Cover design courtesy of Assistant Professor Amir Berbić, School of Architecture and Design. Cover photo taken by Dina Lufi, a junior visual communication student in the School of Architecture and Design. Structured and drafted by Dr. Ahmed Mokhtar and Ms. Teresa Crompton based on analysis carried out by members of the self-study workgroups and informed by the AUS 2003 self-study report structure. Reviewed by workgroup chairs and members of the Self-Study Steering Committee, AUS students, faculty, staff, senior adminstrators and members of the Board of Trustees.
Š American University of Sharjah, December 2008
American University of Sharjah
Institutional Self-Study Report
Submitted to Middle States Commission on Higher Education
Š December 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
American University of Sharjah was founded in 1997 to embody the vision of His Highness Sheikh Dr. Sultan Bin Mohammad Al Qassimi of establishing an American model institution of higher education that is grounded in the history and culture of the Arab gulf region. The university first achieved full accreditation by MSCHE in 2004. AUS has an appropriate mission that characterizes the university and guides its planning and assessment processes. However, the mission was developed without the participation of university constituents. A new mission is currently being developed, with constituent participation, as part of a new strategic plan, the formation of which has been the first priority of the university’s new Chancellor, who joined in Fall 2008. AUS has a highly qualified, diverse and active Board of Trustees that operates using established bylaws. It also has a body of diverse and qualified administrators who work within a clear organizational structure. Formal procedures need to be established for recruiting, hiring and evaluating senior administrators with the involvement of a variety of constituents. Following the formation of a Board of Trustees-approved strategic plan in 2002, AUS achieved— earlier than planned— financial sustainability without government support, except for infrastructure and utility operating costs. In 2006 the Board of Trustees approved a new mission. In response, a planning structure was developed; however, this happened without the involvement of constituents. Nevertheless, the planning structure provided guidance and formed a basis for performance assessment for the different units, and linked units’ performances to the mission. A variety of mechanisms are used by units to monitor performance and elicit feedback. Interviews carried out by a selfstudy team showed that the feedback results in improvements. However, the communication of these improvements to stakeholders remains ineffective. In addition, the budget allocation process seems to be linked only vaguely to the planning structure, and to involve little input from administrative units. Nevertheless, AUS has solid financial, physical, information technology and human resources to achieve its objectives with the current number of students. Some staff issues need to be addressed, in particular the provision of on-campus accommodation or a more realistic housing allowance program. The Faculty Senate, Student Council and AUS Alumni Association provide working structures for shared governance practices. However, a representative body for staff is needed to adequately address staff issues. It is also important that procedures to assess and improve the effectiveness of the representative bodies are established. AUS has four academic units offering 21 bachelor’s degrees, 41 minors and 13 master’s degrees. All AUS programs have received accreditation or initial accreditation from the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, using rigorous standards and highly qualified international evaluators. Professional programs are either accredited or in the process of being accredited by appropriate professional accrediting bodies in the US. Faculty, students and alumni are fairly satisfied with the current general education program, with the exception of grounding in Arab culture. This is a particularly AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. i
important matter as it is a part of the AUS mission. Nevertheless, the general education program is currently undergoing considerable review to establish clear goals and outcomes. Graduate programs are oriented to meet the needs of professionals in the UAE. More resources are needed in terms of financial support for students and increased administrative support at the school/college level. AUS utilizes a variety of tools to assess student learning. These include the assessment of individual courses, constituent feedback, standard examinations, acceptance for graduate study at reputable graduate programs, attendance at international conferences and the receiving of awards. Several channels exist to communicate feedback from these tools and thereby close the loop. Nevertheless, while there are some program-level assessments occurring, no official university-wide process exists for learning assessment, except at course level. AUS has established an institutional research office and is on its way to developing such a process. In accordance with its mission and environment, AUS has a diverse body of students of more than 75 nationalities, with almost similar numbers of males and females. Enrolled students are qualified and the average high-school GPA is increasing. Reflecting the reputation of AUS as the preeminent regional institution, a growing number of students are applying for the limited seats available. The management of student enrollment across the academic programs remains an important challenge. To help students gain the most from their university experience AUS provides, with varying degrees of success, numerous academic and extracurricular support services. There is generally a need for formal assessment processes for these services. AUS faculty come from over 40 countries, yet predominantly they have been trained in reputable institutions across North America and have North American teaching experience. However, concerns have been expressed by some regarding fair treatment related to faculty diversity. The service load remains an issue, particularly with regard to covering the needs for various levels of local and international accreditations. Despite a teaching load of nine to 12 credit hours per semester and a high service load, faculty continue to engage in a variety of scholarly activities. Nevertheless, AUS needs to establish an environment that better supports scholarly activities. Documented procedures exist for faculty recruitment, evaluation and contract renewal. There remain, however, concerns about the clarity and implementation of some of these procedures. Faculty salaries are comparable with AAUP-reported figures but it is difficult to assess whether they are comparable with those in the region. A two-tier benefits package was introduced several years ago and continues to attempt—through different versions—to achieve fairness between faculty with different family structures. As AUS faculty are required to live on campus, the campus is a residential community with the related requirements and concerns. In general, the self-study team believes that AUS meets the MSCHE standards. Naturally, as revealed through the recommendations stated in this report, there is room for improvement; many of the recommendations have been already addressed by the new university administration.
ii‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
TABLE CHAPTER 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
4.2
4.2.4
4.4 4.5 4.6
5.2 5.3
GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION ...................................................... 17
4.2.2.1 4.2.2.2 4.2.2.3 4.2.2.4 4.2.2.5
Academic Affairs............................................................................................................20 Finance and Administration .........................................................................................22 Student Affairs................................................................................................................22 Enrollment Management ..............................................................................................23 Public Affairs ..................................................................................................................23
4.2.3.1 4.2.3.2
Selection of Senior Administrators .............................................................................25 Job Descriptions of Senior Administrators................................................................25
4.2.4.1 4.2.4.2
The Chancellor ...............................................................................................................25 Senior Administrators ...................................................................................................26
4.3.1.1 4.3.1.2
Faculty Assembly ...........................................................................................................27 Faculty Senate .................................................................................................................28
Qualifications and Qualities ......................................................................................................... 24 Performance Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 25
4.2.5 Flow of Communication ............................................................................................................... 27 ROLE OF FACULTY IN SHARED GOVERNANCE .................................................................................. 27 4.3.1 Faculty Organization Plan ........................................................................................................... 27 4.3.2 Faculty Handbook ....................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.3 Faculty Participation in Decision Making .................................................................................... 29 ROLE OF STUDENTS IN SHARED GOVERNANCE ................................................................................ 30 ROLE OF STAFF IN SHARED GOVERNANCE ........................................................................................ 31 ROLE OF ALUMNI AND PARENTS IN SHARED GOVERNANCE ......................................................... 31
CHAPTER 5 5.1
MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .............................................................. 14
BOARD OF TRUSTEES .............................................................................................................................. 17 4.1.1 Bylaws and Operation .................................................................................................................. 17 4.1.2 Service Assessment ....................................................................................................................... 18 4.1.3 Communication with Constituents ................................................................................................ 18 ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2.1 The Chancellor ............................................................................................................................. 19 4.2.2 Senior Administrators .................................................................................................................. 20
4.2.3
4.3
SELF-STUDY OVERVIEW ................................................................................... 6
MISSION DEVELOPMENT........................................................................................................................ 15 MISSION AWARENESS AND MANIFESTATION ..................................................................................... 15 INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY ..................................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER 4 4.1
INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW ........................................................................... 1
MODEL AND EMPHASIS .............................................................................................................................6 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ...............................................................................................................7 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SELF-STUDY REPORT .................................................................................. 10
CHAPTER 3 3.1 3.2 3.3
CONTENTS
THE GENESIS OF THE UNIVERSITY .........................................................................................................1 FOUNDER’S VISION ....................................................................................................................................2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS ....................................................................................2 INSTITUTIONAL STATUS.............................................................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2 2.1 2.2 2.3
OF
STUDENTS ......................................................................................................... 32
STUDENT PROFILE ................................................................................................................................... 32 5.1.1 Intensive English Program ............................................................................................................ 33 5.1.2 Undergraduate Students ............................................................................................................... 34 5.1.3 Graduate Students ....................................................................................................................... 34 RECRUITMENT .......................................................................................................................................... 36 ADMISSIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 36 5.3.1 Admission Standards ................................................................................................................... 36 5.3.2 Transfer and Visiting Students .................................................................................................... 38 5.3.3 Enrollment Management Plan ..................................................................................................... 39 AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. iii
5.4
5.5 5.6
5.7
5.8
REGISTRATION AND ADVISING............................................................................................................. 39 5.4.1 Student Records ............................................................................................................................ 39 5.4.2 Registration Process ...................................................................................................................... 40
6.3 6.4 6.5
6.6
7.2
5.6.2.1 5.6.2.2 5.6.2.3 5.6.2.4
Academic Achievement Center ...................................................................................45 Writing Center ................................................................................................................45 Economics Tutoring Center.........................................................................................46 Math Learning Center ...................................................................................................46
5.7.2.1 5.7.2.2 5.7.2.3 5.7.2.4
Clubs and Organizations...............................................................................................48 Student Center ................................................................................................................48 Learning and Counseling Center .................................................................................48 Student Employment.....................................................................................................49
CO-CURRICULAR SUPPORT ..................................................................................................................... 46 5.7.1 Student Orientation ...................................................................................................................... 47 5.7.2 Student Activities ......................................................................................................................... 47
5.7.3 Athletics Program ........................................................................................................................ 49 5.7.4 Student Residence ......................................................................................................................... 50 5.7.5 Career Advising and Placement Services ....................................................................................... 51 5.7.6 Alumni Support........................................................................................................................... 52 5.7.7 Health Services ............................................................................................................................. 52 5.7.8 Cultural Enrichment Events ........................................................................................................ 53 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................... 53 FACULTY ............................................................................................................ 54
PROFILE AND WORKLOAD DISTRIBUTION ......................................................................................... 54 FACULTY ACTIVITIES .............................................................................................................................. 55 6.2.1 Teaching ....................................................................................................................................... 55 6.2.2 Scholarly Activities and Professional Development ........................................................................ 56 6.2.2.1 6.2.2.2 6.2.2.3
Scholarly Activities .........................................................................................................56 Professional Development ...........................................................................................58 Faculty Development Center .......................................................................................59
6.5.3.1 6.5.3.2 6.5.3.3 6.5.3.4
Advantages and Disadvantages ....................................................................................65 Quality of Community Life ..........................................................................................66 Safety and Security .........................................................................................................67 Housing Policy ...............................................................................................................67
6.2.3 Service .......................................................................................................................................... 59 FACULTY RECRUITMENT AND CONTRACTS ........................................................................................ 59 FACULTY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION.............................................................................................. 60 FACULTY RETENTION ............................................................................................................................. 61 6.5.1 Salaries ........................................................................................................................................ 62 6.5.2 Benefits ......................................................................................................................................... 64 6.5.3 Campus Living ............................................................................................................................ 65
ADJUNCT FACULTY .................................................................................................................................. 68
CHAPTER 7 7.1
First-Year Student Registration....................................................................................40 Returning Student Registration ....................................................................................40
5.4.3 Student Advising System .............................................................................................................. 41 5.4.4 Degree Audits .............................................................................................................................. 42 FINANCIAL AID ........................................................................................................................................ 42 RETENTION ............................................................................................................................................... 44 5.6.1 Retention Data............................................................................................................................. 44 5.6.2 Retention Support Centers ............................................................................................................ 45
CHAPTER 6 6.1 6.2
5.4.2.1 5.4.2.2
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS ........................................................................... 69
PRE-COLLEGE AND PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS............................................................................... 69 7.1.1 Intensive English Program ............................................................................................................ 71 7.1.2 Placement Tests and Remedial Courses......................................................................................... 71 UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS.............................................................................................................. 72 7.2.1 Development and Termination of Programs .................................................................................. 72 7.2.2 Development of Curricula ............................................................................................................. 73 7.2.3 General Education Requirements ................................................................................................. 73 7.2.3.1 7.2.3.2 7.2.3.3
Stated Objectives, Depth and Breadth .......................................................................73 The Relation of GERs to the AUS Mission ..............................................................74 Development and Assessment .....................................................................................75
iv…. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
7.3
7.4 7.5
7.2.4 Internship Requirement ................................................................................................................ 78 GRADUATE PROGRAMS........................................................................................................................... 78 7.3.1 Development and Termination of Programs .................................................................................. 78 7.3.2 Assessment of Programs and Curricula ........................................................................................ 79 7.3.3 Support for the Programs .............................................................................................................. 80 NON-CREDIT OFFERINGS ...................................................................................................................... 80 LIBRARY AND INFORMATION LITERACY ............................................................................................. 81 7.5.1 Library Services............................................................................................................................ 81 7.5.2
7.6 7.7
7.8 7.9
8.2
8.2.5
9.2
7.7.1.1 7.7.1.2 7.7.1.3
Assessment of Individual Courses ..............................................................................85 Constituent Feedback ....................................................................................................85 Student Success ..............................................................................................................85
PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT CYCLES ....................................................... 91
8.2.1.1 8.2.1.2 8.2.1.3
Staff Profile and Salaries ...............................................................................................93 Staff Recruitment and Hiring .......................................................................................95 Staff Development and Promotion .............................................................................95
8.2.3.1 8.2.3.2 8.2.3.3 8.2.3.4
Description .....................................................................................................................98 Review of the Facilities Master Plan .........................................................................100 Improvements ..............................................................................................................100 Assessment of Services ...............................................................................................101
8.2.4.1 8.2.4.2 8.2.4.3
Description ...................................................................................................................101 Improvements ..............................................................................................................101 Assessment of Services ...............................................................................................102
8.2.5.1 8.2.5.2
Budget Development Process ....................................................................................103 Budget Assessment and Improvement .....................................................................103
Financial Resources ...................................................................................................................... 96 Physical Resources ........................................................................................................................ 98
Technical Resources .................................................................................................................... 101
Resource Allocation .................................................................................................................... 103
ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS ....................................................................... 104 8.3.1 Unit Missions, Goals and Objectives .......................................................................................... 104 8.3.2 Performance Indicators and Assessment Tools ............................................................................ 105 8.3.3 Utilization of Assessment........................................................................................................... 107 8.3.4 Awareness of Improvements ........................................................................................................ 107 8.3.5 Requirements for Licensure in the UAE .................................................................................... 108 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................... 108
CHAPTER 9 9.1
The Program ...................................................................................................................82 Assessment of the Program..........................................................................................83
PLANNING ................................................................................................................................................. 91 8.1.1 Basis and Process ......................................................................................................................... 91 8.1.2 Materializing, Revising and Improving the Planning Structure ..................................................... 92 RESOURCES AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION ........................................................................................ 93 8.2.1 Human Resources ........................................................................................................................ 93
8.2.4
8.4
7.5.2.1 7.5.2.2
Information Literacy..................................................................................................................... 82
7.7.2 Communicating Results and Closing the Loop .............................................................................. 86 7.7.3 Summary on Assessment of Student Learning .............................................................................. 87 ACADEMIC PROGRAM ACCREDITATION AND ASSESSMENT ............................................................ 88 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................ 90
8.2.2 8.2.3
8.3
Facilities and Collection ................................................................................................81 Assessment of Library Services....................................................................................82
ACADEMIC ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES ........................................................................................ 83 7.6.1 Research Activities and Awards ................................................................................................... 83 7.6.2 Study Abroad .............................................................................................................................. 84 ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING................................................................................................. 85 7.7.1 Assessment Techniques ................................................................................................................. 85
CHAPTER 8 8.1
7.5.1.1 7.5.1.2
INTEGRITY ....................................................................................................... 110
FAIRNESS IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION................................................................................................ 110 9.1.1 Faculty ....................................................................................................................................... 110 9.1.2 Staff ........................................................................................................................................... 110 9.1.3 Students ..................................................................................................................................... 110 COMMUNICATING EXPECTATIONS TO CONSTITUENTS ................................................................. 111 AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. v
9.3 9.4
9.5
ACADEMIC FREEDOM ........................................................................................................................... 112 ETHICAL CONDUCT ............................................................................................................................... 112 9.4.1 Copyright and Academic Honesty............................................................................................... 112 9.4.2 Professional Behavior .................................................................................................................. 113 9.4.3 Internal Auditing ....................................................................................................................... 114 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................... 114
CHAPTER 10 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 115 10.1 MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................... 115 10.1.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 115 10.2 GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................. 115 10.2.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 116 10.3 STUDENTS ................................................................................................................................................ 117 10.3.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 119 10.4 FACULTY .................................................................................................................................................. 120 10.4.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 121 10.5 EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS .................................................................................................................. 122 10.5.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 124 10.6 PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT.............................................................................................................. 125 10.6.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 127 10.7 INTEGRITY............................................................................................................................................... 128 10.7.1 List of Related Recommendations ............................................................................................... 128 CHAPTER 11 APPENDICES..................................................................................................... 130 11.1 ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 130 11.2 REPORT SECTIONS AND STANDARDS FOR ACCREDITATION ......................................................... 132
vi…. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Chapter 1 1 .1
INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW
THE GENESIS OF THE UNIVERSITY
American University of Sharjah (AUS) was founded in 1997 by His Highness Sheikh Dr. Sultan Bin Mohammad Al Qassimi, Supreme Council Member, Ruler of Sharjah and President of American University of Sharjah, who envisioned the university as the institution of educational preeminence in the Arabian Gulf Region. AUS was planned and operates as a multinational and multicultural institution within the framework of a university that is “American” in its formal academic and organizational characteristics. AUS is the first coeducational university in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and remains one of the few coeducational institutions among larger universities in the Arabian Gulf region. At the inception of AUS, the Founder entered into partnerships with American universities; a Figure 1.1 AUS Main Building team from the American University of Beirut was engaged to serve as the planning body in 1996, and an educational consultation and assistance agreement was also signed with the American University (AU), Washington, DC. Later a similar contract agreement was made with Texas A&M University to cover the School of Engineering. Under these contracts American University and Texas A&M University recruited and nominated the senior management team and guided the initial development of AUS policies and programs. The contract with Texas A&M University was terminated in 2004. The contract with AU ended effective August 31, 2007. The view of both parties was that the kind of management advice and direction envisioned under the agreement in effect since 1997 was no longer needed by AUS. In place of the old agreement, AU and AUS entered into a long-term agreement based upon an endowment fund of $2,400,000, the income of which will be used to support faculty, staff and student exchange relationships between the two institutions, as mutually agreed upon by the president of AU and the Chancellor of AUS. The two institutions are equal partners in the relationship, and AU no longer plays a mentoring role. Chancellor Dr. Peter Heath has led the university since Fall 2008, following Dr. Winfred L. Thompson, who headed the university beginning in August 2002. Dr. Thompson succeeded the first Chancellor, Dr. Roderick S. French. In its opening year AUS had 31 faculty and 282 students. These figures have grown steadily each year. As of Fall 2008, AUS has 354 faculty and 5,192 students, made up of 4,722 undergraduates, 254 graduate students and 216 Intensive English Program students.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 1
1 .2
FOUNDER’S VISION
In 1997 His Highness Sheikh Dr. Sultan Bin Mohammad Al Qassimi expressed his vision of AUS as an institution that would equip students to take a full role in the advancement of society. AUS was therefore mandated to: • reinforce the efforts of the leaders of the UAE “to ensure that science and education regain their rightful place in the building and advancement of our society and shaping the lives of our children” • join other institutions of higher education in seeking “to reshape fundamentally the minds of our youth to enable them to address the challenges of life using the scientific method” • become a “center of research for educational development and the solution of social problems” • become “organically linked” to the economic, cultural, scientific and industrial sectors of society in “productive cooperation” • exercise the “independence and objectivity in teaching and research” necessary for the achievement of these goals This vision continues to guide AUS and forms the basis of its mission.
1 .3
ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS AUS should be viewed within the cultural and environmental spheres it occupies— locally the emirate of Sharjah, nationally the UAE, regionally the Arabian Gulf and, more broadly, the Middle East.
Figure 1.2 Location of AUS in Sharjah (Latitude: 25°18'35.84"N, Longitude: 55°29'28.79"E) (Courtesy of Google Earth)
2 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
The emirate of Sharjah is one of seven independent states that make up the federation of the United Arab Emirates, the country occupying an area along the east central coast of the Arabian Gulf. Sharjah is the third largest of the emirates, having an area of 1,000 sq. miles (2,600 sq. kilometers), and is the only one to span the breadth of the UAE, having coastlines on both the Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. The emirate contains a wide variety of vistas—from palm-fringed sandy beaches to arid level plains, from gently rolling dunes to rugged mountain ranges. The university is located 10 miles (16 kilometers) from the city of Sharjah, the emirate’s capital, which is situated on the shores of the Arabian Gulf. Under the leadership of Sheikh Dr. Sultan, Sharjah has developed as a city of
learning and the arts, as confirmed by its 1998 UNESCO designation as the “Cultural Capital of the Arab World.” Today the city has nearly 30 museums covering sciences and the arts as well as providing a showcase for the emirate’s history and culture. AUS is situated as the flagship institution within University City, a landscaped 1,640 acre complex sponsored by Sheikh Dr. Sultan as part of his vision for the expansion of education and learning in the emirate. University City is characterized by its attractive grounds and boulevards, and the distinctive architecture of domes and arches of its academic and administrative buildings. University City houses several colleges, universities and other facilities including: • University of Sharjah, with separate men’s and women’s campuses, plus an associated College of Fine Arts, as well as a Medical College with attached Teaching Hospital (1) • Higher Colleges of Technology, for national men and women, with segregated campuses (2) • Sharjah Police Sciences Academy (3) • Sharjah Public Library (4) • University City Hall (5) • Dr. Sultan Al Qassimi Centre for Gulf Studies (6)
Figure 1.3 The location of AUS within University City (Courtesy of Google Earth)
The fact that AUS students come from 78 nationalities serves to reflect the high percentage of expatriates in the UAE. The most recent UAE government census, conducted in 2005, showed the population to be about 4.1 million (source: UAE Yearbook 2007, National Media Council). UAE nationals make up about 22 percent of this number. The UAE is renowned for its tolerance toward its large expatriate communities, which contain people from a rich variety of cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds. AUS follows this spirit of openness and admits students solely on the basis of academic qualifications, regardless of any other consideration. AUS has thereby succeeded in building an academic community that brings together people from diverse nations and backgrounds, and strives to instill in its students the importance of appreciating and understanding diversity, global issues and their own roles in society. Islam is the official religion of the state, and Arab Islamic culture predominates. While Arabic is the official language of the UAE, English is commonly used as a lingua franca between the different communities. All classes (except some in Arabic and translation studies) and administrative functions at AUS are conducted in English.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 3
In the last few years, the Arabian Gulf region has seen unprecedented economic growth, due in part to high oil prices. This has, in turn, provided both challenges and opportunities for educational institutions. The rapid rate of development in the UAE over the past few years has resulted not only in a significant increase in population, but also increases in both individual incomes and the cost of living. Several universities from North America, Europe, Australia and other parts of the world, taking the opportunity to offer educational services in this active economy, have already opened branches in the UAE, and others are planning to do so in the near future. Such a rapidly changing context will affect AUS as it looks to the future.
1.4
INSTITUTIONAL STATUS
With a student body composed of 78 nationalities and faculty of 47 nationalities, AUS is serving vibrant, young, multicultural but dominantly Arab and Muslim constituents. Owing to the guidance provided by the Founder’s vision and the institution’s stated mission, AUS has succeeded in being seen not as a foreign entity but rather one that blends with its environment. It is therefore viewed as a local institution but one that utilizes international experience and expertise, most particularly from the North American educational tradition. AUS is licensed in the United States as an institution of higher education authorized to offer degrees by the Department of Education of the State of Delaware. The university first achieved full accreditation by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) in the United States in 2004. AUS is also licensed by the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, and all programs are recognized by the ministry and have been awarded either accreditation or accreditation-eligible status. Today AUS offers 21 bachelor’s degrees, 41 minors and 13 master’s degrees through four academic units: the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Engineering, the School of Architecture and Design and the School of Business and Management. Since 2006 all bachelor’s degree programs in the College of Engineering have been accredited by ABET, Inc. The School of Business and Management is preparing for accreditation with the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). In addition other programs, for example in architecture and chemistry, are planning for professional accreditation. AUS is operating on a sound financial footing. Thanks to generous support from the Founder, the Government of Sharjah and some of the trustees in building the university infrastructure and covering operating costs during the establishment years, AUS carries no debt. Following a strategic financial plan, AUS generates 98 percent of its budgeted revenues from student fees, student housing and auxiliary services. For the fiscal year 2006–2007 AUS had a total expenditure budget of UAE Dirhams 264 million (US$ 72 million). Today AUS is in its twelfth year of operation, and the university’s reputation as the preeminent university in the region is evidenced by the continuous growth of the number of high-quality students enrolling despite increases in tuition fees. Well-established American-model institutions in the region, such as American University of Beirut and 4 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
American University in Cairo, now view AUS as a competitor. The growth of this reputation is in part due to the dedicated efforts of the university community. In addition, a number of other achievements have contributed. These include the building of the new purpose-built library (considered to be the premium facility of its kind in the UAE), the growth in the provision of student scholarships, the increase in the number of external sponsors and donations from AUS alumni, and the increase in the number and quality of the university’s co-curricular and cultural enrichment activities. More, however, needs to be done to consolidate the successes of AUS and to sustain its well-deserved reputation—a reputation that is already clearly established regionally and is growing internationally.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 5
Chapter 2 2.1
SELF-STUDY OVERVIEW
MODEL AND EMPHASIS
AUS first achieved full MSCHE accreditation in 2004 and therefore the current comprehensive self-study is the university’s second. In seeking initial accreditation, the university used the only appropriate model of self-study assessment—the comprehensive model. Now, as a newly accredited institution seeking reaccreditation five years after initial accreditation, the university is required by MSCHE to employ the comprehensive model again. At the time of the commencement of the current self-study, the Board of Trustees was facing a choice: AUS could either rapidly expand student numbers or alternatively retain present numbers but work to improve student quality. Members of the Board of Trustees were divided on the matter but there was an initial decision toward the latter focus. At the same time, members of the Self-Study Steering Committee were seeking a topic of focus for the self-study that would be useful to the university. After discussion, the topic of quality of service was agreed upon. It was a happy coincidence that both the board and the steering committee at the same time felt the quality issue to be of importance to AUS. The steering committee decided upon the specific emphasis on quality of academic and non-academic services, and the theme “Signature of Quality: Share the Vision” was agreed upon as reflecting this spirit of their intentions. The committee saw this concentration upon institutional quality as offering: • a focus that is both useful and forward-looking • a vital means of achieving the university’s mission of preeminence in the region • pedagogical value, in that it provides students with a role model in carrying out work of quality • the opportunity for AUS to assist society via the propagation of quality through people who deal with the university at every level Later, however, continued discussion among members of the Board of Trustees resulted in the decision to expand the number of accepted students but with a reasonable rate of increase—one that would ensure that the university retains the ability to work to improve quality. It is important to note that the evaluation team assigned by MSCHE for the first AUS accreditation did not set out any requirements or recommendations; rather, it provided AUS with suggestions. Most of these suggestions were in line with the recommendations made by AUS in the 2003 self-study report. While there were no accreditation obligations, the current self-study demonstrates that the university has given serious consideration to the recommendations made as a result of the previous one, and has acted upon most.
6 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
2.2
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
In June 2006 the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs (VCAA) appointed Dr. Ahmed Mokhtar, Associate Professor in the Department of Architecture, as Chair of the AUS Self-Study Steering Committee. From a list of recommended people the Chancellor then selected the Self-Study Steering Committee, the members of which represented faculty, staff and administrators. The Self-Study Steering Committee membership is as follows (in first name alphabetical order): • Mr. Ahmed Aboubaker, Institutional Research Analyst, Office of Institutional Research • Dr. Ahmed Mokhtar, Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, School of Architecture and Design, Chair of the Self-Study Steering Committee • Dr. Fatima Badry-Zalami, Professor, Department of English, College of Arts and Sciences • Ms. Haifa Ismail, Events Coordinator, Office of Public Affairs • Dr. Ibrahim Al Kattan, Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering • Dr. Imran Zualkernan, Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Engineering • Dr. Jamal Abdalla, Professor, Head, Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering • Dr. Jeanine Romano, Director of Institutional Research, Office of Institutional Research • Ms. Juliet Coutinho, Judicial Affairs Manager, Office of Student Affairs • Ms. Kathy Ray, University Librarian • Mr. Kevin Mitchell, Director of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs, Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, School of Architecture and Design • Mr. Mohammed El-Shahed, Senior Student Recruitment Officer, Office of Enrollment Management • Dr. Munir Majdalawieh, Assistant Professor, Department of Management Information Systems, School of Business and Management • Ms. Reem Al-Alami, Finance Manager, Finance Department • Dr. Robert Bateman, Director of Graduate Programs and Outreach, Assistant Professor, School of Business and Management • Mr. Ronald Williams, Coordinator of Institutional Assessment, Office of VCAA (in Fall 2007 became AUS Internal Auditor) • Dr. William Heidcamp, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences In addition, Ms. Teresa Crompton was hired in January 2007 as the Self-Study Secretary/Editor.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 7
The Self-Study Steering Committee held its first meeting on October 3, 2006, at which the self-study process was explained by the chair and several organizational tasks were performed, including the selection of a useful emphasis for the study. Two members, Chair Dr. Ahmed Mokhtar and Mr. Ronald Williams, Coordinator of Institutional Assessment in the Office of the VCAA, attended a Self-Study Institute workshop in Philadelphia at the end of October 2006. Bearing in mind lessons learned from the university’s previous self-study, the steering committee discussed the process of the formation of workgroups and subsequently agreed upon the following plan: • A total of 15 workgroups should be established, each with a small number of members. This would not only ensure that each group has a narrow focus but would also avoid problems and tensions caused by having a large number of members, some of whom do not participate fully. • Workgroups should have associate members—normally those whose work is involved with, or who are directly affected by, the standard(s) addressed by the workgroup. Associate members provide input and feedback, and participate in discussions, but should not be responsible for the analytical output of their workgroup. Preparing for workgroup formation, the 14 standards were assigned to steering committee members, each of whom was requested to familiarize him- or herself with the assigned standard(s) through the study of the following information: • the “Standards at a Glance” as set out in the MSCHE publication Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education • the detailed description of the assigned standard(s) as explained in the MSCHE publication Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education • relevant sections of the previous Institutional Self-Study Design • relevant sections of the previous AUS self-study report, Educational Preeminence in the Arab Gulf: An Assessment of Progress • relevant sections of the previous evaluation team report Based on their understanding of the standard(s), each member of the steering committee then developed a profile for workgroup members, aiming to choose those people whose experience best fitted them to deal with the issues addressed by the standard(s). The chair requested that steering committee members nominate colleagues who had a proven record of working in workgroups. The chair then matched the profiles for the workgroups with those of the nominees, negotiated arising conflicts and finally provided the steering committee with a workgroup membership list. Following discussion and some modifications, the steering committee produced a final list of names. Both the Chancellor and the VCAA provided feedback, and minor alterations were made to accommodate the fact that some members were known to be unavailable at some time during the self-study period. Table 2.1 shows the names, tasks and codes of each of the 15 workgroups, as well as the standard(s) addressed and the names of members and associate members.
8 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Code
Workgroup Name
Standard
A
Mission and Goals
1
B
Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal
2
C
Institutional Resources
3
D
Leadership and Governance
4
E
Administration
5
F
Integrity
6
G
Institutional Assessment
7
H
Student Admissions
Part of 8
I
Student Retention and Academic Support Services
Part of 8 Part of 9
J
Student NonAcademic Support Services
K
Faculty
L
Undergraduate Educational Offerings and Related Educational Activities
Part of 11 Part of 13
M
Graduate Educational Offerings and Related Educational Activities
Part of 11 Part of 13
N
General Education
12
O
Assessment of Student Learning
14
Part of 9
10
Full Members
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Associate Members
Jamal Abdalla (Chair) Jeremy Keymer Samer Sultan (left AUS FA07) Ibrahim El Sadek (Chair) William Heidcamp Rana Ahmed (on sabbatical during 07) Said Faiq (starting FA07) Rula Shahin Reem Al-Alami (Chair) Flory D’Souza Abdulrahman Al-Ali Mehdi Sabet (Chair) Kassem Saleh (left AUS FA07) Ermita Rante Ginger Krieg (starting FA07) Earl Naumann (Chair) Fatih Rifki Lina El-Khoury Haifa Ismail (Chair) Khaled Assaleh Malcolm Richards Robert Bateman (Chair) Hazim El Baz Nasser Hamdan Mohamed El-Shahed (Chair) Giuliana Krebs (left AUS SU07) Nadeen Faour (left AUS SU07) Eirik Heintz
Juliet Coutinho (Chair) Ezz Taha Mohamed Helal Nasser Qaddoumi Munir Majdalawieh (Chair) Akmal Abdelfatah Deborah Wilson
• • • •
Kevin Mitchell (Chair) Hany El-Kadi Paul Williams Ibrahim El Sadek
• John Mosbo • George DeBin • • • • •
Thomas Varghese Mark Kirchner Ashi Sheth Nada Mourtada-Sabbah Mohamed Khamis (student) • Winfred Thompson • Richard Mundy • Tina Ann Varghese (student) • Malake El-Haj (left AUS SU07) • Basheer Daoud • Ahmed Al Reyami (student) • Jihad M’nasria (student) • Wadih Atiyah (left AUS
• Kathy Ray (Chair) • Lynda Ataya • Maria Eleftheriou • • • • • • •
• Winfred Thompson • Turki Al Yahya (alumnus) • Lorin Ritchie
SU07)
• Ronald Ray • Rawan Shawar (student) • Muhammed Atif Ehsan • Karwan Khader • Vanessa Middleton • Christine Furno • Waleed Hakim
• • • • • • • •
Ibrahim Al Kattan (Chair) Peter Mitias Amer Moustafa Fatima Badry (Chair) Martin Giesen Mohamed Gadalla Ismail Genc Masood Khan (Chair) (left AUS FA08) • Asif Hashim • Imran Zualkernan
• Robert Cook (left AUS SU07) • Pia Anderson • Yahya Amiri (student) • Daphne Flanagan
Table 2.1 Structure of the Workgroups AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 9
The selection of workgroup members covered a cross-section of the university community as indicated below: • members: 32 faculty, 13 staff and 4 administrators • associate members: 6 faculty, 6 staff, 9 administrators, 6 students and 1 alumnus • workgroup chairs: 10 faculty, 4 staff and 1 administrator The Chancellor sent individual invitations to nominated workgroup members and associate members informing them about their intended role in the workgroup and requesting their participation. With one exception, all those invited accepted the invitation. As Table 2.1 indicates, some adjustments to workgroup membership were made, either because members left AUS or for other reasons.
2.3
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SELF-STUDY REPORT
Based on feedback from the previous AUS self-study, the steering committee agreed that workgroups should not write individual reports but rather they should provide analytical output for their research questions that would then be compiled into the self-study report by the chair of the steering committee with the help of the self-study writer/editor. The steering committee also agreed that the organization of the present report should follow closely that of the university’s previous one in order that progress (or otherwise) that has occurred in various areas since the last self-study can be readily identified. Following the creation of the draft report, members of the steering committee and the chairs of the self-study workgroups carefully reviewed it to ensure that it correctly represented the true status of AUS and the findings of the self-study workgroups. Figure 2.1 explains the process of the development of the final report, as it was presented to workgroups during the January 24, 2007 orientation session. Using feedback from the university’s previous self-study, the steering committee decided that individual workgroups should develop their own research questions. Each workgroup was given a clear mandate to cover one standard, part of a standard or parts of different standards, as shown in Table 2.1. Documents necessary to the understanding of the self-study process and the assigned standard(s) were sent to all workgroup members and associate members in December 2006. On January 24, 2007 the official self-study launch took place, with the Chancellor addressing workgroup members. The Chancellor’s address was followed by an orientation to the self-study process by the steering committee chair. A member of the steering committee, Dr. Robert Bateman (at that time Assistant Professor of Public Administration), then gave a presentation explaining the emphasis on “quality of academic and non-academic service,” and how to measure quality. These events were followed by a lunch at which members and associate members of individual workgroups were seated together, giving them the opportunity to get to know one another. The following day the committee of workgroup chairs met for the first time to establish coordination of effort across workgroups.
10 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Figure 2.1 Development Process of the Self-Study Report
In order to provide a repository of self-study documents and data, and to disseminate information and facilitate a culture of transparency, the steering committee chair developed a site on iLearn, the university’s Blackboard Academic Suite™ course management system. This site is accessible to all AUS faculty, administrators, staff and students. A university-wide awareness campaign was then put in motion to promote inclusiveness. Banners and posters advertised the self-study around campus and an article was published in the university’s campus newsletter. After the self-study launch on January 24, 2007, the steering committee chair asked the workgroups to develop research questions related to their standard(s) and identify the sources of data required to answer them. He requested that workgroups make use of the previous AUS self-study documents as well as sample questions and data sources from MSCHE, together with a sample self-study design from another university. A template for research questions and associated sources of data was provided for workgroup use and group e-mail lists were established to facilitate communication between the members of each workgroup. On February 24, 2007, a full day retreat for workgroup chairs took place so that the research questions could be seen by people other than workgroup members. The questions were put through several tests. Not only were they appraised for their effectiveness, but they were also reviewed against conformity to the standard(s) they addressed, against the recommendations of the previous self-study and against the suggestions of the previous self-study evaluation team. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 11
The self-study design was sent on March 1, 2007 to the AUS liaison at MSCHE, Dr. Robert Schneider, who visited AUS on March 12. Dr. Schneider met with the Chancellor, members of the committee of workgroup chairs, and representative faculty, administrators and students. Dr. Schneider discussed and subsequently approved the selfstudy design document. The workgroups then began the process of collecting the data necessary to answer their research questions analytically. Two types of data were identified: common data for use by multiple workgroups (for example, the university’s catalogs) and specific data needed by individual groups. Common resource documents, organized into categories, were made available on iLearn. Meanwhile, each workgroup chair was given a lever-arch file in which to collect and organize the specific data required by his or her workgroup. Some workgroups needed data that did not at that time exist in document form; some requested numerical data from the institutional research analyst. In addition, some data were collected by conducting interviews and surveys. Workgroups were given the deadline of April 15, 2007 to submit to the Self-Study Steering Committee Chair the questions they wished to include in a general questionnaire to be sent to target groups (i.e., students, administrators, staff, faculty, etc.) The workgroups also defined which target group each question should be sent to. The questions were categorized into collections of questionnaires and then published on iLearn or the SurveyMonkey website. Messages were sent to faculty, staff, administrators, students, alumni, employers and members of the Board of Trustees asking for their participation. The results were later collected and passed to the appropriate workgroups. The results were also made available to the AUS community by means of publication on iLearn. In addition, the data collected by the workgroups were also published on iLearn. A document outlining a standard format was distributed by the steering committee chair to the workgroups to aid them in their presentation of the answers to their research questions. The format required the listing of the evidence used in answering each question, and provided a space for any recommendations. November 24 was set as the deadline for the submission of answers. The great majority of answers were submitted by this deadline and then published on iLearn to be accessible to the AUS community. The steering committee chair, with the help of the self-study writer/editor, then compiled a first draft of the present self-study report, using the answers submitted by the workgroups together with background material and other descriptive information not available in the workgroup answers. The draft report was completed at the beginning of April 2008 and subsequently passed through several review cycles. It was first distributed to workgroup chairs as well as steering committee members, who held a full-day retreat to discuss the report and made modifications. An amended draft was then prepared and made available to all university constituents. The feedback from constituents was discussed among all members of the committee and modifications were incorporated. In June 2008 Chancellor Thompson formed a committee to review the draft report. This committee provided feedback to the Self-Study Steering Committee. In August 2008, as with that of other constituents, this feedback was discussed by members of the SelfStudy Steering Committee and modifications were made as deemed appropriate. The steering committee then established a sub-committee to update and revise the whole document for consistency. The work of this sub-committee was discussed by steering 12 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
committee members in October 2008 and incorporated as appropriate. For a final round of constituent review, in November 2008 the document was sent to all faculty, student, staff and alumni for feedback. In addition, it was also sent to the Board of Trustees, the Faculty Senate, the Student Council and the Alumni Association for their specific feedback. The steering committee then reviewed the feedback comments and incorporated them as deemed appropriate. The report was then ready for final editorial and design review.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 13
Chapter 3
MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Guided by the Founder’s vision for the university, the current AUS Mission Statement was developed and approved by the Board of Trustees in February 2006. The mission guides the development of AUS, providing the university community with a sense of common purpose and direction. Associated goals and objectives for the period 2005– 2010 are derived from the mission.
The mission of American University of Sharjah (AUS) is to achieve and maintain preeminence as a coeducational institution based upon American models and grounded in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region. AUS is a not-for-profit university that: • Admits students on the basis of their academic qualifications regardless of race, color, gender, religion, disabilities, age or national origin • Employs faculty and offers academic programs that are equivalent to those at leading institutions of higher education in the United States • Integrates liberal studies, professional education, and co-curricular and extracurricular learning experiences to provide its graduates both breadth and depth of knowledge • Values strong relationships with its alumni, the public, the media and appropriate governmental entities • Encourages and supports research and scholarship by its faculty and students and serves as a resource for the community • Provides students with a rich and varied campus life that fosters personal growth, maturity and a sense of social responsibility • Operates effectively and efficiently, develops and uses its fiscal and human resources wisely, and encourages wide participation in its governance
14 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
3.1
MISSION DEVELOPMENT
The initial AUS Mission Statement was developed by the university’s senior administration with some input from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee. Deliberated on at length by the Board of Trustees prior to its approval, the mission statement was inspired by the Founder’s vision as articulated in the AUS Historical Preamble, which was viewed as providing the background for the understanding of the distinctive mission of the university. Following recommendations made in the university’s previous self-study, the mission, goals and objectives were re-cast after AUS obtained initial accreditation from MSCHE in 2004. After review and revision during the academic year 2005–2006, the Board of Trustees approved the new mission statement. The current mission, goals and objectives are structured in bulleted points, each of which refers to one or more aspects of the university. These points have been used to create the university’s planning structure as discussed in Chapter Eight. Currently, there is no documented process for the development of the university’s mission, goals and objectives. The current university mission seems to be driven from the “top down” with very limited involvement of faculty, staff and other constituencies. In
accordance with its commitment to principles of shared governance, IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop, publish and implement an inclusive and transparent process for updating its mission, goals and objectives.
3.2
MISSION AWARENESS AND MANIFESTATION
The AUS mission is published on the university website and in the graduate and undergraduate catalogs and the faculty handbook. Self-study survey results show that faculty and staff respondents have a high degree of awareness of the mission while the student respondents have less awareness. Furthermore, most faculty and staff respondents believe that the mission, goals and objectives of their academic units are consistent with those of AUS. In addition, a high percentage of faculty respondents agree that the objectives and outcomes of the courses they teach are consistent with the mission, goals and objectives of their academic unit, while only half of student respondents believe that the mission, goals and objectives of their course of study are consistent with those of the university. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop
mechanisms to improve student awareness and understanding of the university’s mission, goals and objectives.
The self-study process has revealed that the majority of the university’s mission components do characterize the university now, and that the majority of the associated goals and objectives are achieved or are close to being achieved. In an interview, Chancellor Thompson stated that he considers the university’s mission, goals and objectives to be already more than achieved with the exception of two areas: the development of research, and compliance with requirement that the university be “grounded in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region.”
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 15
3.3
INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY
With the exception of its opening statement, the university’s current mission statement could describe any standard high-quality American institution of higher education. Such a description was enough to distinguish AUS in the region during the first years of its life. However, the context within which the university operates is changing rapidly, rendering the distinction of being an American-model university insufficient to attract quality students and faculty. Not only are several well-known American institutions opening branch campuses nearby, but in addition several local universities are being established or reorganized to follow the American model and receive American accreditation. Such an increase in competition, while not alarming at this point in time, should act as an encouragement to AUS to increase its efforts to further develop the university’s unique identity in a way that will enhance its attraction to students as well as to faculty. The AUS mission, driven as it is by the Founder’s vision, will certainly inform the definition of the university’s developing identity. The mission’s opening statement is that AUS is to “achieve and maintain preeminence as a coeducational institution based upon American models and grounded in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region.” As such, the university is expected to have an identity that amalgamates the American model of university education with the immediate Arabian Gulf context. However, according to both Chancellor Thompson and the VCAA, this has not yet been achieved. Yet the issue of identity may also be viewed from other perspectives. In an interview the VCAA stated that “The university has many different centers of identity, which do not need to be identical. For instance, one college might define itself through comparison with research institutions, whereas another might define itself through comparison with undergraduate teaching institutions.” IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS initiate a
dialogue involving all constituents, aiming at the formation of an institutional identity that reflects the university’s mission and supports its competitiveness and preeminence in the region.
16 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Chapter 4 4.1
GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
The governing body of AUS is the Board of Trustees, which is responsible for approving policies and securing resources consistent with the mission and goals of the university. There are currently 13 board members including the Founder and President of the university, His Highness Sheikh Dr. Sultan Bin Mohammad Al Qassimi, as the chair. The AUS Chancellor is an ex-officio member. Members of the board are highly accomplished academics from the United States and United Kingdom, in addition to influential local businessmen.
Members of the Board of Trustees
(Fall 2008)
His Highness Sheikh Dr. Sultan Bin Mohammad Al Qassimi, Member of the Supreme Council and Ruler of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, Chairman of the Board and President of AUS Dr. MaryAnn Baenninger, President, College of Saint Benedict, Minnesota, USA Mr. Joseph L. Brand, Senior Partner, Patton Boggs LLP, Washington, DC, USA Professor Lord Alec Broers, Member of the British House of Lords, UK Mr. Abdul Jalil Yousuf Darwish, Chairman of UAE Enterprises Group, UAE Dr. Leroy S. Fletcher, Regents Professor Emeritus, Thomas A. Dietz Professor Emeritus, Texas A&M University, USA Dr. Roderick S. French, Chancellor Emeritus, American University of Sharjah, UAE Mr. Hamid D. Jafar, Chairman and CEO, Crescent Petroleum Company, Sharjah, UAE Dr. Cornelius Kerwin, President, American University, Washington, DC, USA Baroness Onora O’Neill of Bengarve, CBE PBA FMedSci, Member of the British House of Lords, UK Honorable John R. Petty, Chairman, TECSEC, Incorporated, Virginia, USA Mr. Maroun A. Semaan, President and CEO, Petrofac International Ltd., Sharjah, UAE Dr. Peter Heath, Chancellor, American University of Sharjah, UAE
4.1.1
Bylaws and Operation
A set of bylaws for the operation of the AUS Board of Trustees were established when the Amiri Decree Number 5 was signed into law on August 16, 1998. These bylaws define the governing responsibilities of the board, including the election and term of board members, meeting and voting guidelines, powers and responsibilities, business procedures, conflict of interest policy, and the formation and responsibilities of the executive committee and of standing committees. The bylaws require a board of not less than nine nor more than 15 members. As AUS is incorporated in the state of Delaware, the bylaws require that the majority of board members hold citizenship of the United States of America. The Founder and President appointed the first board members but later memberships were determined by elections according to the bylaws. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 17
At the time of the previous self-study, of the 11 board members two were of Arab background and one was female. The previous self-study recommended that, in keeping with the AUS mission, the board select members who represent different points of view, interests and experience as well as diversity in characteristics such as age, race, ethnicity and gender. The recommendation has been acted upon and today four board members are of Arab background and two are female. Upon election to the board, members are provided with a comprehensive set of AUS documents as an orientation to the university and to their responsibilities as board members. Board members are expected to monitor and advise on financial and academic operations to ensure the healthy development and stability of the university. Three board meetings are conducted annually and, although there is a geographic dispersion of members, the board has endorsed conducting two meetings on campus and one in London, UK. This represents an increase in on-campus meetings following a recommendation from the previous self-study. This should provide better opportunity for the board and the various campus constituents to interact, and for the board to experience AUS first-hand. Minutes of board meetings are confidential but are available for evaluation teams upon request. IT IS RECOMMENDED that a summary of
Board of Trustees discussions be made available to university constituents shortly after a board meeting, and that the minutes of board meetings, or an abbreviated version thereof, be made available after approval by the board. The board, through the executive committee and the standing committees, charges the administration to develop policies covering specific issues for its review and approval. The review of policies, either by the standing committees or by the full board, has ensured the board’s engagement in the on-going governance of the institution. Although the bylaws do not preclude advisory representation by alumni, students, faculty or staff, currently only the VCAA and the Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration (VCFA) attend board meetings to provide information and clarification as required. IT
IS RECOMMENDED that the Board of Trustees consider inviting alumni, students, faculty and staff to some board meetings and committees.
4.1.2
Service Assessment
In response to a recommendation made in the university’s previous self-study, the Board of Trustees worked to establish the guidelines for term limits for trustees (with the possibility of three consecutive three-year terms before a forced departure from the board for at least one year). It has begun creating a process for evaluating the service of individual board members. These evaluations will occur in the year in which the terms of individual members expire. Normally, the term of individual board members is three years.
4.1.3
Communication with Constituents
The Board of Trustees maintains its involvement in policy making at AUS by reviewing and deciding on proposed policies that are presented to it. The Chancellor acts as a bridge between the board and university constituents, providing information to the board and communicating the concerns of on-campus constituents. He also provides the board with addresses made by the Faculty Senate President to the Faculty Assembly, statements 18 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
of the senate president to the senate and occasional survey materials. The Chancellor is also responsible for reporting the actions of the board to constituents on campus, particularly through faculty senate meetings. The Vice Chancellors who attend board meetings report to their divisions and offices, after obtaining the approval of the Chancellor. IT IS RECOMMENDED, however, that the Board of Trustees establishes a mechanism for direct interaction with campus constituents.
4.2
ADMINISTRATION
The organizational structure of AUS is shown in Figure 4.1. The Chancellor heads the university, with administrative units reporting to the five Vice Chancellors. The line of authority and reporting chain are clear. The following individuals report directly to the Chancellor: VCAA, VCFA, Vice Chancellor for Public Affairs (VCPA), Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs (VCSA), Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management (VCEM), Assistant to the Chancellor for Development and Alumni Affairs, Director of Institutional Research and Internal Auditor. This group meets weekly to coordinate the administration of the university. Matters arising from academic or administrative departments are presented and discussed in these meetings, thus facilitating communication and allowing input from multiple constituents in decision making.
4.2.1
The Chancellor
The Chancellor, the chief executive officer of the university, is appointed by the board and is conferred with the authority and accountability for decision making as set forth in Article 11 of the bylaws. The Chancellor conducts a weekly meeting with the senior administrative staff to review the previous week, plan for the upcoming week and to conduct general discussions on university issues. He also holds regular weekly meetings with both the VCAA and the VCFA in addition to weekly meetings with other Vice Chancellors individually. The Chancellor sometimes attends the Council of Deans meeting, held weekly with the VCAA, to provide updates on the policies of the Board of Trustees and other administrative matters. As a non-voting ex-officio member, the Chancellor attends all Faculty Senate meetings and the meetings of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee to represent the views of the university administration. In the summer of 2007 Dr. Winfred Thompson, who was appointed Chancellor in August 2002, announced his retirement effective at the end of the academic year 2007– 2008. A Board of Trustees Chancellor Search Committee was then established and the board secured the services of Academic Search Inc., of Washington, DC, an executive firm specializing in higher education searches. In addition, a representative group of seven campus community members representing faculty, staff and students served as the Campus Advisory Committee to the board committee. As a result, at the beginning of February 2008, four highly qualified candidates were invited to Sharjah and arrived consecutively within the period of one week. Each met with Sheikh Dr. Sultan as well as members of the board, senior administrators, the Campus Advisory Committee, the Student Council and the Faculty Senate Executive AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 19
Committee. In addition, each attended a 75-minute open meeting with faculty, staff and students. The Campus Advisory Committee presented a summary of opinions collected from faculty, staff and students, and made recommendations to the board’s Chancellor Search Committee. On February 20, 2008 it was announced that Dr. Peter Heath, then provost of American University of Beirut, had been appointed as the university’s third Chancellor, to take up the post from August 1, 2008.
4.2.2
Senior Administrators
4.2.2.1 Academic Affairs The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs is responsible to the Chancellor for overseeing the academic programs and faculty hiring, renewal, dismissal, promotion and granting of term or rolling contracts. In addition, the VCAA is responsible for oversight of the library, the Office of the Registrar, the Office of Academic Administration and Operations, the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs, the Office of Research, the Faculty Development Center and the Academic Achievement Center. The VCAA also serves as an ex-officio member of the Faculty Senate and Faculty Senate Executive Committee, providing input on academic matters. The VCAA meets weekly with each Dean, the Director of Academic Administration and Operations, and the Director of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs individually, and with the other two directors biweekly. Additionally, a number of committees report and provide recommendations to the office of the VCAA, supporting the effort to ensure shared governance. Membership typically includes representatives of the four schools/colleges, units such as the library and, as appropriate, representatives of the Faculty Senate. The committees are: •
The Council of Deans (COD): develops policies and serves as an advisory body to the VCAA. The council is composed of the Deans of the four schools/colleges, the directors of Academic Administration and Operations, Graduate and Undergraduate Programs, Library and Registrar’s office. It meets weekly and is chaired by the VCAA. Issues of curriculum, faculty and staff personnel policies, faculty research and professional development, accreditation, instructional technologies and similar matters constitute the council’s agenda.
•
The University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UUCC): a standing university-level committee charged with ensuring that the curricular integrity of undergraduate academic programs is maintained. It is responsible for reviewing requests for new courses and changes to existing programs.
•
The Academic Operations Council (AOC): coordinates operational issues shared by colleges and schools, coordinates curricular-related issues between schools/colleges and the Office of the Registrar, and makes recommendations for policy issues to be addressed by the COD.
•
The Academic Appeals Review Committee (AARC): responsible for ensuring that the procedures followed and the sanctions imposed on students are in accordance with the policies outlined in the university catalogs.
20 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Figure 4.1 Organizational Structure (Fall 2008) AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 21
•
The Graduate Program Curriculum Committee (GPCC): a standing universitylevel committee responsible for ensuring that the curricular integrity of graduate academic programs is maintained. It is responsible for reviewing requests for new programs and changes to existing programs.
•
The University Research Grant Committee: responsible for the review of proposals for the competitive AUS Faculty Research Grant (FRG) program.
•
The Institutional Review Board: a research ethics committee that examines all research proposals where human subjects are involved and approves that the research methodology protects all participants involved in the research.
•
The Animal Care Committee: examines all research proposals where animals (fish and mammals) are involved and approves that the research methodology used meets international standards.
•
The Advisory University Faculty Evaluation Committee (AUFEC): serves as an as-needed advisory body to the VCAA on some rolling contract and promotion recommendations.
•
The Sabbatical Leave Committee: a standing university-level committee responsible for making recommendations on sabbatical leave applications.
4.2.2.2 Finance and Administration The Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration is responsible to the Chancellor for budgeting and resource development and for coordinating and monitoring the administrative and financial operations of the institution. He holds weekly meetings with the Senior Staff Committee composed of the heads of departments under finance and administration. The committee looks at issues related to finance and administration across the university as a whole and ensures that all departments are synchronized in regards to major projects, decisions and issues. The committee develops an agenda of action items that includes financial operations, information technology, purchasing, maintenance, transportation, building programs and services, human resources and university health center concerns. The VCFA serves as an ex-officio member of the Faculty Senate and provides input on all finance and administration matters. To assist different AUS departments in their business transactions, the Office of Finance and Administration has published the Business Procedures Manual for Administrative Policies and Procedures that contains sections on finance, purchasing, logistics, risk management, information systems, housing, auxiliary services and the university health center.
4.2.2.3 Student Affairs The Office of Student Affairs (OSA) headed by the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs (VCSA) provides non-academic student support services to serve student body. It conducts weekly meetings chaired by the VCSA and attended by the directors of or representatives from its departments: Student Activities, Residential Halls, Learning and Counseling Services, Judicial Affairs, Career Advising and Placement Services and the 22 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Study Abroad program. Each unit of Student Affairs and the president of the Student Council have a weekly meeting with the VCSA. The VCSA also meets individually with the Chancellor on a weekly basis. Each OSA department prepares a comprehensive monthly report of its activities and functions and a consolidated OSA report is prepared monthly for the Chancellor’s office. Each OSA department conducts weekly meetings with its staff to discuss planning and implementation. Students are involved in providing feedback and taking part in the decision-making process through the various OSA committees. The committees include: • Student Activities Advisory Committee • Residential Halls Advisory Committee • Judicial Affairs Advisory Committee • Global Day Planning and Implementation Committee • OSA Newsletter Committee • Student Handbook Advisory Committee • Conduct Council Hearing Board • Sporting Events Selection Committee • Athletics Scholarship Committee • Haj and Omrah Committee (pilgrimage to Mecca) • Community Services Advisory Committee
4.2.2.4 Enrollment Management In March 2008 the new position of Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management was created and the Dean of Admissions promoted to it. The VCEM is responsible for the Office of Enrollment Management, which handles student recruitment and admission, the Testing and Professional Development Center, financial aid and the coordination of external scholarships. The VCEM conducts at least two meetings a month that are attended by all enrollment management staff members. Two additional monthly meetings are held at which unit supervisors and other staff members discuss issues related to planning and the improvement of services. In place of standing committees the office forms teams to work on specific tasks. The teams and their assigned tasks change frequently as determined by work requirements.
4.2.2.5 Public Affairs The Office of Public Affairs serves as a link between the university and the internal, local, regional and international communities. It consists of three entities under the leadership of the Vice Chancellor for Public Affairs. These entities are: •
Public Relations Department: handles all official government documents and transactions for students, faculty and staff, from issuing visit and residency visas and driving licenses to car registration. It also handles international student affairs, security and safety.
•
Media and Printing Department: implements the university’s communications and media policies and plans. It produces the university’s official newsletters, publications and website and ensures effective working relationships with the AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 23
local media through organizing press conferences, media interviews, and the issuing of press releases and press invitations. •
Events Division: serves as the focal point for all university events. It sets policies and procedures concerning AUS events and provides guidance in planning and coordinating them. An events manual is distributed at the beginning of each semester to all faculty and staff as a guide to organizing events. A calendar of events is disseminated weekly to ensure that campus events do not overlap.
The VCPA holds weekly meetings with the heads of these entities to discuss plans, policies, procedures and overall outcomes. Each entity within the Office of Public Affairs holds weekly staff meetings.
4.2.3
Qualifications and Qualities
Senior administrators at AUS are expected to have academic and administrative qualifications that are similar to those of their counterparts in the United States. However, because of the university’s mission and location, additional qualities are sought. In the recent Chancellor search process a list of desired characteristics was drawn up. The university sought not only “an accomplished, creative academic leader who has demonstrated the ability to lead and manage a large, complex university similar to AUS” but also required the new Chancellor to have “multicultural sensitivity and an international outlook” and be “a willing student of the local culture and enjoy engagement with business, government and educational leaders in Sharjah, the UAE and the wider Gulf region.” This combination of characteristics is desirable in all senior administrators at AUS. The curricula vitae of AUS senior administrators reveal that all have the academic qualifications, background and experience sufficient for their roles. Chancellor Thompson has terminal degrees in both law (LLM) and history (PhD) and has extensive academic administrative experience, including 13 years as a US university president. Chancellor Heath received his BA in Near Eastern Studies from Princeton University and his PhD in Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations from Harvard University. He has extensive academic as well as administrative experience including serving as provost at the American University of Beirut for 10 years. The VCAA has a terminal degree (PhD) in inorganic chemistry and has extensive academic administrative experience, including seven years as VCAA in US universities. The VCFA has the appropriate terminal degree in his discipline (MBA), and several years’ experience as chief financial officer of a US university, as well as a background in business at the executive level. The VCSA has a terminal degree (PhD) in demography and administrative experience of 25 years with the UAE Ministry of Education in addition to significant professional experience in the area of student affairs. The VCPA and VCEM also have appropriate academic degrees and significant administrative experience in their professional areas. Moreover, the VCSA, VCPA and VCEM have the necessary cultural background and sensitivity required to guide student and university services and activities and to deal with issues and problems arising for students and the university in this multicultural, coeducational institution.
24 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Each of the academic Deans has a terminal degree (PhD) in a discipline appropriate to the school/college that he heads, as well as extensive professional and scholarly activity. The Deans represent a mix of American administrative experience with the necessary experience in the specifics of the regional context.
4.2.3.1 Selection of Senior Administrators The previous AUS self-study report recommended that procedures for the selection of senior administrators be adopted to provide opportunity for input from faculty, staff and students. In the recent Chancellor search process, the Campus Advisory Committee had student, faculty and staff representation. However, this was not due to the presence of formal procedures. The search for the VCAA involved the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and the Student Council. Several recent Dean searches have involved faculty. The trend is towards greater involvement of various groups, but this is not a formal requirement. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop formal procedures for
the recruitment and hiring of senior administrators, and that these include provisions for the involvement of students, faculty, staff and other constituents as appropriate. In self-study interviews with senior administrators, respondents were asked if the selection process for senior administrators gives appropriate consideration to diversity issues such as age, race, ethnicity and gender. The general view appears to be that diversity at AUS is not an issue. The organizational chart in Figure 4.1 shows that of the present 36 administrators, 13 are women and 17 are Arabs. This mixture is important as it contributes to the achievement of the university’s mission as a “coeducational institution based upon American models and grounded in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region.” The mixture, however, is not balanced across the different administrative units. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS continue to seek diversity
at all levels of its administration and in all units.
4.2.3.2 Job Descriptions of Senior Administrators In the university’s previous self-study it was concluded that there was no written description of the roles, responsibilities and functions of the Vice Chancellors or Deans. A recommendation was made that position descriptions setting out the roles, responsibilities and functions of senior administrators should be defined and made accessible. In response to this recommendation, AUS now has job descriptions for all senior administrators. The descriptions include position summary, scope, representative duties and responsibilities, desirable knowledge and abilities, and preferred qualifications.
4.2.4
Performance Evaluation
4.2.4.1 The Chancellor Beginning in the academic year 2005–2006, responsibility for evaluation of the Chancellor was officially assigned to the Board of Trustees, and the plan was for evaluation to occur annually based in part upon an annual goals and objectives statement submitted to the board by the Chancellor. The annual assessment process is based primarily on the Chancellor’s goals and performance related to those goals. The goals are AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 25
developed annually by the Chancellor in consultation with a trusteeship committee. The Chancellor and the committee discuss the goals, their concordance with the institutional mission and planning structure, and their practical feasibility. The Chancellor reports on the progress of these goals during an interim period and again at the end of the year. Through this process and dialogue the Chancellor is able to adjust his goals to ensure continuous improvement. Newly appointed and future Chancellors will be assessed in a more thorough review approximately every five years. The five-year review will involve the entire Board of Trustees and other constituents of the university.
4.2.4.2 Senior Administrators In the university’s previous self-study report it was stated that “there appears to be little in the way of a formal documented process for performance evaluation of senior administrators, including the Deans,” and a recommendation was made that “procedures for performance evaluation of senior administrators include opportunity for input from faculty, staff, and students and that such procedures be made accessible.” It was also stated that formal evaluation of the performance of those above the Dean level had never occurred. In response to these recommendations, measures for formal performance evaluation were put in place. The Chancellor evaluates annually the senior staff members who report to him based, in part, upon submitted goals and objectives statements. During self-study interviews, some Deans reported that they had provided the Chancellor with input for the performance evaluation of the Vice Chancellors. However, there are still no formal and documented procedures in place for involving faculty, staff and possibly students, when appropriate, in the periodic evaluation of senior administrators. Evaluation of Deans is carried out annually by the VCAA, who meets with each Dean at the beginning of the academic year to establish annual goals, which are generally derived from the mission statement. The process is informal and the Deans are evaluated at the end of the year based on the achievement of these annual goals. Faculty give their opinion of their respective Dean in periodic web surveys. Results of other surveys conducted for the self-study suggest that faculty have not seen the performance improvement they would like and would appreciate more opportunity for input. Evaluation of Associate Deans and department heads is carried out by the Deans at the end of each academic year. Faculty involvement seems to be very limited. A three-year cycle of surveying is planned, whereby thorough formal evaluation of department heads is carried out using input from faculty, staff and related administrators. The plan will provide faculty committees within academic departments that will review the performance of the department head annually. Other surveys to be carried out under the three-year cycle system include those for the library, the Office of Academic Instructional Technology and the Office of the Registrar. In addition, surveys of the Deans’ office staff are planned. The Office of Finance and Administration periodically conducts university-wide surveys for its departments and any receiving a satisfaction score of less than 85 percent is 26 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
required to initiate remedial action. In addition to these reviews of personnel and offices, all divisions provide a semester update reporting attainments and milestones in the achievement of the institution’s goals, objectives and strategic processes. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS establish formal procedures for annual performance evaluation of senior administrators that include involvement of appropriate campus constituencies and senior administrators.
4.2.5
Flow of Communication
During the self-study, senior administrators were asked whether there is “a timely, accurate and open flow of communication and information among senior administrators to enhance decision making to achieve the Vision, Mission and Goals of AUS.” Responses varied significantly, depending upon the position of the respondent. The Chancellor felt that communication is excellent and cited the weekly meetings with the Vice Chancellors as encouraging a free and open flow of communication and information. The Vice Chancellors indicated that communication was generally good but that some problems occur. Some said they would like to be provided with a greater amount of specific information rather than taking part in general discussions. The Deans felt that both the flow of communication among themselves and the upward flow of information from them to the VCAA are good. However, the downward flow of information is more of a problem. Information, for example concerning the university budget, is often not shared with them in a timely manner. Further, the Deans are not empowered to make decisions, and see a lack of transparency in the decision-making process; rumors about decisions travel much faster than formal communications and are usually the means by which the Deans first hear of things.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS administrators develop procedures to ensure better flow of communication.
4.3
ROLE OF FACULTY IN SHARED GOVERNANCE
4.3.1
Faculty Organization Plan
As part of the creation of a structure for shared governance, the Faculty Organization Plan (FOP) was developed by a drafting committee of elected faculty and approved by the Chancellor and Board of Trustees in September 1999. The FOP states that the faculty organization consists of two bodies, the Faculty Assembly and the Faculty Senate.
4.3.1.1 Faculty Assembly The Faculty Assembly consists of the academic personnel holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, lecturer or senior lecturer who are fulltime employees of a degree-granting school/college of the university, and the Chancellor, Vice Chancellors and Deans of the schools/colleges. All members of the assembly are entitled to vote. The powers, duties and privileges of the assembly are exercised in accordance with the bylaws of the university and subject to the authority of the Board of Trustees. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 27
According to the FOP, the assembly has the responsibility to preserve, generate, transmit and apply knowledge and understanding, and to foster and support the vital spirit of open inquiry and critical thinking. The assembly is accountable for the quality of instruction and scholarship at AUS and accepts the responsibility and authority, both primary and shared, for developing, monitoring and modifying policies affecting the academic environment. The assembly has the responsibility and authority to provide the administration with recommendations concerning the development and implementation of other policies affecting academic life. In practice, the assembly meets once each semester. The agenda typically includes the Chancellor’s announcement of important new policies decided by the Board of Trustees, the report to faculty of the outgoing senate president of senate achievements under his/her presidency, and the discussion of issues that require the opinion of a large number of faculty. The number of faculty attending the assembly is typically reasonable.
4.3.1.2 Faculty Senate Unlike most other institutions in the region, AUS has an active Faculty Senate made up of elected faculty; each school/college has five representative senators and three senators represent the Intensive English Program. The Chancellor, Vice Chancellors and Deans are non-voting ex-officio members and regularly attend meetings. The senate meets monthly during the academic year and occasionally additional meetings are scheduled to discuss pressing agenda items. A variety of issues that affect faculty and academic aspects of the university are discussed. Senior administrators provide input and explanations to issues and listen directly to faculty concerns. While the senate has an advisory role, it has had an important impact on some university policies relating to faculty such as procedures for faculty evaluation and the faculty handbook. Senate members meet members of the Board of Trustees at an annual dinner gathering that provides an opportunity for the exchange of ideas in an informal setting. The senate also organizes activities such as workshops and talks by invited speakers on issues of relevance to faculty. There are currently no evaluation measures in place for assessing the effectiveness of the Faculty Senate. The senate is run by the Senate Executive Committee (SEC) which consists of seven elected members. The SEC has a direct relationship with the Chancellor and the VCAA, as both attend its monthly meetings. The relationship between the SEC and university administrators is typically one of open and formative discussion for the benefit of the university. Differences of opinions do occur and occasionally compromises can be achieved. The SEC is typically involved in providing recommendations on candidates for senior administrative posts, for example that of the Chancellor and the VCAA. The Faculty Senate has established a set of standing committees with specific functions. These committees and their activities are central to the faculty governance process. They address all aspects of educational programs, academic matters and many non-academic issues that affect the lives of faculty. Each committee has its own mandate, as approved by the senate. Committees are chaired by senators and include faculty representation from all schools/colleges. Additionally, ad hoc committees may be formed to look into specific issues as they arise. All committees formulate, review and recommend items to the SEC for inclusion on the agenda of the monthly senate meeting, where they are debated and voted on by senators. 28 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
In recent years, however, a lack of interest in joining the senate has been noted among faculty. It has proved hard to fill some senate seats and other seats were filled unopposed. In the academic year 2007–2008 the election for senate president had to be postponed because there were no nominees. Occasionally, monthly senate meetings are cancelled or are held but are unable to make decisions because of lack of quorum. The reason for this lack of interest is unclear; one possible explanation, however, could be that administrative decisions that have important implications for faculty have been made in opposition to senate recommendations or without consulting the senate. Surveys of faculty suggest that opinions toward the representative nature of the senate are mixed. The faculty senate has no formal mechanism for collecting feedback, for which it often relies on the initiatives of individual senators.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate study the effectiveness of its operations. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate investigate the reasons for the lack of faculty interest in joining it.
4.3.2
Faculty Handbook
The university’s first Faculty Handbook was approved by the Board of Trustees in June 2002, and was updated and republished in 2003. As new policies were developed and old ones updated, the current handbook was developed through the collaboration of the Faculty Senate and the VCAA. It was approved by the senate, the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees, and published in June 2007. The Faculty Handbook serves as the primary reference for policies pertaining to faculty employment at AUS. Policies are approved by the Board of Trustees and/or the university’s higher administration and are binding to both faculty members and administrators. The policies are typically produced in consultation with faculty (through the senate) and the Council of Deans. They cover faculty ranks and titles, contracts, rights and responsibilities, development, evaluation, dismissal and grievance procedures. Interpretation of the Faculty Handbook in specific instances and resolution of conflicts over them is made jointly by the university’s upper administration (the Chancellor and the VCAA) and the Senate Executive Committee. AUS schools/colleges may have their own manuals stating specific internal policies. However, policies contained or amended in the Faculty Handbook apply to all faculty and take precedence over school/college statements. AUS has no process that deals with cases where an administrator does not follow the procedures of the handbook. Reporting the case to higher levels of administration does not always result in a corrective action. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS appoint
an independent ombudsman to mediate and solve problems following established procedures and, if required, report to the Board of Trustees.
4.3.3
Faculty Participation in Decision Making
Typically within an academic program faculty decide on curricula, courses and other matters. Academic recommendations are normally made through a committee structure, regular committee meetings and scheduled faculty meetings. In contrast, two-thirds of AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 29
faculty responding to a self-study survey indicated they had very limited involvement in decisions related to governing, planning, budgeting and policy making. The results of surveys, along with the lack of interest in the Faculty Senate, are signs that deficiencies exist in the practice of shared governance by faculty at AUS. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate develop mechanisms to strengthen the faculty role in decision-making processes.
4.4
ROLE OF STUDENTS IN SHARED GOVERNANCE
The Student Council is the association that comprises all matriculated undergraduate students. The Student Council, advised by the VCSA, is the executive authority of the Student Union and forms part of the university’s continuing process of enacting principles of shared governance. The council, an elected body established at the university’s inception, represents students’ interests, voices their views and concerns, protects their academic freedom and ensures their engagement in decisions and policies influencing student life at the university. It consists of 13 executive officers elected through campus-wide elections. The council provides a structure for student involvement on campus. The details of the duties and bylaws of the Student Council are outlined in the Charter of the Student Government. In the university’s previous self-study it was found that students had been involved in some university-level committees. It was also found that individual schools/colleges had student representative bodies with varying roles and responsibilities. It was, however, recommended that the effectiveness of student governance as a voice for students should be studied and improved and that consideration be given to including students on more university committees. In the last few years, the Student Council has been an active participant in some important university committees, for example the Chancellor Search Committee, the Commencement Committee, the Hearing Board in Judicial Affairs and the Residential Advisory Board. Unfortunately, Student Council involvement has not been as successful as hoped due partly to students’ academic commitments and partly to a lack of enthusiasm from students for participating in the discussion of issues relating to the Student Council. A self-study survey indicated a generally negative impression of the role of the organization. In a self-study interview, the council president (2007–2008) indicated that the council does not have a standing procedure to evaluate its performance, adding that one of the challenges the council encounters is reaching out to students who are not interested in council matters.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Student Council study the effectiveness of its operations and investigate the reasons for the negative attitude of students toward it.
30 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
4.5
ROLE OF STAFF IN SHARED GOVERNANCE
AUS currently has no structure whereby staff can take a role in shared governance. Comments by staff in the self-study surveys show that staff have a variety of concerns, but are unsure how to address them. These issues include promotion, professional development and relations with supervisors. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS set
up an appropriate structure to represent staff in shared governance.
4.6
ROLE OF ALUMNI AND PARENTS IN SHARED GOVERNANCE
The American University of Sharjah Alumni Association (AUSAA) became an official unit of the university in June 2006. It serves as the liaison office with alumni, representing alumni within the university community and serving as a vehicle for advancing their interests. The AUSAA aspires to create a strong bond among AUS alumni and to strengthen existing ties between alumni and the university. The association works closely with the Office of Development and Alumni Affairs to carry out its programs and assist in its day-to-day responsibilities. As AUS constituents, parents are not represented by an association. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS, drawing on the experiences of other Americanmodel universities in the region, investigate the advantages and disadvantages of establishing an association to represent parents.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 31
Chapter 5 5 .1
STUDENTS
STUDENT PROFILE
In 1997, the university’s opening year, the number of enrolled students (freshmen) at AUS was 208. The number of students has continued to grow steadily since then, as Figure 5.1 demonstrates. In Fall 2007, AUS had 374 Intensive English Program (IEP) students, 4,334 undergraduate students, and 233 graduate students. The AUS mission states that the university “admits students on the basis of their academic qualifications regardless of race, color, gender, religion, disabilities, age or national origin.” The student profile manifests this statement, with 56 percent being male and 44 percent female. Figure 5.2 shows the gender distribution across the schools/colleges. No study has been done to investigate the reason for the uneven distribution among the schools/colleges, but preference is not given on the basis of gender in any unit.
Figure 5.1 Student Enrollment Headcount
Figure 5.2 Student Headcount, Fall 2007
The previous self-study report stated that in Fall 2003 there were 68 nationalities represented among students at AUS; in Fall 2007 this number had risen to 81. The percentages of the top 10 nationalities are shown in Figure 5.3, indicating a very cohesive mix of the regional nationalities. No data are collected about the race or color of students, and applicants are asked their religion for immigration and visa purposes only. Figure 5.3 Top 10 Student Nationalities, Fall 2007
32 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
5.1.1
Intensive English Program
Students who meet university admissions requirements but who have not achieved a score of 530 in the paper-based or 71 in the Internet-based Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) exam are admitted to the Intensive English Program (IEP), where they are assigned to one of five levels based on further English testing. Once these students achieve the required TOEFL scores they are considered “matriculated” and enter the undergraduate student body. In Fall 2007, 297 students were admitted to the IEP program; as Figure 5.4 shows, the number of IEP students has fluctuated, with a significant increase in 2006. Figure 5.5 Figure 5.4 Enrollment Headcount for Entering IEP Students by Nationality also shows the distribution of nationalities of the new IEP cohort in Fall 2007, and it may be observed that it contains a much higher percentage of UAE nationals than the nationality distribution across the university as a whole. This is because most come from public schools where the level of English language is usually low. Almost all UAE nationals receive an external scholarship to study at AUS, which means that they are more likely to be able to afford an extra year in the IEP. The average TOEFL score for the Fall Figure 5.5 AUS Fall 2007 Top 10 Nationalities 2007 IEP cohort is 451, with an average for New IEP Cohort high school GPA of 91 percent. These averages are similar among male and female students; however, only 28 percent of IEP students are female. This is because more male students are offered external scholarships and the majority of those come from public schools. Figure 5.5 shows the change in headcount by nationality over several years. According to the Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management, the reduced number of student nationals from Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and those from the non-Arab category seems to be due to: • the continuing increase in the minimum school GPA admission requirements. This has resulted in a significant drop in the pool of qualified applicants from these countries. • the increase in IEP tuition, which is now the same as undergraduate tuition. This also affects UAE nationals who are not on external scholarships or receiving financial aid from AUS. • the increase in scholarships offered by the GCC countries to their citizens to study in Western countries. For example, Saudi Arabia offered more than 5,000 such scholarships last year. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 33
• •
5.1.2
the reputation of AUS as an academically demanding institution the number of new universities now being established in other GCC countries, thus affecting the overall intake
Undergraduate Students
Most students arrive at AUS shortly after completing their secondary education and attend on a full-time basis. The undergraduate student body is traditional in age, with the average age for undergraduate students in Fall 2007, not counting IEP students, being 19.8 years. Of the undergraduate student body (including IEP students), 77 percent have residence in the UAE, although the majority of these are expatriates (reflecting the large expatriate population in the country). The undergraduate enrollment distribution by school/college since Fall 2004 is shown in Figure 5.6 Enrollment Headcount for Entering Freshman Figure 5.6. At the time of the Cohort previous self-study the School of Business and Management attracted the largest number of undergraduate students. However, in Fall 2004 the balance tipped to the School (now College) of Engineering.
5.1.3
Graduate Students
In Fall 2007 AUS had 233 graduate students enrolled in its eight master’s degree programs. At the time of the previous self-study in Fall 2003 the graduate enrollment was 153. Figure 5.7 shows that almost 25 percent of graduate students are UAE nationals; at the time of the previous self-study this figure was almost 50 percent. Unlike the other students, most UAE nationals receive external scholarships. The increase in the number of students who support themselves is a sign of confidence in the value of the education provided by AUS, which graduate students obviously see as providing a good return for their investment. Approximately 44 percent of graduate students are female; Figure 5.8 shows the divisions of the genders across the schools and colleges. No study has been done to investigate the lack of gender balance in CAS and CEN but it is not related to any gender preference during admission. As the majority of students enrolled in graduate programs are in full-time employment, graduate programs are offered on a part-time basis.
34 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Figure 5.7 AUS Top 10 Nationalities for Graduate Students, Fall 2007
Figure 5.8 Enrollment of Graduate Students by Gender, Fall 2007
Figure 5.9 Enrollment Headcount for Entering Graduate Students by School/College
Figure 5.10 Enrollment Headcount for Entering Graduate Students
Figure 5.10 shows a drop in the number of entering graduate students since 2004. According to the VCEM and two of the graduate program directors, the reasons for this are: • the higher cost and longer duration of AUS’s programs compared to those of other institutions in the UAE • the increased competition in the region • limited numbers of graduate assistantships and no university scholarships for graduate students • relatively few resources committed for recruiting graduate students • the increased cost of advertising without concomitant increase in funding • the increasing traffic problem in Sharjah. Many prospective applicants now shy away from AUS as the campus becomes ever more difficult to reach, especially when courses take place after 5 p.m.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that graduate programs directors and the Office of Enrollment Management clearly identify the factors that have led to the decrease in the number of entering graduate students and make specific recommendations for reversing the trend. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 35
5.2
RECRUITMENT
The Office of Enrollment Management conducts comprehensive annual recruitment campaigns to ensure that seats are filled with the best qualified candidates. Recruitment campaigns are therefore planned to reach prospective students from different educational systems, not only in the Arabian Gulf region but also in the Middle East and beyond. The Office of Enrollment Management conducts, on average, about 90 recruitment activities annually. These include: • participation in at least 15 local, regional and international educational fairs and exhibitions • program of visits to the AUS campus by secondary school students • presentations in major secondary schools both locally and regionally • meetings among high school academic advisors and university admissions coordinators • local and regional presentations to the public • media campaigns, which have seen a significant budget increase, from Dhs. 2 million in the academic year 2002–2003 to Dhs. 3 million in 2006–2007 At the time of the previous self-study the university produced a single catalog covering both undergraduate and graduate programs. Now two catalogs are produced annually, covering undergraduate and graduate programs separately. The catalogs provide extensive official information about the programs offered at AUS, as well as general information about the university and its policies and procedures concerning admissions, registration, tuition, scholarships and general requirements for graduation.
5.3
ADMISSIONS
5.3.1
Admission Standards
Information relating to admissions, including transfer and part-time study policies, is clearly set out in the university’s catalogs, which are available in hard copy and online. AUS admissions policy reflects the university’s mission to “achieve and maintain preeminence,” and admissions guidelines are designed to attract highly qualified applicants and to admit those students who can best contribute to the distinctive character of the AUS community. An applicant’s potential for academic achievement at AUS is an important factor in determining admission. The admissions policy is concerned with the quality of the applicant’s high school academic program and his or her performance in that program, the applicant’s TOEFL score, personal recommendations from those with substantial knowledge of the applicant, and intellectual curiosity, creativity and evidence of enthusiasm for scholarly work. AUS makes a particular effort to recruit and enroll qualified students from a wide range of economic groups. It gives special attention to financial assistance to ensure that all qualified students have access to the university. AUS accepts applications from, and does not discriminate against, disabled people. While the campus has some problems in supporting disabled individuals, the university is working toward providing an accessible campus and adequate support services. 36 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Minimum admission requirements have been progressively increased from a GPA equivalent of 70 percent in the academic year 2001–2002 to one of 80 percent in the academic year 2006-2007. The average high school GPA is also increasing, as Figure 5.11 shows. At the same time the English language proficiency level has increased from a minimum TOEFL score of 500 points in 2001–2002 to 530 points in 2006–2007, which make the university’s admission standards among the highest in the region. A rise to 540 points is due in the academic year 2009–2010. Figure 5.12 shows that the number of students with higher TOEFL scores is increasing every year. Figure 5.13 appears to suggest a high rate of admission compared to applicants and a declining admission yield. With regard to the former, it is the well-publicized practice of the Office of Enrollment Management only to accept applications from prospective students who meet the admissions standards. Those who do not meet the standard are neither processed nor counted as an applicant. Thus, the approximately 50 percent admission rate refers only to those who meet the Figure 5.11 Average High School GPA for Newly Enrolled Undergraduate and IEP admission criteria. That the enrollment Students yield is declining is a reflection of the quality of students admitted. As the admission standards have increased, the number of students who have other educational options in Europe and North America also has increased. The declining yield has been expected. As a standard procedure, admissions literature and web pages are revised and updated each academic year. The admissions prospectus contains a wide variety of material about the admissions process and requirements, as well as information on university majors, student life, on-campus services and other matters. To make this information more accessible to speakers of Arabic, who represent a large segment of constituents, a concise Arabic informational flyer has been Figure 5.12 Percentage of Newly Enrolled developed. In addition, at the beginning of Undergraduate Students with a TOEFL Score of 550 or Above each academic year, information packs are dispatched to about 300 high schools around the world. Publications and literature are also widely distributed during public presentations, high school visits to campus, educational exhibitions and similar events. To improve communication, an e-mail account is provided to each applicant upon receipt of their application. This account facilitates the provision of updates to applicants on the status of their application, documents required to complete their files, deadlines AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 37
and other important announcements. In November 2007 an SMS service was introduced to communicate similar information. Approximately six weeks before the beginning of the semester, the Orientation Week schedule is sent to all admitted students, detailing scheduled activities and events. To help students and parents make informed choices about an applicant’s field of specialization, additional material has been developed for each major offered by the university to cover possible career options, employment, required skills, desirable personal attributes and ways of gaining experience. During Spring Semester 2007 the Office of Enrollment Management conducted a survey to measure stakeholder satisfaction regarding the quality of services it provides. The survey questionnaire was distributed among prospective students, parents, high school counselors and academic advisors. Of those who responded, the large majority agreed that AUS admissions literature is easy to understand and that the publications and literature answered their questions regarding admission at AUS. Moreover, most agreed that the AUS website met their expectations.
Figure 5.13 Undergraduate Admissions
5.3.2
Figure 5.14 Graduate Admissions
Transfer and Visiting Students
Information on the policies and procedures for transfer and visiting students is provided in the catalogs. The Office of the Registrar processes the transcripts of students transferring from other institutions of higher education. Transfer credit is awarded after a three-stage review process: 1) review of the applicant file and acceptance by the Office of Enrollment Management; 2) review of the applicant file by the Office of the Registrar to determine if credits were earned from a recognized and accredited institution; and 3) review of the course material by the appropriate academic head/Dean. The decision regarding credits awarded is made solely by the appropriate academic head/Dean. Figure 5.15 Number of Transfer Students per Figure 5.15 shows the number of transfer Semester students to AUS during the last few years.
38 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Visiting students, study abroad students and transient students apply for admission and registration through the Office of the Registrar. Applicants submit a visiting student application, an official university transcript and a letter verifying good academic standing from their home institution. However, discipline-specific accreditation bodies also play a role in decisions regarding the transfer of credits.
5.3.3
Enrollment Management Plan
Over the past few years, admissions standards have been gradually raised. This primary intention of this policy has not been to limit the numbers of students enrolled, but to increase the quality of incoming students, as well as the quality of the experience students receive at AUS. The reason that standards were raised gradually rather than rapidly was, in part, to help preclude the possibility that enrollments would drop below targets. So far, the raising of admission standards has not decreased the number of applications. Furthermore, applicants have been of increasingly high quality. To evaluate admission standards, dialogue takes place throughout the year with regard to matters such as the monitoring of applications for the fall intake, the achievement of targeted enrollments and considerations for admissions the following year. Most dialogue takes place between the VCEM and the Chancellor, but discussions among the Chancellor’s staff and between the VCEM and school/college Deans also take place. The Board of Trustees gives formal approval annually to admissions policies and enrollment targets. However, to help predict the distribution of admitted students among majors, serious research must be conducted on needs and trends of the market. This research must be linked with the enrollment management policy within the strategic plan of the university.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS better manage the enrollment of students among majors.
5.4
REGISTRATION AND ADVISING
The goals of the Office of the Registrar are to maintain and ensure accuracy of permanent student records, to communicate and fairly implement academic policies affecting student records, to provide students with appropriate access to their record and to work with all units of the university to develop optimal academic calendars, as well as course and examination schedules.
5.4.1
Student Records
The initial application files of all new AUS students are created by the Office of Enrollment Management. Once students formally enroll and register for classes, their files are transferred to the Office of the Registrar, where they are stored in a secure records room. When students graduate or otherwise leave the university their files are moved to the registrar’s audit office where they are filed in another secure records room. In all instances, the Office of the Registrar follows the recommendations and procedures for student record retention set out by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. In addition, all student records are kept in the Banner student AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 39
information system database. Although AUS allows students to inspect their own files, it does not provide copies of the documents contained therein. The files are considered the property of AUS and are maintained with the strictest confidentiality. Information about this policy is published in the catalogs. However, in this region it is a culturally acceptable and even expected practice to provide information on student performance to parents/guardians.
5.4.2
Registration Process
Every semester a registration guide is prepared and posted on the university’s website six to eight weeks before the start of the early registration period. The guide clearly lays out registration policies, procedures, deadlines and fees. Within individual schools/colleges the Associate Deans bear primary responsibility for student registration procedures, and they work together to find ways to improve the process. As members of the Academic Operations Council (along with the Registrar, the Director of Academic Administration and Operations, and the Director of the Academic Achievement Center) they meet regularly to discuss a variety of issues, including registration.
5.4.2.1 First-Year Student Registration Due to the highly structured first-year programs in SA&D, SBM and CEN, Associate Deans can essentially register new students en masse. This means that new student registration can be handled with minimal assistance from support staff. However, firstyear CAS student registration is not so easily handled since the programs allow greater choice. While this makes registration more complex and therefore more time-consuming, it may be offset by the smaller number of first-year CAS major students. More problematic for CAS is meeting the needs of students from other schools who are taking required CAS courses. In this respect, CAS carries a much greater registration load than other schools. Although the registration process is improving in terms of efficiency, nearly every stakeholder agreed that it is not yet an efficient process, especially in terms of staff and student time. One of the major roadblocks has been an inadequate number of sections/seats available for high-demand courses.
5.4.2.2 Returning Student Registration Survey data indicated that student opinion regarding registration procedures appears to be split. Informal conversation with students indicates that they experience numerous frustrations with the registration process and utilize a variety of workarounds to try to “beat the system.” Similar to first-year student registration, one of the major roadblocks has been an inadequate number of sections/seats available for high-demand courses. The advantages of an online registration system disappear when all the sections listed online are full or registration dates are not well publicized. This situation then forces students and staff into inefficient manual procedures, which cause long delays and frustrations for everyone involved. Throughout the week of registration, it is common to see long lines of students 40 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
in CAS waiting to see the Associate Dean, who meets with each student individually, looks at his/her specific registration problem, calls department chairs or faculty members for permission to add another student to a needed course or raise the caps in current sections, or tries to add a new section. It is a tedious and inefficient process and results in many students employing a variety of “creative” strategies to get the courses they need, thus causing more problems and delays for other students and staff. Faculty advisors, especially new faculty, have a difficult time assisting returning students with registration issues because of the continuous changes in information given to them. Classification of courses meeting the requirements sometimes changes so faculty must refer to different catalogs to find the appropriate course classification requirements depending on the year the student enrolled. Figuring out the appropriate path for each student advisee can be a cumbersome and time-consuming process. Students register for their courses via the Internet, and in a self-study survey a majority of student respondents agreed that a web-based registration system is preferable to registering with an advisor. Surveys suggest that students like registering online, but they are dissatisfied with the overall process. In response to the challenges experienced during registration, a consultant was employed in Fall 2008 to analyze registration processes and make recommendations regarding improvements. In addition, Associate Deans have been working together to address a number of issues related to registration of new and returning students. Some of the proposals developed by the Associate Deans were implemented and have led to improvements, while other recommendations have not yet been acted upon. AUS recognizes that this is a complex and multifaceted challenge that will require cooperation by all academic and administrative units involved in registration.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS find ways to improve the registration process. Corrective action should be taken and continuous assessment carried out to ensure an acceptable level of user satisfaction.
5.4.3
Student Advising System
The university’s undergraduate catalog states that “academic advising is an essential element of the educational process.” The purposes of advising are to assist students: 1) in obtaining a well-balanced education, 2) in interpreting university policies and procedures, and 3) in planning their schedules and selecting appropriate courses each semester. Although not explicitly stated, a further purpose of academic advising is to ensure that students meet all degree requirements as they progress through their major and are on track for graduation at the time they expect to graduate. Every admitted student is assigned a faculty member advisor within his or her major and is required to meet with the advisor at least once each semester. The involvement of individual faculty members varies across schools/colleges, with some schools consolidating advising responsibilities to a smaller group of faculty and others requiring each faculty member to be an advisor. The number of students per advisor varies significantly from school to school and from program to program. The specific arrangements vary but the overall intent is the same: to provide guidance and support to AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 41
the students from their first year until they graduate. Students usually meet with advisors before the registration period in order to consult on needed courses, check prerequisites and obtain approvals. To ensure that each student meets with his/her advisor, an advising “hold” is placed within the Banner web pages to prevent students from registering. Once a student meets with his/her advisor and has received a signed registration form, the hold is removed and the student is then able to register via the Internet. Through the advising process, faculty become better acquainted with students and help them understand and meet the requirements of the program. As faculty get to know their advisees, they are able to provide advice tailored to the specific needs and abilities of individual students. Through the advising program, faculty also become aware of program deficits and can use this information to make improvements. However, the feedback loop might be more effective in improving the advising program if students kept the same advisor throughout their years at AUS. A self-study survey indicated that student respondents were concerned that although faculty advisors help them understand degree requirements, they are less knowledgeable about academic resources available.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the reasons for the low level of satisfaction with the advising system and establish a process for continuous assessment and improvement to ensure an acceptable level of student satisfaction.
5.4.4
Degree Audits
The Office of the Registrar is responsible for performing degree audits to certify that students have met all the graduation requirements for their chosen degree. Academic chairs/program directors are asked to verify and review the audits with their graduating students two weeks prior to the registration for their final semester. To date, the audit function is implemented using the online Banner system, which is available to both advisors and students via the AUS website.
5.5
FINANCIAL AID
From its inception, the university’s various approaches to financial aid and scholarships have enabled an ever-increasing number of highly qualified students with limited financial resources, regardless of their race, color, gender, religion or nationality, to meet the financial costs of tuition at the university. They have also played a significant role in establishing the university’s regional reputation as a genuine not-for-profit institution of higher education that provides tangible assistance to quality high school students and allocates considerable resources to retain them through to graduation. Through its Financial Aid Office the university offers a range of aid packages and scholarships. More than 50 percent of the student body receives financial aid from the university and more than 25 percent of the student body receives outside sponsorship. The average university aid awarded is 50 percent of tuition. Beginning in Fall 2007, students were able to receive aid for on-campus housing (at the same percentage as their tuition award) in addition to tuition and could also apply for summer session aid. 42 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
University-sponsored financial aid is now awarded for a full academic year, whereas in the past it was reviewed every semester. Over the past three years, the requirements for maintaining need-based financial aid have been adjusted downward—from a minimum semester GPA of 2.50 with a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.00 to a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.25. This change has permitted more students to apply for financial aid and allowed those already on aid to continue. During this same time period, an average of just 8.7 percent of students who lost their financial aid left the university; 91.3 percent of students who lost financial aid registered for classes the following semester. It appears, therefore, that the vast majority of students who lose financial aid find ways to continue at AUS despite the loss, at least in the short term. Since the retention rate for students who lose financial aid is about the same as the overall retention rate, it appears that the loss of financial aid does not have a major impact on students’ decisions to leave the university. Funds allocated for financial aid and scholarships were increased from approximately Dhs. 15.3 million in the academic year 2004–2005 to approximately Dhs. 38 million in the academic year 2007–2008 (an average annual increase of 35.5 percent). Figure 5.17 shows that the number of students benefiting from the university’s scholarship and financial aid program has increased from 1,343 in Fall 2004 to 2,303 in Fall 2007 (an average annual increase of 20 percent). To ensure equal access to financial aid and scholarships, AUS admissions literature and the university’s website offer up-to-date information on these programs. Students may, after receiving a letter of admission, obtain application forms for financial aid and scholarships from the Scholarship and Financial Aid Office or the Office of Enrollment Management. The Office of Enrollment Management not only provides assistance to existing students as well as applicants and their parents, but also regularly communicates the university’s financial aid and scholarship requirements and procedures to high school academic advisors and counselors, encouraging them to identify potential applicants. It should be noted that all financial aid is focused on undergraduate students. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop a financial aid structure that supports graduate students.
Figure 5.16 Funds Spent on Financial Aid and Scholarships (in Dhs.)
Figure 5.17 Number of New and Current Students Receiving Financial Aid and Scholarships AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 43
5 .6
RETENTION
5.6.1
Retention Data
Useful graduation rate data became available in 2004, when the first class of significant size graduated from the university. Though retention rates were examined prior to 2004, definitions of entering students, new freshmen and cohorts began to be applied in a consistent fashion in Fall 2004. AUS follows Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) conventions and definitions for the freshman fall cohort and applies these to mainstream freshmen and the IEP cohort. In other words, AUS tracks all newto-college students Percent Percent Percent Percent (according to the # of continuing continuing graduating continuing Students IPEDS definition), but to 2nd year to 3rd year in 3 years to 4th year if a student starts in the Fall 688 86.19% 73.11% 0.29% 68.17% 2004 IEP he/she will be Fall tracked in the IEP 652 90.34% 80.98% 2005 cohort. There are, Fall 655 90.38% therefore, two cohorts 2006 Fall tracked: the mainstream 635 2007 first-time freshmen and Table 5.1 Retention Rates for Fall Freshman Cohort the IEP first-time freshmen. According to the AUS registrar, fewer than 10 percent of students withdraw from the university each semester. Those who do withdraw cite a variety of reasons, mostly related to personal issues such as illness, marriage and family problems. Retention does not, therefore, appear to be strongly correlated with financial issues. As Figure 5.18 shows, the retention rate for undergraduate students from the first to the second year is increasing. This rate is slightly better than the average retention rate of 89 percent for peer institutions in the same year (2005). Looking at the Fall 2004 freshman cohort, (the first cohort of AUS students for which this information is available), 68 percent have continued on to their fourth year. Figure 5.18 Figure 5.18 Retention for Fall 2004 IEP Cohort also shows a good rate of retention for students who are admitted to the IEP. These retention rates are quite favorable and, based on more recent data, appear to be improving over time. With the appointment of a Director of Institutional Research in the fall of 2007, retention rates will be studied more closely. The director plans to track student retention and persistence 44 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
to graduation, and will establish realistic benchmarks for both IEP and freshman cohorts, as well as identifying appropriate peer groups for the latter.
5.6.2
Retention Support Centers
5.6.2.1 Academic Achievement Center Established in Spring 2007, the Academic Achievement Center (AAC) has taken on the role of coordinating and assisting with academic counseling and advising for all undergraduate students, with a special emphasis on monitoring the academic progress of freshman students. The center identifies academically at-risk students, especially students in their first year and those on academic probation, and assists them by offering academic counseling and advising. The center holds study skills workshops on topics of interest to undergraduate students, such as time management, note-taking and taking examinations. The AAC has developed an “early warning system” to identify at-risk first-year students. It contacts freshman students’ instructors after the first six weeks of the semester and asks them to identify those students who are experiencing academic difficulties. AAC counselors also contact individual instructors and request progress reports of students on probation. Moreover, students who are enrolled in multiple sections of 0-level courses are contacted to work directly with AAC counselors. However, there are currently no processes in place to identify students with special needs such as dyslexia and attentiondeficit disorder. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Academic Achievement Center
create a process and develop the expertise to deal with students who have special needs. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Academic Achievement Center assess the effectiveness of its services and programs and make specific recommendations for improvements. 5.6.2.2 Writing Center
The Writing Center was established in 2000 and its peer-tutoring program in 2004. Staffed by the director and team of 13 part-time peer tutors, the center aims to help students become independent, confident writers through an interactive approach to writing. The center offers one-on-one tutoring sessions to students throughout the university, either those who have been referred by faculty or who have approached the center independently. Tutors work with students on various aspects of writing, for example thesis development, organization, outlining, paragraphing, sentence structure, wording, vocabulary and mechanics. In the academic year 2006–2007, 2,383 appointments were registered. In response to a self-study survey, students commented that the center helped them improve their writing skills. A small pilot study investigating whether Writing Center instruction led to an improvement in student writing was conducted in 2005. The findings showed a significant improvement in the quality of writing in students’ final drafts after they visited the center. Although the results of the study were encouraging, the sample size for this study was small (involving only four students), and a larger sample size is needed to yield more general results. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Writing Center implement
a larger-scale assessment project to determine the effectiveness of its program.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 45
The Writing Center advertises its services through a variety of methods, but 85 percent of its clients come from the Department of Writing Studies. IT IS RECOMMENDED
that other academic departments work with the Writing Center to extend its services to a wider range of students.
5.6.2.3 Economics Tutoring Center Since 2003 the Economics Tutoring Center has offered peer-tutoring sessions for students taking courses in Principles of Economics. Due to the popularity of the sessions, their frequency and the numbers of students attending them have increased. There are currently no assessment procedures in place for the center, but informal conversations with students and faculty indicate that the center’s services help students perform better in Principles of Economics courses. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the
economics peer-tutoring program assess its services.
5.6.2.4 Math Learning Center Established in Fall 2007, the Math Learning Center offers peer-tutoring to students. The center promotes its services through pamphlets, posters and faculty referrals. Although there are currently no data available concerning student awareness of center’s services, informal conversations with students indicate that they are familiar with them. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that the Math Learning Center establish procedures to assess the effectiveness, and faculty and student awareness, of its services.
5.7
CO-CURRICULAR SUPPORT
The university’s mission states that AUS “provides students with a rich and varied campus life that fosters personal growth, maturity and a sense of social responsibility.” AUS non-academic student support services have 100 professional staff and offer a wide range of physical facilities, including student housing, sports facilities, the Learning and Counseling Center and the Student Center. Student support services are intended to aid the development of students to enable them to become socially active people who demonstrate leadership qualities and are able to communicate effectively. Many of the university’s non-academic student support services come under the Office of Student Affairs led by the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs. The non-academic services and programs reflect the university’s goal of providing students with an American-style higher education, but one that operates within the cultural traditions of the Arabian Gulf region. Therefore, male and female housing units are in separate facilities, and male and female students are not allowed to visit each other in the residence halls. Likewise, while the sports complex is open to all students, male and female students do not use common facilities, such as the swimming pool and training rooms, at the same time. AUS offers two awards that have helped propagate active participation in co-curricular activities. The annual Student Appreciation Awards were introduced by OSA in 1998. The awards honor students who have made outstanding contributions to or performances in sports teams, clubs and organizations. The Athletic Awards were 46 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
introduced in 2004 to honor outstanding athletic achievement. Students who receive these awards are given a percentage of tuition remission. Student support programs are publicized through a variety of methods—e-mails, announcements, meetings, training sessions, internal and external university publications, posters, fliers, bulletin boards, electronic message display boards, the student handbook calendar, student orientation programs and the Student Affairs website. Parents who responded to a self-study survey are pleased with the student support services offered by the OSA.
5.7.1
Student Orientation
Orientation programs take place for new students and their parents at the beginning of each semester, prior to registration. The programs aim to help new students gain familiarity with the university, meet other new students and talk to the senior students who assist with the orientation program. Orientation includes campus tours, meetings, lectures and other activities. Incoming freshmen are expected to participate in all activities, as the information provided is designed to ensure a successful first-year experience. During orientation OSA distributes packets containing a copy of the Student Handbook and other material relating to student support services and the services and facilities offered by Student Affairs. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS define the
responsible unit and purpose of the student orientation program. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the responsible unit conduct periodic assessment of the program.
5.7.2
Student Activities
The university tries to provide the best student activity programs in the region. These programs are intended to provide students with opportunities to acquire a variety of skills in the areas of leadership, team building, cultural Figure 5.19 Global Day Event sensitivity, time management, and financial and event management, which will enhance their personalities and allow them to function effectively when they join the workplace. AUS students have the opportunity to take part in a wide range of activities, including the annual Global Day, sporting events, club fairs, art exhibitions, cultural and artistic performances, poetry nights, Ramadan iftar meals and community service (for example, visits to orphanages and residential homes for the elderly). The student activities report for the academic year 2007–2008 shows that 17 community service events were conducted with the participation of 70 student volunteers. The activities report for the same academic year shows that, overall, 130 activities were conducted.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 47
5.7.2.1 Clubs and Organizations AUS offers its students a wide range of clubs and organizations. In the academic year 2007–2008 students formed and managed 29 culturally oriented clubs and organizations, which contribute to the achievement of the university’s goal of encouraging cultural diversity. There were in addition a further 19 interest-oriented clubs and organizations. Two-thirds of students who responded to a survey are members of clubs and organizations. Students also participate in The Leopard student newspaper and the Realms literary magazine.
5.7.2.2 Student Center The Student Center is the main cocurricular area and social interaction venue of the university. The ambience and relaxing atmosphere make it a popular place to spend leisure time, and it is frequented by all sectors of the campus community. Approximately 1,000 people use its facilities daily, and this number is exceeded when student activities and programs are scheduled. The leisure facilities include lounge areas, a food court, a TV room, an Figure 5.20 The Student Center Internet café, a piano lounge and a women’s lounge. Cafes and restaurants include Albert Abela, Burger King, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut, Pic ’n Mix, Dunkin’ Donuts, Starbucks, Deli Marche, Subway and Momento. Upstairs are located the offices of the Student Council, the offices and meeting rooms of clubs and organizations, and well-equipped and technologically advanced multipurpose halls. In the basement are situated a mini-mart, pharmacy, travel agency and barber, as well as a billiards room and bowling alley.
5.7.2.3 Learning and Counseling Center The Learning and Counseling Center (LCC) aims to offer students a range of support services to help them identify their academic, social and personal needs, and thereby fulfill their academic potential. The center offers sessions on adjustment to university life, leadership, stress management, time management, cultural sensitivity, communication, assertiveness, and personal and emotional issues. The approach taken by the center’s counselors (both have a PhD) is to offer a variety of counseling options, including personal guidance, counseling on a one-to-one basis, group counseling and parent counseling. The LCC also helps students select a suitable major and improve their academic performance. Counseling is still considered a taboo by a majority of AUS students; therefore, convincing them to use the counseling facilities available presents challenges. However, this area of student support services is fast developing, and the LCC is striving to eradicate the myths that students may carry about the center’s services.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Learning and Counseling Center better 48 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
publicize its activities and periodically assess the awareness of students of these activities. 5.7.2.4 Student Employment Employment on campus provides students with job opportunities, training and work experience, and also enhances their employment potential after graduation. Records of student employment show that between August and October 2007, 330 students from the 430 who applied both online and in person were placed in employment. Some students who are resident on campus choose to work as Resident Assistants and Desk Assistants. Resident Assistants are offered customized training by the OSA and, in addition to financial support, are offered housing discounts and a certificate of recognition from Student Affairs. Students may also choose to perform voluntary work. Students and the campus community are informed of employment rules and practices through the Student Employment Office, the website and announcements. Following a recommendation made in the university’s previous self-study, the OSA has created a manual for student employment. In addition, in summer 2007, aided by IT services, the OSA developed an online student employment system for the AUS community.
5.7.3
Athletics Program
AUS is committed to the concept that athletics, both intramural and intercollegiate, comprise a part of the educational process. The mission of the athletics program is to enrich the educational experience of students, staff and faculty and promote their wellbeing by providing high-quality and satisfying sporting experiences. The university’s state-of-the-art equipment and sophisticated indoor and outdoor sports facilities are among the best in the region and are available to all members of the AUS community. The Sports Complex offers facilities to meet the sporting needs of the AUS community and to promote the role of athletics in higher education. The indoor facilities consist of two multipurpose courts for basketball/volleyball/tennis/ handball/soccer and badminton; two squash courts; two fitness centers; one multipurpose hall Figure 5.21 AUS Sports Complex currently being used for table tennis, karate and yoga; and an exercise hall hosting aerobics sessions and cardio exercise. There is also an Olympic-sized swimming pool and two saunas. Outdoor facilities include six tennis courts, two basketball courts and two volleyball courts. The soccer field is fully illuminated and equipped to accommodate large numbers of spectators for major events. A cricket practice net is located beside the football field. A playing field with two football fields and a large multipurpose field for cricket and baseball were constructed during Summer 2008. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 49
In the academic year 2007–2008, more than 220 students represented AUS in sports teams. There were 12 men’s teams for soccer, basketball, volleyball, table tennis, badminton, bowling, chess, squash, swimming, tennis, cricket and fitness, and six women’s teams for basketball, volleyball, table tennis, tennis, swimming and badminton. The student activities report for the academic year 2007–2008 shows that 106 sporting events were conducted. To satisfy increasing demand, two fitness centers have also been established; students may take part in sessions conducted by professional trainers, in aerobics, yoga, swimming, fitness, squash and the martial arts. Members of the AUS community take part in AUS intramural tournaments and interdormitory competitions. In addition, AUS hosts friendly matches and other major sporting competitions for 50 to 60 local and regional universities. For the past eight years AUS has organized and hosted the Sharjah Ramadan Sports Festival, and 80 percent of the UAE Higher Education Sports Federation annual Figure 5.22 Average Number of Daily Users of the games are also organized and hosted Sports Complex by the university. AUS competes internationally. For example, in the spring of 2007 and 2008 AUS teams participated in the International Sports Festival at the American College of Greece in Athens. In 2008 AUS took the gold medal in the men’s soccer tournament, and three bronze medals. Figure 5.22 shows that the number of Sports Complex users is increasing significantly. This reflects both the increase in the number of AUS community members and also the quality of the services provided. In a self-study student survey, most respondents were generally happy with the sports activities provided by the university. The trend toward great use of the sports complex, however, suggests the need for AUS to expand the facilities and the numbers of staff in order to continue to provide services at the current levels of quality. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS assess the growing
requirements for sports facilities and assign the necessary resources to accommodate those requirements.
5.7.4
Student Residence
Students are encouraged to live on campus; residence halls offer an environment that fosters self-dependence and respect for social and communal standards. As AUS students come from many countries and a wide range of cultures, the residential halls offer exceptional opportunities for learning acceptance and tolerance of cultural diversity. Residence life provides opportunities for students living on campus to improve their leadership, communication and social skills, which reflects on and carries over into their academic development. With the growth in student numbers the number of residential halls has increased. A decade ago there were two halls, accommodating 150 students. In Fall 2007 there were 12 residential halls— eight accommodating 1,140 men and a further four accommodating 50 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
872 women. This means that more than 49 percent of the student body resides on campus. There is great demand on student residences, as 96 percent of available spaces are normally occupied throughout both semesters. One new female dormitory is currently under construction. All residential hall rooms have Internet and direct telephone connections. Halls offer a wide range of facilities including study rooms, computer labs, dining areas, recreational areas, TV rooms, laundry facilities and fitness centers. In addition, the Women’s Welcome Center, located in front of the women’s residential halls, features a beauty salon, a TV room reception area and a mini-mart. Professional staff assistance is available to residents around the clock. Satisfaction with the services of the residence halls is generally high among both students and parents. Prospective occupants are informed about housing rules through the university website before they join AUS, and further information is provided in the Student Handbook, which students receive on arrival. The university’s curfew policy has always been unpopular with resident students. However, it is necessary for the university to have such a policy since it is a requirement of the society in which AUS is based; not only are the parents of resident students in favor of the curfew but it is also felt to be essential in ensuring the safety and security of students. It should be noted that undergraduate students have priority over graduate students in allocating residence rooms. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the
possibility of allocating a specific number of rooms to graduate students and assigning these rooms at the time of enrollment.
5.7.5
Career Advising and Placement Services
The main objective of the university’s Career Advising and Placement Services (CAPS) is to help direct students in choosing their career path. The service provides information about career options and counsels students about career paths throughout their academic careers. In the freshman year, CAPS gives guidance to students who require help in choosing a major. In subsequent years it assists students with job search skills, introduces them to the job market and puts them in contact with employers. CAPS conducts workshops that offer instruction in the writing of curriculum vitae and cover letters, and provides information on internships, networking, interview skills, job search skills and Career Fair preparation. CAPS has also responded to faculty requests by offering workshops for specific groups, such as those for management information systems and engineering management. CAPS advertises its services through e-mails to students and graduates, presentations during orientation, posters and banners, and awareness days in AUS schools and colleges. The service’s website is also instrumental in reaching out to students, graduates and employers. The advertising has been effective, as the number of students visiting the CAPS office increased from 300 in 2004 to 3,050 in 2007. CAPS organizes two annual events, the Open Day and the Career Fair, to bring together students and potential employers. At the Open Day high-level professionals give presentations on developments and challenges in their career areas. Participating AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 51
companies also set up displays and a luncheon is provided, which is attended by faculty and employers, giving attendees the opportunity to network, exchange ideas and establish channels of communication. The Career Fair, which assists students in their job searches, has grown markedly in recent years. Whereas in 2003 only 30 companies attended, in the academic year 2007–2008 105 companies participated, 32 of which opted to act as sponsors and contributed approximately Dhs. 200,000 to the AUS budget. More than 800 students attended this fair and the feedback from participating companies was excellent; they were impressed by the students’ academic standards and their careerrelated skills. Student feedback has also been positive. CAPS recruits employers through a variety of means including direct contact, information from consulates and embassies, employer directories from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and via personal contacts made by CAPS staff. However, in a self-study survey, comments from alumni indicated that CAPS needs to be more proactive in recruiting employers in order to expand the current database. Many alumni felt that the database was deficient and that there were insufficient opportunities to network with other alumni and employers. It should be noted that, as mentioned in Section 5.7.6, the Alumni Contact Directory was published in Fall 2008. Alumni also feel that CAPS could make the job search process easier by arranging for employers to have on-campus interviews with AUS students. The CAPS office is in regular contact with alumni currently in the workforce and is attempting to address these issues.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the need for additional resources to accommodate the expanded services of CAPS and to further improve the quality of services, particularly for student placement.
5.7.6
Alumni Support
Established in Summer 2007, the Office of Development and Alumni Affairs aims to foster relationships between AUS and its alumni by providing opportunities for mutual involvement that will contribute to the success of both. The office also aims to promote a spirit of unity and loyalty among current and former students. To achieve this, the office, in cooperation with the AUS Alumni Association, has organized a number of events, which include a Ramadan Iftar meal for 300 alumni in Abu Dhabi, and the AUS Tenth Anniversary Alumni Reunion, which brought nearly 1,500 of the university’s alumni (half of the total) to the campus. The Ruler of Sharjah presided over this event. In addition, a reliable database for AUS alumni has also been constructed, and the Alumni Contact Directory was published in Fall 2008 and sent out to each alumnus/alumna and made available to members of the campus community. An interactive online alumni forum is also planned, which will offer graduates a way to interact with one another and also with prominent members of the campus community.
5.7.7
Health Services
The University Health Center (UHC) is a vital facility that provides primary health care to students, and faculty and staff and their eligible dependants, and provides emergency health care to all campus residents after working hours, on weekends and during holidays. UHC employs three full-time general practitioners, a full-time dietician nutritionist and a psychologist, four registered nurses and appropriate support staff. 52 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Surveys of the campus community suggest general satisfaction with the services provided.
5.7.8
Cultural Enrichment Events
In the university’s early years, the presentation of classical music events was seen as one way of enriching the cultural life of the campus community. More recently cultural events have become the responsibility of a Figure 5.23 Classical Music Event at AUS Campus committee, and are supported by the Chancellor's budget. In 2007 and 2008 the committee’s aim has been to broaden audience appeal by including a greater variety of events, which have included concerts of popular and tribal music, dramatic performances and lectures by prominent cultural figures. Academic year 2007–2008 saw 11 events that together attracted an audience of some 6,000, with a significant number of students attending.
5 .8
S U M M A RY
Due to the diversity of its student population and the variety of activities and services available, students and other members of the university community have access to a rich extracurricular campus life.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 53
Chapter 6 6 .1
FACULTY
PROFILE AND WORKLOAD DISTRIBUTION
AUS has assembled an outstanding faculty of 331 members (Fall 2007) educated at some of the most prestigious institutions in North America and Europe. About 80 percent received their highest degree from US institutions and over 90 percent from North America. Excluding faculty in the Intensive English Program, over 89 percent of the Fall 2007 full-time faculty held the terminal degree. Including IEP faculty, the figure was 82 percent. Conforming to the AUS mission, faculty members typically have North American teaching experience prior to joining AUS. Nevertheless, faculty come from different parts of the world and 44 nationalities are represented in the faculty body. This is a significant increase from 25 nationalities five years ago. Figure 6.1 shows the distribution of faculty nationalities. It is worth noting that a portion of those with nationality in the US, Canada and the UK have roots in the Middle East. This nationality structure, Figure 6.1 Percentage of Faculty by together with the fact that about 25 Nationality, Fall 2007 percent of faculty are female, helps to assure the manifestation of the university’s mission as a “coeducational institution based upon American models and grounded in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region.” It should be noted, however, that an important portion of faculty have expressed concern that they are not treated fairly, irrespective of gender, race, religion, family status or nationality. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the AUS administration and Faculty
Senate investigate the factors that led an important portion of faculty respondents to indicate that they did not feel they were generally treated fairly irrespective of gender, race, religion, family status or nationality. The number of faculty has increased steadily from 227 in Fall 2004 to 331 in Fall 2007; this reflects an increase in the number of students, and has also resulted in reducing the student/faculty ratio to between 15:1 and 14:1 (calculated using FTE credit hours), in the range targeted by the Board of Trustees. The student/faculty ratio varies significantly, depending upon discipline and pedagogy, ranging from 8:1 to 19:1. In some areas the hiring of additional faculty has not kept pace with rapid student enrollment growth.
54 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
The self-study faculty survey was utilized to approximate the percentage of time spent by faculty on major activities. Figure 6.2 provides a profile of how respondent faculty members indicated that they spend their time: 60 percent on teaching, 25 percent on service and the balance of 15 percent on research. These percentages are consistent with those specified for Figure 6.2 Average Distribution of Faculty teaching, service and scholarship in the Time Spent Faculty Handbook and are very similar to those found by the first self-study; at that time they were attributed to the service load required by a new university. AUS faculty continue to designate a larger than usual portion of their time for service, particularly in assessments for the accreditation requirements of several organizations. This indicates a continuing need to establish shared governance regulations and to support the many activities sponsored by the university. A majority of faculty responding to a self-study survey did not believe that the balance of their responsibilities reflected the AUS mission. Interviews with senior administrators revealed that research and professional development are considered critical factors in considering faculty for promotion and the awarding of rolling contracts. Putting this view together with the distribution of workload may explain the results of self-study surveys that indicate that a significant majority of faculty respondents believe that the policies and procedures concerning faculty evaluation, promotion and contract renewal are not fair. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate make
specific recommendations on service requirements and commitments of faculty and on how the service load might be reduced while maintaining an appropriate level of input into governance issues.
6 .2
FACULTY ACTIVITIES
6.2.1
Teaching
Starting in the academic year 2007–2008, and excluding the Intensive English Program (IEP), the typical teaching load at AUS is nine credit hours per semester. However, faculty at the instructor ranks are required to teach a maximum of 12 credit hours per semester, albeit with only two separate preparations. During Fall Semester 2007 and Spring Semester 2008, late resignations in one department also necessitated 12 credit hour loads for those at professorial ranks. Flexibility in the system, which has worked well for both faculty and academic units, has allowed some faculty to teach more than nine credits in one semester but less than nine in another. With the exception of the IEP, overloads were eliminated for the academic year 2007–2008. Every semester, student evaluations are carried out for each section taught at AUS. After issuing grades, the results are sent to faculty, department heads and Deans. Faculty are required to provide course assessments and complete course profiles at the end of each semester.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 55
As AUS faculty commit a significant portion of their time to teaching, it is also an important component in performance evaluation, whether for merit, contract or promotion purposes. According to the Faculty Handbook, it is expected that 50 to 80 percent of performance weight goes to teaching. The handbook states that “Teaching should be evaluated using Figure 6.3 Faculty View of the Effectiveness of multiple measures, which may include Methods of Teaching Evaluation student surveys, peer evaluations, evaluations by department heads/directors of academic units, preparation of students for subsequent classes, teaching portfolios, and other appropriate means.” Nevertheless, there has been no agreement on a standard format for such evaluation and a significant number of faculty have expressed dissatisfaction with the current measures in place to evaluate teaching. A survey showed the difference between what faculty respondents perceive to be effective tools for evaluating teaching and what they perceive the actual tools used to be. Figure 6.4 Faculty Perception of the Utilization of Methods of Teaching Evaluation Figures 6.3 and 6.4 show that there are differences that merit further investigation. Faculty Senate and Faculty Development Center discussions are consistent with these findings IT IS RECOMMENDED that
the Faculty Senate investigate the reasons why faculty are not satisfied with the teaching evaluation system, and make specific recommendations for improvement.
6.2.2
Scholarly Activities and Professional Development
6.2.2.1 Scholarly Activities The Faculty Handbook outlines the performance expectations for the various ranks of faculty with regard to scholarly activity, stating that “faculty members at the professorial rank of Assistant Professor and above are expected to conduct scholarly activities and to disseminate the results of such activities in appropriate peer reviewed venues.” The handbook defines the term “scholarly activity” as “scholarship directed toward new discovery, investigations resulting in creative and artistic expressions, the evolution of novel and more effective teaching methodologies and materials, and the integration and application of new methodologies in the profession.” AUS faculty receive institutional support for their scholarly activities through seed grants, research grants and sabbatical leave. Policies and guidelines for each of these support tools are given in the Faculty Handbook. Seed grant funds are allocated by the Deans, and research grants and sabbatical leave applications are evaluated by committees of faculty peers. 56 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Dhs./ Faculty
Dhs./ Award
Dhs. awarded
FRG Awards
AUS Eligible Faculty
Academic Year
Table 6.1 and Table 6.2 show the amounts of money available through the faculty research grant and seed grant programs (the latter restricted to 212 42 484,014 11,524 2,283 new faculty). The tables 2003-4 2004-5 221 27 476,559 17,650 2,156 indicate that the amount 240 25 430,181 17,207 1,792 did not increase 2005-6 2006-7 285 38 660,000 17,368 2,316 significantly during the 2007-8 319 28 500,973 17,892 1,570 indicated time period. Very few faculty have Table 6.1 Money Available through Faculty Research Grants sought external grant funds. During the academic year 2006–2007, six faculty members were granted a total of Dhs. 441,376 of external grants ($1 US=3.68 Dhs). Dhs./ Award
Dhs. Awarded
SG Awards
AUS Eligible Faculty
Academic Year
Combining these numbers with the average time allocated by faculty for scholarly activities (15 percent as mentioned above), and the fact that there are relatively few full-time graduate students at AUS, the difficulty that most AUS faculty find 2004-5 221 13 130,880 10,068 in pursuing their scholarly work may 2005-6 240 16 214,471 13,404 be apparent. Nevertheless, AUS 2006-7 285 20 256,080 12,804 faculty register patents; publish Table 6.2 Money Available through Seed Grants books, conference papers and journal articles; participate in international exhibitions and local design projects and exhibitions; and carry out many other scholarly activities. It has, however, proved difficult for the self-study to trace the number and type of these activities as there are no standard procedures for collecting such data. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop
standard procedures to track and document the type and level of research activities undertaken by faculty.
Results of the previous self-study survey indicated that 85 percent of faculty respondents felt that “AUS does not provide an environment suitable for quality research and creative work.” The report recommended that the university “continue to provide, and increase as possible, financial resources to support research, scholarly activities and creative work.” Subsequently, AUS established consecutive entities that focused on developing research activity. The current entity is the Office of Research within the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs, which has a mission that includes promoting research and finding ways to increase student involvement in faculty research. The office is headed by the Coordinator of Research, who is a faculty member. The existence of such entities seems to result in some progress. The current self-study survey revealed that 54.5 percent of faculty respondents disagree that the university provides the support they need to foster their research, scholarship and creative activities. The percentage of faculty that is dissatisfied is, therefore, still significant, even if lower than before. On the other hand, most survey respondents agree that the university provides adequate library AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 57
support and IT support for their research. Smaller percentages found the physical space and research assistance to be adequate. Availability of time is an important factor in faculty scholarly engagement and productivity. The decision to eliminate teaching overloads is one step toward increasing time available to faculty. Flexibility in teaching loads across semesters is another. Course release and sabbatical opportunities can also provide time, and faculty have indicated that they would like to see both increased. The schools/colleges have some flexibility to provide release time for scholarly activities but in practice these have been limited due to student course needs. The significant reductions in student/faculty ratios achieved during the past two years are resulting in reduced class sizes and greater flexibility in teaching assignments. The sabbatical leave program was first implemented in 2004. Since then there has been a gradual increase in the number of leaves granted as the number of faculty eligible to apply for leave has increased and at a pace consistent with the number of applications. (Six years of service to AUS is required before a faculty member becomes eligible for a sabbatical leave.)
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS increase resources and help establish an environment conducive to faculty research and creative work, and that faculty increase their efforts to obtain external funding to support their research and creative work. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the AUS administration and Faculty Senate assess current approaches to in-house funding and identify specific recommendations for improvement so that funds can be used most effectively. 6.2.2.2 Professional Development Recognizing the importance of professional development in the teaching and scholarship of its faculty, AUS encourages professional development activities and supports them through conference grants, possible course release and leave without pay. Subject to availability of funds, faculty can receive up to US$2,500 per year on a competitive basis to travel and attend conferences or take part in other professional activities. The university permits up to one week of absence per semester while classes are in session to attend professional events. Leave without pay may be granted to faculty members on rolling contracts for a maximum of one academic year. Since 2004, 18 faculty members have been granted this opportunity. Policies and procedures for the conducting of professional development activities are clearly set out in the Faculty Handbook. Faculty responses to the self-study survey were split on the issue of adequacy of travel grants, and many indicated that they would like to see increases in the number of course releases.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the AUS administration and Faculty Senate assess current approaches to faculty professional development and identify specific recommendations for improvement so that funds are used most effectively. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS allocate additional resources to increase opportunities and enhance support for faculty professional development.
58 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
6.2.2.3 Faculty Development Center The Faculty Development Center (FDC) was launched in Spring 2007, indicating an increase in institutional resources for faculty development. The center’s current mission is focused on teaching and learning, and it aims to support teaching and professional development of faculty. The center is headed by a faculty member who serves as its coordinator and reports to the Director of the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs. The FDC provides workshops, seminars and teaching/learning circles throughout the academic year on topics related to teaching practices and effectiveness, classroom management, improving student learning, instructional technology and educational research. In a self- study survey of faculty most faculty respondents agreed that the activities of the FDC are adequate for their professional development.
6.2.3
Service
The Faculty Handbook states that all regular faculty members are expected to serve the university by participating in various committees. As shown in Figure 6.2, faculty respondents estimate that they spend 25 percent of their time on committee work/service. Faculty serve on university-level committees, Faculty Senate committees, school/college committees and departmental committees. Faculty also put important effort in the many levels of accreditations requirements and for organizing conferences. In addition to these on-campus service activities, many faculty members also serve on municipal, professional society, voluntary, conference and public service committees and teams. This outlet for service is strongly encouraged by AUS. AUS faculty also serve in AUS research centers that seek to boost engagement with professional communities. The Institute of Materials Systems collaborates with governmental and private sectors with the aim of playing a leading role in materialsrelated issues in the UAE and across the region. The Cisco Regional Networking Academy is run in partnership with Cisco Systems to teach students to design, build and maintain computer networks. The Mechatronics Center seeks to lead research and to promote multidisciplinary research activities among faculty members and graduate students at AUS, and between AUS and universities in the US, Europe and Japan. The AUS Earthquake Observatory uses state-of-the-art equipment and software to record and analyze the region’s earthquake activity, and provides expert opinion on earthquake and seismic hazards and related risks in the UAE and the Arabian Gulf region. The Institute of Urban and Regional Planning and Design advances urban planning as it relates to the local culture and identity of the UAE and the region.
6.3
FACULTY RECRUITMENT AND CONTRACTS
Faculty recruitment and hiring procedures are outlined in the Faculty Handbook. Available positions are announced on the university website and are advertised in the media. Applications are submitted to the appropriate search committee representing the faculty body of its academic unit. The applications are also made available to departmental faculty. The committee carries out initial screening, taking into consideration written faculty comments. The search committees of some academic units carry out phone interviews at this stage to aid in the creation of a shortlist of candidates, which is then AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 59
passed to the school/college Dean. It is the responsibility of the Dean to arrange for inperson interviews with shortlisted candidates. When feasible, candidates may be invited for on-campus interviews, but most are interviewed by the Deans during special trips dedicated to recruitment. Interview reports brought back by the Dean are shared with the search committees and the Dean then recommends to the VCAA the candidate(s) to whom an offer is to be made. Although most units would prefer to conduct on-campus interviews, the location of AUS makes it particularly expensive to invite candidates from North America. When questioned about their involvement in the recruitment process, many respondents agreed that they had been involved in new faculty decisions but were less comfortable that they had significant input on the recruitment of department heads. In view of these responses, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the AUS administration
and Faculty Senate review the procedures and assess their implementation in the hiring of faculty and department heads.
Faculty are typically hired for a three-year term that is renewable for a further three years. Prior to the end of the second contract, the faculty member will normally go through an in-depth evaluation process. If successful, he/she then receives a rolling contract that indicates a commitment by the university for continuous employment. Due to UAE labor law there is no tenure at AUS. A faculty member on a rolling contract always has three years’ notice in advance if his/her contract is to be terminated. Faculty who fail an evaluation process receive a one-year terminal contract effective the following fall. Faculty on rolling contracts go through an in-depth performance evaluation every five years. The Faculty Handbook is not clear on whether a faculty member has the right to apply for a rolling contract prior to the end of the second three-year term contract. Rare cases were reported where faculty were denied this opportunity. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate address the right of faculty members to apply for rolling contracts prior to the end of the second three-year term contract.
6 .4
FACULTY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Promotion, contract renewal, award of rolling contract and merit raises are based on performance evaluations. Merit increases are recommended to the Dean by the department head. Contract renewal —usually in the final year of the initial three-year contract— is determined by the Dean and the VCAA in consultation with the department head. However, promotion and the awarding of a rolling contract require an in-depth evaluation that Figure 6.5 Success Rate for Promotion and Rolling Contract includes peer review. The Faculty Senate has developed a rigorous procedure that includes the selection of peer review members. Promotion requires the involvement of external reviewers. Faculty are evaluated in the three basic categories of their work: teaching, scholarship and service. Faculty who receive a negative outcome have the right 60 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
to appeal through the grievance procedure as set out in the Faculty Handbook. Figure 6.5 shows the success rate for promotion and rolling contract award in different schools during three consecutive academic years. Table 6.3 shows the number and percentage of faculty on rolling or term contracts for the academic year of the writing of this report. The self-study survey and interview results suggest that faculty have a generally negative attitude toward the whole performance Term Rolling Total Percent on evaluation process, from the system of Contract Contract Rolling Contract informing them about the procedures to 76 64 140 46% procedural transparency and fairness. IT CAS
IS RECOMMENDED that the AUS administration and the Faculty Senate investigate the reasons for the negative attitude toward the performance evaluation process, and take corrective action.
CEN SAD SBM Total
32 13 53 174
26 18 19 127
58 31 72 301
45% 58% 26% 42%
Table 6.3 Faculty Contracts 2007–2008
It is to the university’s credit that early in its history it put into place rigorous evaluations of faculty. In retrospect, it appears that faculty are over-evaluated and that time spent preparing materials for evaluation and the processes themselves are overly burdensome to faculty and administrators alike. In response, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, college/school Deans, VCAA and Chancellor held a retreat in Spring 2007 that focused on annual evaluation. The need for change was unanimously agreed. As follow-up, the Deans and VCAA held a retreat during Fall 2007. During the academic year 2007–2008 the Deans, working with faculty in their colleges/schools, developed plans for modifying the annual review process. Those plans were discussed with the outgoing and incoming Senate leadership during Spring Semester 2008 at a meeting of the Council of Deans. Some changes were implemented. A follow-up session of the SEC, the Deans, VCAA and Chancellor is anticipated during academic year 2008–2009.
6.5
FACULTY RETENTION
Semester Hired Fall 2000 Fall 2001 Fall 2002 Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007
# of Faculty Hired
48 39 48 33 34 51 57 80
% Returned in Fall 2001
% Returned in Fall 2002
% Returned in Fall 2003
% Returned in Fall 2004
% Returned in Fall 2005
% Returned in Fall 2006
% Returned in Fall 2007
81.25%
62.50% 89.74%
62.50% 74.36% 93.75%
58.33% 69.23% 83.33% 93.94%
54.17% 46.15% 77.08% 75.76% 76.47%
50.00% 46.15% 70.83% 72.73% 70.59% 88.24%
47.92% 41.03% 64.58% 69.70% 61.76% 76.47% 84.21%
Table 6.4 AUS Faculty Retention by Semester Hired
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 61
The retention of quality faculty is an important factor in the university’s mission to be the preeminent institution of higher education in the region. The university strives to retain faculty by several means; these include salary, benefits package and campus life. Table 6.4 shows the retention rate for faculty by the semester of hiring.
6.5.1
Salaries
Tables 6.5 through 6.10 show how salaries at AUS have Professor $90,061 changed over the past years relative to AAUP average Associate Professor $79,713 salaries for Category IIA (Master’s) institutions For this Assistant Professor $63,657 evaluation only the salaries of full-time AUS faculty Instructor $46,232 whose major regular assignment (at least 50 percent) is All Combined $70,250 instruction. These data demonstrate that progress has been made at all professorial ranks, especially during the Table 6.5 AUS Faculty Average past two years. In the most recent two years, particular Annual Salary in US$ by Rank, 2007–2008 progress has been made with regard to the salaries of professors and associate professors. This was accomplished, in part, by using a portion of the 2007–2008 salary increase pool to assign an across-the-board dollar amount to all professors and associate professors. In contrast, ground was lost at the instructor rank between 2006–2007 and 2007–2008 despite providing some funds to that rank. For 2008–2009, salary allocations include directing a portion of the increase toward those with salaries below $50,000. That will affect a few assistant professors, but primarily instructors. It also should be borne in mind that there is currently no income tax in the UAE, and all US citizens receive the direct financial benefit of an approximately $85,000 salary exclusion allowance upon which no US income tax is imposed. Therefore, a large portion of the salary of most faculty who are US citizens and Green Card holders is tax-free income.
Maximum 75th percentile Median 25th percentile Minimum
$117,303 $82,456 $72,975 $53,168 $36,000
Table 6.6 Distribution of Faculty Salary, 2007–2008
Comparison between faculty salaries at AUS and those reported by AAUP are useful, but do not provide information about the situation in the Gulf region. Faculty and administrators alike receive only anecdotal information about salaries offered to potential faculty by universities in the region—as much as 50 percent higher than paid by AUS. On the other hand, there are universities in the region from which AUS has been able to recruit faculty with ease. Although at this point only two AUS faculty have been lost to much higher paying institutions, it would be AAUP AUS very desirable to have information about the Professor $91,197 $84,667 salaries of faculty elsewhere in the Middle East. Associate Professor $69,363 $73,564 $56,313 $60,868 The data are, however, not available; none of Assistant Professor $45,164 $45,944 these countries has reporting requirements from Instructor $69,062 $67,080 which data are made public. In addition, All Combined institutions have no history of sharing Table 6.7 Comparison of AAUP and AUS information and are unlikely to begin doing so, Average Faculty Salaries, 2006–2007 a factor that stems from the fact that regional 62 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
universities tend to be recruiting from the same, often limited, pool of applicants and they do not want to lose whatever competitive advantage they may perceive they have. Salaries for newly hired faculty are competitive; few offers are declined on the basis of salary alone. To meet market demands, however, newly hired faculty have sometimes received a higher salary than existing faculty with comparable experience. Similarly, newly hired faculty with limited experience have been hired at or near salaries of continuing faculty with greater experience. Since academic year 2004–2005, a portion of salary increase funds has been allocated to address both these internal equity issues, as well as disparities with outside market conditions. As noted above, some faculty ranks have been provided with increments to better align them with AAUP salaries. Market factors are also an issue the university addresses through its salary structure. The university has been very successful in hiring first-choice faculty in high demand areas such as business and engineering by paying premium salaries. A natural, and unfortunate, consequence is large disparities between disciplines in one college or Figure 6.6 AAUP Salaries Compared to AUS Average Salary, school and those in 2002–2007 another. The Office of Institutional Research and the office of the VCAA are assembling information that will compare AUS and US salary data by discipline. (The last time such a study was completed was in 2005). The information will help the university identify areas where AUS salaries are out of line compared to those of US counterparts. The fact that AUS is located in the UAE leads to additional salary considerations, including private-sector options, public-sector salary increases and high inflation. The continued, exceptional growth in the UAE and some other GCC countries leads to high demand for engineers, architects and finance specialists, in particular. Salaries offered in the private sector are substantially higher than typical academic salaries. Arguments can be made that the university should be using the local private sector as the benchmark for salaries in some disciplines, whereas others argue that the differentials between privatesector and academe as seen in the UAE are not substantially different from those in the US. In addition, it is not uncommon to see newspaper headlines describing 20 to 70 percent salary increases in the public sector.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that in addition to AAUP comparisons, AUS continue to attempt to obtain data for faculty and professional salaries in the region.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 63
6.5.2
Benefits
To attract and retain faculty, AUS provides a number of benefits, including free oncampus housing inclusive of most utilities, an annual 13th month indemnity payment (which was increased to 10 percent of the base salary in academic year 2008–2009) in lieu of retirement pension to all full-time employees who have completed at least one year of continuous service, on-campus health facilities and tuition for undergraduate study for up to two eligible dependents at AUS. (Staff who are not provided on-campus housing currently receive 35 percent of base pay as a housing allowance). There are additional fringe benefits, which currently follow one of two plans. Two plans remain in effect until August 2009, when the original plan expires. The original plan applies to those faculty who were hired before the academic year 2004–2005 and who wish to continue in it until August 2009 (faculty were given an option to shift to the new plan). Under this system, the university pays for the schooling of up to two children to a maximum of Dhs. 35,000 per child, provides health insurance, life insurance and annual leave tickets for the faculty member and dependents. The second plan— the “self-directed plan”— was introduced in the academic year 2004– 2005 and applies to all faculty hired since that time and to those existing faculty who have opted into it. This system provides a sum equivalent to 25 percent of the base salary, out of which faculty pay for child education, health insurance and annual travel tickets as applicable. Any portion of the 25 percent not used is encashed at the beginning of the following academic year. Circumstances particularly relevant to AUS employees by virtue of the institution’s location are school costs, home leaves and housing costs. Housing costs do not affect faculty directly because housing is provided. For staff, however, it is a major issue. A deficiency in mid-income-level housing and the rapid growth in mid-income-level expatriates have driven large increases in housing costs for staff members. The second major inflationary effect in the UAE, and one comparable in magnitude to the housing issue, is schooling for children. The original benefits plan was viewed by the Board of Trustees as providing a substantial benefit to those with families and insufficient benefit to those without. (In the extremes, benefits approached 100 percent of salary for the former group and as little as 5 percent for the latter). The new 25 percent benefit plan meant a fixed increase in salary, but each faculty member became responsible for their family-related costs. This made the benefits unattractive to faculty members with children. As a result, the pool of hiring became smaller. The 25 percent benefit plan leveled the field but, many argue, will lead to a preponderance of faculty without families, due both to school costs and the cost for North American faculty to periodically take their families home. The two Deans interviewed about the benefit plan issue stated that the self-directed plan reduces the university’s chances of hiring faculty with families. They agreed that it attracts more single applicants and those with only small families. In response to a question about whether the current benefits package is sufficient to ensure that the best faculty available can be hired, the Deans gave the following responses: 64 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
AUS benefits are competitive for two groups: 1. Singles or couples with no children. 2. Couples with older/mature children that are no longer dependents; mature faculty in the twilight of their career. However, the current benefit structure is not sufficient for families with more than two children. Candidates do reject offers. [One school/college] hired 20 faculty members: five candidates rejected offers because of: a) teaching load, and b) benefit package. AUS administration is aware of the possibility of losing good faculty because of educational costs for dependents. Knowing that the original benefits plan contains features that are standard among benefits plans offered in the region, the AUS administration has recognized some disadvantages in the self-directed plan. In an interview, Chancellor Thompson suggested that, “One area that needs review [is] educational costs at elementary and secondary schools. The AUS point of view is that this issue needs to be reviewed before 2009.� Currently, a Faculty Senate committee is reviewing a modification scheme for the selfdirected plan with the aim of making it attractive to faculty with families. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS compare its benefits plan to those offered in the region and establish a benefits plan that attracts and retains quality faculty, including those with dependents.
During Spring 2008, the Faculty Senate presented to the administration a plan to address educational expenses. The plan was described to the Board of Trustees at its June 2008 meeting, but was thought not to be financially feasible (up to Dhs. 100,000 or $27,174 per family for education). The board did, however, take the step of assisting with educational costs by approving an annual US $2,000 allocation per child enrolled in KG2 through grade 12, up to a family maximum of three children, effective in September 2009. Another important benefit is medical insurance. The current medical coverage and its provider, Al-Buhaira National Insurance, have received mixed reviews from faculty and staff alike. Investigations into alternative medical plans, and the tradeoffs of coverage and cost, continue. Recently the university reached an agreement with the University of Sharjah dental clinic for provision of dental services at quite low cost. The quality of this service is yet to be assessed. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the
reason for the dissatisfaction with the medical insurance scheme and take corrective action. The benefits provided by the university are not at a level that all employees find satisfactory. The Board of Trustees is committed to their continuing review.
6.5.3
Campus Living
6.5.3.1 Advantages and Disadvantages With minimal exceptions that occurred in Fall 2008, all faculty members are required to live on-campus and AUS provides free furnished housing with free utilities and maintenance. No doubt the proximity to the central campus contributes to the strong engagement of AUS faculty with students academically and in terms of co- and AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 65
extracurricular activities. Some of the advantages to faculty of living on-campus include proximity to the workplace and campus facilities— including stores, a bank, sports and leisure facilities, the University Health Center and the day care center—as well as minimal housing costs. Living on campus releases faculty from the stress of housing search, housing maintenance and traffic and transportation problems. From the university perspective, the requirement that faculty live on campus reduces costs compared to a housing allowance as is provided to staff. A self-study survey showed that most faculty respondents would not wish to live offcampus even if given the choice, while a few would wish to do so. This may reflect the fact that in relation to other residential communities, the AUS campus is considered to be excellent. However, as an increasing number of high-quality residential communities are being developed in the UAE, the campus is losing its advantage of quality, particularly as the shortage of land on campus has increased the density of new faculty housing and the amount of green space is significantly reduced. Some faculty find that there are disadvantages to campus living. Issues raised include limited stimulation in the campus environment, a desire to separate “work” and “home” lives, the closure or partial closure of campus facilities during semester breaks and the difficulties of reaching downtown Sharjah and Dubai due to the ever-increasing amount of traffic. Some would prefer to purchase property in Dubai if a housing allowance were provided to those living off campus.
As a competitive tool to attract and retain high-quality faculty, IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS enhance the quality of its residential campus to keep up with regional improvements. 6.5.3.2 Quality of Community Life Because of its housing policy requirement that faculty live on-campus, AUS is a residential community in addition to a university. In Spring 2008, there were 388 housing units of different sizes, accommodating all full-time faculty, most senior administrators and a small proportion of staff, along with family members. This number of units is expanding as more housing units for faculty and staff have been approved for construction. As home to hundreds of people of different ages, the university provides facilities to enhance the quality of life for its residential community. A leisure center with swimming pool and fitness room is dedicated to residents. Several children’s playgrounds are located in housing areas. Residents can also use the sports complex facilities, although priority is given to students. However, a number of faculty have indicated that they would like another leisure center on campus. In Fall Semester 2008, following demand from faculty, the university appointed a Director of Wellness with the responsibility of improving overall standards and quality of life within the AUS community, in the workplace and socially on a day-to-day basis. Professionally guided weekly physical training programs for faculty and their family members are conducted, and further sports and social activities are expected in future semesters. It is worth noting that in a self-study survey, a large percentage of faculty 66 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
respondents stated that they regard quality of residential life as being as important as a competitive salary in continuing their commitment to AUS. Few respondents indicated that they viewed quality of residential life as more important than a competitive salary. As
a competitive tool to attract and retain quality faculty, IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS capitalize on the advantages of its on-campus residential policy and continue to support organized activities for its resident community to enhance the quality of community life. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that residents of the AUS campus have access to sports facilities equal to those of AUS students. 6.5.3.3 Safety and Security One of the advantages for faculty in working at AUS is the feeling of safety and security on campus. The UAE is generally regarded as having a very low crime rate, and the campus is gated and guarded by Sharjah police and Amiri guards. In addition, AUS contracts a private security company to patrol the campus and buildings. The AUS campus, while generally safe, does not necessarily meet international safety standards, as many of its facilities were designed and constructed without being reviewed for safety according to such standards. The university has a safety officer. Various emergency plans are established and are available on the university website, but most faculty members are not aware of the existence of such plans. The university established the Safety Enforcement Division in January 2007 to put policies and procedures in place and to coordinate with the Sharjah Civil Defense Department, the Municipality and the Protective Medicine Department. Regulatory food inspections are also conducted to ensure that the food outlets on campus are following safety measures when it comes to cleanliness and hygiene.
Bearing in mind the added pedagogical value of having and demonstrating international standards, IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS determine costs and recommend to the Board of Trustees a projected timetable for retrofitting to ensure that facilities meet international standards for safety and security. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS disseminate, implement and assess safety and security procedures and regulations that follow international standards. 6.5.3.4 Housing Policy Housing policies, particularly in terms of who has priority for the various sizes and styles of housing units, has been a topic of discussion among faculty for several years. During that time several housing policies have been proposed by Senate committees but until Spring 2007 none received endorsement by the Faculty Senate. The senate recommendation from Spring 2007 was largely implemented during the summer of 2007. In an interview held during the 2007–2008 academic year, Chancellor Thompson stated that he was interested to see the policy consistently and fairly applied, and to see a system that was generally agreed upon. A revision of the 2007 policy was approved by the Senate in Spring 2008 and implementations began during Summer 2008. Yet, some housingrelated policies remain unclear. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Faculty Senate
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 67
develop fair and transparent administration-approved policies for all housingrelated services.
6.6
ADJUNCT FACULTY
In Fall Semester 2008 there were 28 adjunct faculty working at AUS, representing 8.9 percent of the total faculty head count. In Fall Semester 2007 there were 17 adjuncts, representing about 5 percent of the total faculty headcount. Adjuncts are typically hired to provide specialized expertise that does not exist among regular faculty. However, in CAS, adjuncts are also hired to help teach introductory courses. Adjunct positions of the latter kind are advertised in the local press, and candidates are normally interviewed and selected collaboratively between the department head and Dean. Minimum adjunct qualifications follow those of the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. For introductory courses, a master’s degree is required, and for upper level courses a terminal qualification (PhD, EdD, MFA, etc.) is needed. Exceptions are possible with extensive professional experience and approval by the Ministry of Higher Education’s Commission on Academic Accreditation (CAA). Adjunct faculty performance is evaluated each semester by the department head and reviewed by the Dean. For teaching a three-hour undergraduate course adjuncts are remunerated a minimum of US $4,000 and a typical maximum of $5,000; those with a master’s degree start at the low end. There are exceptions to the maxima for particularly noteworthy faculty. Compensation for a graduate course is multiplied by 1.2. The rate of compensation is increased when adjuncts have served for multiple semesters.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS clearly define and consistently apply criteria for hiring adjunct faculty and evaluating their performance.
68 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Chapter 7
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS
The vision of the Founder of AUS includes the aim of the university joining other institutions of higher education in seeking “to reshape fundamentally the minds of our youth to enable them to address the challenges of life using the scientific method.” The university’s mission includes the offering of “academic programs that are equivalent to those at leading institutions of higher education in the United States.” Moreover, AUS seeks to integrate “liberal studies, professional education, and co-curricular and extracurricular learning experiences to provide its graduates both breadth and depth of knowledge.” The various academic programs offered by AUS strive to materialize these aims. The programs are affiliated with two colleges and two schools: College of Arts and Sciences (CAS), College of Engineering (CEN), School of Architecture and Design (SA&D) and School of Business and Management (SBM). These schools and colleges offer 22 bachelor’s degrees (with 39 minors) and eight master’s degrees, as shown in Table 7.1. The table shows in addition the number of credit hours, the number of degrees conferred and areas of concentration. The table indicates general stability but also some flexibility in terms of offerings and credit hours. In June 2008 the university was informed that the CAA granted initial accreditation for five additional master’s degrees in chemical, civil, computer, electrical and mechanical engineering. Descriptions of those programs will appear in the 2008–2009 online version and the 2009–2010 print version of the AUS Graduate Catalog. The annual academic calendar comprises two 16 week semesters, Fall and Spring (in addition to a week’s mid-semester break), as well as a summer session of six weeks and one of three weeks. The latter typically is used for special courses. That the academic calendar is longer than at many US institutions reflects UAE Ministry of Higher Education requirements.
7.1
PRE-COLLEGE AND PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS
AUS attracts students from a wide range of academic and linguistic backgrounds. The university recognizes secondary school certificates awarded by ministries of education and private secondary schools that are recognized by their host country. It also accepts certificates awarded by recognized qualification authorities, and national and international boards (e.g., American-style High School Diploma, International Baccalaureate, Pakistani Board(s) certificates, Iranian certificates). Due to this diversity, AUS takes additional steps to ensure a minimum standard of academic readiness among freshmen.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 69
BS Chemistry
Number of credit hours needed based on catalog/ Number of degrees conferred*# 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08*^ College of Arts and Sciences 120
BS Environmental Science
128/3
125/11
125/13
121/6
BA English Language and Literature
120/4
120/5
120/11
120/11
BA International Studies
120/16
120/20
120/22
120/21
BA Mass Communication
120/27
120/56
120/66
120/71
Degree
BS Mathematics MA TESOL MA Translation and Interpreting B of Architecture B of Interior Design BS Architectural Studies BS Design Management BS of Multimedia Design BS Visual Communication Master of Urban Planning
BS Business Administration BS Finance BS Management Information Systems BA Economics BA Public Administration MBA
36/2 36/6 36/10 36/3 36/4 36/10 School of Architecture and Design 172/26 172/24 172/20 139/5 139/13 139/6 145/2 NA/1 120/11 120/14 120/14 122/18 122/17 122/10 122/23 122/17 122/26 48/2 48/8 48/5 School of Business Management 123/134
123/151
Concentrations
Environmental Biology and Ecosystems, Chemistry and Analysis English Language, English Literature International Relations, International Economics, Arab Studies a Global Context, Western Studies Advertising, Journalism, Public Relations
122 36/5 36/2 172/42 139/13 120/17 122/18 122/15 48/1
123/191
123/228
123/5
123/8
123/7
123/13
123/16
123/20
123/16
123/4
120/7 120/9
120/8 120/18
120/6 120/6
120/3 120/2
48/13
51/25
51/19
51/20
MPA Gulf Executive Master of Public Administration
Accounting, Economics, Finance, Management, Management Information Systems, Marketing
Finance, Human Resource Management, Supply Chain Mngt.
51 40
College of Engineering* BS Chemical Engineering 140/18 140/21 140/34 140/49 BS Civil Engineering 140/14 140/24 140/27 140/50 BS Computer Engineering 140/42 140/34 140/40 140/29 BS Electrical Engineering 140/37 140/52 140/52 140/82 BS Mechanical Engineering 140/10 140/24 140/28 140/31 BS Computer Science** 130/37 130/33 130/32 130/20 MS Engineering Systems 36/6 36/17 36/11 36 or 39 /49 Management MS Mechatronics Engineering 36/6 36/11 36/7 36/26 * Was a school until ** This program *#Degree-conferred-academic year consists of *^Does not include 2007-2008 academic was at one time in Summer 1, Summer II, Fall & Spring semesters Summer I & Summer year. CAS. in a consecutive order. II 2008 graduates.
Table 7.1 Degree Program Offerings 70 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
7.1.1
Intensive English Program
As English is the medium of instruction at AUS, competence in English is necessary for student success. Students who do not have the required TOEFL score (530 on the paper-based exam for Fall 2007 and Fall 2008) but who otherwise satisfy the university’s admissions standards may be admitted to the Intensive English Program (IEP). The mission of the IEP is to increase student language proficiency to a level suitable for undergraduate study, including achieving the TOEFL score required for matriculation into university courses, and to enhance students’ academic skills to enable them to function successfully in their first-year course work. Further details regarding the IEP are provided in Section 5.1.1.
7.1.2
Placement Tests and Remedial Courses
All admitted freshman students are required to sit for placement tests appropriate to their intended majors during orientation week. The type and number of tests required by each student is shown in Table 7.2.
Table 7.2 Placement Tests by Major
The remedial courses are designed to address student weakness as indicated by placement tests. These courses— offered within CAS— are considered to be appropriate in preparing students for their chosen program of study. Four remedial math courses (MTH 001, 002, 003 and 004) are offered for engineering, business, and architecture and interior design majors, in addition to a physics course (PHY 001) for engineering majors. A writing course (WRI 001) is offered by the Department of Writing Studies. Students earn credits for attending these courses but they are not counted toward graduation. There is an assessment procedure for placement tests and remedial courses. For example, during Spring Semester 2008 the physics department set up a committee of three faculty members to reevaluate the physics placement test and the PHY 001 course. The Department of Writing Studies monitors the English placement test, making revisions to it each year as appropriate. In addition, a recent evaluation of the persistence rates of students placed in the WRI 001 courses as new freshmen along with those students that matriculated into WRI 001 from the IEP was conducted. The results indicated that revisions to the curriculum should be considered. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 71
continue to periodically assess and improve as appropriate the effectiveness of placement tests and remedial courses.
7.2
UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS
7.2.1
Development and Termination of Programs
New programs are derived from the mission of the university and the needs of its students. The mission includes undergraduate curricula with strong liberal arts foundations. Early in the institution’s history, professional programs were emphasized; only relatively recently have programs in a variety of liberal arts disciplines been added or begun to be developed. For example, recent additions include the traditional natural sciences of biology and chemistry, as well as mathematics; the expansion of social science offerings is under consideration. A fine and performing arts “program” has also been started, which comprises courses in art, theater studies and music. Curricular additions such as petroleum engineering, landscape architecture and public administration are but a few examples of programs recently developed, in process or under consideration in response to regional needs. The development of the first programs offered at AUS were patterned after those of US institutions that provided assistance to AUS—particularly American University in Washington, DC, and for engineering curricula, Texas A&M. With maturation of the university came the establishment of processes and procedures for independent program development, including formation of the first university curriculum committee in Fall 2004 and a graduate curriculum committee in Fall 2007 (prior to that graduate curricula were discussed at meetings of the graduate program directors). In all curricular matters, faculty are the primary party responsible for development and approval. Since AUS is nearly 90 percent tuition-dependent, the fiscal viability of potential programs is a consideration. In some cases, majors can be developed at relatively low cost since most of the resources are in place due to the department’s service role. In other cases, substantial additional resources are required; those costs are weighed against both potential income and the program’s importance to the mission of the university. Thus, it is recognized that not all programs important to the mission will cover their costs by the revenue generated, but it also is recognized that not all desirable programs can be added to the university’s menu. As the university is a young institution, relatively few of its academic programs have been cancelled. Criteria for cancellation could include a poor record of job, professional or graduate school placements; an inability to hire appropriate faculty; a lack of student interest; financial considerations; or failure to achieve accreditation from the CAA and/or other appropriate accreditation. AUS has a clear and documented process for the development of programs, as shown in the University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee Guide. AUS recently developed a documented process for the termination of programs and for the assessment of programs with low enrollment.
72 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
7.2.2
Development of Curricula
The curricula of the university are based on American models of higher education. Programs in architecture, business and engineering are patterned after those of US institutions and developed and refined to meet North American accreditation standards. For example, engineering programs have recently received ABET accreditation, business programs are pursuing AACSB accreditation, and the architecture department has begun the accreditation process with NAAB. Similarly, the recently-developed chemistry major follows the guidelines of the ACS-CPT. As is the case with North American universities, AUS graduates enter the workforce, attend graduate schools and enroll in professional certification programs. Curricular development and improvement is guided by these multiple student goals and benefits from the input of a variety of national advisory councils, current and prospective employers, and alumni. Programs that are intended to meet the needs of the region are particularly sensitive to these requirements, while at the same time working within the context of American models. Curricular development is guided by both internal and external processes and evaluations. Although the initial impetus for a given program may come from a variety of sources, the curricula are developed through the expertise of faculty. In some cases, consultants are hired to assist with curricular development. Proposed curricula, goals, outcomes and assessment measures are vetted at the department level, by college/school and university curriculum committees and the Council of Deans. All undergraduate majors and graduate programs must be accredited by the CAA. CAA accreditation processes are rigorous, patterned after those of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. All program accreditations are reviewed on site by a visiting team of two to three members, generally including at least two from North American universities. Re-accreditation is driven by assessment and program improvement. More detailed information about this process is discussed later.
7.2.3
General Education Requirements
7.2.3.1 Stated Objectives, Depth and Breadth The details of the general education requirement (GER) course objectives are outlined in the 2007–2008 AUS Undergraduate Catalog, although the objectives are not clearly stated. The catalog states that the GERs are derived from the AUS Mission Statement. In that sense, “liberal studies and professional education are integrated to give students both breadth and specialization in their academic programs. The general education program is designed to inspire and invigorate the intellectual and creative potential of students and to encourage them to conceptualize, reflect and act.” Every student must successfully complete a minimum of 42 credits of general education requirements, with a minimum grade of C- to graduate. To this end, AUS currently requires its students to take courses in: • Arabic heritage (minimum of 3 credits). This requirement is designed to further students’ understanding of the importance and relevance of Arab culture and civilization and its historical development. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 73
•
• • • • •
English language competency (minimum of 12 credits). This requirement is aimed at equipping students to write with a level of mastery equal to the demands of university course work, and helping them acquire the critical reading and comprehension skills necessary for all their courses. Mathematics and/or Statistics (minimum of 6 credits). This requirement is intended to equip students with mastery of quantitative reasoning and university-level mathematical skills. Information literacy skills. Information literacy refers to a set of critical research skills that enable students to identify, locate, retrieve and evaluate information resources in a variety of formats. Computer literacy skills. All AUS students must be computer literate. Science (minimum of 6 credits). All AUS students must have university-level knowledge of scientific reasoning and the experimental sciences. Humanities and social sciences (minimum of 15 credits, of which at least six must be in the humanities and six in the social sciences).
Almost all AUS students are second language users of English. Thus, the required credits for English language competency are higher than the norm in universities in the US. Consequently, 30 credits are available to achieve the required disciplinary breadth. The fact that GERs are fulfilled in 23 disciplines suggests breadth of study is available to students, but the variety of courses in humanities and social sciences remains limited. Further, though breadth is available, the present ways by which a student may satisfy the GERs does not ensure that all students achieve that breadth. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS encourage a broader choice of general education requirements to strengthen the breadth of education in a university dominated by professional programs. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that, as resources permit, AUS consider expanding course offerings in the arts, humanities, social sciences and physical education. 7.2.3.2 The Relation of GERs to the AUS Mission
Part of the AUS mission is “to achieve and maintain preeminence as a coeducational institution based upon American models and grounded in the history and culture of the Arab Gulf region.” AUS therefore seeks in its GER programs to address these twin cultural models. Models of US university education span a wide range. With regards to the role of general education or core programs, the American models generally agree on the desired outcomes as stated in the Harvard Task Force Report, which includes outcomes such as the ability to think and write clearly and effectively and the achievement of depth in some fields. In addition, many models of American education place emphasis on “inculcating the values of citizenship,” familiarity with computer technology, competence in a foreign language and physical activity. The United Arab Emirates has adopted an outlook that retains traditions that are seen as vital in preserving cultural identity in the face of major demographic challenges, while embracing global liberal trends. Three trends (and choices) that shape contemporary discourse in the Arabian Gulf region are attitudes described as liberal, conservative and Islamist:
74 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
•
The liberal agenda tends to favor tolerance for diversity within the broad guidelines of the law and social conventions. Some aspects of life, especially in the dominant economic sphere, are comparable to the free market conditions of the most highly developed countries.
•
A more conservative approach aims to preserve more traditional structures, such as gender segregation in public schools, the role accorded to women and the general separation of the private realm from the public sphere.
•
An Islamist segment of society seeks a more spiritual alternative to what are seen as largely secular and materialistic Western models.
All three directions— liberal, conservative and Islamist— are present and merge in the UAE. The challenges posed by the extraordinary pace of development affect all aspects of society and life. They range from issues of the environment to political empowerment, from impacts on work ethic and health to moral norms. They affect business opportunities and military strategy. They impact practical matters such as traffic and lifestyle issues relating to gender roles and sexuality. Contemporary culture in the UAE is thus shaped by competing values and choices. General education courses should participate in this discourse more fully. Self-study survey results revealed that while most students seem to have a favorable opinion of the GERs, the question of the usefulness of the Arabian Gulf culture component received unusually low ratings, as only 24 percent of student respondents agreed that “The university’s general education requirements help me learn more about Arabian Gulf culture,” while 36 percent disagreed. Regarding the Arabic Gulf topic components of the GER course offerings, the Arabic program’s courses deal with Arab heritage, and in Spring 2007 some 870 students— an impressive number— took a course in the Arabic heritage segment. However, few if any courses focus on issues of contemporary Arabian Gulf culture. Consequently, the actively debated challenges briefly outlined above are not, or not sufficiently, addressed by courses offered in the Arab heritage segment. Course enrollment data for Spring and Fall 2007 in comparison with courses listed in the undergraduate catalog reveal the small number of arts and sciences courses that focus on Arabian Gulf topics. Only five courses appear to deal with contemporary issues related to the UAE, and in most of them local focus is tenuous.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Arabic heritage requirement be revised so that it better addresses the contemporary challenges of the region. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the general education requirement program on Arabian Gulf culture be strengthened and more courses offered that reflect the central discourse affecting this society. 7.2.3.3 Development and Assessment The current general education requirements (GERs) have remained largely unchanged since the early days of the institution, and the previous self-study report recommended AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 75
that “a university-wide committee on general education be considered to review the general education course offerings in the context of the mission and objectives of AUS.” Material gathered during the current self-study suggests that there are no comprehensive mechanisms in place for the assessment of GERs. Assessment of courses that are counted as GERs is limited to the instructor/department level. The University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee reviews courses when they are proposed for the catalog; however, the committee has not evaluated the courses as GERs per se, but rather to determine if they meet university standards. IT IS RECOMMENDED that a
university-wide mechanism be developed to assess the effectiveness of the general education requirements and suggest improvements as appropriate.
The previous self-study report also recommended that “By providing an American educational model, which includes emphasis on the liberal arts…the university has the opportunity to more comprehensively advance democratic discourse through the core curriculum.” There is no evidence to suggest that AUS has engaged in efforts to advance democratic discourse since the recommendation was made. IT IS RECOMMENDED
that AUS explore opportunities to help advance democratic discourse through its general education requirements. The self-study conducted several surveys to assess faculty and student perception on the value of the general education requirements. As Figure 7.1 demonstrates, faculty responses to survey questions about whether general education requirements prepare students for their major course work are mixed.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS inform faculty through workshops, and students through orientation week, of the connection of general education to majors. The Educational Testing Service (ETS) exam and the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress (MAPP) were administered to a pilot group of juniors with a GPA of 3.0 and above, and Figure 7.1 Faculty Responses to Statements subsequently the incoming freshman class. Regarding whether GER Subjects Prepare The exam measures four general education Students for their Major skills (critical thinking, reading, writing and math) in one examination. The skills measured by the MAPP test for new freshmen are grouped into proficiency levels: three proficiency levels for writing, three for mathematics, and three for the combined set involved in reading and critical thinking. The results were classified in three proficiency classifications. A student classified as marginal is one whose test results do not provide enough evidence to classify the student either as proficient or as not proficient. The results for the AUS students who took the MAPP indicated that 29 percent are proficient, 29 percent are marginal and 41 percent are not proficient at Reading Level 1. In addition, 9 percent of students scored at the proficient level in Reading Level 2 while 1 percent scored at the proficient level in critical thinking. 76 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Generally better performance was obtained in writing and mathematics. In Writing Level 1, 37 percent of students scored at the proficient level, 43 percent scored at the marginal level, and 20 percent were classified as not proficient. In Writing Level 2, 71 percent were classified at the not proficient level, and 87percent were classified as not proficient in Writing Level 3. The test results indicated that 95 percent were not proficient in critical thinking. In mathematics, the scores indicated that 28 percent, 71 percent and 85 percent scored at the proficient in Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3, respectively. In humanities, social sciences and natural sciences the scaled mean scores were 109.68, 109.19, and 111.39 (total mean score is 430.69) respectively.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS identify instruments for assessing general competencies at various levels and develop an institutional plan for periodic assessment and improvement (e.g. an instrument to test competencies in math, and assess students upon entry to the university and prior to graduation). To address these and other issues, a major review of the GERs was started during the academic year 2006–2007, following the establishment of the then-new office of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Alumni Affairs and the forming of the General Education Review Committee (GERC). The mandate of the GERC was to review and develop the GER mission, goals and objectives and propose improvements to GERs. The committee made use of the Harvard Task Force Report, but also considered that a variety of issues pertaining to education in the Arabian Gulf region need to be addressed by general education courses at AUS. At the close of that academic year, GERC submitted its report to the VCAA. The GERC draft report noted that students in technical majors appear to defeat some of the purpose of general education by side-stepping the breadth requirement. The report argued against the practice of double-counting GER courses and major requirements. It recommended expanding breadth by obliging students to choose humanities and social science courses from themed “baskets.” It also recognized that 30 credits of GERs divided among many disciplines can provide breadth, but that depth likely suffers. However, students may achieve the desired depth by selecting their free electives or opting for minors. The GERC report was not adopted. Instead, the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs (which replaced the Office of Undergraduate Studies and Alumni Affairs) began efforts to develop a proposal for a general education program with a clear mission statement, defined goals and measurable objectives. Emphasis was placed on the alignment of the general education program with the mission of the institution, while adhering to the requirements of accrediting bodies that include the Middle States Commission on Higher Education and the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. Faculty were invited to send their comments and feedback on the changes proposed in the GERC report. The report served as the basis for discussion by a new General Education Advisory Committee that was formed during academic year 2007–2008. Membership of this committee included representatives from the colleges and schools selected by the director in consultation with the VCAA, a current AUS student, an alumnus and the Registrar. The Director of the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs launched an Intranet website to keep the campus updated on progress, disseminate information and facilitate the collection of feedback. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 77
In two presentations at the Faculty Development Center, the short-, medium- and longterm goals for the general education proposal effort were presented in open meetings. Draft mission, goals and objectives were distributed to all faculty members via e-mail; this was followed by two public meetings at the FDC to discuss the drafts. The process continued during Spring 2008 with an alumni survey on general education. Revised mission, goals and objectives were distributed to faculty members and feedback was obtained via an online survey. The collection of feedback was followed by open meetings at the FDC. The Director of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs provided a final report to the VCAA, and the results were shared with the Board of Trustees Academic Affairs Committee at its June 2008 meeting.
7.2.4
Internship Requirement
An internship or practicum is a requirement of the CAA for disciplines such as engineering, health sciences and other applied fields. Policies and procedures for establishing, coordinating and evaluating internships are department and/or school/college specific. Faculty coordinators are responsible for coordinating internships within individual units. Information regarding internships is disseminated via information sessions for students. In many instances, reports are required to satisfy internship requirements. Evaluation of internships takes place within each school/college; evaluation processes are diverse and range from evaluation solely by the department chair/coordinator to evaluation by a school/college-level coordinator.
7.3
GRADUATE PROGRAMS
One of the elements of the Founder’s vision is for AUS to become a “center of research for educational development and the solution of social problems.” AUS reflects this in its mission that includes the stated aim that AUS “Encourages and supports research and scholarship by its faculty and students.” In response, AUS has eight established graduate programs, and five very recent additions, across its four schools/colleges to meet the needs of the community both within the UAE and across the region. Details of the eight programs, listed in Table 7.1, are provided in the university’s Graduate Catalog and on the website. The five new programs have already started but did not receive accreditation from the CAA in time to be published in the 2008–2009 catalog, although they may be found on the AUS website. The university’s graduate programs foster a stimulating intellectual environment of collaborative research and intellectual exchange, and students in them seek both career advancement opportunities and personal enrichment.
7.3.1
Development and Termination of Programs
Graduate program development and design are related to the mission, goals and objectives of the school/college, which in turn are linked to the university’s mission and goals. The process is a “grass-roots” one, which starts with faculty input and is subject to regular monitoring, assuring constant improvement to the programs. To attract students, programs must offer those things that are in demand; programs are therefore primarily market- and student-driven. During preparation for accreditation a more comprehensive attempt may be made to revise the curricula as a result of UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research recommendations. 78 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
In recent years graduate programs have been under the authority of several administrating entities— the Director of Graduate Studies and Research followed by the Dean of Graduate Programs— and are currently headed by the Director of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs. In Fall 2006 the University Graduate Curriculum Committee was formed to review proposals at the graduate level. The committee consists of two representatives from each school/college, one Faculty Senate representative, the university Librarian and the Registrar. The committee’s role is to maintain the integrity of graduate academic program curricula. Interviews with Deans revealed that each school/college employs its own policies and procedures in the process of designing and developing graduate programs: • The Dean of CAS reported that the primary responsibility for curriculum design and development lies with the faculty of graduate programs. Specific courses are typically proposed by faculty or department heads who then bring them to the attention of the Dean for review. If approved, the proposal is sent to the CAS Curriculum Committee for review and then on to the University Graduate Curriculum Committee for final review and approval. New program proposals are treated in a similar manner, with the exception that they may begin with an administration directive, and their final approval is made by the Board of Trustees after review and approval by the Graduate Program Curriculum Committee, the Graduate Program Council, the Council of Deans, the VCAA and the Chancellor. • The Dean of CEN revealed that the first parameter for developing a new program is community need. A feasibility study and survey are performed with the purpose of determining that adequate resources are available and that there is a need among faculty for a specific master’s program. Through an outreach program CEN is trying to find better ways to determine the needs of industry for master’s programs of an applied nature. For the development of current programs the input of employers, alumni and exiting students is used in a formal way. In addition, information about new trends in similar programs around the world (but especially in the US) is used to study developments in programs. • The Dean of SBM revealed that the development of new programs is primarily market- and student-driven. The preparation of graduates who will be competent in the marketplace is the primary guide, and therefore programs must offer those things that are in demand to attract students to a program. • The Dean of SA&D stated that because professional program graduates are expected to be engaged in urban planning, curricula are designed to conform to professional accreditation (PAB in the US).
7.3.2
Assessment of Programs and Curricula
Faculty members in each graduate program review the student course evaluations each year. Based on these evaluations and an examination of course outcomes, departments can recommend changes to the curriculum and improvements to the program. This process is further aided by exit interviews of graduates and surveys of employers. Reviews and revisions are based on incorporating assessment findings into development and changes in curricula. Each graduate program has assessment policies and procedures that involve employers, alumni, students and faculty. Assessment is carried out regularly AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 79
with specific time-phase plans and there is a hierarchy of assessment and change approval procedures. Assessment covers individuals’ courses, tracks, program structure, admission and advising, etc. The directors of graduate programs reported that the assessment loop is documented in accreditation reports and maintained on the internal server. In response to a self-study survey, 80 percent of graduate student respondents and 71 percent of employers agreed that AUS graduate programs prepare their graduates for leadership roles in industry and professional practice both locally and regionally.
7.3.3
Support for the Programs
The general consensus of the graduate program directors and Deans interviewed was that graduate program directors generally receive less support than they need to meet their teaching, administrative and other academic responsibilities. Time constraint was cited as a major problem. Program directors are expected to market programs, supervise faculty, deal with students, maintain the quality of thesis and projects and work on the outreach of the school. In addition, directors handle accreditation and recruitment matters, which are additional burdens. Yet directors are required to teach four courses per year. One Dean stated that in comparison with local institutions, resources are above average but are still below what is found in US institutions. As an example, another Dean stated that one course release per year plus an additional stipend is not adequate, and pointed out that the support is equal to only ¼ staff member. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the
Council of Deans examine and redetermine the roles, expectations, compensation and release time of graduate program directors. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS develop cross-university clear and consistent procedures for compensating faculty for supervising graduate project/theses and for teaching courses during evenings and weekends.
7.4
NON-CREDIT OFFERINGS
CEN provides non-credit offerings through the AUS Cisco Regional Networking Academy. The academy, which started in 2000 in partnership with Cisco Systems, offers a comprehensive course that trains students and professionals to design, build and maintain computer networks, and prepares them for industry-standard certification. Courses or programs of study taken on a non-credit basis, or credit-bearing courses offered in continuing education programs or through outreach programs are not accepted to meet any AUS program requirements. Further, AUS academic policies and regulations, as specified in the Undergraduate Catalog, are adopted to transfer courses from other universities. As stated in the catalog, courses should be taken from accredited institutions that provide learning experiences similar to those offered by AUS. The academy awards a certificate of completion to students who successfully complete the required two semesters. In Fall 2007 CAS began offering non-credit instruction courses in Arabic and English. These courses are intended for faculty, staff and their spouses. The courses provide instruction in oral and written language skills.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that academic units clearly articulate how non-credit offerings are related to institutional mission and goals. IT IS FURTHER 80 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
RECOMMENDED that AUS develop procedures for periodic evaluation of noncredit offerings as part of program assessments.
7 .5
LIBRARY AND INFORMATION LITERACY
7.5.1
Library Services
7.5.1.1 Facilities and Collection In January 2006, the university library moved to a purpose-made building that is considered to be the premier facility of its kind in the UAE. With a total of 94,150 square feet (8,750 square meters) of functional space on three floors, the library offers a variety of learning environments including the Information Commons, an integrated computing, research and hands-on assistance zone; computer classrooms for information literacy and research instruction; group study Figure 7.2 The New Library Building and seminar rooms; and power/data enabled tables and carrels areas throughout the building. The library has 135 computer workstations with wireless zones and network points for laptop use. Other facilities include a faculty center, a video-conferencing room, a bookstore and a cafe. As well as books and audio/visual materials the library’s collection includes a total of 107,572 print volumes, 450 print journals, 48 electronic databases, 33,933 e-books and 47,000 ejournals. The total number of library staff is 23 FTE, including eight professional librarians all holding master’s degrees from institutions accredited by the American Library Association. Each academic department has been assigned a librarian “liaison” who meets with the department head, keeps faculty up-to-date on new library resources and services, consults faculty on new book acquisitions and is involved in determining resource needs for new programs, etc. The liaison program is the primary formal means by which librarians reach out to faculty, and there are in addition multiple informal channels that librarians use to integrate the library into the larger academic environment. A formal assessment of these liaison and outreach efforts was conducted in Spring 2008, but information from the assessment was not available as of this writing. Informal feedback indicates that the liaison program has been moderately successful in building faculty awareness of library programs, collections and services, and in building better connections with academic units. Librarian liaisons oversee collection development in their assigned areas and work actively with program/department chairs/heads and faculty to ensure that collection growth is in alignment with the academic needs of the university. Further efforts to connect library collections with the curriculum are made by the university librarian in her role as an ex-officio member of undergraduate and graduate curriculum committees. The AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 81
university librarian is required to sign off on all new course proposals thus ensuring that the library remains closely connected to the needs of an expanding and evolving curriculum.
7.5.1.2 Assessment of Library Services According to self-study survey results, a majority of teaching faculty respondents indicated that they agreed that the library’s journal (print and electronic) and book collection met their curricular needs. In addition, a majority of faculty respondents indicated that the library collection was adequate for their research needs. The library does attempt to help faculty meet their research needs through interlibrary loan and document delivery services (ILL/DD). Surveyed students’ satisfaction levels were similar to those of faculty, with a majority of respondents agreeing that the library’s book and journal collections are adequate for their homework and research needs. Judging the library as a whole—services, collections and study spaces—a majority of student respondents agreed that the library helped them succeed academically. Student respondents indicated that the DVD/VHS collection was adequate for their homework/research needs. The library plans to administer LibQual, a broad spectrum library satisfaction survey, every three years. The initial survey with LibQual took place in Spring 2008. The results are expected to provide for a more accurate evaluation of the performance of the library. In addition to LibQual, the library conducts a variety of formative and summative assessments. These include the analysis of usage data from the library’s catalog, online databases and electronic journals; student focus groups (conducted in 2005 and 2006); use of Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) standards as benchmarks of library effectiveness; and a librarian outreach program to gain feedback from faculty and program directors.
7.5.2
Information Literacy
7.5.2.1 The Program The library is an active partner with faculty in increasing students’ information literacy competencies. All AUS students (possibly except for transfer students) receive at least one research skills workshop through their required writing or English courses. Many faculty also schedule specialized course-specific sessions. The launch of the AUS Information Literacy (IL) program began in the Fall 2002 semester and has steadily gained campus-wide attention and support. Although all have instruction duties, two of the seven professional and internationally recruited librarians have dedicated responsibilities to the Information Literacy program. Library efforts are evident as assurances are made so that IL librarians are given the opportunities and sufficient resources to research instruction pedagogy, design and implement instructional activities, and assess student performance and IL program effectiveness. Library administrators have promoted information literacy initiatives to various university entities so that the IL program remains a compulsory component of the general education requirements. One notable example is the push to have a separate description 82 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
of the IL competencies listed in the undergraduate catalog, which has helped to clarify and distinguish the IL program as a unique and integral component of student learning at AUS. Previously, editions of the university catalog blended computer literacy and information literacy into one brief description. Over the past few years, the library administration has provided funding and leave time to send IL librarians to several highly acclaimed conferences and workshops. IL librarians have been free to demonstrate their commitment to information literacy through collaboration opportunities with other regional libraries. In December 2005 the grassroots organization Information Literacy Network (ILN) in the Arabian Gulf region, initiated discussions and AUS librarians have continued to serve on working committees as the group has steadily grown. Participation by AUS librarians has been strongly encouraged by the library administration.
7.5.2.2 Assessment of the Program Student learning outcomes in the information literacy (IL) program are measured through in-class assessments, end-of-semester faculty and student surveys and more recently an online test administered to a sample of students who have completed the course-integrated IL program. Results are used to improve the IL program. Librarians report that formative and summative assessments were undertaken in Spring 2007 but formal results have not been tallied at the time of this writing. Based on assessment feedback, library workshops have been modified to promote more active learning.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT AUS analyze assessment data of student information literacy skills and use the results in conjunction with information literacy workshops. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS expand its information literacy competency program beyond first-year students, make it a component of all major programs, and include competencies for seniors and graduates.
7.6
ACADEMIC ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES
7.6.1
Research Activities and Awards
AUS aims to promote research among its undergraduate students. While some courses lend themselves more to research than others, the various professional programs have consistently included a research component in the senior year. The Annual Honors Convocation celebrates the achievements of the university’s most distinguished students. The last such event was held in October 2008 and honored 249 students who were on the Chancellor’s List – that is, those who had been named on both the Fall 2006 Dean’s List and the Spring 2007 Dean’s List. To be named on the Dean’s List, a student must earn a GPA of 3.5 or above for a semester. In addition to these students the convocation also honored the winners of the prestigious BP Excellence Awards and the Sharjah Islamic Bank (SIB) research awards, which are given annually to the most innovative student projects. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 83
7.6.2
Study Abroad
AUS offers students the opportunity to study abroad at other institutions and gain full AUS course credit. To study abroad, a student must have a cumulative GPA of 2.5 and have completed at least 59 credits (junior standing) of undergraduate courses in residence at AUS. In addition, students from a university that has a formal exchange agreement with AUS may study at AUS for a semester or a full academic year. Since the time of the last self-study the university has signed Memoranda of Understanding with 12 institutions of higher education in several countries, including Austria, Canada, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. The terms of the memoranda variously provide for student exchange programs, exchange of faculty and collaboration in research initiatives and areas of common interest. Additionally, American University in Washington, DC, and AUS have established an endowment that will provide the opportunity for AUS students to study at AU. That program could begin as early as Spring 2009. During the summer of 2007, eight AUS students from the College of Engineering enrolled in summer courses at Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, Utah. During this eight-week summer term students were able to attend classes alongside US students, taking courses in their major field of study, in general education areas and in a variety of free elective courses not typically offered at AUS. Credit earned at BYU was transferred back to AUS following the completion of summer courses to satisfy degree requirements. In the 2008 summer term, six students from the College of Engineering and College of Arts and Sciences enrolled in summer courses at BYU and Iowa State University (ISU). In addition, each school/college organizes international study trips and exchanges. Examples include a trip to Florida in Spring 2005 by a group of 26 students from the School of Business and Management. In the same year 27 students from the School of Engineering made a week’s study trip to Germany, visiting the corporate facilities of some leading engineering firms. In Spring 2007 SA&D hosted a group of graduate students from Columbia University, New York, who were collaborating with fifth-year ARC 506 students. Also in Spring 2007, 13 students from the Department of International Studies participated in the 53rd session of the Harvard National Model United Nations in Boston. In Spring Semester 2008, 12 advertising students from the Department of Mass Communication went on a one-week social marketing study tour to Canada where they visited a number of advertising agencies. University faculty and students have also been involved in a number of volunteer activities within the UAE and further afield. Of particular note is a project carried out by SA&D students and faculty who volunteered to assist Pakistani families rebuild their homes after earthquake damage.
84 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
7.7
ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING
7.7.1
Assessment Techniques
7.7.1.1 Assessment of Individual Courses Over the 12 years of its existence, AUS has developed a culture of teaching in conformity with the content, format and official description of courses. Consequently, the great majority of schools/colleges, departments and academic units require their teaching faculty to set the goals and objectives of individual courses in accordance with their respective catalog descriptions. In a self-study survey, all faculty respondents stated that they include the learning goals and objectives of their courses in their course syllabi. In addition, all communicate the learning goals and objectives of their individual courses to students at the beginning of the semester. Further, more than 95 percent of faculty respondents stated that they assess student work/projects against learning goals and objectives, while 92.5 percent evaluate their course outcomes against the learning goals and objectives. All schools/colleges require faculty to write course assessment reports. More than 94 percent of faculty surveyed indicated that they complete a course assessment report. Schools/colleges have processes for archiving course portfolios and explicit processes that tie student assessment at various levels (course, degree and school).
7.7.1.2 Constituent Feedback Schools and colleges use a variety of methods to obtain feedback from students and other constituents, which is then passed to curriculum committees. Most schools/colleges conduct exit surveys, and most have an advisory council that provides student learning-related feedback. All schools/colleges consider feedback from internship (where appropriate) and alumni surveys, and conduct employer surveys to solicit feedback.
7.7.1.3 Student Success Of particular interest to the institution is the measure of AUS student knowledge compared to that of students from similar institutions. During Spring 2008, the School of Business and Management administered the Major Field Test in Business (ETS) to all AUS students (a total of 125) enrolled in Management 406, the capstone course in the BSBA program. Students sat for the test on April 12, 2008 (125 of the 130 students registered in the course participated). SBM scores on the test were compared with a normative base that consisted of 37,217 examinees from 447 North American institutions that took the test between August 2006 and June 2007 (more recent data were not available). The mean score for SBM students placed them in the 55th percentile among the individuals who sat for the exam and in the 60th percentile on an institutional basis. They scored at the 80th percentile in finance and in international issues; 75th percentile in economics and in management; 70th percentile in accounting; and 50th percentile in marketing. AUS students’ poorest performance was in legal and social environment (15th percentile), which is particularly directed toward the US setting. Other scores were at the 30th percentile for information systems and 40th percentile for AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 85
quantitative business analysis. The school is reviewing its curricula in the latter two areas to identify reasons for the lower performance. Two indirect measures also assist in determining the preparation of AUS graduates: one is the ability of students to compete successfully at both national and international levels, and the other is their performance in continuing their education. These and the Major Field Test help confirm that AUS is achieving its mission to “offer academic programs that are the equivalent in content and quality to those offered by leading institutions of higher education in the United States.” Each semester students are encouraged to submit papers to conferences and projects to competitions and to participate in professional workshops, symposia and exhibitions. In this way not only do students raise the profile of the institution but they also gain confidence in themselves and the quality of education they are receiving. Examples of success stories are the award to an AUS student of a Fulbright scholarship to study for an MBA in the US, the achievement of recognition in local and regional architecture design competitions, the winning of the Jeddah Economic Forum Collegiate Business Venture Award 2007 and the invitation to attend a United Nations sponsored environmental conference in Germany in Summer 2007. AUS graduates are admitted for graduate studies at the master and PhD level at prestigious institutions in the US and elsewhere (some with full scholarships). These institutions include Stanford, MIT, Columbia, Yale, Harvard, University of Chicago, University of Calgary, University of British Columbia and University of Nottingham.
7.7.2
Communicating Results and Closing the Loop
AUS has numerous processes—though not always documented ones—for communicating the results of assessments of student learning. Instruments such as course assessment reports, employer surveys, alumni surveys and internship reports are processed at the departmental level and passed on to the appropriate committees (for example, curriculum committees) and then to the Deans. In turn the Deans feed these results into the institutional process via the Council of Deans. The formal and informal analyses of student learning assessments of individual courses are usually included in the course portfolio developed by each faculty member each semester. The department heads and Deans generally review the course portfolios. Such evaluations are used mainly in the annual faculty evaluations for merit increase and promotion in some schools/colleges. Based on the review of the course portfolio, department heads in some schools/colleges provide feedback to faculty and so assist them in enhancing their teaching effectiveness. Thus the efforts put into student learning assessment are recognized and appreciated in an indirect way. However, in the self-study survey, 34 percent of faculty respondents agree that they receive feedback on their course assessments from their department chair or Dean, while 49 percent disagree. Self-study survey results show that an equal number (40 percent) of “part-time” administrators (department heads, Associate Deans and graduate program directors) who responded agree and disagree that results of exit interviews, alumni and internship surveys are appropriately analyzed and communicated to faculty, and archived. This might be an indicator that there are different processes in different academic units. In response to the statement, “The results of graduating students/alumni/internship 86 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
providers’ survey analyses are discussed in faculty and/or administrative meetings,” 20 percent of “part-time” administrators agreed and an equal number disagreed. The majority of respondents, 60 percent, neither agreed nor disagreed.
7.7.3
Summary on Assessment of Student Learning
In many regards, assessment of student learning has been a part of the AUS fabric since the university began. A range of formal processes for assessing student learning at the course level are in place, non-formal processes to evaluate student learning holistically, and standard exams often are utilized to assess student learning in general education requirements. Several programs use and/or are developing exit interviews, alumni surveys, internship surveys and employer surveys, and the use of standardized exams from which the knowledge and skills of AUS students can be compared to their US counterparts. There also remains considerable room for further development of assessment at the university. Too frequently, the success of a few graduates is pointed to as indicating program success; how well the programs are providing for the majority of their students is not always well documented. A university-wide process to evaluate student learning against a set of learning outcomes that reflect program, department, school/college and university missions, goals and objectives in not well established, though such processes exist in some areas. For example, CEN and SBM have developed and put processes into place as required for professional accreditation. The use of assessment results differs significantly among the units. To address these issues, the university is putting into place a coherent feedback structure, which includes flows from programs to faculty and Deans, from colleges/schools to the VCAA and Council of Deans, and from divisions to the Chancellor’s senior staff. These will help, but the university will need to take proactive steps if it is to ensure that needed communication lines are open and active. A concerted effort to tie the mission, goals and objectives of the university to those of the divisions, colleges/schools, departments and academic programs is underway. The processes for intertwining budget planning and planning for improvements are being developed. A university-level assessment taskforce has now been established, the work of which will form the basis for continuing efforts to have comprehensive policies related to assessment and “closing the loop.” These efforts will need to continue and be refined as the university gains greater experience via them. Another issue that deserves attention is the increasing of faculty understanding of assessment methods, analyses and follow-up. At present, no training for faculty is provided on student learning assessment, though such training is planned as the university incorporates Blackboard Outcomes into its assessment processes. It is important that the university develop various means by which faculty become more aware of the benefits of and approaches to assessment of student learning. Assessment efforts also should be extended to other programs of academic affairs such as placement tests and remedial courses. In addition, assessment should be an important part of consideration for program growth and potential elimination. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 87
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop university-wide assessment processes for student learning that are fully documented, systematic, widely-used and sustained. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS establish a program to train faculty, administrators and staff to effectively use such processes, leading to the creation of a culture of student learning assessment.
7.8
ACADEMIC PROGRAM ACCREDITATION AND ASSESSMENT
All private higher education institutions located in the UAE are required to be licensed every five years by the CAA. Unlike most accreditation agencies in the US, the CAA requires not only institutional licensure every five years but also requires individual program accreditation for all majors and graduate degrees. These are also reviewed on a five-year cycle. Applications for accreditation, whether for initial (new programs) or full accreditation (a program with graduates) include information similar to that required for licensure. Key differences between the documentation prepared for initial and full accreditation (or reaccreditation) are assessment requirements and the expectation that full or reaccreditation documents represent a self-study of the program. Initial accreditation documents must clearly articulate how assessment will be undertaken; full accreditation documents must demonstrate that program measures are in place, have been used and have informed program improvement. Full accreditation also requires a self-study of program strengths and weaknesses. In addition to the documentation described above, both initial accreditation and full accreditation (or reaccreditations) involve a two-day site visit by one of the CAA commissioners and at least two specialists in the field of the program to serve as evaluators. The latter may be brought from around the world but typically include at least one from the US. To CAA’s credit and AUS’s benefit, the CAA has been successful at attracting exceptionally well-qualified individuals for on-site visits, some of whom are senior officials with US professional accrediting societies. Following the visit, the team produces a report that typically includes recommendations (which the university is required to address) and suggestions (which are optional). The university may list, advertise and enroll students only after a program receives official notification of initial accreditation. Full accreditation is applied for within two years after the first graduates complete the program. After full accreditation, the program is reviewed every five years through the self-study and on-site visit process described above. Several accreditation site visits and reports have been conducted and prepared since the initial licensure process. Numerous recommendations and suggestions have been made to assist the university in improving its programs, and no programs have ever been denied CAA accreditation. For example, between 2006 and 2008 17 academic programs (seven undergraduate and 10 graduate) were reviewed for initial or full accreditation. AUS has found the review process to be arduous but very helpful to its academic programs. Recommendations for one program have helped inform improvements in 88 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
others. The reviews also have led to broader university improvements. As an example, CAA feedback for master of science programs in engineering included recommendations regarding IT and library services. Recommendations for other programs helped improve courses/curricula and were used to assist in the process of writing measureable student learning outcomes. All programs offered at AUS have either initial accreditation (those recently added) or full accreditation (those with graduates). As a result of the accreditation process, each program has developed, or is in the process of developing, goals and student learning outcomes that are clearly aligned to courses and assessment within the programs. The Director of Institutional Research is working with all academic programs in Fall Semester 2008 to develop a standardized system for defining student learning outcomes for each program. These outcomes will appear in the graduate and undergraduate catalogs. The objectives/student learning outcomes for each of the primary units, and a list of their assessment measures, are available. Because each program is required by CAA to submit a report for reaccreditation every five years, assessment of student learning outcomes is an on-going process that all programs use to demonstrate student learning and evaluate improvement. Though individual accredited academic programs continue to collect information to demonstrate how students are meeting specific outcomes, which in turn helps to improve programs, AUS has recognized the need for a better process—one in which the evaluation of academic programs can inform institutional planning. Currently the accreditation process affects institutional planning only in situations where the recommendations and suggestions require the institution to make changes in areas such as the registration process, admissions, library resources, faculty loads, new hires, etc. To address this shortcoming, an Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment (IEA) Task Force is developing an institutional effectiveness manual and is piloting Blackboard Outcomes assessment software. The Outcomes system is designed to help develop a more systematic process of assessment across the institution. Eight programs have been selected to pilot the Outcomes software. In the Fall 2008 four of these programs—the departments of Economics, Electrical Engineering and Writing Studies in addition to the library—will pilot the software. After an evaluation of the experience of these first groups, four additional programs/units (the Department of Mechanical Engineering, the Foundations program in SA&D, the MA TESOL program and the Office of the Registrar) will continue the software pilot. It is expected that as a result of these two pilot evaluations, the IEA Task Force will be able to lead the implementation of the software across the university, resulting in an informative and systematic assessment process. At the university level, surveys are conducted of graduating students, and alumni provide information regarding graduates’ attitudes toward the university’s preparation for employment and leadership roles in industry and professional practice both locally and regionally.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 89
7.9
CONCLUSION
AUS strives to offer a variety of academic programs that enhance students’ academic and co-curricular experience. Over the past 10 years many programs have been developed, reevaluated and improved. The university’s undergraduate programs are generally considered to be the best in the region, and succeed in attracting students from many countries. Graduate programs, on the other hand, have been directed in particular toward meeting the local needs of the UAE. Feedback from master’s program graduates and their employers has been positive. The five new engineering master’s degrees, which have recently received CAA accreditation, are also directed toward local need but have the potential to attract students from further afield.
90 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Chapter 8 8 .1
PLANNING
8.1.1
Basis and Process
PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT CYCLES
In February 2002 the Board of Trustees approved a five-year strategic plan, which had been developed in consultation with faculty and staff. The plan served as a guide for university strategic planning and financial sustainability. It proposed to make certain that the university would be able to operate without an annual subsidy from the Government of Sharjah. The principle objective was to achieve this financial goal by 2007. This level of sustainability was achieved in 2004, ahead of schedule. At the 2006 meeting of the Board of Trustees, a new mission statement for the university was approved. Subsequently, preliminary work has been done to lay the groundwork for a new strategic plan. A new planning structure was developed, which was directly linked to the institutional mission statement. Thus, goals were linked to the bulleted sections of the mission statement, objectives for the period 2005–2010 were linked to the goals and strategic processes were linked to the objectives. The resulting document, entitled AUS Planning Structure (shown in Table 8.1) was published in March 2007 and was distributed widely across the campus. The strategic processes include the areas of enrollment management, program assessment, the curricular review process, an external relationship initiative, research initiatives, student life enhancement and the administrative planning process.
Table 8.1 Abstract of AUS Planning Structure – Reference Guide (for reference only)
The planning structure was developed largely by senior administrators and approved by the Board of Trustees. The self-study workgroup found no evidence of faculty, staff or student involvement, or significant involvement of the academic Deans. Whether based on the planning structure or independent of it, most administrative units have developed annual initiatives for improving their processes in keeping with their mission statements and sense of contribution to the overall needs of AUS. Most of these AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 91
documents take the form of single-year operating objectives. However, a long-term plan for the academic affairs division was informed by several iterations of input from faculty and administrators in the schools and colleges. When Chancellor Heath began his leadership of the university in Fall 2008, he immediately started a process of institution-wide strategic planning. He formed a steering committee that includes senior administrators as well as representatives from faculty, students and staff. This committee meets on a weekly basis and is engaged in a structured process to develop the strategic plan. As one concern of this process is inclusiveness, regular feedback is solicited from faculty and staff. For example, all faculty and staff were invited for two separate meetings to offer feedback for the SWOT analysis. A draft for the university strategic plan is expected by the end of Spring 2009; the following academic year will be devoted to fleshing out the plan at the unit level.
8.1.2
Materializing, Revising and Improving the Planning Structure
The AUS Planning Structure provided guidance to administrative units by highlighting areas for continuous improvement. Department and unit heads provide their senior administrators with operating goals for the year that are consistent with the process elements of the planning structure. Thus, the planning structure undergirds decisionmaking in the various administrative levels through identification of key values. Each semester, beginning with Fall 2006, progress made toward achieving institutional objectives on each of the strategic processes by individual programs and units has been reported by the senior leadership and compiled into Semester Milestones documents. For example, in the Fall Semester 2006 Milestones document, the Office of Enrollment Management (at that time the Office of Admissions) demonstrated that it had measured and evaluated the objective by conducting studies in which the correlation between high school GPA and AUS GPA was investigated. In the Milestones report of Spring Semester 2007, it was recorded that the minimum GPA requirement for student admission was raised to 85 percent, thereby demonstrating how the evaluation informed the process that led to an improvement, thus “closing the loop.” Another example comes from the objective stating that, “Increasing student success in course work, as well as retention and graduation rates consistent with high standards.” One of the strategic processes was, “Better retention rates of enrolled students to the extent consistent with maintenance of high academic standards,” which led to the establishment of the Academic Achievement Center and the hiring of faculty to achieve a student-to-faculty ratio of less than 15:1. A further example, coming from the objective stating that, “[Research] focus upon areas of particular concern to the Emirate of Sharjah and the needs of the United Arab Emirates and the region,” has led to a formalized outreach effort to local businesses and industries by the College of Engineering, providing consulting and contracting services. Additional examples in other areas of interest can be found in the Semester Milestones documents, which demonstrate that objectives are continuously being evaluated and, in some cases, are being successfully maintained. These reports are made available to the AUS community via the university’s website. 92 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
The planning process as depicted by the AUS Planning Structure has proven itself useful, but in its current state does not address long-term directions for the university, provide overarching initiatives that that will help move the institution in those directions, establish priorities or tie those priorities to resource allocations. Thus it is better suited to annual academic and operational improvements than to longer-term guidance of the university— i.e., strategic direction and long-term resource investment. Therefore, IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS develop a longer-term strategic plan to better define the future of the university, and include appropriate constituents and stakeholders in the process.
8.2
RESOURCES AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION
8.2.1
Human Resources
The university’s human resources include its faculty, staff and senior administrators. Faculty and senior administrators are covered elsewhere in this report. That staff are dealt with here reflects the fact that the Human Resource (HR) Department is more involved in their hiring, promotion and development than it is in that of faculty and senior administrators.
8.2.1.1 Staff Profile and Salaries In line with the growth in the student body over the same period, the approved number of staff positions has increased from 410 in FY 2003 to 482 in FY 2008. As is the case with faculty, students and senior administrators, AUS staff represent a mix of nationalities, as shown in Figure 8.1. However, this nationality distribution varies by grade—apparently a reflection of the labor structure in the UAE and the fact that particular salary strata attract personnel from particular countries (Figures 8.2, 8.3, 8.4). It would appear that this nationality distribution is viewed by some members of the university community as a source of problems, particularly when the grade requirement fits employees from both Western and non-Western countries. There seems to be an unhealthy real or perceived difference in compensation for people doing the same job. In the self-study surveys, several comments revealed a negative feeling among staff members toward their compensation and treatment relative to that of their colleagues. Unfortunately, more than one staff member attributed this to the issue of national origin. While this is difficult to prove, IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS reaffirm its
commitment to compensation policies and practices that reward experience and quality of work without regard to race, color, gender, religion or national origin. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the reasons for the negative feelings of some employees and take appropriate action.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 93
With the booming economy of the UAE and the Arabian Gulf states, salaries in the region are increasing significantly in order to attract applicants from a limited pool of qualified people, and also to compensate for the high inflation rate. AUS also faces these challenges. In an interview, one senior administrator stated that, “AUS is losing good people because of the poor salary scale. AUS should put more effort into retaining the good people by increasing their salaries as this would cost AUS less in retaining good staff rather than recruiting staff at a lower salary scale and going through the training
Figure 8.1 Distribution of Staff by Nationality - All Grades
Figure 8.2 Distribution of Staff by Nationality - Grades 2–5
Figure 8.3 Distribution of Staff by Nationality - Grades 6–9
Figure 8.4 Distribution of Staff by Nationality - Grades 10–13
program.” Another senior administrator commented that, “The staff recruitment process is bad because the salary scale and benefits are poor in comparison to the market. Therefore it is hard to recruit and retain good staff.” The Board of Trustees recognizes staff compensation as a concern; approved cost-ofliving increases have been small relative to the level of inflation in the local economy. Surveys of staff and administrators across the university point to staff compensation as a major concern, particularly as the university needs to compete with new market entrants for capable staff members. 94 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Another major concern for staff is housing. Currently, there are no clear and transparent rules on who among staff is assigned on-campus housing or specifying the type of units assigned. Considering the significant increase in the cost of housing in the UAE, many staff seems to prefer that AUS provide them with on-campus housing or appropriately increasing their housing allowance.
8.2.1.2 Staff Recruitment and Hiring The AUS Human Resource Policy Manual specifies general procedures for filling vacant job openings. Based on a preliminary review of individuals’ qualifications by the Human Resources department, those applicants who appear best to meet the qualifications for the position are interviewed by the appropriate department head or supervisor. The staff member’s job title is stated in the job offer and then in the contract. The job responsibilities are given by the hiring department (new employee’s supervisor).
Figure 8.5 Average Staff Monthly Salary by Grade (in Dhs.)
During self-study interviews with senior administrators the following concerns were expressed: Decision-making in the staff recruitment process is very centralized at the top. Human resources is the weak link at AUS. This is an area that is very controlled from the top and the Deans have no authority to promote staff or give them raises. This is very restricting to senior administrators. Staff recruiting is problematic; better staff salaries are required to attract quality personnel. [Recruiting] should not have to be done by the end-user and should be taken care of by the recruitment section of the HR department. The HR director agreed with these issues, stating that the recruitment process is not efficient for certain categories. The nature of the local job market and the escalating inflation rate present a challenge in attracting viable candidates. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS investigate the issues associated with the staff hiring process through the involvement of the various parties affected by it. 8.2.1.3 Staff Development and Promotion
The funds for staff development are centralized with HR and therefore departments wishing their staff to attend training programs have to request funding. Although the university expends funds in support of staff development (see Figure 8.6), survey responses from staff suggest that many do not believe that the training program is adequate.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 95
The HR Policy Manual outlines the policies and procedures for staff promotion, including information on salary increases and administrative procedures. There is, however, no specific schedule for staff promotion. Most positions are defined on a scale that does not take into account promotion for individuals. A staff member who seeks promotion usually applies for a change in position and has to move to another department. In response to a self-study survey question asking whether there is a schedule for promotion Figure 8.6 Average Annual Spending on Training and Development per Staff Member only 19 percent of staff agreed while 66 (in Dhs.) percent disagreed. During self-study interviews with senior administrators, concerns about staff promotion were voiced. Examples of these concerns include the following: The system for internal promotions is weak and very restricting. For example, if a position is available at Grade 11, an external candidate can be recruited at this grade and with a Grade 11 salary and benefits. However, if an existing staff member is at Grade 8 and is perfectly qualified for the position he/she cannot be chosen for this position with this grade or with the salary scale. Staff are allowed to move only one grade at a time and can have a salary increase of a maximum of 15 percent. The process of internal promotions is cumbersome and can take up to six months. Even though a position is already approved, filling this position needs to be approved by the Chancellor. This results in delays that can last for months. For the administrative staff who perform clerical duties, there are some staff members who work much harder than others and are not recognized for their hard work. Staff who work hard and diligently should be recognized for this by receiving promotions without necessarily having responsibilities added to their portfolio. This is not allowed for in the AUS HR system. The HR system should be able to accommodate this. The university’s Planning Structure document outlines seven areas of focus for “specific improvement emphasis.” In the area of financial and administrative planning, one objective is that AUS have a process that “Enhances the capabilities of staff through professional development and opportunities for personal growth within the organization.” IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop means to improve staff
professional development. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS put in place a staff promotion policy that satisfies the university’s strategic plan.
8.2.2
Financial Resources
According to its mission statement AUS is a not-for-profit organization that operates effectively and efficiently, and develops and uses its fiscal resources wisely. Therefore AUS as an organization does not aim to attain profits but to be self-sufficient financially,
96 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
which it has been since 2004; that is, since that date it has not required the financial support of the Government of Sharjah for its regular operational expenses. AUS is a tuition-dependent university, with tuition being the largest primary source of income, accounting for 85 percent of revenue in the academic year 2007–2008. Other income is mainly accounted for by revenue from the residential halls (9 percent in academic year 2007–2008) and other sources such as the Student Center food court, miscellaneous services, and fees and fines. This indicates that the financial resources available, along with their distribution, are sufficient. Tuition fees have increased annually in line with inflation. In FY 2005, 2006 and 2007 the fees were raised 5 percent, 4 percent and 3 percent, respectively. Prior to FY 2007, fulltime tuition covered up to 18 credit hours. However, in FY 2007 the scheme was changed so that full-time tuition covered only up to 16 credit hours, with extra charges for further credit hours. In addition, in FY 2007 lab and technology fees were introduced. In FY 2008 tuition was increased by 9 percent for returning students and 13 percent for new students; lab and technology fees stayed the same but the extra charge per additional credit hour increased. These increases in fees have ensured that the university’s financial resources are sufficient and that it does not require external support.
Figure 8.7 Budgeted Expenditure for FY 2008
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 97
Since 2003 budget surpluses have contributed to a growing positive fund balance. A plan is in place to continue building university reserves by 5 to 10 percent annually. The fund balance is placed in a variety of investments as approved by the investments subcommittee of the Board of Trustees. The purpose of these investments is to establish contingency reserves. AUS is maintaining these reserves in case the requirement arises in the future to fund buildings (currently these are funded by the Government of Sharjah). Due to the government’s contributions to AUS operations in terms of free utilities and grounds maintenance, the percentages of AUS budget attributed to each budget category as shown in Figure 8.7 are somewhat different from those typically reported for US institutions. The relatively higher personnel costs at AUS are attributable to two factors: higher cost of benefits for employees and additional categories of personnel. All faculty and staff receive a benefits package that is not normally provided at universities located in the US. The budget analyst studies the budget versus actual figures monthly and assesses areas of budget shortage that need to be covered and areas of budget surplus that can be utilized in other areas as necessary. The future year budget figures approved for the departments primarily depend on prior year actual spending patterns. Contingency reserves are kept with the Chancellor and Vice Chancellors for unbudgeted initiatives.
8.2.3
Physical Resources
8.2.3.1 Description To accommodate the increase in student numbers, the built environment continues to develop. In Fall 2002, AUS had 2,500,000 square feet (232,000 square meters) of total built space. In Spring Semester 2007 it added to that figure 673,000 square feet (62,500 square meters). By the end of 2008 the university is projected to occupy 3,337,000 square feet (310,000 square meters) of total built space. As Figure 8.8 shows, the campus comprises eight academic buildings, six of which flank a large raised plaza. The academic buildings (marked “2” in Figure 8.8) house classrooms and lecture halls of various sizes, science and computer laboratories, workshops, and studios as well as offices for faculty and support staff. The Main Building (marked “1” in Figure 8.8) and adjacent library (marked “3” in Figure 8.8) are located on the plaza. Together they mark the center of the AUS campus and are the only buildings situated on the main axis of University City’s central boulevard (see Figure 1.3 in Chapter One), occupying a prominent position and acting as a landmark within and around University City. The AUS campus, with its residential population and facilities, remains in character an independent small town despite the expansion of Sharjah’s suburbs around University City. Approximately 50 percent of the student body, the number divided roughly equally by gender, lives in campus housing. The students occupy 12 residence halls, eight for men (marked “5” on Figure 8.8) and four for women (marked “4” on Figure 8.8). There is also a large sports complex (marked “7” on Figure 8.8), a Student Center and a mosque. Faculty members and their families are required to live on campus and there are therefore extensive housing complex areas (marked “6” on Figure 8.8) as well as faculty 98 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
facilities such as a leisure center and a day care center. The campus also includes a health center and pharmacy, a post office, a copy center, a bank and a number of ATM machines, two small grocery stores, men’s and women’s hairdressers, a travel agency, a merchandise store and a number of food and beverage outlets, making it in many respects a self-sufficient community.
Figure 8.8 AUS Campus (Courtesy of Google Earth)
Space constraints hinder the large expansion of facilities. The resource most lacking is academic space, with AUS having 15.1 square meters per student compared to 17.2 square meters at a typical university. However, there are currently two new academic buildings, for the College of Engineering and the School of Business, in the pipeline. Once these buildings are completed the university’s goal of 17.2 square meters of academic space per student will be attained. Restraints created by a lack of office space are another area of challenge. The space currently available is continually being re-designed and shuffled to accommodate more offices. However, a “warehouse”—a building that will contain warehouse space, facilities workshops and office space for related staff currently located in the main building—is scheduled for completion in 2009. Once all Facilities Department offices have moved into this, more space will become available in the main building for administrative offices. Sports space and facilities are also tight. However, in November 2006 the Board of Trustees approved the construction of a large playing field with two football fields and a large multipurpose field for cricket and baseball. These facilities were completed in Summer 2008. Similar planning is made for extracurricular resources. Student and faculty housing is another major area of challenge, but every year new facilities are approved by the Board of Trustees and built to accommodate the increasing numbers of students and faculty. Construction schedules of faculty housing remain an AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 99
issue as new faculty and their families often have to be accommodated on arrival in a hotel for several weeks or months, causing a disappointing start to their experience at AUS. IT IS RECOMMENDED that every effort be made by the administration to
facilitate timely construction of university facilities. 8.2.3.2 Review of the Facilities Master Plan
The Facilities Master Plan is updated periodically and revised plans are discussed with the Board of Trustees, usually twice a year. Any amendments to the plan will be in line with approved changes by the board. The Facilities Master Plan ensures that all resources are adequately supported to accomplish the institution’s goals through a variety of checks. AUS compares itself to universities in the US with the goal of providing similar types of academic and extracurricular space in line with published statistics. The university has had two schemes for the future number of students, one being for it to remain at about 5,000 and the other for expansion beyond that figure. It appears that as yet no decision has been formalized as to which direction the university is to take in this regard. In a self-study interview the VCFA stated that the university administration is awaiting guidance from the Board of Trustees regarding the future size of AUS. The current master plan is for 5,000 students with the appropriate numbers of faculty and staff, and this is in line with university financial planning and budgeting. As the university expects student numbers to expand beyond 5,000, expansion needs beyond the published master plan are currently under consideration.
8.2.3.3 Improvements At the university’s launch in 1997 the initial facilities had been designed and constructed in the remarkably short period of 11 months. The downside of such fast development was that many facilities lacked safety and accessibility features, and some proved unsuitable for their intended purpose. The Facilities Department strives to correct some of these problems, providing a level of service that has met with the general satisfaction of faculty and staff as evidenced by responses to a self-study survey. Work includes improving building accessibility, introducing new building management systems, energy efficient fixtures, better air conditioner monitoring and control, smart classrooms, acoustics and other technological enhancements not available in the existing buildings. The renovation of the Languages building and the Intensive English Program space in 2006 included many of these enhancements. There are plans to continue the renovations process. Renovating two buildings per year would raise all existing academic buildings up to current standards by 2012. In addition, the university’s facilities were designed to be neither energy efficient nor environmentally friendly. In Spring 2008, Chancellor Thompson formed a committee to investigate ways to tackle these issues—a move which is of particular importance since by the year 2012 the provision of free utilities by the Government of Sharjah will end and the institution will then pay for its own energy consumption. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS ensure that all new facilities are built to international standards regarding energy consumption, environmental impact, safety and accessibility. Existing buildings should be retrofitted to achieve these objectives as soon as possible. 100 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
8.2.3.4 Assessment of Services In a self-study survey regarding the services provided by the Facilities Department, the majority of respondent staff and faculty agreed that the department provides a satisfactory service. IT IS RECOMMENDED that facilities department develop
and implement a periodic assessment system for its services.
8.2.4
Technical Resources
8.2.4.1 Description AUS has an impressive array of instruction and information technology resources and its departments and programs offer a range of specialized computer laboratories equipped with software to support student work. Additionally, the library features an information commons with an expanded range of computers, software and related technology along with support for student research and other academic work. All AUS classrooms are networked and most are equipped with data projectors and other technology that enable faculty members and students to enhance learning with digital and online content. Wireless network access is available in all academic and administrative areas of the campus, and capacity is being increased in selected locations to support wireless laptops. The College of Engineering has approximately 30 laboratories and workshops. All equipment and instruments are accessible to and extensively used by students. The various departments share six computer labs with more than 180 stations. All labs have dedicated lab instructors and engineers. Additionally, all engineering facilities offer wireless connectivity. The School of Architecture and Design provides for the use of both Macintosh and Windows platforms. All students have 1:1 access to the 100 Mbs Ethernet. Dedicated ancillary spaces, which are shared by all curricula, include digital classrooms and closed networked studios, a high-end Macintosh lab, a Windows-based lab, input/output labs, a printmaking shop, lighting and photography labs, a dedicated student wood and metal shop, a Technical Equipment Center, a 3-D lab, the Material Resource Room, an exhibition gallery and dedicated critique rooms. Multimedia, video and sound equipment is featured in the Advanced Digital Laboratory, which includes sound editing booths. Similarly, the College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Business and Management have adequate facilities for their programs. AUS also has a widely-used course management system (iLearn) that is based on the Blackboard platform. During Fall Semester 2007, 70 percent of course sections used some component of the system. The number of active sections has increased from 401 online sections in Fall 2005 to 893 in Fall 2007 and now nearly all students, excluding those in the IEP, use the system on a regular basis.
8.2.4.2 Improvements Since 2004, a capital renewal/deferred maintenance budget line has been created specifically for the purpose of replacing and updating technology available on campus and incorporating future developments and changes. As a result, many improvements have been carried out since the time of the university’s previous self-study in 2004. These include: AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 101
• • • • • • • •
Internet bandwidth has been upgraded from 4Mbps, to 8Mbps, 16Mbps, 24Mbps, 32Mbps, 82Mbps and to 100Mbps (current), with capacity to go to 155Mbps (scheduled for December 2008). deployment of Course Management System (iLearn powered by Blackboard) for online coursework submission and testing increase in amount of network storage space available to students (650MB) and staff/faculty (2GB) to provide additional resources increase in mailbox quota (students 100MB, staff/faculty 250MB) wireless network access is now provided throughout campus and in dormitory labs and TV areas videoconferencing and distance education services are available for interacting with colleagues from different universities video streaming services are available to convert from VHS and DVD to online video delivery for on-campus installing more than 100 additional projectors in classrooms and labs
Another structural improvement has been the creation of the Office of Academic Computing in Fall 2004 aimed at centralizing and monitoring technological requests from the academic sections of the university. All technology requests are forwarded to the office for assessment before processing. The office continuously assesses the technological resources available and their efficient utilization before processing new requests and upgrades.
8.2.4.3 Assessment of Services The IT Department and academic computing staff rely on occasional satisfaction surveys, system monitoring tools and statistics from primary systems to assess progress and effectiveness. Other assessment techniques are used such as monitoring bandwidth utilization on the AUS Internet service and utilization rates of the course support system (iLearn). Responses by faculty, staff and students to self-study survey questions regarding oncampus technical resources were mixed. Faculty recorded lower levels of satisfaction than the other groups, primarily with respect to the adequacy of technology for their teaching needs. Responses to surveys concerning the university’s central IT Department (ITD) suggest general satisfaction with the services provided. Although most faculty and staff registered satisfaction with the university’s Internet services, students were less satisfied, perhaps because gaming and other non-academic activities are allowed limited bandwidth. There was some level of dissatisfaction expressed as well by faculty regarding the availability of computer labs.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS determine the specific needs of classrooms and computer labs, take appropriate action, and periodically assess the services provided.
102 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
8.2.5
Resource Allocation
8.2.5.1 Budget Development Process The university’s current budget development process has been simplified and the focus is placed upon the institution’s overall budget goals. The process has been made easier by “working backwards” and determining what AUS wants its fund balance and reserves to be, what student financial aid needs to be, what the projected number of students should be, what the number of total faculty will be and whether there will be any exceptional circumstances that will reflect on the budget, etc. This also helps determine the tuition rates. The total university budget is then prepared taking into consideration the objectives of the next fiscal year’s budget. In the past, Deans and directors were given the option of requesting budget figures based on their projected figures and plans for the next fiscal year. Under the new budgeting system, the budget allocation is carried out centrally at the Vice Chancellor and Chancellor level with little input from the academic Deans and office directors. The Chancellor distributes the operating and capital expenses to the various major units (VCAA, VCFA, VCSA, VCPA, VCEM) and the Chancellor’s office based upon the budgets and actual expenses for the previous year, and senior staff projected requirements for the next fiscal year. The internal distribution among their departments is then made for capital and operating expenses and uploaded as the next fiscal year’s budgets. However, contingencies are kept with the Chancellor, VCAA and VCFA in case new initiatives arise that are not budgeted. An initial review is carried out by the chair of the Board of Trustees finance committee and the necessary changes made. The final budget is then prepared and presented to board members for approval. As currently configured, the process gives limited scope for new initiatives, particularly in academic units. Approval of new programs does not necessarily imply that the required funding will be allocated. Several unit heads interviewed expressed hesitation about pursuing new programs or strategic initiatives, citing the lack of transparency and limited feedback on fiscal priorities. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS establish a clear
budget allocation process to support organizational objectives, establish priorities and give unit heads the information necessary to propose initiatives consistent with the mission and goals of the university. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that AUS ensure that the budget process begins with and reflects unit-level input and priorities. 8.2.5.2 Budget Assessment and Improvement
Allocation of resources is assessed from the start by making sure that the budget reflects the strategic processes of the university’s Planning Structure. For example, substantial portions of new budget funds have been allocated to faculty salary increases, thereby addressing the focus area of “Competitiveness of faculty salaries and benefits with those of a reasonable cohort of universities with which AUS aspires to be compared.” Assessment of allocation is also done by comparing the budgeted and actual expenses. Comparison reports are generated by the budget office and are sent to the end users. Further, the actual year-to-date results of the actual expenditure compared to the AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 103
approved budgets are prepared and presented to the Board of Trustees during each board meeting. Improvements and changes are continually being made to the budget, but not to the total budget approved by the Board of Trustees each year. Within certain categories, transfers may be made across departments or areas but the overall budgets have remained the same through the years. In some cases shortages are covered by the contingency funds with the approval of the Chancellor or the VCFA. If in some cases the budgeted figure is very different from the actual expenditure then the budgeted figure for the following year is amended accordingly to correctly reflect the actual required amount.
8.3
ASSESSMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
8.3.1
Unit Missions, Goals and Objectives
Most academic and administrative support units have a defined mission statement or an equivalent document that reflects organizational purpose and goals. In some cases, subunits also present their own mission statements. These documents are generally consistent in the sense that they support the overall mission and objectives of the university, but they do not follow a standard format or terminology. Most mission statements are readily available on the AUS website. Overall objectives are generally defined in terms of stakeholder services to be provided, or the mechanisms employed to promote efficient use of university resources in achieving the goals of the institution. Depending on the nature and function of the unit, and because of the focused bullets structure of the AUS mission, statements of some units support several elements of the university’s overall mission whereas others reinforce fewer aspects of the mission in specific ways. Some departments (e.g., CAPS, the library) reported that they are in the process of updating their mission documents, in some cases to refine lists of objectives down to a smaller number of broad themes. Specific elements are added, based on either survey responses collected by the university or feedback obtained through the unit’s own mechanisms. Input of staff members has also been noted in the process of mission revision in the units that reported these initiatives. Most units were able to provide a current list of annual objectives. Several reported that these are augmented on an “as needed” basis to respond to new challenges that arise during the academic year. The objectives are generally defined in terms of activities to be accomplished (e.g., HR will arrange for customer service skills training for all staff), projects to be completed or outcomes to be accomplished. Others are in the form of maintaining ongoing activities, processes or procedures necessary for the unit to provide the services required. Objectives are usually clear, though not necessarily measurable in terms of service levels or other objective performance indicators. Project-related goals are generally defined in terms of completion dates. Other goals are often relatively general. Few are framed in terms of specific metrics, even when such indicators are routinely monitored. 104 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
In summary, most academic and administrative support units have missions, goals and objectives, but these do not follow a standard format or terminology. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that AUS arrange a series of workshops for department heads to provide guidance on the development of formats of unit and program mission statements, goals and objectives. This initiative should include the review and integration of mission statements at upper administrative levels to ensure coherence and coverage of key functions of the university.
8.3.2
Performance Indicators and Assessment Tools
With the approval of the appropriate senior administrator, the leader of each unit selects the performance indicators appropriate to its mission and objectives. Perhaps because objectives are expressed in a variety of forms, a range of indicators is used. Activity and project completion dates are objectively monitored, though some facility completion targets in particular are often beyond the ability of the university to control. The implementation of a new service or process may also have a target date defined, but in some cases such goals are simply expected to be completed at some point during the year. Relatively few goals are expressed in the form of numeric performance targets, though several finance and administration units have specified an 85 percent favorable score to be attained on surveys. Even where not mentioned specifically, this level of satisfaction is becoming an implicit standard for customer services delivered by these departments. The metrics and other measures of accomplishment used are generally appropriate to the missions and objectives of the units, but there are no overall guidelines for selecting performance indicators. A variety of assessment mechanisms are used across the support functions of the university, ranging from up-to-the-minute measures of system resource availability in the IT unit to the use of occasional university-wide surveys collecting data for use by all departments. With the exception of these surveys, the instruments used to monitor performance and elicit feedback vary widely, as the following examples illustrate: • after-action reviews (Operations, Student Affairs) • annual review meetings with customer academic units (IT, library, CAPS) • annual statistical report (library) • control charts and dashboards (Operations) • departmental surveys (Enrollment Management, IT, Health Center, Student Affairs) • dorm visits (Student Affairs) • employer database growth (CAPS) • faculty exit interviews (HR) • focus groups on web interface design (library) • illness incidence reports (Health Center) • incident reports (Judicial Affairs) • LibQual survey (library) • information literacy testing (library) • online system monitoring and performance tracking (IT) • online surveys (Facilities) • participation tracking for events/activities (Student Affairs, Operations, CAPS) AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 105
• • • •
post occupancy surveys (CAS on behalf of Facilities) Student Council weekly input (Student Affairs) summaries of staff performance reviews (HR) weekly customer meetings (IT with Academic Computing)
Several units track specific indicators that can then be compared with accreditation guidelines or the standards of professional societies. Due to the unique nature of the university, some approaches to measurement and reporting have emerged in response to multiple independent— but partially overlapping— accreditation reviews. In addition to accreditation through CAA, for example, academic and many administrative support functions are also subject to initial (“eligibility”) and final (“accreditation”) reviews of each academic major by the CAA. The schools and colleges also pursue discipline-based accreditation through such organizations as ABET and AACSB. Fortunately, the supporting elements of the university have acquitted themselves well in these reviews, in part due to a proactive approach. To take one example, the library must compare itself to counterpart institutions using ratios related to ACRL recommendations, while at the same time demonstrating its ability to support specific disciplines with adequate books, journals and online resources that respond to local conditions. Assignment of a library liaison to each school/college has resulted in excellent responsiveness at the same time that the development of a standard format for assessing program resources has streamlined the development of self-study accreditation reports. In some cases indicators are tracked but not routinely reported, due to the low anticipated value of additional improvement in an area. This is particularly true where processes have become essentially transparent to the end-user, allowing for management by exception. For example, requests by on-campus faculty and staff for housing maintenance are usually handled on the same day, with a high percentage of repair orders addressed within two hours. The operations unit monitors response time, but now focuses primarily on other aspects of the quality and range of services provided. Although the ability of support units to select appropriate metrics and actually collect the data continues to improve, there has not yet been a systematic effort to evaluate and refine the measurement indicators or assess the instruments used. Unit leaders are keenly aware that the university faces unique challenges that make the use of external standards difficult. Beyond the guidance of the respective Vice Chancellors, however, there has not been a formal effort to harmonize the collection, analysis and reporting of performance data— though the Office of Finance and Administration and, to a lesser degree, Student Affairs units follow a generally consistent pattern. With the addition of two staff members dedicated to institutional assessment and research, the university now has an opportunity to develop a more coordinated, consistent and reflective approach. The will and interest of most support units in improving their performance is certainly evident. The university’s previous self-study report of December 2003 recommended the development and implementation of an integrated assessment plan for the university. A group met in September 2006 to determine what approaches to learning assessment were being used by academic units; however, the self-study workgroup focusing on institutional assessment was not able to identify any systematic efforts to apply a general assessment approach to support units. One specialist in institutional research and assessment was hired by the university in 2006. A director of institutional research, who 106 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
reports directly to the Chancellor, joined AUS in Fall 2007, in part to lead the effort to create an integrated institutional effectiveness plan. A draft institutional effectiveness plan has been prepared to be presented to the Board of Trustees. In addition, an institutional effectiveness and assessment task force has been formed and is developing an institutional effectiveness manual and piloting Blackboard Outcomes assessment software.
8.3.3
Utilization of Assessment
Most unit leaders interviewed for the self-study were able to point immediately to specific improvements made as a result of stakeholder assessments collected from a variety of sources. In some cases, the improvement required changes to ongoing operations in response to input from students, staff or faculty. Other situations involved the addition of new services. These improvements often resulted from feedback in the form of survey responses, complaints, suggestions and internal discussions about how to improve customer service or operating efficiency. Examples of recent enhancements are in the supporting materials. Self-study interviews revealed mixed responses to questions about the extent to which unit assessment data is used to support decision making. Several factors may account for the differences. Some units reported no difficulty securing resources if they were able to demonstrate a need with supporting data. The IT Department, for example, indicated that it is able to use system performance data to successfully justify necessary equipment upgrades. The University Health Center was able to use its statistics to secure approval of a new treatment room for minor emergencies. On the other hand, the basis for resource decisions is not widely understood, at least in terms of the mission of the institution. Academic support departments expressed greater concern about limited feedback on their performance and several units indicated less assurance that adequate resources would be provided to carry out new initiatives. No one interviewed expressed any certainty about overall priorities for spending. The allocation process was described by some individuals as lacking in transparency. Human resource and structural decisions were noted as examples. Some departments report difficulty justifying needed staff positions, for example; others are given staff they do not want or who lack the requisite skills. Some major functional units have been created, only to be disbanded a year later. To paraphrase one comment, jobs or even departments are apparently created for specific individuals, rather than people being hired to meet a need identified by performance data. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the AUS
organizational structure be driven by the strategic plan and informed by assessment data.
8.3.4
Awareness of Improvements
Several unit leaders expressed frustration with their inability to adequately educate the university community on the availability of existing services, improvements to services and new services offered. Although the self-study survey responses show that some individuals expect more services than the university can reasonably provide, other comments suggest that members of the AUS community are simply unaware of what services and support are available. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 107
Some department heads indicated that their efforts to notify students, staff and faculty were simply lost in a flood of daily e-mails, posters and flyers. Self-study interviews revealed many instances of support units actively improving the level-of-service provided, but most have been less successful at publicizing their efforts. Even when units have made efforts to communicate improvements, with limited exceptions the changes have not been identified as coming in response to input from stakeholders.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS develop a communications strategy that effectively informs stakeholders of new, improved or removed services.
8.3.5
Requirements for Licensure in the UAE
It is important to reiterate that all private higher education institutions located in the UAE are required to be licensed every five years by the Commission for Academic Accreditation (CAA) of the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. This licensure applies to the entire institution and all its activities and is of the same magnitude as MSCHE review, requiring detailed information on mission, governance structure, policies and procedures, physical and financial resources, academic programs, faculty and other personnel, and quality assurance measures sufficient to accomplish its mission. AUS was granted its first UAE licensure in 1999. Like many accreditation agencies in the US, the CAA requires the university to participate in a rigorous process that includes preparing a self-study document for review and a site visit by the CAA. The self-study must include the following components: • a feasibility study, including a statement of financial resources • a financial guarantee • a site approval and architectural plan • a timed action plan • an organization chart • a policies and procedures manual comprising all institutional policies • an institutional effectiveness manual • the catalog • the student handbook • the faculty/staff handbook In early Fall 2008, AUS submitted its self-study and was visited by five CAA commissioners who met with numerous faculty, staff and students over a two-day period to evaluate the extent to which AUS is meeting the standards.
8.4
CONCLUSION
Although the university is fortunate to have exceptional physical, human and financial resources—and has made a start with development of the AUS Planning Structure— reaching the next level in institutional effectiveness will require a comprehensive strategic plan that integrates goals and assessment with resource allocation. An institutional effectiveness system will then provide a transparent mechanism for determining the extent to which AUS is delivering on its mission, and help to identify those areas 108 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
requiring additional attention and support. The institutional effectiveness system will serve to define key performance indicators that can be used to track the success of future initiatives and, in addition, provide a more systematic, documented and aligned process by which to evaluate planning and resource allocation.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 109
Chapter 9 9.1
FAIRNESS IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION
9.1.1
Faculty
INTEGRITY
The Faculty Handbook outlines the policies and procedures governing faculty contracts, performance evaluation, grievance and separation. Faculty grievance procedures are in place to ensure that a faculty member is given a fair and impartial hearing. The university has relatively few formal faculty grievances—fewer than five per year have been typical in recent years—which suggests that conflicts are resolved at lower levels.
9.1.2
Staff
The Human Resources Policy Manual, in a section on problem resolution, sets out the procedures to be followed in the event that an employee believes that a condition of employment or a decision affecting him/her is unjust or inequitable. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a number of staff are not aware of the existence of the procedures. As a result of feedback obtained during the self-study surveys, the steering committee became aware that some AUS staff members did not complete the online surveys and expressed concern that their responses might not remain anonymous and might result in retribution. This revealed that concern with the work environment may exist or is developing for a group of staff. It should be noted, as mentioned in the chapter on governance, that staff have no representative body that is in direct contact with the upper levels of university administration. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS ensure a
healthy working environment for staff at all levels.
9.1.3
Students
AUS ensures that students are made aware of their rights through the Student Handbook, a copy of which is given to each student, as well as through mandatory orientation programs for new students. In the case of academic student grievances, resolution is sought at as low a level as is possible, beginning with the faculty member for a particular course. Students are held responsible for adhering to standards of academic integrity; breaches of academic integrity are considered to be serious offences. Students may appeal academic issues to the head of the academic department, the college or school Dean’s office, and the Office of Graduate and Undergraduate Programs. In the event of major sanctions, an appeal may be heard by the Academic Appeals Review Committee. The Judicial Affairs Department deals with all non-academic student disciplinary issues. It is responsible for ensuring that students both fulfill their responsibilities and maintain their rights. The department has in place a thorough and well-established procedure to resolve all non-academic disciplinary issues in a fair and honest manner. Upon receipt of a complaint, statements are taken from both the plaintiff and the defendant and the issue is then dealt with in a manner that reflects its seriousness. In minor issues, for example a curfew violation, and minor fights and misconduct issues, students are given penalties 110 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
such as conduct probation or social probation, and observed for a short period of time. In the case of more serious offences, such as prolonged curfew violation, or major misconduct issues such as theft, alcohol consumption and insulting faculty members, a student’s case is presented before the Conduct Council Hearing Board. The board takes statements from all parties in private and, after reviewing the case, takes appropriate action. The board can recommend dismissal from the university, although the final decision is taken by the Chancellor. In the case of expulsion from university accommodation, the final decision is made by the VCSA.
9.2
COMMUNICATING EXPECTATIONS TO CONSTITUENTS
AUS, while being consciously based upon the American model of higher education, operates within the setting of the culture and traditions of the Arabian Gulf region. It is therefore different from most other institutions in the region and from typical American institutions. AUS employs a variety of methods to ensure that all sectors of its community are aware of the university’s distinctiveness and related expectations. These methods include orientation sessions, meetings, e-mail communications, posters, flyers, leaflets, banners, information posted on the AUS website, internal publications and newspapers. The mission and expected outcomes of some of the four schools/colleges, along with the specific requirements for each degree offered, are presented in both the undergraduate and graduate catalogs. The names and academic credentials of all full-time faculty are also listed. The catalogs are distributed free of charge to all students, parents, faculty, staff and administrators as well as any member of the public requesting a copy, and their contents are also posted on the university website, which is maintained at www.aus.edu. Communication with constituents outside AUS, such as parents and potential students and faculty is carried out via the website as well as the public media. The AUS web pages contain a wide variety of information, including official announcements, newsletters, press releases, event listings, admission requirements and course information. The website also includes information about the university’s accreditation status and includes the self-study report. It is the responsibility of each university department to ensure that its website is updated. Changes to the website are coordinated through the Media and Printing Department within the Office of Public Affairs as well as the IT Department. Many university publications appear both in hard copy and also on the AUS website. These include the catalogs and the student and faculty handbooks. To ensure that published information is up-to-date the catalogs and Student Handbook are revised annually, while the electronic format of the Faculty Handbook is updated when a change is approved. Press releases and other information about the university that appears in the public media, for example in the press and on television, are managed by the Media and Printing Department within the Office of Public Affairs. The university communicates with its internal constituents via its website and print publications, including the AUS News (a quarterly newsletter) the AUS Campus Report (the university’s internal newsletter) and The Leopard (the student newspaper). In addition, mandatory orientation programs are provided for incoming faculty and students at the AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 111
beginning of each semester and orientation sessions for new staff members take place at the time of their first joining the university. These programs include briefings on aspects of cultural awareness and also offer information about the university and its departments, services, rules, and expectations regarding ethics, respect, tolerance and academic integrity.
9.3
ACADEMIC FREEDOM
The Faculty Handbook lists the rights and responsibilities of faculty and the policies governing their academic freedom. The VCAA, Deans and department heads are responsible for assuring that academic freedom is established, consistently followed, fair and transparently applied. They are also responsible for ensuring that faculty members are free to pursue scholarly inquiry without undue restriction, and to voice and publish individual conclusions concerning the significance of evidence that they consider relevant. While students do have some opportunities for expression on campus, venues for student-driven critical debate are more limited than expected in a university setting. While there are always sensitivities and restrictions that result from the location and environment, AUS has a unique opportunity to serve as a leader by providing venues for reasoned critical debate through a campus public sphere that values responsible dialogue. The discussions that take place within the context of courses can form the basis for more prominent campus-wide exchanges of ideas through campus media and other formal venues. A vital public sphere on campus may also provide students with opportunities to explore the balance between rights and responsibilities associated with debate and dialogue. IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS explore opportunities to help
advance democratic discourse through extracurricular activities including student publications.
9.4
ETHICAL CONDUCT
9.4.1
Copyright and Academic Honesty
The AUS Business Procedures Manual sets out the university’s policies regarding the use of software, computers and networks at AUS, and of computers and networks elsewhere if AUS resources are used to gain access to them. The manual states that “Copyright laws protect most software available for use on computers at the American University of Sharjah,” and provides information regarding software licensing. The manual further states that “It is the policy of the University to respect the copyright protections given to software owners by law. It is against University policy for faculty, staff, or students to copy or reproduce any licensed software on University computing equipment, except as expressly permitted by the software license. Also, faculty, staff and students may not use unauthorized copies of software on University-owned computers or on personal computers housed in University facilities. Unauthorized use of software is regarded as a serious matter and any such use is without the consent of American University of Sharjah and subject to disciplinary action.” 112 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
The manual sets out the Code of Conduct for faculty, staff and students using the university’s computing resources and services, stating that the services “are to be used in a manner that supports the mission of the University in fostering the overall academic climate.” The code includes information on academic and professional ethics, identification and authorization, purpose of usage, copyright and intellectual property, privacy, false identity, interference, improper or obscene material, harassment, and copyright and patents. The web pages of the library and the copy center state that both adhere to the copyright regulations of the UAE Federal Law. In addition, the library’s website states that, as an institution accredited in the US, the library adheres to the “spirit of copyright legislation existing in the United States as it pertains to distribution of scholarly material.” AUS presents its Student Academic Integrity code in the Undergraduate Catalog. The Graduate Catalog refers students to the university website. A comprehensive range of potential violations is described, along with adjudication processes, penalties and appeal procedures. It is common that faculty mention the code in their syllabi. A preliminary survey about academic integrity was completed by one of the academic units. The results showed that the enforcement of the code is neither uniform nor systematic. It also showed important deficiencies in some areas. During Spring Semester 2008, the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs established a taskforce to make recommendations for improvements in educating and administering an academic integrity code. An initial set of recommendations is expected in Spring 2009.
9.4.2
Professional Behavior
AUS graduates have an excellent reputation among employers for professional behavior. The manager of the Career Advising and Placement Services (CAPS), states that “In my working years at AUS I have never received any negative feedback from employers,” adding that companies that have hired AUS graduates subsequently request more because of their professional and ethical performance. According to the VCPA, who is in regular contact with professionals from across the UAE and beyond, “AUS students have a very good reputation all over the UAE.” It has been his experience that “the private sector and government prefer to employ AUS graduates.” The VCPA also states that AUS graduates have “given up jobs when they found the company they joined to be unethical.” In addition, the College of Engineering specifically solicits feedback from employers about its students’ behavior and their adherence to ethical conduct during the summer internship at the end of the junior year. Employer feedback regarding student observation of professional ethics is an important factor in the evaluation of the internship. The Faculty Handbook has a section dedicated to professional conduct, ethics and conflicts of interest that sets out the ethical obligations of faculty toward students, other members of the university community, AUS as an institution and their profession. The handbook specifies certain procedures to be followed in case of a violation.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 113
9.4.3
Internal Auditing
The role of the internal auditor involves directing a comprehensive audit program including operational, financial and compliance audit projects. It is the duty of the auditor to maintain organizational and professional ethical standards. The internal auditor works independently with extensive latitude for initiative and independent, professional judgment. The position reports to the Chancellor and the Finance Committee of the Board of Trustees through the administration. For organizational and budgeting purposes, the Internal Audit department is part of the Office of the Chancellor. IT IS
RECOMMENDED that the internal auditor report directly to the Board of Trustees.
9.5
CONCLUSION
Throughout the sections of the self-study it is clear that AUS has in place documented and publicized policies to support the university’s intentions for maintaining integrity. However, there are currently no mechanisms in place for assessing the extent to which these intentions are materialized. The university should consider establishing processes to assess the effectiveness of its integrity policies. The university should also consider establishing a means by which representative groups of staff could interact directly with upper levels of university administration.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that AUS establish documented assessment mechanisms that monitor and help maintain integrity in all aspects of university function.
114 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Chapter 10
10.1
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
MISSION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
AUS has a mission that is driven by the Founder’s vision for the university. The mission not only defines the university’s purpose, but also indicates its intended accomplishments and the constituencies that it intends to serve. The self-study process has revealed that the majority of the university’s mission components do characterize AUS as it is now. The mission generally guides the planning and evaluation processes. However, three aspects have been identified that need clarification and definition; these are related to the grounding of the university in the history and culture of the Arabian Gulf region, the support of research and scholarship, and the role of AUS in serving as a resource for the community. Most faculty are aware of the university’s mission and consider it in their course development; it is, however, less well recognized by students. Unfortunately, the participation of constituents in the development of the mission has in the past been rather limited. However, under the leadership of the new Chancellor, the university is currently in the process of developing a strategic plan with the involvement of its various constituencies and the governing body. This process will lead to the redefinition and reshaping of the university’s mission and will also help define the identity of AUS as a university in a region where the American model of education has become the norm.
10.1.1 • • •
10.2
List of Related Recommendations AUS develop, publish and implement an inclusive and transparent process for updating its mission, goals and objectives. AUS develop mechanisms to improve student awareness and understanding of the university’s mission, goals and objectives. AUS initiate a dialogue involving all constituents, aiming at the formation of an institutional identity that reflects the university’s mission and supports its competitiveness and preeminence in the region.
GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
AUS has an active Board of Trustees, the members of which are highly qualified and represent diversity of nationality and gender. The board meets regularly and through its committee structure fulfills its responsibilities of policy and resource development. Established bylaws govern the board’s operation, and the process of self-assessment of board members’ services is being developed. The board communicates with AUS constituents mainly through the Chancellor, and direct communication is very limited. The Faculty Assembly, Faculty Senate, Student Council and Alumni Association are representative bodies that support the structure of shared governance. No representation AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 115
for staff or parents exists. As part of shared governance practice, the representative bodies mentioned above are part of the decision-making process, but have only an advisory role. Faculty Senate/administration relationships have been generally positive, with regular meetings of Senate officers with the Chancellor and VCAA being held at which many issues come under discussion. Some important faculty policies have been established through the Senate and mutually approved by the Senate and the administration. Similarly, the Student Council engages with Student Affairs’ administrators to address student issues and concerns. The Faculty Senate and the Student Council have no procedures to evaluate their performance, and self-study surveys showed that constituents have an impression of them that is less favorable than desired. These issues need to be investigated so that the effectiveness of these bodies in the practice of shared governance may be increased. The administrative structure of AUS is clear and comparable to that of many peer institutions. All senior administrators have written job descriptions and the appropriate qualifications and experience to conduct their work. In support of the university’s mission, senior administrators have a variety of backgrounds. The different divisions have clear responsibilities and conduct their work through appropriate mechanisms. Staff and senior administrators are periodically assessed (the Chancellor being assessed by the Board of Trustees), although there are no formal procedures for the evaluation of senior administrators. Many units have periodic assessment of their services. While there has been constituent input in the selection of some senior administrators, no formal procedures for their selection exist. The differences between the administrative units need to be better balanced to achieve the university’s mission.
10.2.1 List of Related Recommendations • • • • • • •
A summary of board discussions be made available to university constituents shortly after board meetings, and that the minutes, or an abbreviated version, be made available after approval by the board. The Board of Trustees consider inviting alumni, students, faculty and staff to some board meetings and committees. The Board of Trustees establish a mechanism for direct interaction with campus constituents. AUS develop formal procedures for the recruitment and hiring of senior administrators, and that these include provisions for the involvement of students, faculty, staff and other constituents as appropriate. AUS continue to seek diversity at all levels of its administration and in all units. AUS establish formal procedures for annual performance evaluations of senior administrators that include involvement of appropriate campus constituencies and senior administrators. AUS administrators develop procedures to ensure better flow of communication.
116 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
• • • • • •
10.3
The Faculty Senate study the effectiveness of its operations and investigate the reasons for the lack of faculty interest in joining it. AUS have an independent ombudsman who mediates and solves problems following established procedures and, if required, reports to the Board of Trustees. The Faculty Senate develop mechanisms to strengthen the faculty role in decision-making processes. The Student Council study the effectiveness of its operations and investigate the reasons for the negative attitude of students toward it. AUS set up an appropriate structure to represent staff in shared governance. AUS, drawing on the experiences of other American-model universities in the region, investigate the advantages and disadvantages of establishing an association to represent parents.
STUDENTS
Reflecting its mission, the university has an uncommon breadth of cultural and ethnic diversity, with no single country representing more than 20 percent of the student population. The harmony manifested in this mix of cultures is a credit to all—students, faculty, administrators and support staff alike. During its relatively short existence AUS has established a strong reputation in the region, and this reputation is expanding. The university has experienced tremendous growth while simultaneously increasing its admissions standards at a time when numerous potentially competing institutions are under development. As the university matures and becomes more sophisticated in its approaches to admission, it is beginning to experiment with the use of standardized exam scores and is developing a better knowledge of the quality of students coming from various feeder schools. Experience and observation suggest that the success of AUS has been the result not only of its academic offerings and the improving academic credentials of its students, but also of the range of support services it provides. It is worth noting also that the characteristics for which the university has become known—its coeducational model, its array of nationalities and its relative openness— in many ways have made it a model for aspiring competitors. AUS provides a number of centers and offices that offer assistance to students who encounter academic and non-academic issues and difficulties. These centers and offices include the Academic Achievement Center, the Writing Center, the economics peer tutoring program, the Math Learning Center, the Learning and Counseling Center, and Career Advising and Placement Services. Although the approaches of these entities often reflect best practice, it would be useful and appropriate for each to assess its services and to have data that document the effects on students. In addition to the services themselves, it would be useful for each to examine how its services are publicized and whether alternative and/or additional approaches should be considered. There appears to be significant overlap of services among some of the units. These entities should work AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 117
more closely with each other to identify where duplication is appropriate and where the removal of redundancy is appropriate. The university makes available a number of extracurricular student activities, with many initiated by students under the guidance of the Office of Student Affairs. That 54.5 percent of student respondents to a self-study survey indicated they participate in student activities, and that 45.5 percent noted they participate in three or more activities, strongly indicates that those students who are active at all are very active. Since these percentages are also consistent with the distribution of students who live on campus, it would be useful to know whether the active students tend to be those in residence. If that is the case, the university might consider ways to better engage non-resident students. New student orientation has evolved over time. What began largely as a period of placement testing and registration now includes introduction to academic as well as student affairs. Though the evolution has led to broader orientation, it remains the product of the offices of Enrollment Management, Academic Affairs and Student Affairs, who contribute pieces, rather than there being a planned, coherent program. New students would benefit from the definition of the unit responsible for the program, under which the three areas work together to identify the program goals and outcomes, and assess it. Because the numerous tertiary institutions in the Middle East represent a wide range of quality and because of some accreditation requirements, the university is selective with regard to those from which it will accept transfer credit and transfer students. The relative success of transfer students is, however, not well documented. The development of tracking mechanisms and the keeping of data on success rates will help admissions decisions. Such changes may also suggest modifications to processes by which native AUS students are allowed to transfer courses back to the university. It is recognized that the current registration processes need attention—from the numbers and timing of course sections offered, to the processes themselves, to the resolution of individual students’ issues. AUS intends to bring consultants to the campus to help the university identify those issues that can be addressed by the new system, and those that will need to be addressed by other means. A somewhat related issue is academic advising. Formalized advising has focused on course and program advising and has been directed toward ensuring that students complete program requirements in a logical sequence and timely fashion. As is the case at many universities, the time and effort devoted by faculty varies considerably, and an appropriate balance between faculty guidance and student independence is difficult to achieve. When it was established in Spring 2006, the Academic Achievement Center focused particular attention on advising first-year students and those on academic probation. Now that the center has identified ways to approach those issues, it will have the opportunity to focus more attention on reviewing current approaches to advising and making recommendations for improvements. Career advising has taken two forms: informal through student-faculty interactions, and, for those students who have availed themselves of the opportunity, formal through the
118 ‌. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
CAPS office. A systematic approach to career advising for all students does not exit, and is something the university may wish to consider. The decline in graduate enrollment and the relatively few resources committed to graduate programs is a reflection of the primary role undergraduate education has had at the university. A reversal of the trend is expected, however, with the addition of five master’s programs in engineering, each of which has received initial accreditation from the CAA. Despite these additions, the role of graduate programs is unclear to a number of faculty and, in some respects, to the university more generally. In contrast to undergraduate programs, which attract students from many countries, graduate programs have been especially directed to the more local needs of the UAE. Programs have been added, and the existing ones are evolving, but there remains uncertainty among many with regard to future direction. Support of graduate programs is a concern among a number of faculty, especially as there are a variety of new universities and new graduate programs springing up in the UAE. Competition for graduate students in some areas is becoming increasingly intense. It is likely that the university will in the near future need to make decisions regarding those programs in which it wishes to invest the resources necessary to maintain viability, and those which it may choose to discontinue or maintain at a lower level of investment.
10.3.1 List of Related Recommendations • • • • • • • • • • • •
Graduate program directors and the Office of Enrollment Management clearly identify the factors that have led to the decrease in the number of entering graduate students and make specific recommendations for reversing the trend. AUS better manage the enrollment of students among majors. AUS find ways to improve the registration process. Corrective action should be taken and continuous assessment carried out to ensure an acceptable level of user satisfaction. AUS investigate the reasons for the low level of satisfaction with the advising system and establish a process for continuous assessment and improvement to ensure an acceptable level of student satisfaction. AUS develop a financial aid structure that supports graduate students. The Academic Achievement Center create a process, and develop the expertise, to deal with students who have special needs. The Academic Achievement Center assess the effectiveness of its services and programs and make specific recommendations for improvements. The Writing Center implement a larger-scale assessment project to determine the effectiveness of its program. The Writing Center work with other academic departments to extend its services to a wider range of students. The economics peer tutoring program assess its services. The Math Learning Center establish procedures to assess the effectiveness, and faculty and student awareness, of its services. AUS define the responsible unit and purpose of the student orientation program and that the responsible unit conduct periodic assessment of the program. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 119
• • • •
10.4
The Learning and Counseling Center better publicize its activities and periodically assess the awareness of students of these activities. AUS assess the growing requirements for sports facilities and assign the necessary resources to accommodate those requirements. AUS investigate the possibility of allocating a specific number of dormitory rooms to graduate students, and assign these rooms at the time of enrollment. AUS investigate the need for additional resources to accommodate the expanded services of CAPS and to further improve the quality of services, particularly for student placement.
FACULTY
In conformity with its mission, AUS has recruited quality faculty with diverse backgrounds who have been trained in prestigious institutions across North America and Europe. There have, however, been concerns expressed by some about fair treatment related to this diversity. Faculty generally recognize that, at this stage in its development, the university is substantially oriented toward undergraduate education. The typical teaching loads are nine credit hours per semester. As is the case on many campuses, an effective and efficient approach to evaluating teaching effectiveness has remained elusive. Student evaluations of teaching excellence have received considerable attention by the Faculty Senate and its committees over the past few years. Dissatisfaction with the current system is clear but consensus regarding an appropriate substitute is not. Similar though less extensive debates have taken place with regard to other components of evaluating teaching. Approaches to evaluating teaching are being decentralized and placed more firmly under the purview of the individual colleges and schools. During the university’s first five years, faculty hired tended toward those with significant teaching experience. This was important for quickly establishing academic programs. More recently, however, the university has hired larger numbers of recent PhD recipients. Additional resources to support faculty research would be welcomed. Clarifying the goals and assessing the outcomes of existing resource investment appears to be in order. Additionally, it will be important to identify and articulate expectations for obtaining external research funds, as there have been few grant applications directed to off-campus agencies. Determining expectations will, in turn, help provide direction for further development of the Research Office, the services of which are at present quite limited. Service contributions by faculty were extensive and intense during the first few years of the university’s existence as programs, curricula and courses were being formulated and as academic policies and procedures for students and faculty were being developed. At the current stage of development, most of these are in place and the service load should be far less. It is a concern that faculty report 25 percent of their time as being devoted to service. It will be helpful to develop a more complete picture of how faculty devote their professional time. If the 25 percent figure is accurate for a representative group of faculty, it would signal a need to reevaluate the balance of desired faculty time allocation 120 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
and the structure of faculty contributions to university governance. Ways to reduce service load, particularly for accreditations and conferences organization need to be considered. The cost of schooling and home leave for families, and the effects of these on hiring and retaining faculty should receive further attention, along with the continuing challenge of balancing the housing costs for staff against salary needs of faculty. Investigations of alternative medical plans and the tradeoffs of coverage and costs should also continue.
10.4.1 List of Related Recommendations •
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
The AUS administration and the Faculty Senate investigate the factors that have led to a significant portion of faculty self-study respondents indicating that they do not feel they are generally treated fairly irrespective of gender, race, religion, family status or nationality. The Faculty Senate make specific recommendations on service requirements and commitment of faculty, and on how the service load might be reduced while maintaining an appropriate level of input into governance issues. The Faculty Senate investigate the reasons why faculty are not satisfied with the teaching evaluation system and make specific recommendations for improvement. AUS develop standard procedures to track and document the type and level of research activities undertaken by faculty. AUS increase resources and help establish an environment conducive to faculty research and creative work, and that faculty increase their efforts to obtain external funding to support their research and creative work. The AUS administration and the Faculty Senate assess current approaches to inhouse funding and identify specific recommendations for improvement so that funds can be used most effectively. The AUS administration and the Faculty Senate assess current approaches to faculty professional development and identify specific recommendations for improvement so that funds are used most effectively. AUS allocate additional resources to increase opportunities and enhance support for faculty professional development. The AUS administration and the Faculty Senate review the procedures and assess their implementation in the hiring of faculty and department heads. The Faculty Senate address the right of faculty members to apply for rolling contracts prior to the end of the second three-year term contract. The AUS administration and the Faculty Senate investigate the reasons for the negative attitude toward the performance evaluation process and take corrective action. In addition to AAUP comparisons, AUS continue to attempt to obtain data for faculty and professional salaries in the region. AUS compare its benefits plan with those offered in the region and establish a benefits plan that attracts and retains quality faculty, including those with dependents. AUS investigate the reason for the dissatisfaction with the medical insurance scheme and take corrective action. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 121
• • • • • • •
10.5
AUS enhance the quality of its residential campus to keep up with regional improvements. AUS capitalize on the advantages of its on-campus residential policy and continue to support organized activities for its resident community to enhance the quality of community life. Residents of AUS campus have access to sports facilities equal to those of AUS students. AUS determine costs and recommend to the Board of Trustees a projected timetable for retrofitting to ensure that facilities meet international standards for safety and security. AUS disseminate, implement and assess safety and security procedures and regulations that follow international standards. The Faculty Senate develop fair and transparent administration-approved policies for all housing-related services. AUS clearly define and consistently apply criteria for hiring and evaluating the performance of adjunct faculty.
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS
General education has received considerable review over the past two years. The review began with a focus on program mission, goals and outcomes, then moved to curricular areas to accomplish the mission, goals and outcomes, and then progressed to specific courses. The university plans to establish a university-level committee to review courses for inclusion in the new general education program. Those reviews should include examination for clearly articulated goals, measurable outcomes and assessment mechanisms. A timetable for periodic, extensive review of courses and the overall program, in addition to more routine assessments and concomitant improvements, will help ensure that the curriculum remains current and that faculty new to the university develop an understanding of the purposes of general education at AUS. Faculty, current students and alumni are fairly satisfied with the existing program with a striking exception—one that also is a part of the institutional mission statement—which is that of rootedness in Arab culture. Particular attention will need to be directed toward this core area of the history and culture of the Arab world to make sure that not only it is covered by the program but also that its relevance is clear to students. The culture in which AUS exists is dominated by professional aspirations— immediate employability upon graduation—with little value placed on the skills and intellectual breadth gained from general education. The university should reflect on how it can help students better understand, and faculty better articulate, the role and purposes of general education. The university also should consider identifying standard instruments for evaluating the overall progress of students with their general education; English competency is particularly relevant to its environment and its mission. One or more widely administered “rising junior examinations” might be helpful. Consideration should be given to how the 122 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
university will respond to students who do not display the level of English proficiency it finds appropriate and necessary for its graduates. Information literacy is a feature of both the current and future general education programs, and a large majority of faculty feel it is important. Librarians devote considerable time and energy to working with faculty to modify and promote information literacy. One of the efforts of and challenges for the new general education program will be to ensure that desired outcomes—such as structuring clear and persuasive arguments based on analysis and presentation, communicating effectively in written English, identifying key ideas and establishing hierarchies of information, distinguishing among sources of information in terms of relevance and reliability, and assessing dimensions of actions and explaining relationships between individual moral choices and professional responsibility —are positively influenced by reinforcement throughout the curriculum, including major courses and electives, and not simply relegated to the 42 hours of general education requirements. AUS undergraduate programs are generally considered to be the best in the region, intended to attract, and successful at attracting, students from many countries. In contrast, graduate programs have been especially directed toward meeting the more local needs of the UAE. Feedback from graduates of the programs and their employers has been positive. The five new master’s degrees in engineering that recently received CAA accreditation also are particularly directed toward the needs of the UAE, but hold the potential to be attractive to a broader audience. A difficulty the university faces is the variety of new institutions and new graduate programs springing up in the UAE; competition for graduate students in some areas is becoming increasingly intense. The university likely will need to make decisions in the near future regarding which programs it wishes to invest the resources necessary to maintain viability in, and which it may choose to discontinue or maintain at a lower level of investment. In the interim, the role of graduate programs is unclear to a number of faculty and, in some respects, to the university more generally. Despite the addition and evolution of graduate programs there remains uncertainty among many with regard to future directions, and support of graduate programs is a concern among a number of faculty. Resource issues will include having a critical number of faculty and financial support for students. An additional consideration is the role of graduate program directors— expectations for student recruitment, faculty evaluation and quality assurance. Some would like to have uniformity among the directors across the colleges and schools, but it remains unclear that such an approach will be appropriate. As a first step to address some of these issues, the colleges and schools have been requested to develop job descriptions for graduate program directors. It is anticipated that expectations, evaluation, compensation and release time similarities and differences can thereby be better addressed than is currently the case. Another issue is the scheduling of work for faculty who teach in graduate programs. The overwhelming number of students are part-time, which results in classes being offered in the evening and on weekends. Faculty who have the added hardship of teaching responsibilities both during the week and on weekends are provided modest AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 123
compensation through the availability of additional faculty development funds. The university will need to consider its compensation for those whose schedules are significantly different from the majority of faculty. Supervision of graduate theses is also an issue. In the recent past there have not been consistent approaches to acknowledging those responsibilities, and it is unclear that the plan to provide compensatory course reductions will be a practical solution. Reaching a satisfactory resolution will require close scrutiny by the Deans and VCAA. For a variety of reasons, the Continuing Education Center was dissolved during Spring 2007 and its functions taken on by the individual colleges and schools. In the absence of a centralized office, it will be important that the colleges and schools employ assessment processes that ensure offerings are compatible with institutional mission and goals and are of the quality expected for regular offerings. These assessments should be a part of the processes used with credit-bearing courses and programs. One of the areas of which the university can be justifiably proud is the library. The building is a beautiful and functional facility but, more importantly, the services provided by library personnel are held in high regard across campus. Despite this, faculty do not appear to be fully aware of the range of library services and programs from which both they and their students can benefit. One potential obstacle to better librarian/faculty integration has been the difference in classification levels, wherein librarians have been classified as staff rather than faculty. This designation has excluded librarians from, for example, serving alongside faculty on a variety of committees, in the Faculty Senate and applying for faculty grants or scholarly development opportunities. Beginning in the 2007–2008 academic year, librarians and lab instructors were reclassified as Academic Staff, which is a quasi-faculty designation. The librarians hope that this change will facilitate greater integration. Additional consideration should be directed toward how faculty, students and staff can be made more aware of the services that are provided by the library. Learning assessment is achieved through various techniques. This starts from individual courses where faculty write course assessment reports. Feedback from students, advisory councils, alumni and employers is used by various schools to evaluate learning. Standard tests, participation in conferences and acceptance for graduate study at prestigious universities are also tools to monitor and assess student learning. The results of these assessment techniques are used—at various levels from faculty and department head to Deans—to make corrections. However, at the university level, there is no documented process for this. It is important to note that all programs at AUS are required to pass through a rigorous accreditation and reaccreditation process by the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research every five years. This includes a self-study of each program as well as a site visit by well-qualified individuals in the field of each program. A report that may include a list of recommendations follows these visits. All programs at AUS have either initial or full accreditation from the Ministry.
10.5.1 List of Related Recommendations •
AUS continue to periodically assess and improve as appropriate the effectiveness of placement tests and remedial courses.
124 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
10.6
AUS encourage a broader choice of general education requirements to strengthen the breadth of education in a university dominated by professional programs. AUS consider expanding course offerings in the arts, humanities, social sciences, and in physical education. The Arabic heritage requirement be revised so that it better addresses the contemporary challenges of the region. The general education requirement program on Arabian Gulf culture be strengthened and more courses offered that reflect the central discourse affecting this society. A university-wide mechanism be developed to assess the effectiveness of the general education requirements and suggest improvements, as appropriate. AUS explore opportunities to help advance democratic discourse through its general education requirements. AUS inform faculty through workshops, and students through the orientation week, of the connections of general education to majors. AUS identify instruments for assessing general competencies at various levels and develop an institutional plan for periodic assessment and improvement (e.g., an instrument to test competencies in math, and assess students upon entry to the university and prior to graduation). The Council of Deans examine and redetermine the roles, expectations, compensation and release time of graduate program directors. AUS develop cross-university clear and consistent procedures for compensating faculty for supervising graduate project/theses and for teaching courses during evenings and weekends. Academic units clearly articulate how non-credit offerings are related to institutional mission and goals. AUS develop procedures for periodic evaluation of non-credit offerings as part of program assessments. AUS analyze assessment data of student information literacy skills and use the results in conjunction with information literacy workshops. AUS expand its information literacy competency program beyond first-year students, make it a component of all major programs, and include competencies for seniors and graduates. AUS develop university-wide assessment processes for student learning that are fully documented, systematic, widely-used and sustained. AUS establish a program to train faculty, administrators and staff to effectively use such processes, leading to the creation of a culture of student learning assessment.
PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT
In 2002, the Board of Trustees approved a strategic plan that aimed at the achievement of financial sustainability without subsidy by the year 2007. The plan’s implementation resulted in the achievement of this goal in 2004. In 2006, the board approved the current AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 125
mission statement. In response, the university developed a planning structure that reflects the new mission. The planning structure included groups of “strategic processes” that addressed each item in the mission. Unfortunately, no evidence was found that the development of the planning structure and its strategic process involved faculty, staff or students. However, the university’s new Chancellor has begun a process to develop an institution-wide strategic plan. A committee that includes senior administrators as well as representatives from faculty, staff and students is meeting regularly with the aim of developing a draft strategic plan by the end of Spring Semester 2009. The AUS Planning Structure provides a sense of direction at the various administrative levels. Accomplishments supporting the “strategic processes” are recorded by each unit every semester. Evaluating progress leads to the modification and development of initiatives and policies, hence closing the loop. However, systematic definition of specific objectives and metrics, together with evaluation of progress against these goals, will be essential to the future quality of education at AUS. Allocation of resources through the budgeting process must also derive from objectives, priorities and assessment. At present, Deans and directors have little input in how the budget is allocated, as the process is carried out centrally at the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor level. Although the allocation process helps to maintain the financial sustainability of the university, lack of clear priorities and limited transparency have made the pursuit of new programs or strategic initiatives more difficult. AUS has adequate human, financial, technical and facility resources to support its mission. For its regular operating expenses, the university is financially independent. However, student tuition accounts for 85 percent of the university’s revenue. As a result tuition has been increased steadily to accommodate the high inflation rate in the UAE. Although AUS staff come from many different countries, the distribution of nationalities in different grades is not consistent. This reflects the nature of the labor structure in the UAE. There is a perception that staff at the same grade level are compensated differently based on their national origin. Recruiting and retaining quality staff remains a challenge as the salary scale hardly keeps up with salary increases in the UAE. In addition, there seem to be other issues relating to the question of whether the staff hiring process should be centralized or non-centralized. There are similar issues relating to staff development and promotion. AUS has an attractive campus that provides adequate physical facilities to support the university’s mission. These include academic, residential and service facilities. With the completion of the two new academic buildings that are in the pipeline, AUS will have the 17.2 square meters of academic space per student typical of peer institutions in the US. Office space, sports facilities and residential facilities remain a challenge. However, the board annually approves the expansion of these facilities. Even so, the university finds construction schedules difficult to control as they are administered through the Government of Sharjah. Availability of land will become an issue, particularly for faculty housing.
126 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
The original AUS facilities were built in a remarkably short time. However, this seems to have resulted in a lack of international standards regarding safety, accessibility, energy efficiency and environmental impact. AUS has addressed some of these issues and has initiated efforts to address the remaining ones. Technical resources at AUS are adequate to support the university’s mission, and include a strong IT infrastructure and Blackboard system. Laboratories, computers and workshops are well equipped, accessible and extensively used. Most academic and administrative support units at AUS have missions, goals and objectives, but these do not follow a standard format or terminology. The leader of each unit selects the performance indicators appropriate to unit mission and objectives and completion dates are objectively monitored. A variety of assessment mechanisms are used by the various units and measured against relevant standards. However, there has not yet been a systematic effort to evaluate and refine the indicators employed, or to assess the instruments used for measurement. Nevertheless, with hiring of senior staff dedicated to institutional assessment, the university now has an opportunity to develop a more coordinated, consistent and reflective approach for assessment, including an integrated institutional effectiveness plan. To renew its license, AUS is required to pass through a rigorous evaluation process by the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research every five years. The process requires the production of a self-study report with particular components, as well as a site-visit by commissioners. This process provides another assurance that AUS is following high standards.
10.6.1 List of Related Recommendations • • • • • • • • • •
AUS develop a longer-term strategic plan to better define the future of the university, and include appropriate constituents and stakeholders in the process. AUS reaffirm its commitment to compensation policies and practices that reward experience and quality of work without regard to race, color, gender, religion or national origin. AUS investigate the reasons for the negative feelings of some employees and take appropriate action. AUS investigate the issues associated with the staff hiring process through the involvement of the various parties affected. AUS develop means to improve staff professional development. AUS put in place a staff promotion policy that satisfies its strategic plan. The AUS administration make every effort to facilitate the timely construction of university facilities. AUS ensure that all new facilities are built to international standards regarding energy consumption, environmental impact, safety and accessibility. Existing buildings should be retrofitted to achieve this objective as soon as possible. The Facilities Department develop and implement a periodic assessment system for its services. AUS determine the specific needs of classrooms and computer labs, take appropriate action and periodically assess the services provided. AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 127
• • •
• •
10.7
AUS establish a clear budget allocation process to support organizational objectives, establish priorities and give unit heads the information necessary to propose initiatives consistent with the mission and goals of the university. AUS ensure that the budget process begins with and reflects unit-level input and priorities. AUS arrange a series of workshops for department heads to provide guidance on the development of formats of unit and program mission statements, goals and objectives. This initiative should include the review and integration of mission statements at upper administrative levels to ensure coherence and coverage of key functions of the university. The AUS organizational structure be driven by the strategic plan and informed by assessment data. AUS develop a communications strategy that effectively informs stakeholders of new, improved or removed services.
INTEGRITY
As AUS exists in a distinctive cultural setting, the expectations reflecting this setting are clearly communicated to its constituents through a variety of means. These include formal orientation for students, faculty and staff. The university communicates its mission, expected outcomes, policies and various activities through its website, as well the faculty and student handbooks and various internal publications. The university has documented procedures for students, faculty and staff that deal with cases of conflict. It is noticeable, however, that there is a tendency to solve problems at the lower level. It is also noticeable that there is a group of staff concerned about possible retribution if they were to voice their opinions. The Faculty Handbook, as well as the academic administrators, assure the faculty right of academic freedom. Students also have venues to express themselves, but are generally more limited than expected in a university setting. AUS can play a better role in encouraging responsible debates that balance rights and responsibilities. In keeping with copyright issues, AUS has policies that protect against the use of unauthorized software and other intellectual property. The Student Academic Integrity Code describes a range of potential violations along with procedures and penalties for violators. However, a survey carried out within one academic unit showed some important deficiencies in the application of the code. A task force is working on providing recommendations for improvements. AUS has an internal auditor and a comprehensive audit program. However, this position currently reports to the Chancellor and to the Board of Trustees finance committee through the Chancellor. A system of reporting directly to the board would be preferable.
10.7.1 List of Related Recommendations •
AUS ensure a healthy working environment for staff at all levels.
128 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
• • •
AUS explore opportunities to help advance democratic discourse through extracurricular activities, including student publications. The internal auditor report directly to the Board of Trustees. AUS establish documented assessment mechanisms that monitor and help maintain integrity in all aspects of university function.
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 …. 129
Chapter 11 11.1
APPENDICES
ABBREVIATIONS AAC AACSB AARC AAUP ACRL ACS-CPT AMIDEAST AOC AUFEC AUS AU AUSAA CAA CAIP CAPS CAR CAS CEN COD Dhs. ESM ETS FDC FOP GCC GER GERC GPA GPC GPCC GS&R HR IEP IL ILL/DD ILN IMS IPEDS IT ITD LCC MAPP MBA MSCHE NAAB NACUBO OSA PAB SA&D
Academic Achievement Center Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business Academic Appeals Review Committee American Association of University Professors Association of College and Research Libraries American Chemical Society – Committee on Professional Training America-Mideast Educational and Training Services Inc. Academic Operations Council Advisory University Faculty Evaluation Committee American University of Sharjah American University, Washington, DC American University of Sharjah Alumni Association Commission for Academic Accreditation (UAE Ministry) Course Assessment and Improvement Process Career Advisory and Placement Service Course Assessment Reports College of Arts and Sciences College of Engineering Council of Deans United Arab Emirates Dirhams Engineering Systems Management Educational Testing Service Faculty Development Center Faculty Organization Plan Gulf Cooperation Council General Education Requirement General Education Requirement Committee Grade Point Average Graduate Program Council Graduate Program Curriculum Committee Graduate Studies and Research Human Resources Intensive English Program Information Literacy Inter-Library Loan/Document Delivery Information Literacy Network Institute of Materials Systems Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Information Technology Information Technology Department Learning and Counseling Center Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress Master of Business Administration Middle States Commission on Higher Education National Architectural Accrediting Board National Association of College and University Business Officers Office of Student Affairs Planning Accreditation Board School of Architecture and Design
130 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
SBM SEC SIB SMS TOEFL UAE UHC UUCC UPAA US VCAA VCEM VCFA VCPA VCSA
School of Business and Management Senate Executive Committee Sharjah Islamic Bank Short Messaging Service Test of English as a Foreign Language United Arab Emirates University Health Center University Undergraduate Curriculum Committee Undergraduate Programs and Academic Affairs United States Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration Vice Chancellor for Public Administration Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs
AUS Self-Study Report 2008 ‌. 131
11.2
REPORT SECTIONS AND STANDARDS FOR ACCREDITATION
Standard for Accreditation 1 2 3
Mission and Goals Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal Institutional Resources
4
Leadership and Governance
5 6 7
Administration Integrity Institutional Assessment
8
Student Admissions and Retention
9
Student Support Services
10 Faculty
11 Educational Offerings
12 General Education 13
Related Educational Activities
14
Assessment of Student Learning
132 …. AUS Self-Study Report 2008
Related Chapter and/or Sections in the Self-Study Report • Chapter 3 • Section 8.1 • Section 8.2.5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Section 8.2 Section 4.1 Section 4.3 Section 4.4 Section 4.5 Section 4.6 Section 4.2 Chapter 9 Section 8.3 Section 5.1 Section 5.2 Section 5.3 Section 5.4 Section 5.5 Section 5.6 Section 5.7 Chapter 6 Section 7.2.1 Section 7.3.1 Section 9.3 Section 7.2.1 Section 7.2.2 Section 7.3 Section 7.5 Section 7.6 Section 7.2.3 Section 7.1 Section 7.4 Section 7.2.4 Section 7.7 Section 7.8