Campus Accountability Goals

California State University Long Beach Academic Years 2002-03 and 2004-05

March 1, 2001 California State University Long Beach (CSULB) welcomes the opportunity to describe campus goals on key dimensions of institutional performance. The campus has set realistic goals for the coming two- and four-year time periods and the campus intends to align efforts and resources to achieve these goals. In recent years, CSULB has focused on improving fundamentals of campus quality that will impact some of the accountability indicators. The General Education program has been thoroughly reformed. The campus has re-sequenced courses to ensure that students acquire needed skills and make progress toward graduation in a timely manner. The campus has reallocated resources to deliver the courses to students at the appropriate time. For example, every entering freshman is guaranteed a package of basic-skills General Education courses. Faculty have been introduced to academic assessment and supported for incorporating it into general education and into courses for their majors. Support programs for students have been strengthened, especially for first year students and the campus has introduced a facilitative focus on customer service throughout the campus. Many CSULB faculty, staff and administrators are involved in a vigorous partnership with surrounding school districts, particularly the large, diverse, urban Long Beach Unified School District. The partners have focused upon improving student readiness for college and the data show evidence of improving student preparation. The campus has also focused on reforming elementary teacher preparation and expanding the flow of students through the pipeline of teacher preparation courses. This strategy will produce an increasing flow of teacher credentials in the next few years. Rapidly rising enrollment is a critical concern at CSULB. The campus has implemented all available means to expand capacity, including a revision to policies on course scheduling to more efficiently utilize facilities. Despite these measures, enrollment is rapidly approaching campus physical capacity (and Master Plan maximum size). As a consequence, an enrollment management plan has been submitted to the Chancellor's Office. The attached accountability goals for Academic Years 2002-03 and 2004-05 were drafted by faculty and staff in respective areas of the campus with appropriate expertise. Campus deans, the four campus vice presidents, the Chair of the Academic Senate and finally the President reviewed the goals. They represent agreed-upon and realistic goals for the campus. Following is a description of the context for each of CSULB's goals for the coming two- and four-year periods, including an assignment of responsibility for each area. Goals for Academic Years 2002-03 and 2004-05 are found in the attached tables.

Performance Area 1: Quality of Baccalaureate Degree Programs

The campus has actively promoted academic assessment. The recent reform of general education featured assessment prominently among new requirements. The General Education Governing Committee has successfully implemented assessment requirements in new General Education courses. The campus has created an Assessment Committee and a position of Assessment Coordinator. Funds have been allocated to assessment projects. The Program and Educational Policies Council Chair has articulated, in these goals, specific steps which will move the campus toward full implementation and, more importantly, toward utilization of academic assessment. The primary responsibility for monitoring campus progress and leading improvement in this area lies with the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the Program and Educational Policies Council and the Campus Assessment Committee.

Link to Area I Goals

Performance Area 3: Progression to Degree

Indicator 3.1 Continuation Rates Continuation rates, for the purpose of this exercise, have been defined by the system to mean persistence beyond the first year of enrollment. This is an area where we already have data that are quite positive for a comprehensive university such as ours that has moderately demanding admission standards. Our first-year retention program has been in effect for about a decade. Evaluation efforts have been in effect for that entire time, with the results fed back to a broad cross-section of campus offices involved in the effort. Major change initiatives have flowed from this evaluation work. For example, we have restructured General Education and have committed substantial new faculty resources to make sure that entering students get the courses they should take to enhance their chances of success in the long run. Consequently, the room for further improvement is limited to fine-tuning of the existing program. Only small marginal improvements in the current data can reasonably be expected. The primary responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who consults with the First-Year Experience Committee and the various retention and graduation committees. These committees include representation from three divisions of the University: Academic Affairs, Student Services, and Administration and Finance. Indicator 3.2: Upper-Division Units Considering the high proportion of CSULB students seeking degrees in applied and professional fields, which often have higher unit requirements than the typical B.A. degree, the campus has already achieved excellent numbers in this area. Clearly, students are able to learn what they will need to take in order to graduate with the lowest possible number of excessive hours. The fact that the number of units taken in upper-division status by transfers to CSULB is actually lower than those taken by first-time freshmen also reflects a well-developed system of course articulation. Some further improvement in the data may occur as a result of the reduction in the total number of units required for the B.A. degree to a uniform 120, effective Fall 2001, but the change will be limited and reflected over several years. Review of the other, typically higher-unit undergraduate degrees must be approached on a case-by-case basis and will take several years. Accordingly, only small changes are projected in this indicator. The primary responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, whose office is responsible both for managing course articulation and the setting of degree requirements.

Link to Area 3 Goals

Performance Area 4: Persistence and Graduation

Indicator 4.1 JCAR Graduation Rates This is an area where we should be able to demonstrate considerable progress in the next few years, especially among our first-time freshmen. Historical data do not speak well of the campus. Nevertheless, more rigorous enforcement of admission standards, in some instances the raising of admission standards by the CSU, the somewhat better preparation in basic skills freshmen are bringing with them at entry, and our own enhanced retention efforts should all be contributing factors. It should be noted that the cells in the JCAR tables that matter most are to be found in the diagonal line running from the top left to the lower right of each table, along with the bottom row. The responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the same bodies identified for Indicator 3.1.

Link to Area Base Year Graduation Data
Link to Two Year Goals
Link to Four Year Goals

Performance Area 5: Areas of Special State Need

Indicator 5.1 First-time, new type credentials The data on CSULB’s response to the special state need for credential teachers show a positive upward trend in the number of credentials produced and an impressive increase in students’ enrollment in teacher preparation programs. On the basis of broad consultation, we decided to focus on supporting and strengthening the Liberal Studies undergraduate preparation of teachers and look forward to that long-term investment of resources showing valuable returns in the future when CSULB recommends increased numbers of well prepared teachers. CSULB has give attention to quality as well as quantity. The Liberal Studies program has been reformed into a standards-based instructional model (with support from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and the National Science Foundation). A great deal of collaboration exists between single subjects faculty and K-12 teachers to align curriculum and assessment for high schools. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with The Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the College of Education and with other academic colleges.

Link to Area 5 Goals

Performance Area 6: Relations with K-12

Indicator 6.1 Outreach efforts The "Long Beach Education Partnership" involving CSULB, Long Beach Unified Schools and Long Beach City College has earned national distinction as a model for outstanding K-16 collaboration. US Secretary of Education Dr. Richard Riley gave the 1999 State of American Education speech on the CSULB campus, publicly praising the Partnership's "Seamless Education". Long Beach hosted the June 2000 conference "California K-16 Partnership and Student Success", bringing nearly 800 people together to discuss effective K-16 collaboration. Faculty, administrators, and staff at CSULB follow the lead of our "Campus Education President" in enthusiastically engaging in cooperative activities with K-12. CSULB has a broad array of collaborative activities with K-12 schools. These include a vigorous outreach program to inform students of college opportunities; intensive work with high schools on student preparation in math and English (supported by the Collaborative Academic Preparation Initiative and the Precollegiate Academic Development program); collaboration on teacher education and new teacher professional development; and many other initiatives. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the College of Education and with other academic colleges. Indicator 6.2 Fully-Prepared New Freshmen This measure is where the growing popularity of the President's Scholars Program has had its biggest impact. That program has improved the average level of preparation of our entering freshmen by increasing the proportion who are drawn from the top eighth of the State's high school graduating class, students who might otherwise be expected to attend the University of California. As a result, it is possible to project a significant increase in the percentage of entering freshmen who are college-ready in English and mathematics without even taking into consideration the likelihood of the freshman class becoming impacted in the Fall 2002. The campus has already shown progress in relation to the Fall 1998 freshman class. The campus also has the largest project in the state funded by the Collaborative Academic Preparation Initiative. This project expanded from six to nine of our major feeder high schools this year and supports a vigorous program of professional development for high school math and English teachers and targeted interventions for CSU-bound juniors and seniors. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests partly with the Vice President for Academic Affairs but that responsibility is shared with the Office of Enrollment Services and the Office of University Outreach and School Relations.

Link to Area 6 Goals

Performance Area 7: Remediation

Indicator 7.1 Remediated within One Year The sheer size of the freshman class has made improvement on this measure difficult to achieve. The percentage of regularly admitted first-time freshmen who needed remediation and were successfully remediated within one year actually declined from 82.3% for the Fall 1998 cohort to 79.3% for the Fall 1999 cohort. The problem is that even when we have sufficient funds, as we have had for the past several years, it is not always possible to locate enough qualified faculty. The campus is projected to improve slowly over the next several years, but that improvement will not come easily. Responsibility monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests entirely with the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Link to Area 7 Goals

Performance Area 8—Facilities Utilization

Indicator 8.1 Pattern of Course Enrollments The Fall 2000 schedule was the first created under the new policy adopted by the Academic Senate the previous year. Its most dramatic impact, as intended, was on the scheduling of classes on Fridays, mostly through the conversion of Monday-Wednesday offerings to a Monday-Wednesday-Friday pattern. Friday-only classes have also been tried with at least moderate success. Where previously the campus generated only 4.3% of its enrollment on Fridays, in the Fall 2000 that number increased to 6.2%. Resistance to the new pattern among some faculty members does continue, as can be seen in the shift of numerous Monday-Wednesday classes to time slots after 2:00 p.m. when they are still permitted. Nevertheless, the incessant growth in campus enrollment and the likelihood that, with time, Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes, which were once the norm, will again come to be seen as normal on a college campus make the projection of further moderate increases in Friday utilization a safe assumption. Weekend usage, primarily by graduate and professional programs, is also growing, albeit at a slow pace. State-supported summer enrollment can now be projected to represent a small but growing proportion of the University’s overall enrollment (most of the sudden jump in this type of enrollment from 1998–1999 to 2002–2003 is merely a conversion of previously existing self-support summer enrollment). No growth is projected in the proportion of overall enrollment achieved after 4:00 p.m., because so much of the overall campus growth represents students of traditional college age who entered as freshmen and want to take their classes in the daytime. There may be some increase in FTES generated at night, but it will likely be offset by daytime growth, so the percentage generated in evening hours is unlikely to go up. The campus is extensively engaged in developing technology mediated instruction but the foreseeable impact of developments on facilities utilization is projected to be very modest. Responsibility for the scheduling of classes rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, so that division must be held accountable for meeting the goals established for this measure.

Link to Area 8 Goals

Performance Area 9—University Advancement

Indicator 9.1 Voluntary Support Guiding its fund-raising endeavors is University Relations and Development’s mission to secure private contributions to support CSULB’s position as a flagship institution of learning. Since its establishment more than 12 years ago, the division has achieved a record of expansion and change to accommodate high levels of private support to strengthen a campus tradition of excellence. Since the division was created, the University has raised well over $225 million in private resources. It should be noted that CSULB now focuses its advancement objectives in three strategic areas: (1) an increase in the percentage of cash contributions; (2) an aggressive endowment-directed gift program; and (3) in-kind giving which directly supports the teaching and research mission of the University. A program is underway to build and promote our Charitable Gift Annuities offered through CSULB. This program will consist of educating our Development personnel, faculty, and staff, as well as increasing exposure to the public at large. Prospect Management and Research will continue to give highest priority to fulfilling the needs of unit development officers and academic leadership for timely, accurate information in support of their programs. The office intends to conduct a thorough rating and screening of the Alumni and Development Records database through an outside vendor in order to provide current geodemographic data in support of unit fund-raising goals. Goals for database screening are: (1) acquisition of information that will help us qualify new or upgraded major gift prospects; (2) acquisition of information that will help us qualify new planned giving prospects; (3) acquisition of information that will help us determine interest patterns which will better target our cultivation efforts for both academic and academic support units; and (4) development of work plans that will optimize our cultivation and solicitation of new prospects. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for University Relations and Development. Indicator 9.2 Special Revenues The revenue projected for CSULB is based upon collaboration of faculty and staff working with the Office of University Research in the Division of Academic Affairs and the staff in the Division of University Relations and Development. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Vice President for University Relations and Development. Indicator 9.3 Alumni participation report The Alumni Association and the Annual Fund Program will continue to work in tandem, providing programs and opportunities for alumni involvement and support. CSULB requires a one-time registration fee for Alumni Association membership, which serves as the impetus in establishing a tradition of annual alumni giving. Responsibility for monitoring campus performance and assuring that these goals are met rests with the Vice President for University Relations and Development.

Link to Area 9 Goals