidence and answer each question, citing any gaps in data collection or concerns that arise regarding institutional practice.  They will also make recommendations for improvement.

Standard Two: Achieving Educational Objectives Through Core Functions

Criteria For Review 2.2

CFR 2.2 examines the integration of the graduate programs with the universities liberal arts culture, mission (to teach…to shape…to send), goals of academic excellence, and the institution’s commitment to the success of these programs.  Through graduate and faculty surveys several questions were asked to identify gaps in mission fit, academic standards, and graduate support services. 

The survey findings reveal a strong fit between graduate programs and institutional mission, but a weaker commitment by undergraduate faculty and by the institution to support the long-term success of these programs.  The lack of institutional support might be explained in part because many of the graduate programs are new and it takes time to build an infrastructure and graduate culture, but the observations provide some margin for improvement. 

Similar findings were made in the second half of the CFR question. However, here the case appears more one of perception by the undergraduate faculty and/or full-time faculty whether or not the graduate research is academically rigorous. There seems to be a consistent observation that graduate students and faculty need improved access to academic resources.  These findings point to opportunities for continued growth and improvement. 

The following is a discussion of the findings as well as the underlying issues of mission fit, full-time faculty commitment and academic support.

Criteria For Review 2.2 (a)

Are graduate programs consistent with the purpose and character of the institution? 

The faculty survey was used to analyze this question. The results include two different but closely related faculty survey comparisons:  1) undergraduate faculty compared to graduate faculty and 2) adjunct faculty compared with full-time faculty.  In many cases the results are strikingly similar. This might be due to the fact that many of the adjunct faculty are graduate faculty teaching in the off-campus programs. See Table 1 for a delineation between full-time and adjunct faculty. Table 2 shows the delineation between faculty who teach graduate students and undergraduate students. Out of the 119 respondents who teach graduate students, 25% teach only graduate students while the other 75% teach both graduate and undergraduate students.

Strategic Objective:  Institution Mission Fit

The institutional mission is the cornerstone of the strategic foundation and serves to focus the organizational resources and cultural commitment to a single vision, providing a coherent structure, to support the objectives and purpose of the institution.  The Mission is set by the senior leadership of the institution and the degree to which that mission is fully integrated and executed throughout the university will drive the success or failure of the organizational purpose.

The institutional mission of “to teach…to shape…to send” is clearly articulated throughout the graduate off-campus culture.  When graduate faculty were asked if the institutional mission is integrated into the classroom through faculty commitment, curriculum design, pedagogy and resources 89 % responded they, “Strongly Agree or Agree” (refer to Table 3). This indicates intentionality in fully integrating the institutional mission throughout the operations of the graduate program.

One interesting finding occurs in the gap between the perceptions of the full-time faculty in contrast to the adjunct faculty regarding the integration of the institutional mission. It is interesting that when adjunct and full-time faculty respond to issues regarding the graduate programs, the adjunct faculty have a slightly stronger positive response to the questions than the full-time faculty. For example, when faculty were asked if the institutional mission is integrated with their course goals and classroom assessment 47% of the adjunct strongly agree compared with 36% of the fulltime faculty (see Table 4). Although a low percentage, the adjunct faculty are a bit higher in their response than fulltime faculty. In the fall of 2005, a first adjunct faculty orientation was held. This may be contributing to the perception of the adjunct faculty regarding institutional mission.

When graduate faculty (of graduate students only) were asked if, “Students’ moral and ethical thinking is stimulated in my classes” over 97 % of the faculty indicated they, strongly agree or agree (See Table 5)  In addition, when graduate faculty were asked if, “Students think critically about the integration of faith and profession in my classes,” then 90% responded, strongly agree or agree (see Table 6). This indicates the importance of the faculty’s commitment to the values and culture of the institution.

When graduate students were surveyed as to whether, “The institutional mission was clearly articulated to me throughout the admissions process,” 61 % of the students either, strongly agree or agree (see Table 7).  Although this is a strong response, student’s awareness of the institutional mission should be heightened even in these initial contacts.  Graduate students reported, “My moral and ethical thinking is stimulated in classes” (Strongly agree or agree 77.5%, see Table 8), and “I think critically about the integration of faith and profession in my classes” (strongly agree or agree 73.2%, see Table 9).  Both of these are strong responses but could be improved.

Strategic Objective:  Prevent Institutional Drift

The second aspect of the institutional fit examination is to consider those anchors in place that protect the institution from drifting away from its core mission.  For example, the Graduate Studies Committee has the responsibility for reviewing each new program as well as on-going programs to ensure they support the University’s mission, purpose and character.  However, the integrity of the system is greatly dependent on each School/Department maintaining and continuously assessing their commitment to the strategic mission and goals of the institution.  

In addition to the Schools/ Departments examination of the institutional fit on each new program, when asked if the institutional mission influences our review of syllabi, curriculum, and teaching methodologies over 86 % of the graduate faculty answered Strongly Agree or Agree with the statement (see Table 10). In addition, when asked if, “The institutional mission is integrated with course goals including classroom assessment and instructional standards,” 79% of the graduate faculty answered they strongly agree or agree (see Table 11).

One area that needs examination is the School/ Department’s polices and procedures for assessing faculty.  When asked to respond to the statement, “Our school or department has procedures and policies for assessing all graduate faculty’s (including adjuncts) commitment to the vision, mission and values of the institution,” only 55% of full-time faculty (see Table 12) and 66% of graduate faculty, strongly agree or agree (see Table 13).

Strategic Objective:  Institutional Long-term Commitment (Faculty Teaching in Graduate Programs)

Just as important as the faculty, staff and student’s commitment to the mission and goals of the institution, is the commitment of the institution to supporting the growth of the graduate programs for their long-term success. This might be measured in the support services and other institutional resources committed to the success of these growing programs. Under capitalization of the programs would have a detrimental impact on the long-term reputation of the university and must be carefully monitored.

When faculty were asked questions about the institution’s commitment to their long term success in professional training and development, the graduate faculty had a significantly weaker response than the undergraduate faculty for the question relating to professional development, but a stronger response when asked about professional training.  This would be an issue for further study. Sixty-two percent of undergraduate faculty and 68% of graduate faculty strongly agree or agree that they have appropriate institutional support for professional training, conferences and continuing education (see Table 14), whereas, 78% of undergraduate faculty and 67% of graduate faculty strongly agree or agree that they have appropriate institutional support for professional development (see Table 15).

The most significant gap between adjunct and full-time faculty as well as the graduate and undergraduate faculty is in questions regarding their commitment to the graduate programs. In both cases the full-time and undergraduate faculty are weaker in their support of the graduate programs. Whereas 89% of all graduate faculty strongly agree or agree with the statement, “I am supportive of the growth of graduate programs,” only 64% of full-time faculty and 66% of undergraduate faculty strongly agree or agree with this statement (see Tables 16 and 17). This indicates that there may be an information gap between what is thought about the resources for PLNU graduate programs.

When graduate students were asked, “Point Loma provides continuous education and life-long learning opportunities”, 85 % responded strongly agree or agree (see Table 18).  This strong response indicates graduate students view a strong commitment from the university toward their life-long learning needs and that this in turn indicates a strategic opportunity to form an educational partnership between the graduate student and Point Loma Nazarene University.  However, this sentiment is not supported by the weaker response from full-time faculty in which only 58% answered strongly agree (see Table 19). A stronger response came from all graduate faculty, but this response was still not as strong as that of the graduate students (i.e., 77% responding strongly agree or agree, see Table 20).
 
Another aspect of the university’s long-term commitment to the graduate programs is the support services and institutional resources committed to the health and growth of the graduate programs.  When responding to “Graduate students have state of the art resources (library, media, IT, etc.),” only 51% of full-time faculty strongly agree or agree (see Table 21) and only 62% of all graduate faculty strongly agree or agree (see Table 22).

Table 23 illustrates the results of graduate students when asked to rate the quality of the support services provided to meet their needs. The results should be carefully interpreted.  The significant N/A results probably indicate that the student did not know what function if any the particular administrative service performs.  For example, the 67 % N/A for Provost and 58 % for Conference Services (i.e. maintains and schedules the Mission Valley graduate facility) probably indicates a lack of understanding or knowledge rather than be interpreted negatively.  On the other hand, the strong positive response for those services that graduate students are most frequently in contact:  Academic Advising, Admissions, and Financial Services, is an excellent indication that these front line support functions are providing good service with some range to improve. As we shall see in the next section, academic support services such as the library and research resources should be carefully examined for the ways in which they are used to support the graduate programs.  It may be that better orientation to these services is needed to link the graduate student to the resources available.

Criteria For Review 2.2 (b)

Are graduate curricula to include active involvement with the literature of the field and ongoing student engagement in research and/or appropriate high-level professional practice and training experience?

This question requires an examination of the quality controls and assurances the schools/departments have in meeting the high academic standards of the institution. These are important issues in light of the significant growth in the graduate programs. Maintaining standards of academic excellence cannot be jeopardized in order to meet market demand. Each program should have standards of excellence incorporated in the degree programs that can be monitored and maintained, including a research component, faculty professional development, and leading edge research and/or professional publications.

Academic Support

The graduate student responses to the questions regarding academic support should be examined carefully. Table 24 shows that only a little more than half of the graduate students believe (i.e., strongly agree or agree) they have state of the art resource support in the library, information technology, and media services. Further, Table 25 shows that only 58 % of the graduate students believe (i.e., strongly agree or agree) they have the leading edge journals desirable for their field of research. On a positive note, Table 26 shows that 78% of graduate students believe (i.e., strongly agree or agree) that leading academic and professional literature are used by graduate students for research. It is recommended that action be taken to identify the areas of concern and resources be committed to address these needs. Graduate faculty and students should make known and have available the leading publications in primary fields of research including academic publications, leading research journals, conference proceedings, etc. Graduate curricula should include active involvement with the literature of the field including class discussions, research resources, and analysis of trends for future directions of the field of inquiry. Availability of such resources is required for graduate level discourse and research. 

The Graduate Project/Thesis

To maintain standards of excellence in graduate programs, students and faculty should engage in leading edge research and professional practices, including the review and critique of current research publications and professional practices. Graduate schools/departments should create and maintain a community of scholarship by dedicating resources to enhance the culture of scholarship.

The project/thesis is a culminating experience for the graduate student that provides the opportunity to use his/her academic skills to more deeply examine a research topic or further develop a field of professional expertise. It is also an excellent mentoring opportunity for the faculty in a one-on-one research role that challenges the student to synthesize the professional skills and academic knowledge gained throughout the master’s experience into a single project that adds value to his/her institution and build his/her subject expertise.

When graduate students were asked about their project/thesis work, there was strong agreement about the value of the research but a weaker response for the institution’s ability to support their work through academic services.  This is consistent with previous findings and focus in on a perceived weakness of the graduate program. When responding to the following statement, “The project and thesis requirements engage graduate students in academic research”, 71% of graduate students responded strongly agree or agree (see Table 27). Table 28 shows that 73% responded strongly agree or agree to “the project and thesis requirements engage graduate students in high-level professional experience.” Again, Table 25 shows that 59% of graduate students responded strongly agree or agree to “I have easy access to leading edge curricula, textbooks, journals, and conference proceedings.” Finally, Table 29 illustrates that 66% responded strongly agree or agree to “I have sufficient academic resources and preparation for projects and theses.”

This weak support for rigorous academic research seems to be consistent with the views of adjunct faculty, full-time faculty, and undergraduate faculty as noted in Tables 30, 31, 32, and 33.

When graduate faculty were surveyed regarding the project/thesis their responses were consistent with previous findings. There were strong positive responses regarding the academic rigor of the research but view the university as having weaker support from academic resources. “Leading literature in the academic/professional field is used and made available to graduate students and faculty for their research agenda” was responded to with strongly agree or agree by 82% of the graduate faculty (see Table 34). Again, Table 22 shows that 62% of graduate faculty strongly agree or agree that graduate students have state of the art resources (i.e., library, media, information technology, etc.). Further, Table 35 shows that 78% of graduate faculty strongly agree or agree that “faculty professional involvement in scholarly research, conferences, and literature review adds to the scholarship of the graduate programs graduate faculty.” Finally, 63% of all faculty (see Table 36) and 67% of graduate faculty (see Table 37) strongly agree or agree that “faculty and students have easy access to leading edge curricula, textbooks, journals, and conference proceedings.”

Criteria For Review 2.4

What are the institution’s retention and graduation rates, and are they appropriate for this type of institution and student population?

In order to examine this issue, four objectives were created. The first objective was to determine similar undergraduate institutions for comparison purposes. The second was to compare graduation and retention rates among the different institutions. The third and fourth objectives were the same expect as applied to graduate programs. The following paragraphs include a discussion on these four objectives.

According to the March/April (2004) issue of Academe: Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors, Point Loma Nazarene University (PLNU) had a status level of IIB (General Baccalaureate). This status level is defined as follows:

These institutions are characterized by their primary emphasis on general
undergraduate baccalaureate-level education.   These institutions are not
significantly engaged in post-baccalaureate education.  Included in this category
are institutions which are not considered specialized and in which the number of
post-baccalaureate degrees granted in fewer than thirty or in which fewer than
three post-baccalaureate level programs are offered and which either (a) grant
baccalaureate degrees in three or more programs areas, or (b) offer a
baccalaureate program in interdisciplinary studies.

Institutions that also have a status level of IIB and are similar to PLNU regarding their liberal arts and Christian focus include Gordon University and Westmont College.

Other institutions that are similar to PLNU regarding a liberal arts and Christian focus include Anderson University, Azusa Pacific University, Biola University, Calvin College, Seattle Pacific University, Taylor University, and Wheaton College.

As can be seen in Table 38, PLNU consistently has one of the lowest percentages concerning the graduation rate. In examining the table, Taylor University – Fort Wayne looks like an outlier. Once this institution is removed, PLNU has the lowest graduation rate of these comparator institutions. In examining PLNU over time, it can be seen that although the percentages are low, there has been some improvement.

As can be seen in Table 39, the freshmen retention rate for PLNU is one of the lowest. However, the percentages show a steady rate of improvement over time.  PLNU has instituted the First Year Experience Committee which has begun to implement some ideas that come from first-year work nationally and that have been shown to help with the retention rate. Specifically, the committee began a summer reading program in the fall of 2005 specifically for freshmen. The hope is to continue this next year with further follow-up activities during the academic year. The project was designed both to help prepare students mentally for the switch to college, but also to give them contact with a professor before they had entered the classroom. Additionally, a new position has been created, Associate Vice President for Student Development, in order to lead Student Engagement and Retention. This organizational structure allows a focus and intentional programming concerning engagement which previously was more difficult. Further, the Student Care Group, staffed by Student Development professionals, is a centralized means of responding to struggling students, who are at high risk for attrition. Finally, improvements in NSO have helped the perception of incoming students concerning the type of institution PLNU is as well as helping students to get acquainted both with each other and with faculty.

The last two objectives were not met. The comparisons could not be made due to very little consistencies among departments of graduate programs and very little consistent data collection from the Graduate School at PLNU.

Criteria For Review 2.9

To what extent are scholarship, research and creative work linked to the improvement of teaching and learning?

The definition of scholarship has been broadened to include significant activities that strategically impact student learning. These activities include: classical research (including the creative work of faculty in the literary, visual, and performing arts), integration (of scholarly work across disciplines), applied scholarship or outreach, teaching (which has been broadened to include curriculum development, advising, as well as instructional and classroom research), and service to the institution or to the profession (citizenship). Table 40 shows the percentages of faculty responding to major and moderate use of the specific item noted. Items refer to scholarship and student learning.

Scholarship of Discovery.  Fulltime faculty (73%) and faculty who teach both graduate and undergraduate classes utilize classical research (75%) more than faculty who teach graduate (60%) or undergraduate (61%) exclusively or adjunct faculty (52%).

Scholarship of Integration.  Faculty who teach both undergraduate and graduate (63%) report collaboration with faculty of their own discipline more than faculty who teach exclusively undergraduate (53%) or graduate students (54%).  Fulltime faculty (64%) collaborate more than adjunct faculty (46%).  Faculty (49%) are more likely to collaborate with off campus colleagues on content than across disciplines (22%)

Scholarship of Application.  Faculty who teach graduate courses and both graduate and undergraduate course are more likely to apply scholarly work to community or societal issues than those who teach graduate courses exclusively.  Graduate faculty (53%) and adjunct faculty (52%) collaborate more with K-12 schools or community colleges than undergraduate or fulltime faculty.

Scholarship of Teaching.  Faculty who teach graduate courses (63%) are more likely to use research based innovations in pedagogy than those who teach undergraduate (29%).  Faculty who teach graduate students (60%) are more likely to mentor students in research or in-depth study than faculty who teach undergraduate students (50%).

Levels of Academic Challenge :  Ninety percent (90%) or more of the faculty members report setting challenging and clear expectations with students being clear about how they can meet course expectations.  Eighty percent (80%) of the faculty report placing an explicit emphasis on insightful and creative work from students. Refer to Table 41.

Active and Collaborative Learning:  More graduate faculty report using collaborative strategies than undergraduate. Refer to Table 42.

Student-Faculty Interaction:  More than 90% of the faculty attempt to get to know students as individuals in their classrooms. An even higher percentage of students believe that students perceive faculty as wanting to get to know them and support their learning. Refer to Table 43.

Enriching Educational Experiences:  Sixty percent (60%) or more of the faculty explicitly integrate and apply their learning beyond the classrooms. Refer to Table 44.

Criteria For Review 2.14

How does the institution identify the special needs of transfer students, assess their performance and retention in the institution, and determine that institutional objectives are met even if course work is taken in other institutions?

All transfer student transcripts are evaluated in the admissions process, and again, more thoroughly in the office of the Vice Provost for Academic Administration.  A course schedule is determined based on these evaluations. 

Once the academic year begins, an ongoing evaluation of each student transcript provides necessary information of student academic success. 67.8% of transfer students responding to the PLNU WASC undergraduate survey reported that all of their academic needs were being met. For students having academic difficulty an early alert system provides information from faculty members. (However this system would work more effectively if more faculty members submitted midterm grades.) Additionally, ongoing tutorial services and academic advising are offered through the Academic Support Center. 63.2% of students responding to a survey stated that their academic support needs had been well assessed by Point Loma Nazarene University.

The Office of Engagement and Retention tracks retention trends of all students including transfer students and the Office of Records and Institutional Research conducts ongoing evaluation of transcripts and experience to determine whether or not institutional objectives are being met.

In conclusion, it appears that transfer students are handled and evaluated fairly well.

Standard Four: Creating an Organization Committed to Learning Improvement

Criteria For Review 4.4

In what ways does the institution review the effectiveness of its quality assurance processes?

As can be seen in Table 45, most programs have some type of internal review process. However, not all programs have an outside review process. Both internal and external review is necessary in order to maintain and improve programs. There are two recommendations made.

Criteria For Review 4.7

In what ways does the institution identify effective approaches to assessing teaching and learning within the institution and at other institutions?

PLNU offers its full-time and part-time instructors, at both the graduate and undergraduate levels, the possibility of using either of two student evaluation systems. The two systems, SIR II and IDEA, are two of the three available nationally-normed and thoroughly tested course evaluation systems. The IDEA form, for example, is used in more than 80,000 classes and 185 institutions. It was developed by Kansas State University before becoming a separate non-profit business. It is constantly being reviewed and updated (see http://www.idea.ksu.edu/StudentRatings/index.html).

The other options available for student evaluations such as the CIEQ have not been as widely field tested over such a large number of classes as the SIR II or the IDEA form (see http://www.cieq.com/ ).

The SIR II (see http://www.ets.org/Media/Products/283840.pdf ) has been developed by ETS, originally centered at Princeton University and now, like IDEA, a separate, non-profit business. The SIR II has been thoroughly researched and carefully validated. Faculty are offered a choice so that they can select an instrument that bests matches the type of class they teach and the sorts of objectives they have established.

The current student evaluation system has been in place at PLNU for at least 20 years. The survey of PLNU faculty found that faculty felt the evaluations were adequate and had been adequately explained as tools for improvement of teaching (see Table 46). However, the number of full-time faculty who felt strongly that PLNU did identify and explain available options for assessing the quality of teaching was low enough (17.1%) to leave concerns. PLNU does provide all new faculty a semester-long New Faculty Seminar in order to orient them to a variety of tasks that they will need to assume, including the task of teaching well and assessing their teaching with one of these instruments. During this time, the new faculty are explained how to use the teaching evaluation tool and how to interpret it. Additionally, a first-time orientation session for adjuncts was presented at the beginning of fall, 2005 and the adjunct handbook has been greatly revised in order to provide better information on issues such as evaluation of teaching. However, it is still necessary that more efforts be made to show faculty how the available national instruments can be interpreted so that the student evaluations can be used for formative purposes.

Much of the support for teaching and learning is done through the Center for Teaching and Learning and through several other faculty-run centers, especially the Center for Women’s Studies, the Center for Justice and Reconciliation and the Wesleyan Center for 21st Century Studies. Programs from the Center for Teaching and Learning were designed after examining over 100 Teaching and Learning sites around the country and after a wide discussion with faculty leaders (primarily department chairs) at PLNU took place.

Every full-time professor at Point Loma Nazarene University is on a schedule of teaching assessment that involves a full profile for the first two years followed by a year of student evaluations. Thereafter the faculty member does one year of a full evaluation cycle followed by two years of student evaluations only. This continues until a tenure decision has been made. Thereafter the faculty member continues on a schedule that involves one year with a full evaluation profile followed by three years with student evaluations only. A full profile includes a self/chair form and a peer evaluation form.

Issues of assessing student learning are the concern of every department on campus and the explicit oversight of the Assessment Committee, the Vice Provost for Educational Effectiveness and the Vice Provost for General Education. In addition to bringing a team of experts on campus in Spring 2001 to train faculty in doing student outcomes based assessment, PLNU has supported the two Vice Provosts concerned and some of the faculty in going to conferences on the issue of learning assessment. The whole campus is now on an annual schedule of assessment, with departments also working on a five-year program review cycle.

Although Point Loma Nazarene University is doing much to support faculty efforts at excellent teaching, there is much that we still hope to accomplish. In particular, we are looking at ways to make the current faculty evaluation system more geared towards formative evaluation and less focused on purely summative measures. In particular we are hoping to make the self/chair form and the peer evaluation process more focused on formative evaluation. The Center for Teaching and Learning Director has examined several other models such as student-based formative evaluations, teaching portfolios and more interactive mentoring relationships. A committee will be examining options and working to bring a proposal to the faculty for their approval.

Recommendations

1. CFR 2.2 examined the integration of graduate program with the university’s liberal arts culture, mission, goals of academic excellence and the institution’s commitment to the success of these programs. A total of 281 graduate and undergraduate faculty members were surveyed in an effort to identify disparity in mission fit, academic standards, and graduate support services. Overall, the survey responses were encouraging, but provided a variety of opportunities for further discussion, examination and program improvement. Below are the list of recommendations from this assessment.
2. CFR 2.2a 1. Regarding integrating the mission into the classroom, more formal policies and procedures need to be explored to protect the university as it grows through more off-campus programs. Such policies should include the professional development of graduate faculty to meet the challenges of the graduate students, careful review of the syllabi, and/or consistent statement and examination of Department/School expectations for support of the mission of the University.
3. CFR 2.21 2. Regarding institutional mission, it is recommended that further work is done to prepare adjunct faculty. PLNU should continue to hold an adjunct orientation at the beginning of each academic year and to enhance the type of issues covered during that time.
4. CFR 2.2a 2. Further inquiry into the weaker response of graduate faculty as compared to undergraduate faculty regarding the institution’s commitment to long-term success in professional development is warranted in order to understand how to proceed.
5. CFR 2.2a 3. Further inquiry into why there may be an information gap between adjunct and full-time faculty as well as graduate and undergraduate faculty regarding commitment to graduate programs is warranted.
   
6. CFR 2.2a 4. Due to the weaker response by full-time and graduate faculty as compared to graduate students concerning PLNU providing continuous education and life-long learning opportunities, it is recommended that steps be taken to close this gap in order for there to be an institutional commitment to support the growth of graduate education and professional development.
   
7. CFR 2.2a 5. Regarding preventing institutional drift, it is recommended that PLNU explore a policy and procedural structure designed to prevent a collapse in this area as the institution continues to grow off-campus.
   
8. CFR 2.2a 6. Regarding institutional long-term commitment, it is recommended that there be improvement in the level of access to academic resources for graduate students in order to increase the level of academic rigor in research and scholarly activity.
9. CFR 2.2a 7. In order to facilitate understanding of graduate students concerning support services it is recommended that PLNU offer a better orientation to these services.
10. CFR 2.2b 1. It is recommended that PLNU use benchmarks to measure standards of excellence such as professional accreditation, national exams, publications, significant research in order to gage improvement and growth in the field in order to maintain professional and academic rigor as well as meaningful research. 
    
11. CFR 2.2b 2. Regarding academic support, there are four recommendations
1. request Schools/Department with graduate programs document the literature of the field used and made available to graduate students and faculty for their research agenda.  This will include the currency of texts, syllabi, library, school/department resources, etc.;
2. request support services such as the library and audio-visual review their commitment to building graduate level facilities and resources;
   
3. review of the curricula, faculty involvement, academic resources and technology for currency in scholarly literature and research compared with similar institutions; and
   
4. request each School/Department make a survey of graduate curricula, textbooks, professional/academic journals and conference proceedings available to faculty and students and identify best practices at comparable graduate institutions.
12. CFR 2.4 1. It is recommended that PLNU continue its efforts with freshmen retention and to continue to look for new and better ways to facilitate freshmen retention.
13. CFR 2.4 2. Further, it is recommended that PLNU continue researching reasons behind students leaving the university before graduation in order to raise this percentage further.
    
14. CFR 2.4 3. Finally, it is recommended that the Graduate School at PLNU develop consistent measures using specific definitions for retention and graduation rates. Afterward, the Graduate School should make comparisons to other institutions on retention and graduation rates and begin modifying their programs accordingly.
15. CFR 2.9 1. It is recommended that PLNU consider scheduled and purposeful collaboration sessions between full-time and adjunct faculty on content and pedagogy (e.g. research-based collaboration strategies) within the same discipline and across disciplines.
    
16. CFR 2.9 2. Further, it is recommended that PLNU consider having faculty correlate their perceptions about setting challenging and clear expectations with student perceptions.
    
17. CFR 2.14. It is recommended that PLNU continue its efforts in utilizing the programs in effect and look for additional ways to meet institutional objectives concerning transfer students.
18. CFR 4.4 1. It is recommended to incorporate some type of internal review for the programs that do not have one.
    
19. CFR 4.4 2. Further, it is recommended that outside consultants be brought to PLNU in order to review all programs that don’t already have outside governing bodies for the effectiveness of each program. Careful consideration should be made as to who the outside consultant(s) is(are). This person, or persons should be considered an expert in the area that will be assessed. This type of investigation needs to be proactive, rather than reactive.
20. CFR 4.7 1. It is recommended that PLNU make a continued and stronger effort to show faculty how to use and interpret the current national instruments so that student evaluations can be used for formative purposes.
21. CFR 4.7 2. It is recommended that the Center for Teaching and Learning focus efforts on formative evaluation in order to better assess teaching and learning at PLNU.