Scholarships of Discovery, Application, and Integration

Statement of Questions Addressed

Methodology

Findings, Interpretations, and Analysis

Discussion, Recommendations, and Conclusions

For questions regarding the WASC Self Study contact the WASC Coordinating Office.

Statement of Questions Addressed

The paradigm of the university as a center of learning for all members of the academic community necessarily includes faculty scholarship as an essential element. Scholarship often termed "professional development," is the process by which faculty engage in life-long learning and remain at the forefront of their disciplines. It is also the process by which new knowledge is discovered, applied or integrated. Cal Poly recognizes scholarly activity as a central part of its mission:

As a predominantly undergraduate, comprehensive, polytechnic university serving California, the mission of Cal Poly is to discover, integrate, articulate, and apply knowledge. This it does by emphasizing teaching; engaging in research; participating in the various communities, local, state, national, and international, with which it pursues common interests; and where appropriate, providing students with the unique experience of direct involvement with the actual challenges of their disciplines in the United States and abroad.

In its Strategic Plan, Cal Poly also recognizes and endorses, as part of the expectations for faculty, the four types of scholarship identified in the Carnegie Foundation report entitled Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton University Press, 1990). These are the Scholarships of Teaching, Discovery, Integration, and Application. Equally significant is our recognition of the role such scholarship plays in creating and enhancing an environment that fosters student learning.

Recently, the significance of student involvement in experiential learning and the methods and processes of inquiry have been reaffirmed by various national groups. The National Science Foundation in 1996 issued Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology. The Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land Grant Universities in 1997 published Returning to Our Roots: The Student Experience, Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities. The Council on Undergraduate Research in May 1999 made public its report of Testimony to House Science Committee, April 1998.

Two major assessment and planning initiatives have made similar affirmations within the CSU. The system-wide Academic Senate has emphasized the need for graduates to be "skilled in using various methods of inquiry: scientific, philosophical, problem-solving and artistic" and to be "able to analyze and evaluate both quantitative and qualitative data" and to recognize "the limits of empiricism" (Baccalaureate Education in the California State University November 1997). In its Cornerstones Report of December 1997, the CSU expressed "a commitment to encourage student involvement in scholarship, research and creative activity under faculty guidance, because these activities are central to the teaching mission of a comprehensive university." Similarly, in Cal Poly’s own planning documents, the involvement of students in hands-on research and creative activities and the importance of developing analytical, critical thinking and evaluative skills, is a recurring theme Visionary Pragmatism and University Strategic Plan college and unit strategic plans). Thus, Cal Poly views faculty scholarship to be inextricably intertwined with educational program quality and student learning and to be a vital component of the intellectual environment of the University.

The following general questions were posed to evaluate faculty scholarship:

1. To what extent do Cal Poly faculty engage in the scholarships of discovery, application and integration (Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate), thus continuing to learn in their fields and to contribute to the learning of society?
2. What additional actions are appropriate to helping increase both qualitatively and quantitatively the University’s scholarly achievements?

Before attempting to develop approaches to answering these questions, a working definition of faculty scholarship, intended to encompass the broad range of scholarly activities of faculty at comprehensive universities, was adopted:

It should be noted that faculty accomplishments and contributions to their fields that occur outside the university, through private consulting arrangements, were not included in the analysis undertaken for this report.

(Top)

Methodology

Faculty scholarship was addressed in three ways, by:

• Quantifying and describing faculty scholarship.
• Assessing current policies and programs that either support or hinder faculty scholarship.
• Quantifying and describing the benefits to students of faculty scholarship.

Specific questions were articulated for each of these approaches and are listed below.

Quantifying and describing faculty scholarship:

1. What types of scholarship are engaged in by Cal Poly faculty?
2. What percentage of faculty engages in scholarship?
3. How much external funding is obtained in support of scholarship? How does it compare with other CSU campuses and/or similar comprehensive universities?
4. How many faculty receive professional awards or recognition from external entities (e.g. awards from professional societies; service on editorial boards of journals; service as reviewers of grant proposals or journal manuscripts; election to professional societies/organizations and service as officers in such societies/organizations)?
5. How extensively do faculty publish in peer-refereed journals? In other professional publications?
6. What creative contributions other than scholarly publications do faculty make in their disciplines (e.g. artistic and literary works, inventions)?
7. Assessing current policies and programs that either support or hinder faculty scholarship:
8. What formal university/college programs exist to support faculty scholarship?
9. What, if any, does the university do with organizations such as federal and state agencies to encourage support of faculty scholarship at Cal Poly?
10. To what extent are facilities, equipment and other physical resources adequate to support faculty scholarship? What specialized/unique resources are available?
11. Are library resources appropriate and sufficient to support faculty scholarship?
12. What conditions or factors prevent optimization of the level and quality of faculty scholarship at Cal Poly?
13. To what extent do policies permit/promote scholarship?

Quantifying and describing the benefits to students of faculty scholarship:

1. To what extent do teaching and scholarship merge?
2. To what extent are students involved in faculty scholarship?
3. What opportunities exist for student research experience off-campus?
4. What impact do student research experiences have on career choices/employment?

A variety of information sources were utilized to answer these questions. Table 1. correlates each question with the data sources used to address it.

Table 1. SOURCES USED TO OBTAIN DATA ON FACULTY SCHOLARSHIP

SOURCES USED:

(Top)

Findings, Interpretations, and Analysis

Quantifying and Describing Faculty Scholarship

Q. 1. What types of scholarship are practiced at Cal Poly?

• design, conduct, and publication of original research and research-related projects;
• artistic and musical design, performance and display;
• creation, publication and reading of literary works;
• design, construction, discovery and communication of new physical/chemical/biological/agricultural/engineering materials, processes, products or theories; physical structures and equipment; economic models and marketing plans;
• design, creation and implementation of new forms of teaching/learning in support of pedagogy.

  Some of these scholarly activities are summarized and discussed elsewhere in this report. Examples of creation and scholarship that fall in the artistic and literary works categories are described in further detail below.

  The scholarly and creative activities of Cal Poly faculty range from individual efforts to large, multi-million dollar projects that involve many faculty and students. In professional programs such as engineering, agriculture, architecture and business, applied research is emphasized. Specialized centers and institutes, involving groups of faculty, have evolved around specific research themes.. Nevertheless, interdisciplinary programs and collaborations among faculty in scholarly pursuits, particularly those that require cooperation across colleges, continue to be rare. (Additional information on special labs and projects)

Q. 2. What percentage of faculty engages in scholarship?

Q. 3. How much external funding is obtained in support of scholarship? How does this compare with other CSU campuses and/or similar comprehensive universities?

Q. 4. How many faculty receive professional awards or recognition from external entities (for example, awards from professional societies; service on editorial boards of journals; service as reviewers of grant proposals or journal manuscripts; election to professional societies/organizations and service as officers of such societies/organizations)?

Q. 5. How extensively do faculty publish in peer-reviewed journals? In other professional publications?

Table 3. Faculty Publications as Reported in Five-Year
Program Review Documents. See text for explanation.

Q. 6. What creative contributions other than scholarly publications do faculty make in their disciplines?

Assessing current policies and programs that either support or hinder faculty scholarship.

Several questions were posed to assess the ways in which infrastructure and policies (formal and informal) affect faculty scholarship. Infrastructure includes library resources and collections; research facilities and equipment; and other physical resources. Policies include official CSU and Cal Poly policies published in the Campus Administrative Manual (CAM), UCAM and other authorized sources; university and college policies/programs that support research, including intervention with state and federal agencies in support of faculty scholarship; and any other Cal Poly/CSU policies or factors that affect optimization of the level and quality of faculty scholarship.

Q. 7. What formal university/college programs exist to support faculty scholarship?

Q. 8. What lobbying, if any, does the University do with organizations such as federal and state agencies, to encourage support of faculty scholarship at Cal Poly?

Q. 9. To what extent are facilities, equipment and other physical resources adequate to support faculty scholarship? What specialized/unique resources are available?

Q. 10. Are Library resources appropriate and sufficient to support faculty scholarship?

Q. 11. What conditions or factors prevent optimization of the level and quality of faculty scholarship at Cal Poly?

• Unavailability of funds to maintain a professional development program for faculty;
• Lack of policy to provide for research/creative activity space allocation;
• Inequitable teaching loads;
• Inadequacy of "seed" funds to develop or expand creative/investigative activities;
• Insufficient support for graduate courses and programs;
• Lack of standardized RPT criteria that acknowledges research as a valued activity;
• Unavailability of functional, "supportive", intellectual environment;
• Ambiguous policy regarding intellectual property of inventors.
• The committee has prepared recommendations for creating an environment that supports faculty in their scholarly work, in the form of an Academic Senate resolution. This resolution was discussed extensively by the Senate and approved on May 25, 1999 (Appendix I.3.C: Academic Senate Resolution on Development of a Research and Professional Development Infrastructure at Cal Poly). An Intellectual Property Policy, with clear principles and guidelines, has been approved since the survey was conducted.

Q. 12. To what extent do policies permit/promote scholarship?

Quantifying and describing the benefits to students of faculty scholarship.

Q.13 To what extent do teaching and scholarship merge?

• Scholarship enables faculty to maintain currency in their disciplines.
• Scholarship keeps teaching relevant and lively.
• Scholarship provides opportunities for undergraduates to engage in sustained work on demanding, multifaceted problems in which they learn to define and communicate their own solutions, and to develop critical thinking and analytical skills.
• Scholarship provides opportunities for students to acquire core competencies that are valued by employers.
• Scholarship provides for extended individual interaction between faculty and students."

In addition, individual examples abound of faculty using their scholarly interests to develop innovative courses and bring new technologies to the classroom and teaching laboratory. To cite one example, geographic information systems (GIS) technology was introduced to the campus by faculty who used the technology to pursue their professional interests. It is now an integral part of many curricula, including landscape architecture, biological sciences and various agriculture programs. Faculty research interests have brought many techniques and specialized instruments to campus that are now integrated into the instructional programs.

Q. 14. To what extent are students involved in faculty scholarship?

Results of Student Research Competitions 1993-1998

Number of student entries, number of students selected to attend the CSU-wide event, and number of winners in the event

Q. 15. What opportunities exist for student research experience off campus?

TABLE 4. OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCE OFF-CAMPUS (E.G., SPECIAL PROGRAMS, NATIONAL LABS, NASA, INDUSTRY PROJECTS, COMMUNITY PROJECTS, FOUNDATIONS, COMPANIES, STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCIES, ETC.) AS FOUND IN MASTER'S THESES AT CAL POLY.

• Development and field-test of a rubric for use in assessment of new teachers
• Site development and implementation of a Safe School Plan based upon national and state research
• Review of research

In 1997, the NIH awarded Cal Poly a Minority International Research Training (MIRT) Grant by the NIH for biomedical research training of minority students. This NIH program funds minority students to do biomedical research in laboratories in foreign countries. The students work with either a Cal Poly faculty member at the foreign institution or with the local faculty at the foreign site. Approximately eight students and three faculty have participated in the program each year since 1997. Research sites include Cambridge, England; Mallorca, Spain; Prague, Czech Republic; Guatemala; and Peru. Students’ areas of research are the biological and bio-behavioral sciences.

Many off-campus internship opportunities exist for students in professional programs. In 1998-99 750 students participated in co-ops and internships off campus. Information was not available as to how many of these internships involved research. It is likely that most do not, but instead provide relevant work experience.

Q. 16. What impact do student research experiences have on career choices/employment?

Discussion, Recommendations, and Conclusions

The following general conclusions can be drawn from this analysis of faculty scholarship at Cal Poly:

• Scholarship is a valued and integral part of the university enterprise and informs hiring, retention, promotion and tenure policies.
• Particularly valued is the important role faculty scholarship plays in maintaining and enhancing the quality of the teaching-learning experience.
• Cal Poly faculty engage in scholarly activities that are typical of most universities, with an emphasis on applied research in the professional fields.
• Undergraduate and graduate students benefit directly and indirectly from faculty scholarship, and these opportunities are supplemented with off-campus research experiences.
• The level of faculty involvement in externally funded research and scholarly activity is low in comparison to other campuses in the CSU.
• Resources and support for faculty scholarship do not meet the needs and desires of faculty; nor are they consistent with the apparent degree to which scholarship is valued by the university community.
• The University does not have current procedures in place to track the kind of information that is needed to assess the research and scholarly activity of faculty and its impact on teaching and learning.

Several recommendations emerged from our analysis. The principal recommendation is that the university provide more support for and recognition of faculty scholarship. To this end, it is recommended that the President and Provost endorse and fully implement the Academic Senate Resolution on Development of a Research and Professional Development Infrastructure at Cal Poly. The specific recommendations contained in that resolution are as follows:

• That research and other scholarly activities be a factor in assigning faculty work loads.
• That research and other scholarly activities be a factor in assigning faculty workspace, facilities, and equipment, without compromising the quality of undergraduate education.
• That campus resource allocations include considerations of research and other scholarly activities, without compromising the quality of undergraduate education.
• That research programs and proposal development efforts be encouraged and supported.
• That scholarly activities be given consistent recognition in retention, tenure, and promotional decisions at all levels of review.
• That research opportunities be encouraged as a valuable component of undergraduate education.
• That graduate curricula be encouraged and developed, including funding for recruitment of graduate students and for graduate assistants.

The second general recommendation is that the University support and encourage more involvement of students in faculty research and scholarship. The subcommittee noted that in most universities, student involvement in faculty research is more common and extensive than it is at Cal Poly. The benefits of this involvement are reciprocal. Students benefit from the experience of direct inquiry, and the scholarship of the faculty is facilitated by student participation. Thus it would seem desirable to encourage students to work with faculty in their scholarly activities and to encourage faculty to involve students in these activities. Possible ways to encourage faculty to involve students in their work are:

• Provide institutional funds for faculty to hire students as research assistants.
• Expand existing programs to increase the opportunities for students to assist in faculty research.
• Expand graduate programs.
• Further explore joint doctoral programs with Ph.D. granting institutions.
• Develop an undergraduate honors program that provides incentives for students to conduct research with faculty.
• Designate certain professors as research professors. These faculty would have lighter teaching loads but would be responsible for involving and supervising significant student research.
• In addition, the subcommittee recommended that:
• The Library further publicize its new electronic resources and continue to seek additional resources for acquiring books and periodicals.
• That lobbying efforts be expanded to help faculty obtain more grants and contracts. The program could start with local agencies and extend to California industries, state departments and agencies, and selected non-profit and U.S. government organizations. An updated listing of Cal Poly graduates working in various companies would be helpful in targeting possible company sponsors in California. Key administrators need the time to lobby off-campus for grants and research. These administrators include Deans and other appropriate upper level administrators.

The third general recommendation, that the University develop and formalize methods for tracking and archiving information on faculty scholarship and resources related to faculty scholarship, addresses weaknesses in the tracking and accessibility of such information. Specifically it is recommended that:

• A formal process be developed to collect and archive information on faculty scholarly activities, awards, funding, etc., in an Academic Affairs database. Input to the database could be a routine part of institutional assessment and would facilitate preparation of future self-study reports and processes for internal reviews and external accreditation reviews. The challenge will be to devise a framework with clearly specified categories that can be uniformly utilized by and applied to all academic programs on campus. The new CSU requirement that all faculty submit annual reports (FARs) that include information on scholarly activities, could be useful in beginning and maintaining this archival process.
• To more clearly assess the extent of publication in peer-reviewed journals, the Academic Senate formalize part of the program review process; for example, develop a standardized summary questionnaire requesting that departments under review submit pertinent information such as the number of FTEF, total publications, and peer-reviewed journal publications. The departments at Cal Poly encompass many diverse disciplines and classical peer-reviewed publications are not necessarily a proper professional activity in all of them. However, a consistent tabulation of publications will provide a gauge of this type of activity over time for those departments for which this is an important measure of faculty scholarship.
• The Foundation and the university utilize the same database with the same data fields for equipment inventory, and that fields be created within the database that would facilitate a search for research equipment. The database should be easily searchable by university or Foundation employees via a World Wide Web interface. This would provide a valuable central archive and means for faculty to identify and access specialized equipment and facilities.

In summary, our self-study of faculty scholarship has identified both strengths and weaknesses in this aspect of the intellectual environment at our university. The recommendations contained herein would address some of the weaknesses and permit further development of the knowledge, talents and special skills of our faculty. This, is turn, would enhance the intellectual environment of the campus, making it a more dynamic and exciting center of learning.

WASC Home | Top

Please send your suggestions and responses to the WASC Coordinating Office

Appendices

Appendix I.3.A.

Information on faculty awards and recognition:

• Seven Program reviews (Appendix I.3.A1-8)
• The Credit Report (Appendix I.3.A9-16)

Available in the Academic Programs Office hard copy only

Appendix I.3.B.

Inventory of CPSLO policies and programs that support faculty professional development and scholarship

Inventory of CPSLO Policies and Programs that Support Faculty

Professional Development and Scholarship

Inventory of CPSLO Policies and Programs that Support Faculty

Professional Development and Scholarship

Inventory of CPSLO Policies and Programs that Support Faculty

Professional Development and Scholarship

Inventory of CPSLO Policies and Programs that Support Faculty

Professional Development and Scholarship

Inventory of CPSLO Policies and Programs that Support Faculty

Professional Development and Scholarship

Appendix I.3.C.

Resolution on Development of a Research and Professional Development Infrastructure at Cal Poly

ACADEMIC SENATE

OF

CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY

San Luis Obispo, CA

AS-527-99/R&PDC

RESOLUTION ON

DEVELOPMENT OF A RESEARCH AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

INFRASTRUCTURE AT CAL POLY

Background Statement: In 1996, the Academic Senate reconfigured its subcommittees. From this process, the Research and Professional Development Committee was formed and given the charge to assist in the development of research policies for the campus. Faculty on this committee, over the past two years, began identifying barriers to research on campus through a campus wide survey, and has prepared recommendations for creating an environment that supports faculty efforts in their scholarly work.

As a predominantly undergraduate, comprehensive, polytechnic university serving California, the mission of Cal Poly is to discover, integrate, articulate, and apply knowledge. This it does by emphasizing teaching; engaging in research; participating in the various communities, local, state, national, and international, with which it pursues common interests; and where appropriate, providing students with the unique experience of direct involvement with the actual challenges of their disciplines, in the United States and abroad.

In Scholarship Reconsidered (citation), Ernest Boyer emphasized that teaching and research are both important scholarly activities of the professorate. In its strategic plan, Cal Poly has encouraged the four scholarships as defined by Boyer;

Cal Poly continually seeks ways to integrate the four types of scholarship, for the purpose of maintaining high quality academic programs. The benefits of faculty scholarship are many. Some examples are:

• Scholarship enables faculty to maintain currency in their disciplines
• Scholarship keeps teaching relevant and lively
• Scholarship can be revenue generating
• Scholarship provides opportunities for undergraduates to engage in sustained work on demanding, multifaceted problems in which they learn to define and communicate their own solutions, and to develop critical thinking and analytical skills.
• Scholarship provides opportunities for students to acquire core competencies that are valued by employers.
• Scholarship enhances the reputation of the individual and the University
• Scholarship provides an avenue for creativity and self expression
• Scholarship provides a means for faculty to reflect on the learning Process
• Scholarship provides opportunities for interaction with working professionals and with scholars at other Universities
• Scholarship provides for extended individual interaction between faculty and students

The National Science Foundation recently undertook an extensive review of science, mathematics, engineering and technology education. Its report; Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics. Engineering and Technology, stated that; "all students have access to supportive, excellent undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology, and all students learn these subjects by direct experience with the method and process of inquiry. Every student should be presented an opportunity to understand what science is and is not, and to be involved in some way in scientific inquiry, not just a 'hands-on' experience."

Need For Policy

To operationalize this commitment to scholarship, Cal Poly needs to develop new policies and revise existing policies to support scholarly activities. A recent survey conducted by this committee of the Cal Poly faculty revealed that although there is some level of support for the research activities of its faculty, Cal Poly does not provide the necessary support to meet the professional development needs of faculty and students in the area of research. The following barriers to professional development were identified by the faculty survey:

1. Unavailability of funds to maintain a professional development program;

2. Lack of policy for research/creative activity space allocation;

3. Inequitable teaching loads;

4.Inadequacy of "seed" funds to develop or expand creative/investigative activities;

5. Insufficient support for graduate courses and programs;

6. Lack of standardized RPT criteria and acknowledgement of research as a valued activity;

7. Unavailability of functional, "supportive" intellectual environment;

8. Ambiguous policy regarding intellectual property of inventors.

Recommendations of the Research and Professional Development Committee

1.0 Make funds available to maintain a professional development program:

It should be the responsibility of each college to allocate and administer resources to maintain a professional development program. It is recommended that such resources be allocated to faculty based on professional progress and productivity.

2.0 Provide space for creative/investigative activities:

It is recommended that each college ensure that adequate space is provided to support creative and scholarly activities, and develop criteria for allocating such space to its faculty and students.

3.0 Equitable teaching loads:

Use flexibility in assigning faculty workloads to support scholarship. Scholarship and creative activities represent significant and valuable contributions to the University, and should be recognized in assigning faculty workloads. Efforts should be made in the assignment of work loads (e.g.; numbers of courses requiring preparation, contact hours, class size, committee assignments) to ensure that all faculty, and particularly junior faculty, have quality time to devote to the pursuit of their scholarship. In addition, junior faculty should be offered a reduced teaching load in their first year of employment.

4.0 Make available creative/investigative "seed" funds:

Cal Poly should establish a campus wide research fund to support the initiation of research programs by faculty, and in particular, junior faculty. These funds would supplement funds currently available through programs such as the State Faculty Support Grants Program. In addition, start up funds should be made available for new or junior faculty, and should be offered as part of the recruitment package.

5.0 Promote graduate curricula:

Graduate programs are an important complement to faculty scholarship. Resources should be dedicated to strengthening, expanding and initiating new graduate programs, particularly in disciplines relevant to the polytechnic emphasis of the campus. Since graduate level courses require a greater in-depth coverage of the subject matter and a greater student-teacher interaction, they should be given an additional weight factor when calculating WTU's.

For questions regarding the WASC Self Study contact the WASC Coordinating Office.

Home | What is WASC? | The Context | Innovative Study
Compliance | Resources | The People |  Contact Info

Last Modified: January 19, 2000
For questions and comments regarding the WASC Self Study contact the WASC Coordinating Office