MEMORANDUM March 27, 2006

To: Faculty Senate Coordinating Committee on Education, Dallas Hoover, Chair

From: Faculty Senate Graduate Studies Committee, Charles Mason, Chair

Subject: Recommendation on the Request for Permanent Status of the MS in Health Promotion

The Faculty Senate Graduate Studies Committee met and discussed the request for Permanent Status of the MS in Health Promotion at four of its meetings. The committee reviewed the various documents contained in the materials sent to the Faculty Senate from the College of Health Sciences. These documents included the self-study prepared by the faculty director of the program, the report of the internal review team, and the various responses and recommendations from the department chair, college curriculum committee, and college dean. The Graduate Studies Committee met with and received comments from the faculty program director together with one other faculty member associated with the program, the department chair together with the associate dean of research, and the dean independently.

After due consideration of the information at hand, the Graduate Studies Committee by majority vote (0 yes, 8 no, 4 abstain) did not recommend that permanent status be granted to the Master of Science program in Health Promotion. By majority vote (7 yes, 4 no, 1 abstain), the Graduate Studies Committee did recommend that the program be continued for one year in provisional status.  The purpose of the continuation is to allow for an additional review by external professional peers and to provide the program director and the administration the opportunity to acquire additional material to document the quality of the program. The program review needs to address whether the program should remain interdisciplinary as originally proposed.

The Committee’s recommendation is justified within its charge. A portion of the charge states “[This Committee] shall make recommendation to the Faculty Senate on courses of study leading to graduate degrees and on matters of policy concerning graduate study, and may employ outside consultants to this end.”

Quantitative information presented in the material submitted to this committee and through testimonials indicates that the MS in Health Promotion has been successful. A listing of some of these factors noted by the committee is presented at the end of this document. However, members of the committee generally felt that information on the quality of the program was lacking, particularly on input from students in the program, from those who have graduated from the program, from employers who have hired graduates from the program, and from individuals from the health profession in the region regarding their perception of the program at U of D. There needs to be assurance that the evaluative documentation sought is objectively obtained and quantitative, and that statements about the program are well documented (such as grant monies, testimonials from state officials, agreement and support of faculty members and administrators from other units, and etc.) The committee members feel that this information is needed in order to make an appropriately informed recommendation about this program. Also, we felt it is unfair to fault the program for not providing qualitative information because the Permanent Status Program Review procedure newly released this year did not explicitly request this as part of the self-study, and the short time interval available for this material to be requested by and provided to our committee for review this spring is not realistic.

The Committee learned of conflicts within the unit related to the administrative structure of the program, especially with regard to its original implementation as an interdisciplinary program.  It is the Committee’s opinion that the academic strength of the program is at risk due to the unhealthy administrative structure and this will weaken its ability to attain excellence. Everyone who has commented on or reviewed this program, without exception, agrees that a Master’s program in the health promotion field is needed and the University of Delaware should have such a program. Our committee believes that this program has a future if it has an academic departmental home in which its home department and home college have sufficient resources and an administrative commitment to support the program, and in which communication in both directions from administrator to teaching faculty and from teaching faculty to administrator occurs regularly in a collegial fashion. Most importantly, there needs to be recognition on the part of the leadership of the program that such a program is not an independent or exclusive endeavor. The greater interest of current and future students in the program, University of Delaware, and health profession can best be served by a positive relationship involving a cohesive faculty and administrative team, in the department where core faculty reside.

Points noted by the Senate Graduate Studies Committee for the MS in Health Promotion

The provisional program was started fall 1998.

It is a 33-credit non-thesis MS program.

The program has 28 students that have completed with 100% employed.

There are currently 17 students enrolled in the program.

It has received a consistent number of applicants at around 50% or above the number of students offered admission.

There have been 11 applicants indicated or received for fall 2006.

One student was accepted for spring and one for fall 2006 so far.

Three graduates from the MS in Health Promotion were accepted into outside doctoral programs.

There has been moderate student support on assistantships through RAs, GAs, and TAs.

A portion of the RA support has come from approximately $3 million in grant support to four faculty members involved in the Health Promotion program.

The program has had an active internship program.

Based on statements from faculty at our meeting, two students have served as senior author on refereed publications resulting from their MS even though the program is non-thesis.

There are seven faculty members who have been identified as core faculty in their plan.

Up to this point, one faculty member has taught 50% or more of the regularly scheduled courses, supervised most of the independent studies/research offerings and advised most of the students.

One faculty member from Urban Affairs and Public Policy has a significant association with the program.

Testimonials indicate that the program has a high level of interest and respect from members of the state government and the regional health profession.

Evidence indicates that the field of Health Studies in general and Health Promotion in particular is growing and will continue to expand for the next several decades.

Through several levels of review and up to Mar 20, no one mentioned disestablishment of the program, although concern had been expressed about the lack of the program being interdisciplinary.

The dean has recommended disestablishment after reviewing the faculty’s plan, discussing it with the department chair, and citing primary dependence on one faculty member, lack of faculty resources, inadequate planning, not being interdisciplinary as originally proposed, and lack of appropriate communication as the main reasons. In addition, the planning committee recommended that the program be housed in the department without consultation with the chair of the department or the dean.

Number of registered students in graduate programs in Health Sciences is as follows:

MS in Health Promotion –16

MS in Human Nutrition—19

Certificate program in Dietetics—18 (non-degree)

MS in Health Services Administration—5

MSN in Nursing—81

MS in Exercise Sciences—16

Total Registered Graduate Students in the College—162

Student records in Health Promotion:

1998—4 students admitted and 3 graduated; 1 student withdrew

1999—6 students admitted and 3 graduated; 3 withdrew

2000---6 students admitted and 5 students graduated; 1 withdrew

2001—6 students admitted and 5 students graduated; 1 withdrew

2002—10 students admitted; 8 students graduated; 1 student withdrew; 1 student still not completed

2003—7 students admitted; 2 have graduated; 5 still not completed

2004—9 students admitted; 1 student graduated; 1 student withdrew; 7 still not completed

2005—7 students admitted and not yet time to graduate