THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234
|
THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234 |
TO: |
Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee |
FROM: |
Johanna Duncan-Poitier
|
SUBJECT: |
Sunbridge College: Renewal of Institutional Accreditation by the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education |
DATE: |
October 10, 2007
|
STRATEGIC GOAL: |
Goal 2
|
AUTHORIZATION(S): |
|
Issue for Decision
Should the Regents renew the institutional accreditation of Sunbridge College?
Proposed Handling
The question will come before the Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee at its October 2007 meeting where it will be voted on and action taken. It will then come before the full Board at its October 2007 meeting for final action.
Procedural History
Sunbridge College has applied for renewal of its institutional accreditation by the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education, pursuant to Subpart 4-1 of the Rules of the Board of Regents.
An accreditation visit to Sunbridge College was conducted in December 2001 as part of a transitional review. The College’s term of accreditation was extended to March 2007 with conditions. The conditions recommended by the review team, the Regents Advisory Council and acted on by the Board of Regents at its March 2002 meeting were as follows: (1) develop and implement a strategic plan to achieve long-range financial, technological and enrollment goals; and (2) implement a formal system to track and assess student learning and achievement. The Commissioner extended the term of accreditation to December 31, 2007, as the administration of the College had changed prior to the December 2006 visit.
On December 12 and 13, 2006, a team of peer reviewers, along with Department staff, conducted a site visit to Sunbridge College as part of a comprehensive review for renewal of institutional accreditation. The team found that Sunbridge College was in substantial compliance with a number of the standards for institutional accreditation except the standards relating to assessment of student achievement; curricula; faculty competence and credentials; and the library. The team found that the College had not made significant progress in regard to the condition of the 2002 accreditation action to develop and implement a systematic plan for the assessment of student achievement. Given the College’s failure to meet the condition of the 2002 accreditation action and its other areas of partial compliance, the site visit team and the Department recommended Sunbridge College be granted probationary accreditation for two years. The Department recommended that all recommendations in the report that follows must be met by December 2009 with a progress report due to the Department on July 31, 2008.
On September 21, 2007, the Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation voted to accept the Department’s recommendation for probationary accreditation for a period of two years with the reporting requirements as listed. Progress reports are shared with the Regents Advisory Council.
Rules of the Regents 4-1.3 (d) requires that if an institution is not in compliance with any such standard, “the commissioner and the Board of Regents shall either:
(i) immediately initiate adverse action against the institution; or
(ii) require the institution to take appropriate corrective action to bring itself into compliance with such standards within a time period that shall not exceed:
(a) twelve months, if the longest program offered by the institution is less than one year in length;
(b) eighteen months, if the longest program offered by the institution is at least one year, but less than two years in length; or
(c) two years, if the longest program offered by the institution is at least two years in length.
(2) The corrective action period may be extended at the discretion of the commissioner and the Board of Regents upon good cause shown, including but not limited to, an adequate showing by the institution that it has a reasonable explanation for not meeting the standard during the corrective action period and that it has a plan acceptable to the department to meet the standard within a reasonable time period.
(3) An institution that is required to take corrective action pursuant to subparagraph (ii) of paragraph (1) of this subdivision shall receive probationary accreditation for such period of corrective action.”
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Board of Regents grant probationary institutional accreditation to Sunbridge College for a period of two years ending on December 31, 2009. The College shall provide a progress report, due July 31, 2008, on the following matters:
Board of Regents members with a conflict of interest, or the appearance of a conflict of interest, on this application are asked to recuse themselves from participating in the deliberation and decisions.
Timetable for Implementation
If the Board of Regents grants probationary accreditation to Sunbridge College, the accreditation would go into effect on December 31, 2007. Sunbridge College is required to submit accreditation data reports annually, a progress report due July 31, 2008, and meet all recommendations by December 31, 2009. If the July 2008 report indicates that the College has not made substantial progress on the recommendations, the College’s accreditation will be brought before the Board of Regents for reconsideration.
Information in Support of Recommendation
Peer Review Visit. Sunbridge College prepared a self-study following the requirements for self-studies in the Handbook of Institutional Accreditation. In December 2006, a peer review team visited the College. It reviewed the self-study, interviewed faculty, administrators, and students; reviewed documents and other information available on campus; and reviewed physical resources. The team prepared a draft compliance review report of its findings and recommendations, which included recommendations to fully meet the standards for institutional accreditation. The team found that Sunbridge College met some of standards for accreditation, but did not meet or partially met the standards related to assessment of student achievement; curricula; faculty competence and credentials; and the library. The team found that the College was still granting credit for its non-credit programming, as was cited in the 2001 accreditation report. The team also found that the College had not developed a systematic plan for the assessment of student achievement, a condition of the 2002 accreditation action.
Peer Review Team Recommendation: Probationary accreditation for a period of two years.
The Department transmitted the team’s draft compliance review report to Sunbridge College, providing it 30 days to prepare a written response correcting factual errors and addressing any other aspect of the report and any recommendations in it. The draft report, the College’s response, and the review team’s recommendation for accreditation action became the final compliance review report.
Regents Advisory Council Review. As required by Subpart 4-1, the Department transmitted the final compliance review report, including its preliminary recommendation for accreditation action, for consideration by the Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation. (The Advisory Council is established in §3.12(d) of the Rules of the Board of Regents “to review applications for accreditation and renewal of accreditation pursuant to Part 4 of this Title, and such other matters as the Department may ask it to review, and make recommendations to the Regents and the Commissioner based on its review.”)
Department’s Preliminary Recommendation: Grant probationary accreditation for a period of two years.
On September 21, 2007, the Advisory Council met to review Sunbridge College’s application and to make a recommendation to the Board of Regents on its accreditation. In a public meeting, it met with representatives of the College, and the staff coordinator. Following presentations by Department staff and Sunbridge College, questions, and discussion, the Advisory Council made the following recommendation to the Board of Regents on accreditation action:
Regents Advisory Council Recommendation: Grant probationary accreditation of Sunbridge College for a period of two years.
Attachments A and B are the Final Compliance Review Report considered by the Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation including the Summary and Preliminary Recommendation on Accreditation Action.
Commissioner’s Review. Sunbridge College nor the Senior Deputy Commissioner appealed the Advisory Council’s recommendation. Therefore, pursuant to Subpart 4-1, the Commissioner adopted its recommendation as his recommendation to the Board of Regents.
Commissioner’s Recommendation: Grant probationary accreditation for a period of two years ending December 31, 2009.
Attachment C sets forth the range of accreditation actions authorized in Subpart 4-1 of the Rules of the Board of Regents.
Attachment A
Summary of the Accreditation Review of
Sunbridge College
and Recommendation to the
Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation
Item for Consideration: September 21, 2007
Sunbridge College, Chestnut Hollow, NY (Rockland County), has been reviewed for confirmation of its compliance with the standards for institutional accreditation and for renewal of its institutional accreditation by the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education.
Recommendation on Accreditation Action: Grant probationary accreditation for two years and all recommendations in the report that follows must be met by December 2009.
Institutional Information: The primary goal of the Sunbridge College is to prepare individuals for careers in teaching Waldorf Education at elementary school level. The Regents granted the College a provisional charter in 1991, authorizing it to award the Master of Science in Education (M.S.Ed) degree. The degree does not lead to certification of teachers in New York. The College was awarded a permanent charter by the Regents in 1999. The Regents have accredited Sunbridge since 1991.
The College is one of three Waldorf teacher-training institutions in the United States. At the time of the visit, the College reported that it enrolled 7 full-time students and 63 part-time students in its degree programs. It also enrolled 113 students in the non-degree certificate and foundation skills programs.
Reason for Recommendation: The last accreditation review for Sunbridge College was conducted in December 2001 as part of a transitional review. Sunbridge’s term of accreditation was extended to March 2007 with condition. The conditions recommended by the review team, the Regents Advisory Council and acted by the Board of Regents were as follows: (1) develop and implement a strategic plan to achieve long-range financial, technological, and enrollment goals; and (2) implement a formal system to track and assess student learning and achievement. The 2006 site visit team found that, while the College presented an optimistic progress report in 2004, it had not made significant progress in regard to development of a systematic plan for the assessment of student achievement. The Long Range Plan 2003-09 that had been developed and included in the progress report proved to be overly ambitious for the College and most of the goals to be completed by 2006 have not been achieved.
The 2001 team recommended that, “Sunbridge College must assure that credit is granted only to students who are degree candidates and have achieved the stated objectives of each credit-bearing learning activity.” In 2002 and 2003, the College made progress in registering some of the non-credit Certificate programs, as recommended. However, the 2006 site visit team found that the College was still offering unregistered credit-bearing curricula,
Based on the findings cited in the report and given the College’s failure to meet the conditions of the 2002 accreditation action, the Department’s preliminary recommendation is that Sunbridge College be granted probationary accreditation for two years and all recommendations in the report that follows must be met by 2009. The College shall provide a progress report, due July 31, 2008, on the following matters:
Report of an Accreditation Evaluation Team Visit to
Sunbridge College
Spring Valley, NY
On December 12 and 13, 2006, a team comprising a staff coordinator and peer reviewers conducted a site visit to Sunbridge College as part of a comprehensive review for renewal of institutional accreditation. The team was composed of the following members:
Ralph (Ric) Campbell
Director
Master of Arts in Teaching Program
Bard College
Annandale-on-Hudson, NY 12504
Ward Deutschman
Special Assistant for Operations and Information Management
Office of Student Affairs
Dowling College
Oakdale, NY 11769
Linnea LoPresti (Review Coordinator)
Associate
Office of College and University Evaluation
NYS Education Department
Albany, NY 12234
Deborah Weibman
Registrar
Dutchess Community College
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Harvey Wiener, Ph.D
Emeritus
Marymount Manhattan College
Massapequa, NY 11758
Prior to the visit, the team reviewed the College’s self-study, report of the 2001 accreditation visit, and other materials and documents provided by the College. On site, the team met with the President and other members of the administration, members of the faculty, staff and students. It inspected the College’s facilities, course materials and student work, library resources, publications, and other materials.
The last accreditation visit to Sunbridge College was conducted in December 2001 as part of a transitional review. Sunbridge’s term of accreditation was extended to March 2007 with condition. The conditions recommended by the review team, the Regents Advisory Council and acted on by the Board of Regents were as follows: (1) develop and implement a strategic plan to achieve long-range financial, technological, and enrollment goals; and (2) implement a formal system to track and assess student learning and achievement.
The College, in its response to the 2001 site visit report, indicated that it had hired a consultant to assist in completing the long-range plan and that it would hire a consultant to assist in developing an assessment system, with a target date of September 2002 to complete the design task and begin implementing the system.
The College did not complete its goals in meeting the conditions of accreditation. The 2006 site visit team found that, while the College presented an optimistic progress report in 2004, it had not made significant progress in regard to development of a systematic plan for the assessment of student achievement. The Long Range Plan 2003-09 that had been developed and included in the progress report proved to be overly ambitious for the College and most of the goals to be completed by 2006 have not been achieved. The failure to accomplish the goals related to curriculum is especially troubling. The 2001 team recommended that, “Sunbridge College must assure that credit is granted only to students who are degree candidates and have achieved the stated objectives of each credit-bearing learning activity.” In 2002 and 2003, the College made progress in registering some of the non-credit Certificate programs, as recommended. However, the 2006 site visit team found that the College was still offering unregistered credit-bearing curricula,
Given the College’s failure to meet the conditions of the 2002 accreditation action, the site visit team and the Department recommends Sunbridge College be granted probationary accreditation for two years and all recommendations in the report that follows must be met by December 2008 with a progress report due to the Department in December 2007.
Introduction
Sunbridge College, in Chestnut Hollow, NY (Rockland County) is situated in a unique, idyllic setting on over 120 acres owned by the Threefold Educational Foundation. The Regents granted the College a provisional charter in 1991, authorizing it to award the Master of Science in Education (M.S.Ed) degree. The Regents awarded the College a permanent charter in 1999. At the time of the transitional accreditation review in 2001, it offered two registered programs, Master of Science degrees in Education in Waldorf Education - Early Childhood and in Waldorf Education – Elementary Education. It also offered several non-credit certificate programs. In addition to the two registered programs, the College now offers the following registered degree programs:
The College is one of three Waldorf teacher-training institutions in the United States. Its programs are based on the work of the Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, Rudolf Steiner. The registered programs do not lead to New York State certification of teachers. The College catalog states: “The education experienced by an individual hoping to become a Waldorf teacher is dramatically different from that in conventional teacher training colleges. Not only does a Waldorf candidate learn about child psychology, pedagogical methodology and classroom management; through an immersion in the arts, through the study of philosophy and development of human consciousness, a candidate begins to understand the self in a new way, and sets out on a path of self-transformation which will continue throughout the whole of his or her career as a teacher.”
The College reported to the team that there are as many as 180 Waldolf schools in the United States and throughout the world. Teachers trained in the Waldorf philosophy are in high demand, with 200 to 300 vacancies per year at Waldorf schools.
At the time of the visit, the College reported that it enrolled 7 full-time students and 63 part-time students in its degree programs. It also enrolled 113 students in the non-degree certificate and foundation skills programs.
Standard: Institutional mission (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (a))
The institution shall have a clear statement of purpose, mission, and goals that shall be reflected in the policies, practices, and outcomes of the institution.
Findings:
“The mission of Sunbridge College is to help individuals deepen their relationship to the world through an encounter with anthroposophy, and to prepare them for vocations of service to humanity and to the earth.
The image of the human being as consisting of body, soul and spirit is central to all educational activities of the College, as is the cultivation of a disciplined path of self development as the source of individual creativity and services.
Through its educational programs, research activities and conferences, the College serves the many practical activities of cultural renewal inspired by the work of Rudolf Steiner, the Austrian educator, philosopher and founder of anthroposophy. These include Waldorf education, with its global network of schools, curative education, the arts, biodynamic agriculture, therapeutic work and social renewal. A particular focus of the College’s work is the education, professional development and certification of teachers and administrators for Waldorf schools and kindergartens.”
Sunbridge College’s mission statement defines the institution and establishes a framework for the institution’s purpose, mission, and goals. Faculty, staff, and students were able to clearly articulate to the review team a deep understanding of and connection to the mission. However, the review team felt that the current mission statement did not provide for reduction to a set of objectives.
The statement, “A particular focus of the College’s work is…certification of teachers and administrators…” exceeds the authority of Sunbridge College. The College neither offers education programs leading to certification of teachers and administrators nor does it have authority to certify teachers or administrators.
The College told the team that its mission was under review as part of its strategic planning process. The review team examined the new mission statement and found that it would meet the standard, if adopted. It is broader than the original, yet maintains the tight integrity of Sunbridge College philosophy, rooted as it is in Waldorf School ethos. The Board of Trustees (as reflected in their minutes), in discussing the new mission statement, is debating the advisability of attracting non-Waldorf schoolteachers to the institution so that these teachers can bring some of Steiner’s philosophy to conventional school settings.
The College is in partial compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
Suggestion:
Provide opportunity for the whole campus to review the new mission statement and provide comments.
Standard: Assessment of student achievement (Regents Rules, Section 4.4(b))
The institution shall prepare and continuously implement a plan for the systematic assessment of its effectiveness in promoting the quality of student achievement and development. Such assessment plan shall include but need not be limited to: graduation rates and, as pertinent to institutional mission and programs, state licensing examination results and job placement rates. The institution shall provide to the department on request and in all applications for accreditation and renewal of accreditation, evidence of its implementation of the plan and its effects on the quality of student achievement in relation to its mission and goals.
Findings:
The College is weak in the area of assessment of its effectiveness related to student achievement and development. The 2001 site visit report recommended that the College develop a comprehensive outcomes assessment plan for student learning to include a formal tracking system with measurable outcomes to be used as benchmarks for determining growth and programmatic change as well as the effectiveness with which the College’s units and services contribute to the consistent implementation of its mission and goals. It also recommended that a formal tracking system for job placement be implemented. Sunbridge has made little progress in addressing the standard and meeting the previously recommended action. The College has drafted a document that is intended to addresses assessment, and administration expressed an eagerness to move toward appropriate assessment, but the College is still not in compliance with the standard five years later. The team found little evidence of a comprehensive plan to assess institutional effectiveness.
The College reports that it cannot report persistence rates correctly because it does not have a consistent process for handling withdrawals. Some of the Program Directors kept files of student progress reports. The team was told that students withdraw due to changes in their life situations rather than for academic reasons. College representatives stated that the workload and demands on Waldorf teachers are heavy, creating challenges to complete the degree programs. Without a means to record this anecdotal information, however, it is difficult for the institution to develop strategies to address the issues.
Most assessment strategies seem only visceral. Although the team recognizes the value of a non-competitive grading environment, it was not possible for the reviewers to assess whether students meet course or program objectives. In the teacher education program, cooperating teachers submit evaluations of their student teachers, but these do not become part of the students’ permanent records. When instructors listed course objectives in their syllabi, it was not always clear how students could achieve the objectives. As a Pass-Fail institution, the College requests that teachers submit grades along with the P-F designation. Students may request to see these grades when they graduate. The grades may also be provided to a transfer institution on request.
Syllabi rarely make explicit the grading requirements and it was not evident that students received information on how they can achieve a passing grade or what they have to do to receive a failing grade. None of the transcripts we examined showed any “F” grades. The Master’s Program Director has produced a rubric for grades--A’s, B’s, C’s, etc.--but it focuses largely on structural matters and makes no mention of content. Further, it did not appear that this rubric is used throughout the institution.
Due to the nature of many of the classes, the assessment is necessarily affective, however it is not documented and is largely idiosyncratic, from teacher to teacher. The recently implemented Academic Affairs committee members will be working toward development of an assessment plan. However, at the time of the visit, the College had not designated an individual with the responsibility for reviewing and ensuring consistent assessment across the institution. The team did not find documentation that purports to indicate institutional goals and objectives and program-level goals and objectives, and the individual courses have only general goals with no indication as to criteria to guide students for successful achievement.
A plan and criteria for regular program review was also lacking resulting in programs that appeared to be based more on the result of knowledgeable and well-meaning faculty effort rather than the result of defined educational goals at all levels and a defined program of study that implements those goals.
Sunbridge College is in partial compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
The institution shall annually submit:
(i) timely and accurate statistical information as prescribed by the commissioner;
(ii) additional specified reports, including data related to persistence and graduation rates, state licensing examination results, job placement rates, and other evidence of the quality of student achievement;
(iii) record of compliance with its program responsibilities under HEA Title IV (including student default rate data, and the results of audits and program reviews);
(iv) record of student complaints and their outcomes; and
(v) other information pertaining to an institution's compliance with the standards prescribed in this Part, as determined by the department.
Findings:
The College has submitted annual reports required through the accreditation process. It is in compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
None
Graduation rates
Associate degrees. If, in the judgment of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution awarding associate degrees that reports an associate degree completion rate below the mean associate degree completion rate reported by all institutions in the state, according to the most recent information available to the department, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent, shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement in terms of graduation rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines intended to achieve at least the mean or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years.
Baccalaureate degrees. If, in the judgment of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution awarding baccalaureate degrees that reports a baccalaureate degree completion rate below the mean baccalaureate degree completion rate reported by all institutions in the state, according to the most recent information available to the department, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent, shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement in terms of graduation rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines intended to achieve at least the mean or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years.
Job placement rates
Graduate-only institutions. If, in the judgment of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution whose mission includes the preparation of students for employment and that offers no programs below the master’s degree that reports job placement rates, including civilian and military occupations, below 80 percent, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent, shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement in terms of job placement rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines intended to achieve at least 80 percent or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years at an institution where the longest program is at least two years duration, eighteen months at an institution where the longest program is at least one year but less than two years in duration, or twelve months at an institution where the longest program is less than one year in duration.
Findings:
Sunbridge uses a data collection system that was designed for use by Waldorf schools. Administrators reported to the team that the system is not supportive of data collection requirements of higher education. As a result, the College manually calculates graduation and job placement rates. It also reported that job placement is informally tracked by the Program Directors.
The data provided to the team for graduation and job placement rates was difficult to follow and embed contradictions. Teachers from Waldorf schools attend Sunbridge while employed by their respective schools to study Waldorf education methodology and philosophy primarily through enrollment in the part time Waldorf Teacher Education program. It appeared that the College is counting these students as placements. For example, the College reported that in Spring 005, it had 12 students enrolled in the part- time Waldorf Teacher Education program. Of this cohort, none had graduated yet the college reported 10 were employed. The data did not reflect placement of graduates but rather the employment status of its current students; therefore, this data would not be an outcome measure of student achievement. It is also important for Sunbridge to collect employment data to track the number of students who are employed by Waldorf schools and those who are employed by other schools as administration reported that not all graduates teach at Waldorf schools.
The team noted that in many cases, the number of students completing their degrees by the date “scheduled to graduate” was quite low. For example, none of the students matriculated in the part-time Waldorf Elementary Teacher Education program have graduated by the scheduled date of Spring 2006. Of the full-time Waldorf Elementary Teacher Education students scheduled to graduate in Spring 2001, only 33.3% have graduated to date.
Recommendations:
Standards: Curricula (Regents Rules, Section 4.4(c))
Integrity of credit
(i) Each course offered for credit by an institution shall be part of a general education requirement, a major requirement, or an elective in a curriculum leading to a degree or certificate.
(ii) Credit toward an undergraduate degree shall be earned only for college-level work. Credit toward a graduate degree shall be earned only through work designed expressly for graduate students. Enrollment of secondary school students in undergraduate courses, of undergraduates in graduate courses, and of graduate students in undergraduate courses shall be strictly controlled by the institution.
(iii) The institution shall assure that credit is granted only to students who have achieved the stated objectives of each credit-bearing learning activity.
Findings:
The registered curriculum leading to the graduate degrees as a whole shows evidence of a clear and unified purpose in design. Faculty said the curriculum is designed in a holistic manner, sequenced to larger knowledge and skills to bring about a broader perspective with students learning “how to do” and “how to teach.” However, through a review of the catalog descriptions of the courses, it appears that no courses require prerequisites to reflect the intended sequencing and a review of the semester schedule revealed that several of the courses for the degree programs had been changed from the registered program.
Courses may be taken as part of the master’s degree programs or as part Certificate programs. The courses taken in the full-time and part-time programs are not identical but the Certificate programs do include courses offered in the master’s program Students are not required to have completed a bachelor’s degree prior to admission to a Certificate program. The Certificate programs are not registered programs; however, a review of student transcripts revealed that students enrolled in the Certificate programs were receiving credit on their transcripts for these courses. Students taking a course for the graduate programs are required to complete additional assignments than students taking the course toward a Certificate program. The consequence is that a given class may have for-credit Master’s candidates alongside students enrolled in the unregistered Certificate programs, who do not have undergraduate degrees or in a few cases more than a few undergraduate credits. This is a consequence of the Waldorf school’s need and ability to hire teachers without regard to credentials, and their subsequent efforts to provide those faculty with formal Waldorf education courses. The 2001 accreditation report recommended that the College register the non-credit Certificate programs and “…assure that credit is granted only to students who are degree candidates and have achieved the stated objectives of each credit-bearing activity.” While the College has made progress by registering some of the Certificate programs, it has still not fully met this recommendation five years later.
The College also offers an unregistered Foundation Studies program for students who have not completed undergraduate degrees. The students enroll in this program prior to taking courses for graduate credit. As with the unregistered Certificate programs, the team found that the Foundation Studies program courses (which are non-credit) were also reported as credit bearing on students’ transcripts. There was also an issue concerning the College’s provision of information about the Foundation Studies program to colleges where students are applying for transfer, in which credit is not claimed but is (inappropriately) suggested.
Several credit-bearing courses--although sometimes for limited credit allowances (.5, .75, etc.) lacked appropriate rigor and did not seem to require graduate level work. Syllabi lacked depth and breadth in designated required readings, required less than graduate level requirements for course completion, and emphasize low-level content demands in many courses such as Gardening, Handwork, and Painting. A visit to the painting class revealed that the class itself offered a very particular pedagogical approach to painting, which placed future teachers in the role of learners, experiencing a developmental approach to painting instruction as a model for teaching elementary school children. Though such a methods course has a recognized purpose in the Waldorf education model, one wonders if these methods might be taught in a more confined context, emphasizing practice and theory that are embellished and made operational in the context of student teaching.
Courses in sculpting and drawing, as part of the Part-time Waldorf Remedial Program, were exclusively practice oriented and had no reading lists or indications of broader contexts in the field. The team felt these courses did not meet the rigor of graduate-level courses and would more appropriately be offered as undergraduate or continuing education non-credit courses.
All courses are given on a Pass/Fail basis. Course goals are for the most part very general. The requirement that, “Credit is granted only for achievement of objectives of all credit-bearing activities; grades and credit are commensurate with demonstrated student attainment of course objectives.” is of limited meaning in this context.
In a review of student papers from one program in order to correlate student performances with grading; the consensus of the reviewers was that there was little difference in “quality” between the papers and that all were severely deficient in the characteristics expected of graduate work. There was little analytic comparison of results; little or no literature review; and no indication of an understanding of any research procedure, in the Master’s theses. The information made available from students and others on achievement of goals of the program was anecdotal and largely the results of satisfaction surveys. No uniform instructional policy statement and internal guidelines on expectations of effort and level were apparent.
Sunbridge College is in partial compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
(i) Institutional goals and the objectives of each curriculum and of all courses shall be carefully defined in writing.
(ii) Each curriculum shall show evidence of careful planning. The content and duration of curricula shall be designed to implement their purposes.
(iii) Course descriptions shall clearly state the subject matter and requirements of each course.
Findings:
Course syllabi, though improved over previous versions, were uneven in quality and had many weaknesses. There was little inter- and intra-program consistency. Not all syllabi stated goals clearly. Often topics to be covered in the course did not appear on the syllabus, making it difficult to see how course goals and objectives could be implemented. Readings in many courses and programs were parochial, requiring texts exclusively by or about Rudolph Steiner or by others familiar in the anthroposophy movement. For example, in the Part-time Waldorf Remedial Education Program, the course entitled “An Introduction to the Philosophy of Special Education” for the fall and spring terms required only two texts, both published by the Anthroposophic Press. Many other valuable books and articles on special education that would help to provide multiple perspectives did not appear in the requirements.
The curriculum for the Part-time Waldorf Remedial Education Program requires review and revision. Some courses seemed overly generalized and inappropriate for developing the skills a remedial teacher would require. It is difficult to see, for example, how a 3-credit course in eurythmy contributes to the remedial teacher’s necessary knowledge base. The program director asserts that teachers can teach any remedial skill after completing the Sunbridge Master’s degree, but course preparation did not support the assertion. There are no methods courses, for example, directed exclusively at teaching remedial mathematics or writing, two essential elements in any remedial program. It is possible that some courses cover these areas, but it was difficult to determine whether this is true; the scope and depth of the required course study was not apparent from the syllabi. And the belief that a teacher who completes this program can teach any remedial subject runs counter to current thinking and practice.
There was wide variability in the degree of compliance with at least the spirit of this regulation. The Master of Arts in Liberal Studies (MALS) program is structured approximating a conventional program in the sense that the courses are defined, the curricula have clear and achievable goals and in many cases show evidence of careful planning, particularly the distance learning courses, other curricula such as the MSED in Early Childhood appear less well developed. It will be valuable to review the MALS program after its first class has completed. At present it is about one year into the first instance of the two-year program. In the MSED programs, the requirement that “Curriculum content proceed from introductory level to advanced in logical sequence with appropriate breadth, depth, and currency” is of concern as the courses do not appear to have prerequisites and are sequenced by primarily by scheduling. More important most of these courses do not seem to fit a conventional definition of “master’s level” as they present the students with skill-building and in some cases the conceptual basis for the skills being taught, but with little attention to comparative analyses, alternative conceptual bases for the application of the skills, and little requirement for development (and perhaps more important, little instruction in developing Elementary student leanings) at the more advanced levels of learning described in Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Course outlines, while indicating the content to be learned, have goals that show modest development, and student assessment is an unclear mix of self-assessment and idiosyncratic instructor assessment. While the instructors seem deeply interested in the well-being of the graduate students, their demands on the students and the assessment of the students’ achievement of those demands seem difficult to reproduce from instructor to instructor.
The institutional goals lack elaboration. This is especially clear in the two-page form, “Requirements for Waldorf Teacher Certificate and an M.S.Ed. in Elementary Education” used to assess graduate students. It lists various attributes of the successful candidate for a degree with little qualification of what is expected for any of the key descriptors, such as “Child Development” in the area of “Knowledge”. From the syllabi of pertinent courses in child development, it was unclear what the criteria for evaluation are in this area. A significant portion of course syllabi lacked clear descriptions of the subject matter and/or failed to make explicit the requirements for course completion in ways that establish expectations for graduate student learning.
Sunbridge College is in partial compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
Suggestion:
Consider establishing a syllabus template to guide teachers in preparing course outlines with sufficient consistency and rigor. For example, each syllabus should indicate the written assignments necessary for completing the course with a passing grade.
Assessment of success in achieving goals and objectives
There shall be a written plan to assess, no less than every five to seven years, the success of faculty and students in achieving institutional goals and curricular objectives and to promote improvement. Such assessment shall include systematic collection, review and use of quantitative and qualitative information about educational programs, including at least some information that directly addresses learning outcomes, and shall be undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development.
Findings:
Elements of assessment are present at Sunbridge College. Faculty complete performance evaluations for each student for each course, and student self-assessment is an important part of the process. Formative evaluation is continuous, with self and peer evaluation as well as frequent discussions with faculty. Many members of the faculty meet weekly to discuss the individual development of virtually all of the full time students – an advantage of a small school with small faculty and student bodies. So students who have difficulty may be “captured” quickly for additional assistance and individual attention.
A written assessment plan and a plan for program review, however, have not been completed. A draft Strategic Plan was provided to the team on site, and some elements of the Plan would promote improvement and help to achieve institutional goals and curricular objectives. How to accomplish the goals was often missing from the plan, and a timeline for assessment was absent. The College is in the beginning stages of the assessment process and has established an Academic Affairs Committee assigned with the responsibility for the development of an assessment plan.
In review of the curriculum from an assessment standpoint, it is difficult to answer three key questions from the materials available. First, what are the skills, knowledge, and intellectual capacities possessed by a successful graduate of this program? Second, how does the curriculum build this set of skills, knowledge, and intellectual capacities? Third, what are the standards or criteria by which assessment of success are determined?
Sunbridge College is not in compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
Program length, credit, and other requirements for degrees
For each curriculum, the institution shall assure that courses will be offered with sufficient frequency to enable students to complete the program within the minimum time for degree completion for each degree level identified in this paragraph.
(i) Associate degree programs shall normally be capable of completion in two academic years of full-time study, or their equivalent in part-time study, with an accumulation of not less than 60 semester hours.
(ii) Baccalaureate degree programs shall normally be capable of completion in four academic years of full-time study, or, in the case of five-year programs, five academic years of full-time study, or their equivalent in part-time study, with an accumulation of not less than 120 semester hours.
(iii) Master's degree programs shall normally require a minimum of one academic year of full-time graduate level study, or its equivalent in part-time study, with an accumulation of not less than 30 semester hours. Research or a comparable occupational or professional experience shall be a component of each master's degree program. The requirements for a master's degree shall normally include at least one of the following: passing a comprehensive test, writing a thesis based on independent research or completing an appropriate special project.
(iv) The master of philosophy degree shall require completion of all requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy except the dissertation, and shall require that the student have been admitted to candidacy in a doctor of philosophy curriculum offered by the institution conferring the master of philosophy degree.
(v) Doctoral programs shall require a minimum of three academic years of full-time graduate level study after the baccalaureate degree, or their equivalent in part-time study. Doctoral studies shall include the production of a substantial report on original research, the independent investigation of a topic of significance to the field of study, the production of an appropriate creative work, or the verified development of advanced professional skills.
Findings:
Sunbridge College courses are carefully structured and scheduled to ensure that the duration requirements for both full-time programs are met. Creative part-time programming allows students who teach in Waldorf Schools across the country appropriate time to finish the degree.
The Master’s curricula require a theses, an introspective journal, or a project. The theses presented showed little evidence of the kind of analytic and comparative information gathering and review that is commonly required of master’s-level work. There were few or no indications of any literature review, and statistical presentations were absent or unsophisticated data exposition. Some students present an introspective journal, and the reviewers did not see any evidence of a Masters level capstone project.
Theses or other terminal requirement for the degree often lacked the depth, breadth, and quality of analysis one would expect from graduate-level students. Even the “extended term paper option” could benefit from required literature review and other evidences of valid research.
The institution reported difficulty in getting students to finish the degree requirements once students completed course work. Many students did not complete the required thesis, extended term paper, or journal.
The College is in compliance with the standard related to time to completion of and the requirements for the master’s degree. However, as noted under previous sections of the report, the graduate level of the content of some of the courses is questionable.
Recommendations:
Suggestion:
An extensive review of internal and external supports or possible alternatives to existing requirements (i.e., comprehensive examinations) might increase the number of degree completers.
Standards: Faculty (Regents Rules, Section 4.4(d))
Competence and credentials
(i) All members of the faculty shall have demonstrated by training, earned degrees, scholarship, experience, and by classroom performance or other evidence of teaching potential, their competence to offer the courses and discharge the other academic responsibilities which are assigned to them.
(ii) At least one faculty member teaching in each curriculum culminating in a bachelor's degree shall hold an earned doctorate in an appropriate field, unless the department determines that the curriculum is in a field of study in which other standards are appropriate.
(iii) All faculty members who teach within a curriculum leading to a graduate degree shall possess earned doctorates or other terminal degrees in the field in which they are teaching or shall have demonstrated, in other widely recognized ways, their special competence in the field in which they direct graduate students.
Findings:
The team found that the faculty are very knowledgeable about and dedicated to the Waldorf philosophy. Faculty resumes reflected prior involvement in the Waldolf movement to a varying extent and faculty appeared to have been hired based on their experience in Waldorf education. Faculty files, for the most part, lacked official transcripts. The files and resumes indicated that the majority of the graduate faculty professors do not possess earned doctoral degrees; however, they have demonstrated their special competence in the field of Waldorf Education and the programs were registered as such with the practitioner faculty
There is only one full-time faculty member holding a doctoral degree and a few of the part-time instructors also held doctorate degrees.. The team felt that greater attention should be given in the hiring process to ensuring new faculty have doctoral degrees and that the College encourage existing faculty to advance their education. In the Remedial Teacher Education Master’s Program, for example, five instructors had only Bachelor degrees. By virtue of their experience they appear competent to teach “Waldorf education” but there is concern about their experience and competence to teach to the Masters level. This is an area of great concern and may provide some explanation for the earlier questions of content level in course requirements. In a review of fifteen faculty CV’s, one faculty member teaching in this program possessed a Ph.D.; and he is a part-time employee teaching one course and on campus one day per week.
In both the full-time Early Childhood and Elementary Teacher Education programs, the program directors possess master’s degrees. One of the directors earned the Master of Education degree from Sunbridge College. Given some of the program analysis offered above, this raises some questions about the curricular leadership of both programs. The majority of required graduate courses in these programs are taught by faculty with master’s degrees and, in some cases, faculty with bachelor’s degrees only. Faculty in the part-time programs were more likely to have doctoral degrees.
In the Master of Arts program for Liberal Studies, four lead faculty manage the curriculum. There were more doctorally-prepared faculty in this program.
The College is in partial compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
(i) The faculty shall be sufficient in number to assure breadth and depth of instruction and the proper discharge of all other faculty responsibilities.
(ii) To foster and maintain continuity and stability in academic programs and policies, there shall be in the institution a sufficient number of faculty members who serve full-time at the institution.
(iii) For each curriculum the institution shall designate a body of faculty who, with the academic officers of the institution, shall be responsible for setting curricular objectives, for determining the means by which achievement of objectives is measured, for evaluating the achievement of curricular objectives, and for providing academic advice to students.
(iv) The ratio of faculty to students in each course shall be sufficient to assure effective instruction.
Findings:
As a small institution, a core of six full-time faculty--with support from part-time teachers--could probably manage the continuity of leadership and stability in all academic programs, including the development, implementation and evaluation of curricular design, ongoing quality assurance, and advising in all program areas. However, because of the unusual schedules in some programs, part-time and adjunct faculty are on campus only for limited periods of time. The director of the Master’s Program, a talented educator with a doctoral degree from Teachers College, is on campus once a week and some weeks over the summer. His duties as a Director over two other Directors were not clear. The part-time Co-Director of the Remedial Teacher Education Program has a full-time job as an assistant principal in Los Angeles and comes to campus only during the period of remedial program course offerings: one week in November, one week in March, and three weeks over the summer. These Directors, chosen for their talents as educators and administrators, are not regularly on campus to participate in necessary discussions about the Institution’s future direction.
While the faculty and student bodies of Sunbridge College are small, there are sufficient numbers of full-time and part-time faculty to assure a teacher/student ratio that ensures the delivery of effective instruction and advisement of graduate students. Class size and degree of contact between teachers and students is very good, although the Self Study reports that faculty do not post regular office hours.
The faculty who act as a body of the whole, along with program directors, participate in the development of new curricula and the review of curriculum changes. Decisions with regard to new programs, etc., are made by the “Council” – a body made up of the full-time program directors and key administrators. Since the program directors are also part of the faculty body, they also bring the faculty perspective to the decision process.
The preponderance of part-time faculty raises some questions about continuity of program standards and coherence of instruction across the programs. Sunbridge feels that the inclusion of full-time faculty in both full-time and part-time programs provides the basis for continuity of faculty contributions and integration across programs.
Faculty on campus regularly meet to discuss curricula and the progress of individual students, which addresses some aspects of the problems associated with programs that rely on a high level of part-time or adjunct faculty. At the same time, the broad range of course designs and expectations evidenced by course syllabi demonstrate a certain inconsistency of expectations for students across courses. This suggests that quality assurance may not be sufficiently addressed.
Sunbridge College is in substantial compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
Suggestion:
Require faculty to post office hours.
Evaluation and professional responsibilities
(i) The teaching and research of each faculty member, in accordance with the faculty member's responsibilities, shall be evaluated periodically by the institution. The teaching of each inexperienced faculty member shall receive special supervision during the initial period of appointment.
(ii) Each member of the faculty shall be allowed adequate time, in accordance with the faculty member's responsibilities, to broaden professional knowledge, prepare course materials, advise students, direct independent study and research, supervise teaching, participate in institutional governance and carry out other academic responsibilities appropriate to his or her position, in addition to performing assigned teaching and administrative duties.
Findings:
The Faculty Handbook includes a defined, formal system for faculty review based on self-evaluation, peer review, and program director reviews. The program directors play a key part by observing from time to time, and engaging faculty members in discussion about their performance. Self-assessment is a key part of the Sunbridge College culture. The faculty self-evaluation is based on answers to broad questions and not clearly aligned with the mission and goals of the graduate programs. As a result, faculty evaluation may not serve the purpose of ensuring program quality and development.
Student course assessments occur at the end of each semester, and the results are incorporated into faculty member’s discussions with the program directors. In the event issues are not resolved in discussion, they are taken to the body of the faculty and then to the Council, which is a decision-making body.
A review of individual full-time faculty assignments indicated that faculty have adequate time for their assigned responsibilities and for professional work above and beyond teaching responsibilities. The Faculty Handbook indicates a normal teaching assignment of 10-12 hours per week during the academic year. However, a culture of research was lacking; neither students nor faculty seemed very much engaged in expanding intellectual and teaching skills through ongoing research activities. Faculty development activities seem largely confined to campus seminars and workshops. There was very little in terms of elaborated policy that addressed time allowances for faculty research and professional development. An unpaid leave of absence may be granted.
Sunbridge College is in compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
Standards: Resources (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (e))
Facilities, equipment, and supplies
(i) The institution shall provide classrooms, administrative and faculty offices, auditoria, laboratories, libraries, audio-visual and computer facilities, clinical facilities, studios, practice rooms, and other instructional resources sufficient in number, design, condition, and accessibility to support its mission, goals, instruction, programs, and all other educational activities.
(ii) The institution shall provide equipment sufficient in quantity and quality to support administration, instruction, research, and student performance.
Findings:
Sunbridge College has adequate facilities to accommodate its current enrollment of students except during peak cycles, such as summer, when increased numbers of students are on campus. The College leases space in several buildings from the Threefold Foundation for offices, classrooms, the library, cafeteria, studios, bookstore, and dormitory facilities. The facilities appeared to be well maintained and lighting was sufficient. There are generally sufficient numbers of appropriate classrooms to conduct the full range of courses in the graduate program and sufficient numbers of appropriate office spaces and/or meeting rooms to accommodate full-time faculty work needs and faculty/student advisement. As indicated in Sunbridge’s self-study and in conversations during the site visit, there are not sufficient offices to accommodate the adjunct faculty.
The administration told the team that faculty have little to no use for AV equipment. The inventory consists of one (1) LCD computer projector. There appeared to be little consideration for teaching the prospective teachers about the use and functioning of AV and computing equipment in their future classrooms. The College explained that Waldorf schools do not use these techniques in the early education, which is the subject of their students’ future teaching. However, the team felt recognized that graduate education students should be literate in the use of computers and instructional technology.
The campus provides wireless online networking. There were seven computers accessible to students located in three locations. The team questioned whether this was adequate access to computers for the graduate students. The College reported that most students have their own computers. Additionally, the administration informed the team that there were plans for further computer acquisitions in the future.
While improvements in office space and computer access are recommended, Sunbridge College is in substantial compliance with this standard at the Spring Valley location.
Recommendations:
Library and information resources
(i) The institution shall provide libraries that possess and maintain collections and technology sufficient in depth and breadth to support the mission of the institution and each curriculum.
(ii) Libraries shall be administered by professionally trained staff supported by sufficient personnel. Library services and resources shall be available for student and faculty use with sufficient regularity and at appropriate hours to support the mission of the institution and the curricula it offers.
Findings:
The Sunbridge Library is extremely small and is deficient for graduate programs. Managed by a librarian and student aides, the library has 8,000 volumes with other volumes in storage. The library appeared to be a specialized library with the complete works of Rudolph Steiner in English and German, and a collection of Waldorf education thesis and dissertations. This comprises the majority of the total collection. While this collection supports philosophical component of the Waldorf education programs, it is minimal in other areas and for the College’s Liberal Studies program. The current holdings in the library are only sporadically updated and it is clear that in critical areas of educational theory and research there is a significant lack of materials. A number of canonical works in the field of education are not evident in the card catalog.
The librarian seeks input from the faculty; however, there was no evidence of a formal collection acquisition and disposition policy. The library’s annual budget of $4,000 is not adequate, even for a small institution like Sunbridge. The budget is derived from grants, fines, membership fees, and $1,000 from the College budget. As a specialized library, it would be more than ample, but as a library supporting the College’s graduate programs, it is insufficient.
Access to the Internet is available on a single computer. There is no capacity for research. There is neither depth within the library’s holdings nor access to databases that would allow graduate students to search relevant research articles in any of the fields of study that are part of the graduate program. The library does not participate in interlibrary loan programs nor has it made arrangements with other collegiate libraries for access for its students Though students have access to a local public library, the inability to search and download the relevant literature, including current work in peer-reviewed journals, is a serious shortcoming of a graduate level program. Periodicals on site were primarily newsletters, with few journals and no newspapers.
The library has two tables available for study space. The shelf space is insufficient, necessitating some books be stored in the basement. The library shares space in a building that contains a performance auditorium, and the team found that the sounds from the auditorium infiltrate the library and challenge careful library reading and concentration on study.
Circulation data provided to the team showed that few students use the library. Students pay a $20 library fee and community members may pay the fee for library access as well. The librarian told the team the collection has lost a number of volumes due to theft. There is no security system and only part of the catalog is currently online. A card catalog is used and students check out books through an honor system.
A library orientation program is provided to students during the first week of the semester. The College reported sufficient library hours, with the library open Monday through Saturday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. However, it reported that it is staffed only 20 hours per week. Given the number of hours it is open, staffing appears to be inadequate. Human resource files indicated that the librarian holds an Master of Library Science degree and is employed as a consultant rather than as a part- or full-time employee.
The academic deficiencies of the College library are significant and it is not in compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
Fiscal capacity
The institution shall possess the financial resources necessary for the consistent and successful accomplishment of its mission and objectives at the institutional, program and course levels.
Findings:
The audited financial statements for Sunbridge College for the period ending May 31, 2006 were reviewed. The College had a federal composite score of 2.4, which is interpreted as “financially healthy.” The College had composite scores of 2.5 and 2.7 for 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Enrollment data reported by the College to the Office of Research and Information Systems (ORIS) showed a significant decline from 2005 to 2006, from 15 full-time and 63 part-time students in 2005 to 7 full-time and 63 part-time students. The impact of the declining enrollment may be reflected in the next financial reporting period.
The College’s offering of unregistered programs may have an effect on its future financial position. It recently provided a copy of a letter from USDE that the College has been transferred from the Advance method of payment to the Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 method of payment for federal student financial assistance programs authorized by Title IV.
The College is in compliance with the standard at this point in time. Staff will continue to assess any changes to the fiscal condition of the College.
Recommendations:
Standards: Administration (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (f))
(i) Responsibility for the administration of institutional policies and programs shall be clearly established.
(ii) Within the authority of its governing board, the institution shall provide that overall educational policy and its implementation are the responsibility of the institution's faculty and academic officers. Other appropriate segments of the institutional community may share in this responsibility in accordance with the norms developed by each institution.
(iii) Academic policies applicable to each course, including learning objectives and methods of assessing student achievement, shall be made explicit by the instructor at the beginning of each term.
(iv) The institution shall provide academic advice to students through faculty or appropriately qualified persons. The institution shall assure that students are informed at stated intervals of their progress and remaining obligations in the completion of the program.
(v) The institution shall maintain for each student a permanent, complete, accurate, and up-to-date transcript of student achievement at the institution. This document will be the official cumulative record of the student's cumulative achievement. Copies shall be made available at the student's request, in accordance with the institution's stated policies, or to agencies or individuals authorized by law to review such records.
Findings:
The College has recently hired a President and is in the process of restructuring administrative duties. The President appears to be an effective administrator. The 2006 Self Study continues to assert the need for a CAO; however, at the time of the visit, it had not done so.
The Program Directors have regular, ongoing conversations about programs, policies, and practices. As a small institution, the meetings are held on a more informal basis as minutes, policy statements, or memoranda regarding the meetings were not available. A coherent and consistent system of oversight related to course policies is not evident. The high degree of variance in the quality of syllabi, methods of assessment, expectations/standards for student learning, and grading criteria indicates that this is an area that needs to be addressed
Student files, complete with transcripts, were available. Most advisement is done by program directors, who work very closely with students. Student files held by the directors of the full- and part-time elementary programs show extensive interaction between student and director. These files do not become part of the students’ permanent files.
Sunbridge maintains a cumulative transcript for each student consistent with the standards of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO). The transcript provides semester credit totals as well as cumulative credit totals. It clearly distinguishes course credit earned toward certificates from course credit earned toward master’s degrees. However, the certificate programs are not registered as credit bearing, rendering the transcript inaccurate.
There are some shortcomings in the transcript mainly due to the lack of a traditional grading system at Sunbridge— nearly every course recorded on a Sunbridge transcript has a grade of P for pass. Rarely a grade of I or NC is recorded. For example, a review of 15 cumulative student transcripts (37 pages of transcripts) revealed only four I’s and three NC’s among the otherwise uniform P course grades. Accordingly, the transcript can provide no qualitative measure such as a grade point average. There is no way to determine attempted versus completed credits. There is no actual identification of withdrawals or failures for quantitative analysis of course completion rates. Of course, the transcript is a reflection of the College’s philosophy. However, there are two resulting disadvantages. First, the outstanding Sunbridge student who transfers on to a traditional graduate school may be underrated due to the Sunbridge transcript. Second, since a college’s transcript database is typically the foundation for assessing student achievement, Sunbridge is at a disadvantage. The College won’t be able to pull withdrawal and failure information from its transcript database, because it isn’t collecting the information. The transcript is also lacking a legend to explain its grading system.
A positive feature relating to the transcript is that there is a downloadable transcript request form on the public part of the College’s web page. A student can conveniently print and mail the form to Sunbridge with the $8 fee. However, the form does not request the student’s signature, so it is vulnerable to a fraudulent request. FERPA requires a student signature or its equivalent on a request for the disclosure of a confidential record.
Student records (both paper and electronic) are maintained with care by the Registrar. However, the disaster plan is tenuous. The Registrar keeps a backup copy of the student data base at home as insurance in case the Sunbridge Administration Building should burn down. This is a traditional precaution. However, in today’s environment where identity theft is frequent, the problem is that the database could be stolen. There have been highly publicized cases of database thefts from employees who had taken protective custody of confidential data. It is safer to locate the back up of the database in a bank safe deposit box or at another college rather than at home.
The College is in substantial compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
The institution shall establish, publish and enforce explicit policies with respect to:
(i) academic freedom;
(ii) the rights and privileges of full-time and part-time faculty and other staff members, working conditions, opportunity for professional development, workload, appointment and reappointment, affirmative action, evaluation of teaching and research, termination of appointment, redress of grievances and faculty responsibility to the institution; and
(iii) requirements for admission of students to the institution and to specific curricula, requirements for residence, graduation, awarding of credit, degrees or other credentials, grading, standards of progress, payment of fees of any nature, refunds, withdrawals, standards of conduct, disciplinary measures and redress of grievances.
Findings:
The newly published Faculty Handbook includes the specific policy statements required by the standard. Discussions with faculty do not indicate any issue with academic freedom. The Handbook adequately addresses workload, complaints, leave, benefits, etc.
The faculty handbook, however, requires more attention. In review of this document, the team found that some of the policies were not complete and there were numerous examples of the lack of care in proofreading this document. This lack of attention does not reflect an acceptable standard for publication of collegiate documents. Committee lists appear to be incomplete.
The policy related to college closing refers to administrators by name rather than title or position. A change in personnel would make the policy statements obsolete.
The Student Handbook similarly addresses the policies relevant to them. Information regarding admissions requirements and structure of curricula is available on separately published program sheets.
The College is in compliance with this standard.
Recommendations:
Suggestion:
Use position titles rather than names of persons in all policy statements.
Standard: Support services (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (g))
The institution shall assure that whenever and wherever the institution offers courses as part of a curriculum it shall provide adequate support services, taking into account its mission and the needs of its students.
Findings:
The College provides adequate support services for its student population. Counseling and academic advisement are the responsibility of the program directors, who are knowledgeable about outside resources available for students with extraordinary issues. Since faculty and program directors meet frequently to discuss the students, issues are often immediately addressed. Students work closely with faculty to ensure student progress. Students also participate in informal study groups to re-enforce class instruction. Faculty and Program directors also work with students to engage in campus-based and community-based events – Halloween parties for the local children, community service, etc.
Full-time student resident assistants are responsible for keeping track of the needs of students, interceding where necessary, and calling for assistance from faculty and staff as needed.
The College does not offer ESL instruction. It does, however, offer a speech course in accent reduction for its international students.
The College is in substantial compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
None
Standards: Admissions (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (h))
(1) The admission of students shall be determined through an orderly process using published criteria that shall be uniformly applied.
(2) Admissions shall take into account the capacity of the student to undertake a course of study and the capacity of the institution to provide the instructional and other support the student needs to complete the program.
Findings:
Sunbridge recognized in its November 2006 self study that its admissions processes were not well documented and consistent across all programs. The team found that the admission process was very well documented but the criteria for admissions was not. The College plans to clearly articulate its admission process and criteria in its 2007-2008 catalog, to be published in January 2007. However, a draft of the new catalog was not available to the team at the time of the visit.
The Sunbridge self study listed eight items normally required for each student’s folder (application, transcripts from previous schools, acceptance letter, student communication, Meningitis response form, immunization records, Sunbridge transcript and Sunbridge diploma) and the team confirmed that these items were included in the folders. The Registrar provided two in-house lists “Application Process for Full-Time Programs” and “Application Process for Part-Time Programs.” The lists indicate the steps for admission starting with the submission of an application and ending with the payment of tuition. The lists include the sending of reminder letters about missing forms and supplementary forms needed to complete the student’s folder.
Specific selection criteria for accepting a student to Sunbridge are defined for non-native speakers of English. These applicants must present TOEFL scores of at least 550 and must submit an acceptable writing sample each year. For other applicants there are few specific criteria. A baccalaureate is required for acceptance into a master’s degree program and the Masters Degree in Waldorf Education requires a 2.7 gpa and a B in the student’s major). Otherwise, Sunbridge acceptance decisions are made by the program director of each program in a manner that appeared to be subjective.
The team found in published information about the Remedial Education Program that the admission process for the Waldorf Remedial Education Program differed from the College’s other programs. Prospective students are required to send their application form to a Michigan address rather than directly to the College. It was not clear to the team how the College provides for consistency in admissions when its applications go to a faculty member rather than a central office.
The College is in partial compliance with the standard.
Recommendations:
Standards: Consumer information (Regents Rules, Section 4.4 (i))
The following information shall be included in all catalogs of the institution:
(1) Information shall be provided on financial assistance available to students, costs of attending the institution, the refund policy of the institution, and the instructional programs and other related aspects of the institution. Information shall include programs of financial assistance from State, Federal, institutional and other sources.
(2) Cost of attending the institution for each of the cost categories listed below shall be provided. Estimates, so indicated, may be used where exact figures are unavailable or inappropriate. Where summary information is provided, an institutional office where detailed information can be obtained shall be identified.
(i) Tuition and fees. Information shall be provided on all assessments against students for direct educational and general purposes. A brief description of the purpose of any mandatory fee shall be included if the purpose of such fee is not apparent from its name. Course fees and lab fees shall be clearly identified. Conditions under which nonmandatory fees need not be paid shall be clearly stated.
(ii) Books and supplies. Estimated costs of textbooks, books, manuals, consumable supplies and equipment, which a student should possess as a necessary corollary to instruction, shall be provided. Separate estimates shall be provided for major program categories for which such costs vary more than 25 percent from the average for the entire institution.
(iii) Room and board. Costs of housing and food services operated by the institution shall be provided where such services are available. Estimated costs of similar accommodations available in the community shall also be provided. These figures shall be consistent with estimated student budgets prepared by the institution's financial aid office.
Other living expenses. Estimated cost of personal expenses applicable to students devoting primary efforts to pursuit of educational objectives shall be provided. This estimate shall be consistent with similar figures defined by the institution's financial aid office.
(3) The institution shall state its policy concerning refunds due to failure of students to complete an academic term for any reason. The policy shall include the percentage or amount of tuition, fees, institution-operated room and board, and other assessments to be refunded after specified elapsed periods of time.
(4) The instructional programs of the institution shall be described accurately.
(i) Degree, certificate and diploma programs. A list of degree, certificate and diploma programs shall be provided. The list shall be consistent with the inventory of registered degree and certificate programs maintained by the Department. The list shall contain at least the official approved program title, degree, HEGIS code number, and shall be preceded by a statement that enrollment in other than registered or otherwise approved programs may jeopardize a student's eligibility for certain student aid awards.
(ii) Program descriptions. Each degree, certificate or diploma program shall be described in terms of both prerequisites and requirements for completion.
(iii) The academic year in which each instructional offering (course) is expected to be taught shall be indicated.
(iv) Program related facilities. A general description of instructional, laboratory and other facilities directly related to the academic program shall be provided, in addition to general information describing the total physical plant. Narrative and/or statistical information shall be provided about library collections and facilities, student unions, and institution-operated eating-places. Hours of operation, including holiday and vacation schedules, shall be provided.
(v) Faculty and other instructional personnel. Regular resident faculty shall be listed by rank, with the highest degree held by the faculty member and the institution by which such degree was granted, and department or major program area to which such member is assigned. An estimated number of adjunct faculty and teaching assistants in each department or major program area shall be provided.
(vi) Recruiting and admission practices. The process and criteria for the recruitment and admission of students to the institution and to specific curricula, as required by subparagraph (iii) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of this section and by subdivision (h) of this section, shall be published.
(vii) Academic calendar. The academic calendar of the institution, and of specific curricula, if different, shall be published.
(viii) Grading. The grading policy of the institution, and of specific curricula, if different, shall be published.
(ix) Student retention and graduation. Information on student retention and graduation rates shall be provided based on a summary of the most recent cohort survival statistics (e.g., percentages of those students enrolled at the end of the spring term, percentages of freshman classes that graduate in four, five and six years) available to the institution for at least full-time undergraduates. Statistics shall be computed in a manner consistent with data reported to the department through its higher education data system.
(x) Outcomes for former students. Summaries of employment outcomes, advanced study, and student professional and occupational licensing examination results compiled by or provided to the institution shall be provided. The student cohort year or years, or date of examinations shall be included. Data displays on employment outcomes shall be by major or discrete curricular area.
Findings:
Descriptions of courses, admissions requirements, faculty profiles, and the academic calendar are published in the catalog. Other than the program directors, no listing of faculty with degrees completed appears in the catalog. Issues like academic withdrawal, grading practices, graduation requirements, and academic calendar do not appear in the catalog, although much of this information is available in the student handbook and other college publications. The catalog adequa