Resolution aims to improve data access in response to multimedia journalism program deletion

Faculty Senate continued discussion about the deletion of Arkansas State University’s multimedia journalism (MMJ) program and passed a resolution to avoid similar situations.

Associate professor of history, Gary Edwards, Ph.D. said during the Feb. 16 meeting two of the points he made in a document about the program’s deletion presented during the last meeting were moot due to statements from Chancellor Todd Shields, Ph.D.

“We wanted to understand why the university didn’t request reduction in viability numbers for multimedia journalism. According to the chancellor last time, this was an unenforced rule,” Edwards said. 

However, during the April 28 Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) meeting, chief academic officer Mason Campbell said the Arkansas Division of Higher Education (ADHE) Academic Affairs staff requested time with the chief academic officers (CAOs) from each institution to discuss their non-viable programs. 

“Our staff required in-depth meetings with all the CAOs and often deans and other campus staff to essentially uncover the elements of these programs that may influence viability we can’t see in the data. Although most of these conversations were not easy, all of the institutions came to the table, of course, willing to follow policy and make necessary adjustments,” Campbell said. 

Policy Change

William McLean, Ph.D., senior vice provost for academic affairs, said some issues with the viability of the MMJ program stem from policy changes from the ADHE. 

“Somebody’s always on the list and somebody’s not. It’s a fairly new process, just to be honest. It went from an idle threat to now it’s a real threat to everyone and I think that’s the way we have to approach it,” McLean said. 

At the April 28 meeting, Campbell said the ADHE developed a new policy for viability after receiving board recommendations at a Jan. 27, 2023 meeting. 

“Our previous viability report was not designed to make determinations based on multiple three-year averages at one point in time and we were only delivering it every three years. We teamed up with the Information Systems staff to develop a new report that included a total of five years, so academic year 18-22, with a list of programs that exceeded two additional years after initially being identified as non-viable,” Campbell said. 

The associate professor said understanding where a program is on the three-year viability review cycle is important to prevent situations similar to the deletion of the MMJ program. According to the AHECB policy, programs are reviewed for viability based on graduation data from a three-year average. 

McLean said the deans and chairs of programs scheduled for deletion in April 2024 were notified in October 2023. He said it was up to the colleges and departments to craft a response by November.  

Policy “Arbitrariness” 

Edwards said the ADHE policy on removing programs that do not meet viability standards was previously unenforced. He said this meant programs with low graduation numbers were not concerned their program might get cut. 

Edwards said Vincent Moreno, Ph.D., chair of English and philosophy, and Eric Cave, Ph.D., professor of philosophy, told him they were worried about the philosophy program.

“Philosophy is underwater according to the standard,” Edwards said. “But they said, ‘We’re always underwater and they always tell us we’re underwater but they never cut us.’”

Moreno said the philosophy program should be on the list for upcoming deletion but is not. He said this is because philosophy serves other areas, including general education requirements. 

“That suggests an arbitrariness through what policies are executed,” Edwards said. “You just feel like there’s an ax over you and it’s hidden by a cloud and at one point you’ll look up and you’ll be dead.”

Edwards said while he is glad philosophy is not on the list of nonviable programs, he would almost be relieved if it was because he would be confident that the ADHE is adhering to the policy.

Cheating Scandal

Edwards said two major incidents of cheating within the MMJ program from 2017 to 2018, which accounted for a 60% loss in graduates, was not an extenuating circumstance the ADHE would consider when reviewing program viability. 

“A cheating scandal of that proportion, even if it’s 100% accurate, seems to matter zero to the Department of Higher Education Coordinating Board,” Edwards said. 

The AHECB annual review of program viability graphic lists three circumstances in which ADHE staff would determine a program warrants special consideration. If it is central to the school’s mission or has a history of high wage, demand job placement, the program continues with reduced viability standards for five years. ADHE staff will also make a special consideration in the event of a data submission correction, in which the program meets viability standards and continues to receive state support. 

Edwards said since the ADHE does not consider cheating scandals a reason for special consideration, departments that experience similar cheating incidents may not feel inclined to properly discipline cheating students. 

“I think a small department that is on the bubble with their numbers would be foolish, in light of this, to ever institute academic discipline ever again,” Edwards said. “Because if you lost several majors, you would go below and the higher education coordinating board does not care why you go below. They only want to know ‘What are your numbers?’”

Resolution

Associate professor of chemistry John Hershberger, Ph.D., presented the resolution he created with associate professor of English Khem Aryal, Ph.D., and Edwards. 

The resolution said, “The University commits to providing the resources and data for faculty to be empowered to fulfill their duties, including but not limited to teaching, research, service and administrative tasks.”

Hershberger said when faculty would previously ask for data, the administration would often not provide it.

“The impression we would get was ‘Well you don’t need to know that,’ or, ‘We don’t want to give that,’ and why that is, I don’t know,” Hershberger said. 

The resolution requested A-State administration provide faculty with any relevant rulings from the ADHE as decisions are made and to clearly document that communication.

Additionally, the resolution requested the administration design a system for faculty to easily access information without having to request it from the administration. The resolution said faculty should have access to information like degree enrollment data, graduation data, and the demographics of current and former students in a program.

“It’s always a struggle to get this data,” Hershberger said. “It’s something we would like to ask the university to help us with so that we can more effectively do our jobs.”

The resolution passed unanimously via voice vote.

Categories: News