John Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New York

SELF STUDYprepared for the

Commission on Higher Education

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools

January 15, 1993

Executive Summary .............................................. 1

Introduction...................................................5

Chapter

1: Mission and Goals ............................ ...... 7

Chapter

2: Governance, Organization and Administration ....... 10

Chapter

3: Faculty: Teaching, Research, Scholarship .......... 27

Chapter

4: Admissions and Retention .......................... 36

Chapter

5: Programs and Curricula ............................ 49

Chapter

6: Outcomes Assessment ............................... 59

Chapter

7:

Student services .......... ............. ...........64

Chapter

8:

Library........... ..... ..... ............ .......... 72

Chapter

9: Plant & Equipment......................... ... .....76

Chapter 10: Publications........... ...................... .....80

Chapter 11: Budgeting, Planning and Resource Allocation ...... o 84

Chapter 12: Diversity, Pluralism and Institutional Integrity..91

Fifteen Recommendations......... ........ .............. ........ 94

Appendix AGoals and objectives ..................................... 95

Appendix BAdministrative Offices ................................... 99

AppendixFaculty:

CSelected Tables ........................... .....103

Appendix DFaculty: Evaluation,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Reaapointment, Promotion & Tenure..106

Appendix EAdmissions and Retention: Selected Tables ............... 109

Appendix FSome Selected Examples of theOffice of Institutional Research's Capabilities .........111

Appendix GCollege Publications .................................... 117

Appendix HOther Resources ......................................... 120

Appendix I1991 John Jay Survey Results ............................ 126

COORDINATING COMMITTEE

Dean Mary Rothlein, ChairDean Eli FaberProfessor Kenneth MoranProfessor Lydia Rosner

STAFF TO THE COMMITTEE

Mr. George CockburnMr. Thomas FernandezMs. Gail Hauss

LISA/CSB CHAIRS OF STUDY TEAMS

CHAIR

STL DY TEAM

Professor Lily Christ

Student Services

Professor Migdalia DeJesus-Torres

Other Resources

Professor Jannette Domingo

Innovation and Experimentation

Professor Louis Guinta

Plant and Equipment

Professor Richard Koehler

Budgeting, Planningand Resource Allocation

Professor Jerry Storch

Library

Professor Richard Lovely

Outcomes Assessment

Professor Marilyn Lutzker

Admissions and Retention

Professor Joseph O'Brien

Programs and Curricula

Professor Sydney Samuel

Governance, Organization andAdministration

Professor Shirley Schnitzer

Publications

Professor Anthony Simpson

Faculty: Teaching, Researchand Scholarship

Professor Jack Zlotnick

Mission and Goals

OJJire of Planning and Development

JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

The City University of Neu , fork

899 Tentb Acaenue, Neu- York, ,N.Y. 101119

(212) 237-8625

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The January 1993 Self-Study Report was compiled and edited by a Coordinating Committee,which was chosen by the President from constituent groups: a representative from the Council ofChairs, a representative from the Faculty Senate, and the Dean of Undergraduate Studies (under-graduate studies being the predominant activity of the College). The chair of the Committee was theDean for Planning and Development, who is the College liaison to the Commission on HigherEducation and who supervises the Office of Institutional Research, which provided most of the data.The Committee recommended that John Jay conduct a comprehensive self-study because at this stageof the College's development all areas would benefit from examination and evaluation. Equallyimportant, a comprehensive self-study would ensure that the process be as inclusive aspossible--contributions were sought from all members of the College community, to the extent prac-ticable. When the Committee recommended a comprehensive self-study it asked that every aspect ofthe College be examined, including the mission itself.

The Coordinating Committee carefully chose the thirteen study team chairs, one for each chap-ter, from the school leaders who were available and interested. To ensure broad representation ofthe College community, factors taken into consideration included academic discipline or area, gen-der, race and ethnicity. The process was therefore enriched by the perspectives that came from aheterogeneous group.

Membership of each study team was as broad as possible, including teaching and non-teachinginstructional staff, administrators and students. Study teams often included representatives of thearea being studied in order to provide their specialized insight. However, these representatives didnot serve as chairpersons, in order to foster objectivity and new ideas.

Unfortunately, some keyfaculty declined to participate or resigned from their study teams; in other cases, particularly withstudents, there were attendance problems.

The two-year process, once begun, was an elaborate one. Surveys were conducted, open hear-ings on specific issues were held, as were hearings with constituent groups. Throughout the processthe study team chairs served as a "committee on committees," particularly charged with addressingthe issues of diversity, pluralism, and institutional integrity. The first draft of the self-study wasdistributed in August 1992 to the entire College community. Copies were distributed and discussedat the annual Leadership Conference with student government and club leaders. The CoordinatingCommittee received approximately 60 written responses and held six open hearings, a Town Meet-ing, and hearings with the College's most important governing bodies. At all of these meetings,input on the draft was welcomed and participants were urged to name which of the many recommen-dations in the report were the most important. (This widely agreed-upon list is included at the end ofthe report.)

In December 1992, a second draft was circulated to ensure accuracy.

Again, theCommittee received written responses and met with constituent bodies who requested such meetings.

In the last analysis, perhaps the College's most demonstrable evidence of integrity is the self-study process itself. The College saw self-study as an opportunity for institutional improvement. Ittherefore did not flinch from honest self-examination or attempt to soft-pedal or minimize problems

once they were uncovered. The study teams and the Coordinating Committee were permitted to dotheir work without pressure from any quarters. Many welcomed the opportunity to express long-held views about the direction of the College. All members of the community were given the chanceto present their opinions--no positions were suppressed or discouraged. Ultimately, this is a matterof academic freedom, which is alive and well at John Jay.

At the outset of the self-study process, the President was committed to implementing therecommendations as they emerged, rather than waiting for the report to be finished. As interimreports were filed and drafts of the report were completed over the past two years, the CoordinatingCommittee announced findings so that relevant offices could make changes.

FINDINGS

Many of the findings related to a fact of life at the College and at The City University ofNew York: enrollment has increased as funding has decreased. A conservative estimate of theCollege's real decrease in the purchasing power of its operating budget over the past five yearswould be 15 %. This IS % decrease in resources, in contrast to a 20 % increase in enrollment overthe same period, brings into sharp focus the College's current financial situation. Even so, theCollege has managed to provide more sections while keeping down class size and increasing studentservices. This could only be accomplished through a variety of stopgap measures, which, if contin-ued in the long term, will seriously compromise the College's ability to fulfill its mission.

The College's mission is one of extraordinary importance as issues of crime and punishmenthave become more central in American life. Historically, there are two elements in the John Jaymission: research, teaching, and training for criminal justice and related agencies; and developingthe whole person through a liberal arts education. But another aspect of the John Jay mission rarelyreceives attention in a formal statement. The College has always been an "open admission" institu-tion with a commitment to remediation. At John Jay there is a continuing debate about allocation ofresources with regard to advancing these varying aspects of its mission. Furthermore, the College'scommitment to access is seen by some as incompatible with its commitment to excAllence in crimi-nal justice. The challenge is to resolve that conflict and proceed in the effort to achieve both.

The term "remedial" is applied loosely at the College because of the different definitions ofthe term. Any discussion of remedial and developmental coursework at the College must start withan agreement on definition of terms and a readjustment of the credit awarded.

The study-team reports repeatedly described problems that arose from a need for bettercommunication between constituencies and the need for a comprehensive planning process. Thisfinding has prompted the College to act. The President asked that a Planning Committee be de-signed, and he recently approved that design. It brings together representatives from administration,faculty, HEOs (non-teaching instructional staff) and students. It is charged with both charting thecourse of the College and fostering communication.

Another major finding of the self-study is the breadth of the retention problem. Some amongthe entering freshmen stop out and then return, but far more leave for so long a period of time thatthey may reasonably be classified as having permanently left John Jay. It is not known whetherthese students transfer to other colleges, whether they have achieved their educational goals, or havedropped out. Again, the self-study proved to be powerful in raising the consciousness of the College,forcing the community to look at a fact of life with wide implications. Many of the recommenda-tions in the report have to do with retention.

For example, the College recognizes that it should enhance its efforts to encourage the re-cruitment and retention of in-service personnel as part of its mission. These students, who are al-ready serving in a variety of criminal justice agencies, provide a stable element in the student body.

Furthermore, it seems clear that students who have a stronger commitment to the special mission ofthe College will stay and succeed.

Another example is the identified need to schedule enough sections at the right level and atthe right times for students, space permitting. The College has an obligation to do this, and it isassumed that retention would improve if the problem were addressed.

Similarly, the self-studyconfirmed that very few Associate Degrees are actually awarded. Some Associate students transferto Baccalaureate programs in the College, but the need for viable, achievable Associate Degrees hasbecome evident.

The ability to identify the extent of the retention problem is a result of the College's revivi-fied Office of Institutional Research, another result of the self-study process. There are healthysigns that outcomes data provided by that office are being melded into routine efforts to assess theeducational effectiveness of the College.

In the area of the teaching faculty, several issues emerged. One is the simple fact that theCollege can now do very little in the way of hiring because of budget cuts. Consequently, progresstowards affirmative action goals and replacement of retiring renowned criminal justice researchershas had to be postponed. An increase in the level of criminal justice research might result if moreacademic leadership from outstanding faculty were available.

Another major faculty issue is the increased reliance on adjuncts in order to handle thegrowing number of students. While John Jay has been fortunate to find a core of committed ad-juncts, and they represent a savings for the College in terms of cash outlay, because of contractuallimitations they cannot be relied upon for departmental service and they have no obligation to doacademic advisement. In answer to a survey question asking students to rate the "best thing aboutJohn Jay," they rated the faculty first. But the practice of most faculty teaching only two days aweek was identified as an impediment to communication, and it is therefore a practice that must beexamined fully.

Considerable debate goes on about the College's undergraduate admission policies.

Twodominant factors--the growing constraint on resources and varying interpretations of the College'smission--contribute to the formulation of different positions and policy recommendations.

At thegraduate level, faculty in the Criminal Justice Master's program have recently examined their pro-gram's admission standards and have formulated proposals to raise them, because a significantnumber who have been admitted in recent years are underprepared for graduate work and are oftenunable to write at the requisite level.

Most John Jay students can be classified as non-traditional college students.

Many are notnative English speakers, most are the first in their families to attend college, and many hold downfull-time jobs and schedule their classes and schoolwork around a work schedule.

The Collegeprovides a panoply of student services to meet the needs of this population. Their need for academicadvisement is being met in part by a formal program with a new director and volunteer advisersdrawn from the administration and teaching and non-teaching instructional staffs. Recently expandedstudent services include a new ESL Resource Center, a Women's Center, and additional studentservice office hours for night students. Areas that need improvement include advisement--the pro-gram needs to be expanded to include all students and all full-time faculty--and the incorporation ofcomputers into the advising process. The need for greater reliance on the computer extends to thecurriculum, as well, and to administrative use of computers, including on-line registration.

The Library has continued to build a nationally known collection in the field of criminal jus-tice. The Library is housed in an award-winning new building that the College completed andmoved into in 1988, with more space and vastly improved facilities, including classrooms, offices, atheater. and athletic facilities. But many feel that North Hall, the College's other building, is not aswell maintained as the new one. The College has been actively working with the University to

acquire space and to erect a building adjacent to its new facility, which would house all the activitiespresently located in North Hall. This new building would solve most of North Hall's problems, butunfortunately the current budget crisis has put this plan on hold.

RESULTS

Several

c suggestions from the self-study teams have been implemented. Among theseare the design o the Comprehensive Planning Committee mentioned above, a broadly representativegroup that has a mandate to do short- and long-term planning. A retention task force, appointed bythe President and chaired by the Provost is looking at ways to improve the retention rate.

TheOffice of External Affairs is implementing a Master Calendar and is stepping up public relationsefforts. The librarian who works with computers, the Director of the Administrative ComputerCenter and the Director of the Microcomputer Center are meeting regularly for the first time toimprove the College's technological capacities. The Curriculum Committee is moving forward withplans to revise and strengthen the Associate Degree programs. Steps have been adopted to retirecourses from the catalogues if they are no longer offered. The Office of Student Development hasincreased student services for night students and is planning a Student Services Day, where availableservices can be publicized. The Office of Institutional Research is in the final stages of developing amethod for systematic outcomes assessment.

The self-study report is therefore a success in many ways already, but the work is not over.John Jay is committed to continuing the effort to improve the College through the recommendationsin the following report. Furthermore, the College sees ongoing self study as the key to continuingsuccess.

Introduction

ACCESS; EXCELLENCE; COMMUNITY

Vigorous growth has characterized John Jay College of Criminal Justice in many significantareas in the decade since its last Middle States self-study, suggesting a considerable degree of vitalityand enterprise.

Enrollment has spiraled upward, growing from 5,881 students in 1982 to 8,522 in1992.

Five new undergraduate majors have been added to the curriculum, one new graduate pro-gram has been developed, and a University PhD program in Criminal justice housed at the Collegeand relying primarily on its faculty has been established.

Writing Across the Curriculum requirements have been widely implemented, and Title IIIgrants have financed creation of a vigorous Microcomputer Center and an experimental undergradu-ate advisement program. The library has introduced many innovations in information technology byestablishing a computerized database collection and by converting to a computerized catalogue.

TheOffice of Institutional Research has been revived and is now producing data for outcomes assess-ment. Finally (although this does not exhaust the list of recent accomplishments), the College occu-pied a new building in 1988, a move that has considerably enhanced the quality of life at the institu-tion.

Amidst these signs of growth and improvement, three major developments have given rise toproblems and challenges that the College must address as it formulates plans for its next decade.One development, the substantial increase in enrollment, is indicative of the College's commitmentto open admission, in a University whose mission stresses access for those who have historicallybeen underrepresented in higher education. Embracing the concept of access in its admission poli-cies, John Jay is a college whose demographic diversity reflects the urban community it serves.Two-thirds of its students are members of historically underrepresented groups, and most are amongthe first in their families to attend college; 52 % receive financial aid.

And yet, self-study has revealed that the 44.9% increase in the size of the student body since1982 has strained support services and contributed to a steady increase in the number of sectionstaught by adjunct faculty, many of whom teach in a large remedial program that draws upon resources required simultaneously to maintain the institution's college-level and graduate programs.Meanwhile, a second major development, recurrent budgetary shortfalls, has compromised theCollege's ability to address such needs. Since 1988, lower state allocations, freezes, and midyearreductions imposed by the University have become the norm. New York State's continuing financialdifficulties portend further cutbacks for the foreseeable future, threatening to perpetuate and evenamplify a disturbing byproduct of the prevailing fiscal uncertainty, the reduction of the size of thefull-time teaching faculty.

This second development raises concern about the College's ability to achieve and maintainexcellence in its programs. John Jay shares the University's commitment to both access and excel-lence. Its mission statement affirms that its purpose is excellence in research, education, and servicein the fields of criminal justice and public safety. But in an era of diminishing resources, the Col-lege must concentrate its energies on developing strategies and formulating plans to attain such excel-lence. With a roster of commitments that range from remedial instruction through the PhD andexternal training, many wonder how we can do it all--yet do any of it excellently--in an environmentof more or less permanent fiscal crisis. Balancing the pulls of access and excellence in an era ofdeclining resources has led to questions such as the following: Ought we to reduce enrollment,curtail the size of the remedial program, and concentrate on excellent Baccalaureate and Master'sprograms in criminal justice, thereby giving priority to John Jay's unique mission within the Univer-sity?

Or, should we maintain the present level of commitment to the University's generalized

emphasis on access, by continuing to support current admission policies, by strengthening the reme-dial programs, and by consequently reducing the number of undergraduate majors and graduateprograms? Might we, instead, successfully reduce the level of cipation in the University's manyPhD programs and the size of the College's external program s, instead of curtailing programsor enrollment, should even more stringent management techniques, such as further reducing releasedtime and expanding class size, be examined?

Along with access and excellence, John Jay must be committed to the value of comma anessential characteristic of a well-ordered academic enterprise as Ernest Boyer of the CarnegieFoundation for the Advancement of Tbaching has argued. A sense of community is rooted mcommon values: the importance of higher education is the shared belief that draws the College'smembers together. Achieving a sense of community at John Jay is complicated by a two-day-a-weekclass schedule, by the complexities encountered everywhere by an ethnically, racially, and religious-ly diverse population, and by a commuting ambience. It is further impeded by the third majordevelopment of the last decade, the rise of a student movement whose activities threw the campusinto turmoil for three successive spring terms. Despite enlightened, intense, and often successfulefforts by student leaders, faculty, and administrators to restore a sense of community, disruptivebuilding takeovers in 1989, 1990 in particular, and 1991 have, according to many, left in their wakea residue of suspicion and fear, cynicism and disengagement, memories of ethnic, racial, and reli-gious intolerance, and a lack of faith and trust. In its ongoing efforts to repair the breaches perma-nently, the College must remain prepared to meet a vital challenge to its wellbeing in the yearsahead.

The chapters that follow, prepared by thirteen study teams comprising faculty, students, andadministrators, portray the College during the third decade of its existence. The challenges faced byJohn Jay as it endeavors to achieve the goals of access, excellence, and community recurthroughout--sometimes implicitly, often explicitly. The effects of rapidly increasing enrollment,severe financial constraints, and recent student activism underlie many of the findings. Each chaptercontains recommendations for addressing conditions that require rectification. A concluding sectionoffers an agenda for the future by identifying fifteen of the most promising recommendations forimprovement to emerge during the self-study. These, it is to be hoped, will enable the College tofashion a community of excellence, that is accessible to many.

Consensus on the mission of an institution can play a vital role in its wellbeing. The missioncan provide a sense of direction, which in turn leads to the establishment of priorities, allocation ofresources, and plans for the future. After much debate and deliberation, the Middle States lvtis-sion study team developed the following Mission Statement:

The Mission

Chapter One

MISSION AND GOALS

John Jay College of Criminal Justice of The City University of New York is a liberal artscollege dedicated to education, research, and service in the fields of criminal justice, fire science,and related areas of public safety and public service. It seeks to inspire students to the highest idealsof citizenship and public service, and serves society by developing graduates who have the intellec-tual acuity, moral commitment, and professional competence to confront the challenges of crime,justice, and public safety in a free society. The College strives to endow students with the skills ofcritical thinking and effective communication; the perspective and moral judgment that developsfrom liberal studies; the capacity for personal growth and creative problem solving that results fromthe ability to acquire and evaluate information; and the awareness and appreciation of the diversecultural, historical, and political forces that shape our society. Building on these intellectual andmoral foundations, the College offers its students an undergraduate and graduate curriculum thatbalances the arts, sciences, and humanities with professional studies, and encourages its students todevelop a continuing relationship with learning and service.

Fulfillment of the Mission

Two key documents shaped the mission of the College. The first is a 1964 committee reportto the CUNY Chancellor discussing a college for police officers. As a recent history of the Collegeexplained,

The committee endorsed "the need of high-level collegiate training forpolice officers today" for two reasons: such a program was essential in theAmerica of the 1960s, "a period when our public life exists in a state ofacute tension and when for an unpredictable period our sprawling metropo-lis will be subject to civic strife and disorder." The importance of policeeducation to deal with the increasing strife in modern society was matchedby another theme: the increased specialization of police work. The commit-tee wrote that "sound police service demands a number of highly special-ized skills and a sensitivity to the public and the public temper which, verylikely, has existed at no other time in our history." It supported the creationof a separate institution "for the development of broad curricular interests inaddition to police specialization and preparation for administration, pat-terned after the liberal arts curriculum." The committee was certain that asuperior program could be developed at CUNY into "a well known regionaland international facility of higher education for the training of law en-forcement officers from here and abroad."'

1. Gerald Markowitz, Educating

Justice: A Brief History 21John JAy College ( New York: John Jay Press, 1990), 8.

The other document is the 1976 directive from the Board of Higher Education, which reor-ganized the College to "limit its academic focus to the fields of criminal justice and fire science,"mandating "that programs in criminal justice and related fields now offered ... be continued and thatmajors in liberal arts and sciences be eliminated...."

Historically, there are two elements in the John Jay mission: research, teaching, and trainingfor criminal justice and related agencies; and the development of the whole person through a liberalarts education. These elements have given force and direction to the College from the early days ofits history.

But another aspect of the John Jay mission rarely receives attention in a formal state-ment. The College has always been an "open admission" institution with a commitment to academicremediation. Early in the College's history its underprepared students were white, older men work-ing in the criminal justice field. Often they had not completed high school and needed help in read-ing, math, or English .2 The College's willingness to help these students contributed to the profes-sionalization of the criminal justice system. Today the underprepared student tends to be a youngmember of a minority group, who hopes to become a professional and who needs help in two ormore areas of remediation. The College's ability to help these young people succeed in highereducation can have a significant impact on society's ability to staff the uniformed services with awell-qualified, culturally diverse cadre of professionals.

The College fulfills its mission by offering a wide range of graduate and undergraduateprograms in criminology, criminal justice, public safety, fire protection, government, public admin-istration, computer information systems, and the forensic sciences. General education requirementsin the undergraduate curriculum seek to develop the whole person. Students pursue studies in thetraditional academic disciplines along with studies in the professional disciplines related to John Jay'smission.

The interdisciplinary character of the John Jay curriculum and training demonstrates theadvantage of a specialized institution. The College has attempted to integrate the social sciences andto some extent the humanities into the majors. While turf protection afflicts all institutions, some feelit is heightened at John Jay because of the dynamic between the criminal ju-,tice focus and the broad-er social science and humanities landscape.

There are two other facets to a special-purpose mission. First, some in academic depart-ments outside of the special mission find it difficult to develop meaningful research and teachingroles in the College.

Second, the College engages in healthy debate on the scope and direction ofcriminal justice education. Some contend that so much attention has been placed on various modelsof criminal justice education that there has not been enough emphasis on either research or theCollege's obligation to implement the University's policy of open access. For example, the aboveMission Statement focuses on criminal justice education, gives scant attention to research, and omitsmention of the open access policy of the University. Furthermore, respect for criminal justice as aprofession and a field of study is intrinsic to the College's mission. The College must therefore beguided by this attitude in all of its activities.

The College attempts to fulfill its research mission by hiring and promoting scholars, sup-porting grant writing, and providing space for a number of centers and institutes. But these activitiesare primarily idiosyncratic in nature and reflect the particular interests of faculty.

There is littleevidence of a College-wide, comprehensive criminal justice research agenda.

2. Markowitz, 42.

3. Committee on the Associate Degree, "Report," (February 1992).

4. Markowitz, 24.

The pursuit of the College's mission is an ongoing process. To help the College communityaccomplish its mission, a number of goals and objectives were delineated as part of the self-study.These goals are listed below and the objectives appear in Appendix A.

Goal One: Continue to assess and improve the quality of education and research in the fields ofcriminal justice, fire science, and related areas of public safety and public service.

Goal Two: Enhance the academic environment to promote education, research, and professionalservice, and to encourage and facilitate the awareness and appreciation of the diverse cultural, histor-ical, and political forces that shape our society.

Goal Three: Refine the governance structure and associated organizational structures and processesto enhance fulfillment of the mission of the College.

Goal Four: Continue to develop a physical environment that supports the education of the wholeperson and the development of community.

Goal Five: Reinforce local, national, and international public and private partnerships, to inspire thehighest ideals of citizenship and public service, and to confront the challenges of crime, justice, andpublic safety in a free society.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The breadth and depth of the goals and objectives indicate that the Mission study team hasprovided a comprehensive pathway toward the fulfillment of John Jay's special mission. The teamhas also provided guidance to the College to help encourage and facilitate awareness of the diversitywithin the community. Goal One also recognizes the importance of ongoing assessment as a meansof improving the quality of education and research. While some might have hoped for more empha-sis on the remediation issue, several objectives in Goal One specifically refer to this important issue.

The goals and objectives represent the newest effort of the College to propose a comprehen-sive blueprint which addresses various dimensions of John Jay's mission. While there is clearevidence that the College is well aware of its special mission, the College does not possess as full asense of its mission as might first appear. The issues of access, excellence, and community have notbeen fully articulated and discussed. Because of this the College may not have done as good a job asit might in establishing priorities, allocating resources, evaluating outcomes, and planning for thefuture.

The chairs of the study teams and the Coordinating Committee specifically recommend that anew planning process be established and undertake, as its first order of business, the responsibility toestablish priorities for the goals outlined above. (See Chapter 11, "Budgeting, Planning and Re-source Allocation.") It should identify the appropriate bodies and/or administrators, collaborativelydevelop timetables to meet the goals, and establish qualitative and quantitative benchmarks to meas-ure the College's success in meeting its objectives.

John

Jay should set the College's specialized mission within the context of access, excel-lence, and a sense of community. As a result of the self study, consciousness is growing that there isa tension between pursuit of excellence in the College's special mission and the maintenance of thepresent level of undergraduate remediation. Clearly, scarcity of resources heightens this tension.Yet, John Jay must define for itself meanings for the terms access and excellence-and then set rea-sonable plans and goals for achieving both.

The City University of New York (CUNY)

A senior college within The City University of New York (CUNY), a semi-autonomous stateagency, John Jay College is both influenced by and responsive to the University through its relation-ship with the Board of Trustees, the Chancellor, and the administrative structure.

The E lard ofTrustees is a legal entity, the Chancellor its agent. The Bylaws of the University govern University-wide matters and those internal to the individual colleges.

The Board's 1969 document, "Statement of Policy on the Organization and Governance ofCUNY," delineates the major constituents within the College, outlining their responsibilities andalways reaffirming that the ultimate responsibility rests with the President alone. It states in part:

It is important to note that in this document the Board states that "the term

' President'includes the members of the administration who are directly responsible to him who are approvedby him."

It continues:

The President has the final responsibility and authority fordecisions in the following areas: the quality of the faculty and academ-ic leadership, preparation of the college budget and allocation ofmonies within

the college; preparation and implementation of thecollege Master Plan; general management of the clerical, custodialand professional administrative staffs, the maintenance of order andthe disciplining of members of the college community whose conductthreatens that order; and the general administration of the college.

The faculty is primarily responsible for academic matters,including the criteria for admission and retention of students, pro-mulgation of rules concerning attendance, the awarding of credit anddegrees,

the quality of teaching, research and guidance of studentsand the general quality and advancement of the academic program[including] the selection, retention, promotion and quality of the facul-

Chapter Two

GOVERNANCE, ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

Governance

The major external influences upon the College, therefore, are the structures, procedures,and policies set by the Board.

Responsible directly to the Board as its executive agent, the president of each college ischarged with administration and is responsible for general academic excellence and exercising"general superintendence over the concerns, officers, employees, and students of his/her college."

Members of John Jay College participate in the University-wide governance structure in anumber of ways. The President is a member of the Council of Presidents, which gives advice andrecommendations to the Chancellor. CUNY Vice Chancellors responsible for functional areas meetregularly with representatives from the colleges. Thus, for example, the John Jay College Provostjoins other Provosts in regular meetings with the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.

In this

way, also, John Jay College administrators responsible for such matters as budget, labor relations,special programs (SEEK), and facilities planning meet with their counterparts from other collegesand with the appropriate Vice Chancellor. These are advisory bodies only.

The faculty elect representatives to the University Faculty Senate. The size of the delegationis related to the number of faculty. John Jay now has five Senators, four representing full-time facul-ty and one representing part-time. The Senate's policymaking authority refers to University-wide,not College-based programs, and its chair is a nonvoting member of the Board of Trustees.

Mem-bers of the Senate sit on Board subcommittees and are therefore involved in all matters broughtbefore the Board.

Students elect a representative to the University Student Senate. This body has neither formaladministrative nor independent policymaking authority within CUNY, but its chair is a votingmember of the Board of Trustees.

New York State and New York City

Because New York State provides approximately two-thirds of the College's funding, statepolicies guide John Jay in most financial and business management functions.

The New York State Board of Regents is responsible for educational policy and guidelines foreducational institutions statewide. For example, the Board of Regents must approve all major andminor programs, as well as certificate programs. Furthermore, it requires all of the colleges anduniversities in the state to submit a Master Plan every four years. CUNY develops such a plan andthe individual colleges contribute to it.

Because John Jay offers four Associate Degree programs, New York City provides partialsupport as local sponsor of these programs; the state also pays a stipulated percentage of their cost.But for the past two years the state has failed to fund these programs, citing technical jurisdictionalreasons.

Meanwhile, the city has filled the budgetary gap. So the College, dependent on the city'ssupport, is also influenced by its fiscal policies. As of this writing, the jurisdictional issue betweenthe state and city over the Associate Degree programs has not been resolved.

Unions

The instructional staff, teaching and non-teaching, are represented by the Professional StaffCongress; there is a chapter on this and every other CUNY campus. Civil service personnel arerepresented by municipal workers unions (principally District Council 37 of the AFL-CIO) and bytrade unions.

The Director of the Office of Human Resources serves as the President's LaborDesignee.

Labor unions affect College policy and practices through formally negotiated contractualagreements pertaining to salaries, job titles and responsibilities, job security, and grievance proce-dures.

Internal College Governance Structure

CUNY Bylaws are specific as to some elements of a College's internal structure: the role andduties of the president; a college committee on faculty personnel and budget; department organiza-tion, with a tenured chairperson; a departmental committee on personnel and budget; specific ranksand titles for faculty and administrative staff. The Bylaws also set forth conditions and proceduresfor a wide range of matters, including departmental elections, appointments, promotion, tenure,academic due process, student and faculty disciplinary procedures and management of student funds.

While governance plans at each college supersede the Bylaws, all such plans must be approved bythe CUNY Board of Trustees.

The governance structure of any organization must provide a stable and decisive frameworkfor development and implementation of policy. But at the same time the structure must dynamicallyevolve to adapt to external challenge and internal change. At John Jay, the College Charter outlinesthe governance structure and can be modified in two ways: (1) a 75% affirmative vote of thosemembers present and voting at the College Council or (2) a 75 % affirmative vote in a referendum ofboth students and faculty. Such revisions must also be approved by the CUNY Board of Trustees.

The President

CUNY Bylaws grant the President of the College substantial powers associated

with thegeneral superintendence of the College, at the same time holding him ultimately responsible.

By involving the College community and delegating authority, the President can informallyshape the lines of influence and authority. Relying on dialogue with many groups, the Presidentdynamically molds the informal governance structure.

For example, an important forum for bringing together major constituencies has been theperiodic meetings the President has with the Chair of the Council of Chairs, the Chair of the BudgetPlanning Subcommittee, and the President of the Faculty Senate. The Provost sometimes attendsthese meetings; when the issues are administrative in nature, so does the Vice President for Adminis-tration. The President hosts a series of faculty lunches throughout the academic year, which includesthe entire teaching faculty and other members of the instructional staff. However, the Faculty Senatehas expressed the desire to meet more frequently with the President.

The College Council

The College Charter was developed in response to the Board's 1969 policy statement, whichmandated that each college establish a governance structure reflecting its unique mission within theUniversity but in accordance with the spirit of Board policy. The John Jay charter establishes theCollege Council as the primary governing body of the College, having the "authority to establishCollege policy on all matters except those specifically reserved to" other authorized agencies.

TheCharter empowers the Council to establish committees at its discretion.

The Council establishes,eliminates, or merges academic departments and also sets forth procedures for the election of de-partment chairs and members of departmental committees.

The Charter describes the Council as "a representative body with members selected by theinstructional staff, students, administration, non-instructional staff and alumni." It controls mem-bers' qualifications, voting procedures, and terms of office. The teaching members of the instruc-tional staff have 28 representatives; the students, 15; the administration, six; and the non-instruction-al staff and alumni have one seat each. In December 1991, the Council voted to expand representa-tion to the non-teaching members of the instructional staff, who are principally Higher EducationOfficers (HEOs), by giving them five seats in an expanded body of 56 representatives.

The standing committees of the College Council and their duties are listed in the Charter.Of these, the Committee on Faculty Personnel and Budget, chaired by the President, plays a pivotalrole.

In addition to the chairs of the departments, who constitute the majority of the members, theProvost, the Dean of Graduate Studies, the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, three at-large instruc-tional staff, and two students sit on the Committee. It recommends appointments, reappointments,promotions, and tenure for the members of the teaching instructional staff. It also makes recom-mendations on the annual budget submitted by the President.

1 2

The Budget Planning Subcommittee is more intimately involved in the budgeting process,reporting back to the full Budget Committee. This group advises the President as well as the Presi-dent of the Faculty Senate, and the chairs on the Budget Committee.

The Academic Departments

The academic department is a key unit of governance at the College, as many other gover-nance components consist substantially of departmental representatives. Departments elect a chair,as well as personnel and curriculum committees. The President, however, has the power undercertain circumstances to appoint and remove chairs, with faculty consultation.

Curriculum Committees

Four interdisciplinary undergraduate majors and five graduate programs are governed bycurriculum committees that fill a need for multidisciplinary coordination of academic initiatives thatcut across traditional departmental lines.

The College Curriculum Committee created the four undergraduate interdisciplinary majorscommittees. Each is chaired by the Dean of Undergraduate Studies. Membership includes the Deanfor Admissions and Registration, representatives of each department represented in the major, thecoordinator of the program and a representative of the Curriculum Committee. The graduate pro-grams are governed by the Graduate Studies Committee, which is chaired by the Dean of GraduateStudies, and includes the Dean for Admissions and Registration, a representative of the Library, andthe coordinators of each graduate program.

The Council of Chairs

The Council of Chairs consists of the academic department chairs and was formed in 1976 tostudy and propose solutions to problems related to department administration and cross-departmentalissues.

Situated interstitially between faculty and administration, its role has been both managerialand academic, and it has had an ongoing impact on questions ranging from resources to academicstandards. In addition to its own monthly meetings, the Council meets with the Provost to discussissues of mutual interest. Recent agenda items include the capital budget, reports from the CollegeCouncil Budget Committee, adjuncts with low student evaluations, and classroom decorum. Whileits meetings are not open to nonmembers except for the President of the Faculty Senate and otherswho are invited to discuss specific issues, its minutes are distributed.

The Faculty Senate

The Faculty Senate, a deliberative and advisory body which meets twice a month, is com-posed of (1) 13 full-time faculty and two adjunct faculty elected at large by their respective constitu-encies, and (2) the faculty serving on the College Council, who are automatically seated as Senators.Because Senators elected at-large may also serve on the College Council, the Senate can vary in sizefrom 35 to 43 members. Officers--a President, Vice President, Corresponding Secretary andRecording Secretary--are elected by a majority of the members. The Senate's Constitution describesit as "the voice of the faculty" in "matters of teaching, scholarship, research and any and all othermatters related to faculty concerns as part of the educational mission of John Jay College."

TheConstitution was ratified by a nearly unanimous faculty-wide vote. The College Charter stipulatesthat the President meet with the Faculty Senate at least once a semester.

The Faculty Senate's meetings are open to all members of the teaching faculty and it distrib-utes attribution minutes to faculty and administrators.

The Council of HEOs

The Council of HEOs is composed of the 82 non-teaching instructional staff who are notclassified as exempted positions (Assistant Deans, Assistant Administrators or members of theExecutive Pay Plan). It meets regularly to voice opinions about educational policies, student supportservices, personnel concerns and contractual issues, budgetary matters and other institutional con-cerns. The Council's Executive Board is composed of seven annually elected members: a President,Vice President, Secretary and four at-large members.

Student Council

See Chapter 7, "Student Services."

Advisory Board

The external Advisory Board is an informal group consisting of community members outsidethe College, many of whom are experts in the field of criminal justice. They give broad-based adviceto the President, paying special attention to informing the College how it is perceived by thecommunity at large.

In addition, the members are asked to support the school when funding andother issues affecting the College are legislated.

Governance: Analysis Amen Recommendations

This topic elicited a rich range of responses from many groups College-wide.

The Governance study team, as part of its deliberations, conducted a series of interviews withadministrators and faculty. In an attempt to gather even more input, the Coordinating Committeeitself held a series of meetings with constituent groups--the President's Cabinet, the Council ofChairs, and the Faculty Senate--solely to discuss governance.

The Student Council was invited, butwas unable to attend because of the pressures of the end of the semester and student elections.

In general, College-wide decisions are made in an orderly fashion at John Jay. For example,the College discontinued the ROTC program because of the military ban on gar personnel. TheCollege Council deliberated, all parties were permitted to speak, and the Council's decision wasenforced. However, the process can be protracted and cumbersome. A much more difficult adjustment was the three-year process involving negotiations among faculty, students, and administration,whereby the Charter was amended to allow representation of HEOs in the College Council. Theamended Charter permits another voice to be heard without compromising the strength of the origi-nal groups, making a stronger, more representative College Council. Another example of the Coun-cil's flexibility is the abandonment of the Retention and Standards Committee. A new Undergradu-ate Academic Standards Committee includes representatives from each of the academic departments,and a Retention Task Force was appointed by the President.

Despite this strength, several suggestions have emerged to improve College governance.Many people interviewed felt that academic departments do not meet often enough, limiting thedissemination of information. Furthermore, the role of department chair is inadequately defined.Are chairs expected to develop policies, participate in faculty development, and take the ultimateresponsibility for molding and shaping the department--not just schedule classes, hire adjuncts, and

1 4

handle student complaints?

Professors occupy this crucial nexus of governance without a clearmandate.

An orientation designed to familiarize chairs with the program and policy aspects of theirposition could allow them to harness their creativity to the future of the department and the College.

The curriculum development process is, for the most part, highly regarded, but some facultyfeel that not all departments, disciplines, and programs are fairly represented in policy-makingbodies.

For example, several academic disciplines are not assigned seats on the Curriculum Committee because they are part of multidisciplinary departments. Additionally, departments of differ-ent sizes all have the same vote.

Another repeated concern is that the Curriculum Committee meets and makes decisions andmust then report to the College Council, where those decisions could be overturned. Many peoplefeel that non-faculty should never make curriculum decisions. And, while CUNY policy states that"College administrators should have a participatory role in the entire academic decision-makingprocess...,"' faculty state that these should be administrators with academic responsibility.

Until they reach the College Council, the graduate programs are not subject to College-widereview, but remain with the Committee on Graduate Studies. It has been proposed that representa-tives of departments who do not have graduate programs be part of a review process. Anothersuggestion is to publish the criteria by which faculty are eligible to serve in the graduate programs,and how such faculty are reappointed.

Some members of the faculty noted that the College Charter should include all active commit-tees of the College. For example, the Council of Chairs is not mentioned in the Charter, and yet itprovides a forum for departments to share common concerns and formulate recommendations onbudget, personnel, and academic issues.

Another perceived weakness of the governance process is the duplication and proliferation ofcommittees. There are 95 committees at John Jay, 18 of which are part of the College Council (thisdoes not include departmental committees). Faculty must attend many meetings thereby limitingcapacity for meaningful involvement in real decisions.

One solution is to refer issues to the relevant standing committees of the College Council,which could convene ad hoc task forces to deal with specific issues within a specified period. Thesetask forces would automatically disband when the work is completed. This would not only reduce thenumber of committees, but would revitalize the existing governance structures, considered by someto be moribund.

In conclusion, tension between faculty and administration is endemic in higher education.Nevertheless, the College community is interested in reducing it. One method might be to broadenan understanding of University-mandated responsibilities for each group.

Organization An Administration

A description of the administrative offices can be found in Appendix B. See also organizationalcharts below.

1. Organization and Governance of The City University gJ New York ,419-420.

Administrators Reportingto the President

ThePresident

Office of

The President

Dean for Vice President for Director of Vice President for Vice President for Dean for Director ofPlanning and Administrative External Academic Affairs Student Admissions FinancialDevelopment Affairs Affairs and Provost Development and Affairs

Registration and Planning

Office ofAcademic Affairs

Vice President for Academic Affairsand Provost

Office ofThe Provost

Dean for Academic Dean for Director of Director of DeanUndergraduate Departments and SEEK Criminal Justice Sponsored for

Studies Library Research Research GraduateCenter Studies

'Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of

Testing Micro- Undergraduate The Writing January and ESLcomputer Advisement Center Summer Basic ResourceLaboratory Skills Center

Director of Director of Director ofToxicology Center on I nstituteResearch Violence for

and Training and CriminalrCenter Human Justice

Survival Ethics

a,

Division of Student Development

Vice President for Student Developmentand Dean of Students

Office ofthe Dean

Assistant Assistant Assistant to Assistant Director of Department Dean of AssociateDean to the Vice to the Communications of Counseling Student Dean ofof Vice President President vice Skills and Activities StudentsStudents (Affirmative for Student President Communication and

Action Officer, Development (Entering Skills Campus LifeOffice of FreshmenStudents with Programs) Director ofDisabilities) Children's Center

Coordinator,College HealthOffice

Director of Director of Director of Director of Director of

Liberty Career Upward Talent Student Director Student

Partnership Advisement Bound Search Enrichment Financial Services

Director ofInstructional Services

Vice President for Administrative Affairs

Office zfAdministrative Affairs

ExecutiveAssistant

Director ofComputer Center

Director of Dean for Administration Director ofHuman Resources Technical Services

Director of Chief Administrative Director of SecurityCampus Planning Supervisor of

Buildings andGrounds

Office of Admissions and Registration

Registrar

Dean forAdmissions and

Registration

Assistant tothe Dean

Assistant Deanfor Admissions

Office -of Planning and Development -~

Dean forPlanning andDevelopment

Assistant

I Director

iDirector of Director of Director of

Alumni Affairs Planning and CONY Substanceand Development Abuse Education

Development and PreventionDirector of

InstitutionalResearch

Director ofInternships

Office ofExternal Affairs

Director ofExternal Affairs

ExecutiveAssistant

Dean for Director of Director ofSpecial Programs Fire Science Criminal Justice

Institute Training Center

Director of Director ofInstitute on SecurityAlcohol and Management

Substance Abuse Institute

Bursar

PurchasingStaff

Business Office

Director ofFinancial Affairsand Planning

AssistantBusinessManager

PropertyControl

Staff

BudgetOfficer

Payroll Officer

The President

Policy MakingComponents

Advisory Bodies Policy Implementation/Administration

College Council President's Cabinet Academic Affairs

Personnel and Faculty Senate Student DevelopmentBudget Committees

Comprehensive Administrative AffairsPlanning Committee

Admissions and RegistrationTask Force on Retention

Planning and DevelopmentAlumni Association

External AffairsExternal Advisory Board

Financial Affairs and Planning

Organization

Analysis And Recommendations

One of the most striking findings is the repeated observation that there is a blurring of linesof responsibility. This was mentioned by the Provost, the Vice President for Administrative Affairsand members of the Faculty Senate and the Chairs. Such a widespread observation suggests thatclarification would be beneficial. As a result of the self-study, a concerted effort is being made tochannel the administrative concerns of the faculty through the Office of the Provost, who will beresponsible for communication with the Office of Administrative Affairs. Another recommendationis to strengthen outreach efforts through closer coordination between the Office of Planning andDevelopment and the Office of External Affairs.

In addition, there seems to be a broad problem of lack of accountability on the part of theadministration, department chairs and faculty. When the President decides on a specific course ofaction, assignments for follow-up may not be made or acted on. Department chairs at times are latewith class schedules. Faculty miss deadlines for new course curricula, reports on majors, grades,and responses to grade disputes.

One needed organizational change involves the designation of the Provost as chair of theUndergraduate Curriculum Committee. In practice, the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, who reportsto the Provost, heads that group, and his role as chair needs to be formalized. Furthermore, severalacademic activities scattered in different areas organizationally should be centralized under theProvost and assigned to the appropriate Dean. Internships and Co-ops, Freshman Advisement,Professional School Admission Advisement, and 'Ibtoring are all academic in nature and, as such,belong under the Provost's supervision. Certain academic programs--January and Summer BasicSkills and Student Testing--have already moved under the Dean of Undergraduate Studies' leader-ship, but the centralizing process should continue.

Similarly, the Office of Special Programs should report to the Provost's Office. Many of itsprograms are academic and credit generating. Many programs also embody institutional and content-based innovation which frequently influence the regular curriculum. The Provost's oversight of thisoffice would affirm the academic nature of many of its activities.

Administration

The current President believes his responsibility is to chart the course of the College andensure that the unique idea of the College remains at the forefront. He is also concerned that thefaculty and students are seen as a force for positive change in the areas of law enforcement, criminaljustice, and public service. He is therefore a strong advocate for the College in related professionaland government circles. In addition, he sees the present as the time for the College to step into itsrole as an international leader, as mandated by the Board. With the recent changes of governments inEastern Europe and South America, the College can provide assistance as those emerging democra-cies begin to implement humane and service-oriented police forces. One example of his commitmentin this area is the June 1992 conference "International Perspectives: Crime, Justice and PublicOrder" conceived and designed by the President and held in St. Petersburg, Russia. Experts from 19countries gathered in a country with no tradition of civilian police. At the conference, dialoguebegan and plans for future conferences were made so that support can be sustained. Finally, thePresident fervently believes that the College should collaborate with police departments in order topromote highly skilled, educated, and disciplined police who have benefited from the combination ofoutstanding training and a collegial environment.

In March 1992 the state restored funding of the Associate Degree programs--these funds,amounting to roughly $13 million, had been withheld for two years. President Lynch, as part of aUniversity-wide effort led by the Chancellor, contributed to the success with energetic lobbying andclose relationships with influential lawmakers. Despite the President's success in this effort, he is thefirst to acknowledge the contributions made by the Faculty Senate, the Council of Chairs, students,faculty, and other members of the instructional staff.

Another of the President's initiatives is the new building on Tenth Avenue, which opened in1988 largely as a result of President Lynch's creative energy and dogged persistence.

Some administrators feel the President is too accessible and therefore sometimes gives con-flicting signals. On the other hand, some faculty, especially members of the Council of Chairs andthe Faculty Senate, contend that the President has not been available to them to discuss Collegebusiness.

The President is one of the pioneering faculty and staff who saw the College move from adepartment to a small college to a nationally known teaching and research center. During the earlyyears, informality was standard among the group, but now the College is more complex, and theinformality of the old days can no longer accomplish effective management. The College is still inthe process of developing an effective organizational structure.

Faculty criticism of the administration focus not on the ability to speak, but on the quality oflistening. The perception exists that serious issues are raised without meaningful acknowledgement.This has been described by some as a lack of an attitude of helpfulness in some administrative quar-ters. Many faculty also assert that they are not kept informed by their departments on colleagues'research and publishing and other important issues.

It would help for the members of the President's Cabinet to develop a reporting method.That forum was designed to share and distribute information College-wide, but it can be effectiveonly if the members report back to their constituencies. All constituents should be mindful that effec-tive communication is the foundation of trust and orderly progress.

Chapter Three

FACULTY: TEACHING, RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP

Faculty Profile

The full-time faculty at John Jay show versatility as well as expertise, given the complexnature of the College. In addition to teaching and research, they advise students and participate indepartmental administration and College governance.

The faculty, numbering 261, including librarians, counselors and lab technicians, hold de-grees from prominent universities nationwide. There are 91 Full Professors, 100 Associate Profes-sors, 38 Assistant Professors, 4 Instructors, 17 Lecturers, and 11 College Laboratory Technicians.In Fall 1992, approximately 190 of these are full-time teaching faculty.

Table 1

Spring 1992 Faculty by Ethnicity and Gender

* CCLT, SCLT and CLT are laboratory technicians.

Source: OIR

Perhaps the biggest change in the faculty since Fall 1987 is the increase in the participation ofadjuncts in teaching and the decline in full-time faculty in absolute numbers. The proportion of

27

Rank SexAsian African-

AmericanHispanic White Total

Professor F 1 1 1 21 24M 3 64 67

Associate F 1 7 3 27 38Professor M 2 4 2 54 62

Assistant F 7 1 13 21Professor M 1 3 2 11 17

Instructor F 1 1 2M 2 2

Lecturer F 2 1 3M 5 3 6 14

CCLT* F 1 1

SCLT* F 1 1 2M 1 4 5

CLT* F 2 2M 1 1

TOTAL 7 36 16 202 261

undergraduate courses taught by adjuncts rose from 34% in Fall 1987 to 45% in Fall 1991. This isthe result of natural attrition and two early retirement incentives combined with restricted hiringof full-time faculty because of budgetary constraints and increased enrollment. (See Appendix C,Table 12.)

Analysis An Recommendations

Fiscal advantages of increasing the number of adjunct courses are obvious. Full-time profes-sors are paid an average of $55,000 for a 21-hour teaching load (along with other responsibilities),plus benefits. The same amount of teaching, if undertaken by adjuncts, costs the College approxi-mately $14,000. Another advantage, especially for a college with a professional mission, is the abili-ty to draw on the expertise of specialists. John Jay's reliance on adjuncts is somewhat less than theaverage for those CUNY colleges for which data is available. (See Appendix C, 'Fable 13.)

The

disadvantages, when the proportion of adjuncts is close to 50% in any one discipline,can be significant. Students must rely on a smaller group of faculty for advisement. Departmentchairs must recruit qualified adjuncts. Full-time faculty must spend time on semester-by-semesterteaching evaluations. Furthermore, because of contractual limitations, adjuncts cannot be called uponfor critical departmental service like curriculum development.

While these effects have never been formally assessed, administration and faculty fear thatstudents who are taught by many adjuncts may be shortchanged in the educational process. Adjunctinstructors are usually less experienced and almost always less accessible. Furthermore, there isinadequate comprehensive evaluation of adjunct teaching.

Many adjuncts do not have much exposure to the College culture. As they have no tenure orjob security in the College, they may not be around long enough to establish ongoing relationshipswith students and to help provide a sense of continuity. As the majority of remedial courses aretaught by adjuncts, it would seem that all the advantages of a stable, experienced, and visible facultyare largely denied to the students most in need.

At the same time, John Jay has been fortunate to find a core group of adjuncts

who arecommitted to the College. Many return year after year, and some donate their time to serve oncommittees and advise students. Furthermore, the school's location in New York, the center ofcriminal justice practice, permits the College to draw on a rich pool of experts for specializedcourses.

Faculty Recrui tment

Current recruitment practices are influenced by the overall needs of the College, its adher-ence to principles of affirmative action, the attractiveness of the offers it can make, and, of course,the availability of faculty lines. Some vacancies hav - been created by early retirement incentives, butthese are imposed by CUNY and the state--John Jay has very little control over them. Furthermore,the vacant lines are rarely funded to permit the hiring of replacements. In fact, the College can nowdo very little in the way of hiring, and the probability that this will be so for the foreseeable futuremakes any discussion of the subject of faculty recruitment almost theoretical.

Officially, the College conducts searches for new faculty according to established affirmativeaction guidelines and procedures. The College Affirmative Action Officer coordinates the efforts ofdepartments and advises them how best to fulfill the spirit of affirmative action policy. Moreover,following the early retirement opportunities, CUNY directed that replacement should first of alladdress the University's affirmative action goals.

HEO lines can be converted to faculty lines if and when vacancies in them arise, and

someHEOs are qualified to hold academic titles and could become professors. But departments have beenunwilling to hire HEOs at a professorial rank equivalent to their HEO rank because the method ofselection and promotion is different. And some question whether these internal transfers shouldsupersede the tradition of the open search. Furthermore, administrative offices could be denuded oftheir managerial staffs if HEOs took on teaching responsibilities.

Analysis Aad Recommendations

Given the limited amount of hiring of full-time faculty that is now a familiar feature of theCUNY landscape, adherence to affirmative action policy has been quite successful. Most of thepeople hired since Fall 1987 have been minorities and women. As is John Jay practice for all hir-ings, these have generally been in the lower ranks. Because of the competition for qualified minorityPhDs, John Jay has implemented an aggressive plan to increase diversity: The College hires minori-ties at the instructor and lecturer level (those who are still working on doctorates), hoping some canbe offered professorships after completion of their degrees.

Faculty do, of course, recognize that hiring must be done with regard to the needs of theCollege at a particular time. For example, no one expects that a vacancy created in one departmentby a resignation or retirement will necessarily be filled with an appointment in that department. It isunderstood that, in this climate of retrenchment, reapportionment of newly vacated lines is the prin-cipal way in which the College can reshape itself to meet current needs.

Recruitment of senior faculty does not occur very often. When it does, it rarely addresses awidespread faculty concern that John Jay should use such appointments as magnets to attract superiorstudents and faculty, especially those in the criminal justice field. A number of the College's best-known faculty have retired recently, bringing this issue sharply into focus. John Jay has only oneDistinguished Professor, which is most unusual among CUNY senior colleges.

The early tradition of the College was to hire experienced practitioners in criminal justice.But the evolution of the school--and the evolution of criminal justice as an academic discipline--hasrequired the broadening of the faculty to include productive research scholars. Most desirable wouldbe scholars who either have had experience in the field or have a demonstrated sensitivity to practiceissues.

While most professors have PhDs, it has always been recognized that there are fully accept-able equivalents to the standard academic research degree. Those in the creative or performing arts,for example, do not usually obtain PhDs, nor would this ever be expected. The Mathematics Department has long had a policy of hiring those with degrees in math education. The discussion maybecome more significant as the curriculum encompasses nontraditional areas of study. In those cases,such as English as a Second Language, a PhD may not be the most appropriate qualification. In anyevent, recruitment has to proceed carefully, case by case, to ensure that when exceptions are madethey are made for exceptional reasons.

Evaluation. Reap

intment. Promotion. And Tenure

In keeping with the tradition of higher education, faculty personnel decisions are madethrough a peer review process. A series of review committees meet and make recommendations tothe President who, in turn, makes recommendations to the Board of Trustees. (See Appendix D for acomplete description.)

&ay~is Aad Recommendations

It is naturally difficult to develop and apply fair and consistent standards to people of greatlydiffering accomplishments and functions within the College. Identification of universally acceptedstandards of academic accomplishment applicable, for example, to a creative artist, an academiccounselor, a lab technician, and a social historian would indeed be difficult.

Another challenge arises because the composition of the various committees doing the workof the personnel process is not fixed over time. Changes, slight though they may be, do occur. Newdepartment chairs are elected, as are new faculty and student representatives. To some, the changesrepresent a difficulty in maintaining standards; others point out that biases cannot become en-trenched. In general, the process is considered to be just.

But the College has, in recent years, endeavored to improve the process in a number ofimportant ways:

(1) Chairs have been urged more strongly to provide their faculty with more guidance andinformation about the process, and about the kinds of progress expected of candidates in personnelactions at all levels.

(2) The Faculty Senate has sponsored workshops intended to clarify just how the guidelinesused in the process are developed and applied.

(3) Because of the importance of this process to the careers and lives of the faculty, a sub-committee of the Council of Chairs has been meeting since 1990 to refine the criteria for teachingand research and make them more explicit. It will also make suggestions about improving the effi-ciency of the reappointment, promotion, and tenure procedure.

(4) The Provost is completing a much-needed update of the Faculty Handbook. It is scheduledfor distribution to all faculty in mid-January 1993.

Even so, some members of the faculty have difficulties with the way personnel proceduresare implemented:

(1) When unsuccessful candidates in the personnel process seek guidance, some find it inade-quate. Decisions and perspectives of one P&B Committee are not seen as carrying over to the next.Those who have gone through the process of applying unsuccessfully for promotion then do notknow what standard they should try to meet. If guidance were provided in writing, decisions of pastcommittees would be clearer.

(2) There is some level of perceived inequity in the process. The entire College applaudscandidates who show strength in all areas, but questions arise about candidates who are weaker inone or more areas. Some are promoted and some are not, raising questions about the importance ofpolitics in the decision. Furthermore, there is fear that if standards are lowered for one candidatethey are forever diluted because a precedent has been set. Nevertheless, these questions are inevita-ble byproducts of the peer review process, where academic judgment is exercised.

(3) Another issue affects faculty morale: Because the four ranks in the HEO series match thepay of the faculty ranks, some members of the College community mistakenly equate the hiring andadvancement practices of the two groups.

But several differences exist. First, faculty are evaluated by peer review; HEOs bysuperior/subordinate review. Second, faculty work on a nine-month schedule, while HEOs have a12-month schedule. Third, faculty have research obligations; HEOs have a comprehensive responsi-bility to execute decisions of the administration.

10

In the past, when the budget was far more relaxed than it is now, some members of the HEOseries enjoyed a rapid advancement track, and some were hired at the highest ranks--a practicedeplored by faculty. While these decisions could be defended on their merits, the administrationconcluded that, for reasons of morale and equity, greater rigor should be exercised regarding theupward mobility of HEOs. The HEO Screening Committee, chaired by the President, oversees thisprocess. Unlike the advancement practice for faculty, a further control of upward mobility for HEOSexists at the University level, where all recommended meritorious increases or appointments tohigher titles are reviewed by a screening committee in the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Facultyand Staff Relations.

The only exceptions to parity are the top administrators who are in the Executive Pay Plan orthose whose responsibility gives them extra remuneration (REM). Average salaries for rank-and-fileHEOs and faculty in equivalent ranks are roughly the same.

(4) Not all departments have consistently conducted annual evaluations for tenured Assistantand Associate Professors. (Tenured Full Professors need not be evaluated annually.) This becomes aproblem when a faculty member seeks a promotion after a number of years without an evaluationrecord.

Because of the College's age and the fact that its major period of expansion was two dec-ades ago, the John Jay faculty is becoming one which is increasingly tenured, currently 819 b. (SeeAppendix C, 'liable 14.) Until attrition changes the profile, a greater and greater proportion of thefaculty will become exempt from any evaluation process other than routine student assessment. Forthis reason alone, the College may wish to emphasize the need for annual evaluations.

(5) As noted earlier, College personnel decisions are fundamentally driven by peer review.The various committees involved are advisory, but the President almost always follows their advicewhen he makes recommendations to the Board of Trustees. On the rare occasions when he does not,the President is always careful to inform the faculty why he made his recommendation. Unfortunate-ly, two incidents caused many of the faculty to fear that their input could be diminished.

The first of these arose during a student takeover in Spring 1990. A faculty member who wasdenied tenure (by a P&B vote) came to attract the support of a group of disaffected students. Thethen-Chancellor informed the John Jay President that any recommendation to deny tenure to thefaculty member in question would be set aside. Many at John Jay regret that the Chancellor attempt-ed to influence a College decision. Although the sequence of events is not clear to those who werenot present, in the eyes of many the events showed the student body that such decisions are politicaland can easily be changed on the basis of political circumstance. The incident deeply affected theJohn Jay community. Even though the faculty member in question is no longer at the College,people wonder whether control over the personnel process was about to be ceded away from thefaculty in the name of some distorted interpretation of student empowerment.

A second incident occurred in Fall 1991, involving a substitute instructor who laid claim to atenure-bearing line. The outcome preserved the integrity and the academic rights of the department.Nonetheless, the circumstances seemed to reflect a student belief that academic personnel decisionsare political and negotiable. Despite the preservation of the integrity of the personnel process, somestill fear that, in the future, similar situations may have a different outcome.

Faculty Workload

Faculty workload primarily includes teaching, research, advisement, and committee work.The teaching portion for Professors is 21 "hours" per year (nine hours per week one semester and 12the other); Instructors and Lecturers currently teach 24 hours per year, although their contract callsfor 27 hours. Teaching hours are generally reduced if faculty assume ongoing administrative tasks orif a research grant provides for adjunct teaching replacement.

Administrative released time is traditionally awarded to the chairs of academicdepartments--10.5 or 13.5 hours per year, depending on the size of the department. The coordina-tors of Master's programs receive three hours. Other faculty receiving released time include thecoordinator of the Better Teaching Seminar and the chapter chair of the union, among others.Released time granted for administrative tasks is a direct cost to the operating budget of the Collegebecause, in almost all instances, loss of faculty in the classroom must be replaced by adjuncts.

It is not the tradition of the College to grant released time for research, which is consideredpart of the overall workload and basic responsibility of the faculty. Especially in times of fiscalcontraction, this is not likely to change. Therefore, faculty with grants are usually the only onesreleased from teaching responsibilities in order to pursue additional research.

Two-Day Class Schedule

The longstanding tradition at John Jay is to assign faculty to teach their entire schedule twodays a week (either Monday/Wednesday or Tuesday/Thursday). This unusual practice emerged froma class schedule designed to accommodate students who are law enforcement professionals workingrotating shifts. Faculty teach identical courses day and night so students can attend either, dependingon their shift. The need for this kind of schedule is now in question: the New York Police Depart-ment no longer requires officers to work rotating shifts, but Corrections Officers do have suchschedules as do police from other counties. On the other hand, survey results indicate that manystudents come to the College because the day-night schedule is convenient.

The two-day schedule inevitably splits the faculty. Departments cannot easily schedule regu-lar meetings, thus minimizing the opportunities for planning and disseminating information. Fur-thermore, it is difficult to maintain an atmosphere of scholarly pursuit. For example, one cannot holda seminar and ensure large attendance. Some faculty also believe that education is negatively affectedwhen classes meet two days a week. They contend students would benefit from the continuity ofmore frequent meetings, especially in remedial and foreign language courses. The schedule alsoimpedes a spirit of community. It has enabled some of the faculty to live at great distance from thecampus, thereby limiting participation in extracurricular cultural events.

Despite the two-day schedule, many faculty are at the College three, four, and even five daysa week, advising students, pursuing research, and fulfilling committee obligations. Consequently,major committees such as the P&B and Curriculum Committee, as well as the Faculty Senate,schedule their meetings on Fridays, and often have full attendance. Furthermore, faculty are advisersto some 35 student clubs, providing an opportunity for students and faculty to interact outside theclassroom.

Most of the faculty, like faculty everywhere, have had no formal instruction in educationalmethods. Given the percentage of students who come to the College needing two or three areas ofremediation, the College should pursue a formal program of faculty development. A Title III grant isnow under consideration that would fund this. Teaching is taken very seriously, however, and thereare many outstanding teachers at the College. The Faculty Senate presents three or four of itshighly regarded Better 'leaching Seminars each semester, and has been doing to for 12 semesters,attracting an average of 30-40 faculty attendees. The topics range from "The First Week of Class" to"Sexual Harassment."

The University's Faculty Development Program allows a limited number of faculty members(one a year) to obtain the benefit of experiences on other campuses.

The Graduate Center runs a year-long seminar for its doctoral students on the practice ofcollege teaching. Many John Jay adjuncts are also CUNY doctoral students, so this resource is avail-able to them. Given the current reliance of John Jay on adjuncts, perhaps the college should initiateits own program of this kind, or at least explore how faculty can take advantage of programs else-where in the University.

Research

Faculty at John Jay College are required to do scholarly work as part of their normal respon-sibilities. Unfortunately, there is no general compilation of faculty research and publication, but theProvost is currently establishing one.

Over the last three years, the College has received more than $1.7 million in external fundingin response to grant proposals generated by faculty for research. This total is a composite of 91different research grants and represents about one third of the total awards made to the College overthis period of time.

Highlights of research awards granted in 1991, reflecting the variety of work being conductedby faculty, include a Northeast Modern Language Association Summer Fellowship for scholarlystudy and research; two Harry Frank Guggenheim awards to further the understanding of and abilityto control violence and aggression, one for a project entitled "Criminal Careers of Violent FemaleOffenders," and the second for a project entitled "How Supply Affects Demand and Consumption ofCrack in New York City Neighborhoods"; and a National Institute for Mental Health award forcontinuing research on a project entitled "Informed Consent in Aged Psychiatric Patients." Even so,a number of people, including the President and many members of the faculty have commented onthe lack of criminal justice research at the College.

Assistance in preparation of individual and institutional grant proposals is given by the Officeof Sponsored Programs. This office, although generally highly regarded, is limited in its resources.It is staffed by an executive director, an assistant, and a secretary. Sponsored Programs can offerhelp in preparation of budgets and identification of potential funding sources only. It can provideonly modest help in the more general processes of proposal preparation and writing.

One major contribution the College could make (given the absence of in-house research as-sistants) is released time for proposal writing. There are a number of institutional precedents for this.Graduate Studies, for several semesters, offered three credits of released time on a competitive basis.It generally awarded two or three of these each semester. Faculty have been invited to submit re-quests for similar amounts of released time to prepare proposals for external funding in conjunctionwith the Criminal Justice Center. Two people were given released time for three hours each during1990-91 for this purpose. These modest efforts were discontinued because of budgetary limitations.College willingness to release faculty for purposes connected to independent research is thereforeevident, but fiscally limited.

Other discouraging factors include the varying policies on externally funded released timeadopted by different departments. Some allow up to 100% of time to be bought off in this way;others insist that faculty accept a certain minimum teaching load. A consistent policy would help. Inaddition, those in the sciences who seek outside funding are traditionally expected to provide evi-dence to the potential donor that their home institution is prepared to support their endeavors withspace, equipment, and sometimes other resources. These are not things that John Jay can provide inany abundance.

The chairs of the academic departments could play a more active role in supporting faculty intheir research efforts. Some contend that an additional role for the chairs should be to foster researchin their departments. They should hold regular departmental meetings to discuss ongoing research

efforts. Too often, chairs execute only administrative duties instead of creating an environment forpedagogical and intellectual growth.

A bright spot on the horizon is the faculty's record in obtaining PSC-CUNY grants. Theseare essentially seed money grants funded by contractual agreement between CUNY and the facultyunion. John Jay faculty have obtained between 25 and 30 grants a year between 1987 and 1991, asuccess rate of 50-75 %. These grants provide up to $15,000, and very junior faculty can include asummer salary for themselves. The average John Jay award has been about $4,500. Unfortunately,recent awards have been cut in half, across the board, as a result of the budget cuts authorized by thestate legislature and the governor. Faculty who had made travel or other plans based on what theythought were firm commitments have been obliged to revise these.

Another area of traditional University support is in the granting of Fellowship Leaves. One-year Fellowship Leaves on half-pay are granted every seven years to people with tenure, on applica-tion. These requests have been granted automatically to qualified individuals and about 10 areawarded each year. Between Fellowship Leaves, faculty can apply for Faculty Incentive Awards,which provide up to one-quarter pay for one year. Since the beginning of the program in 1979, lessthan half a dozen of these have been applied for or awarded. Applications for these awards are clear-ly limited by faculty access to the outside funding needed to make up for the lost income.

Advisement

Academic advisement is a contractual obligation of the faculty at John Jay. No additionalreward is given other than when it occurs in the formal setting of an independent study course.' Inpractice this obligation is not met by all members of the faculty, a condition exacerbated by thedecline in the size of the full-time faculty. Adjuncts' responsibilities, as already noted, do not includestudent advisement.

Currently, entering freshmen are contacted by mail during their first semester at the Collegefor individual advising sessions provided by the faculty counselors of the Department of Counselingand Student Life. Lower sophomores are invited to participate voluntarily in individual academicadvisement sessions scheduled by the Office of Undergraduate Academic Advisement, which wasestablished in 1992 to institutionalize an experimental advisement system funded by a Title III grantin 1986-89. The advisors in this program are volunteers recruited from among the faculty, HEOs,and other staff, who are trained to advise by the director of that office. In Fall 1992, slightly lessthan half of the volunteers in the lower sophomore program were faculty.

SEEK students have access to their own SEEK Department staff of counselors and advisors.Graduate students are advised by graduate coordinators in the various programs.

After selecting their majors, undergraduates may contact faculty advisors listed in the infor-mation section that precedes each major in the college catalogue. In part so that they can more readi-ly provide academic advisement, the coordinators of the interdisciplinary majors 2 receive three

1. These are normally for three credits. Ten independent studycredits qualify the faculty member for three hours of re-leased time. The formula is the same whether the course isgiven at the undergraduate or graduate level.

2. Criminal Justice (the College's largest major);Criminal Justice Administration and Planning;Deviant Behavior and Social Control; and Legal Studies.

34

credits of released time a year. Because there is wide concern that an insufficient number of stu-dents receive advisement in their majors throu*h these means, the College is currently examininghow to expand academic advisement in the majors, perhaps, according to one option, requiring itprior to registration for the first time as a lower junior. Establishing any mandatory advisementsystem will, however, require that the full extent of the faculty's obligation to provide academicadvisement be clarified.

Chapter Four

ADMISSIONS AND RETEN'T'ION

Admission to John Jay College of Criminal Justice is coordinated and administered by theOffice of Admissions and Registration. Headed by the Dean for Admissions and Registration, whodirects a staff of 21 full-time employees that includes the Registrar and an Assistant Dean of Admis-sions, the office is also responsible for registration, audits to certify that requirements for degreeshave been fulfilled, probation, dismissal for academic reasons, readmission, evaluation of transferstudents' transcripts, student records, and enforcement of academic regulations. In addition, theOffice of Admissions and Registration recruits prospective students, thereby supplementing theinformation about the College routinely distributed by the University, and the procedures by whichCUNY allocates applicants, particularly entering freshmen, to each of its constituent colleges.

Various segments of the admissions and registration processes are administered also by theDivision of Student Development, which is responsible for freshman orientation and entering-fresh-man placement; the Office of Undergraduate Studies, which oversees the CUNY proficiency exami-nations in reading, writing, and mathematics used for placement purposes; and the SEEK Depart-ment, which conducts orientation, placement, and counseling for all SEEK students. (See Chapter 5,"Programs and Curricula," for a discussion of SEEK).

Undergoduate A mi i n

Undergraduate admission to John Jay is noncompetitive, and in its liberality surpasses theUniversity's requirements for admission to a senior college.

For admission to a Baccalaureateprogram, the University requires a high school average of 80 gr standing within the top 35 % ofone's class Qr a combined SAT score of 900. Since 1977, however, when it received a waiver ofexception from the University's Board of Trustees, John Jay has admitted students to its Baccalaure-ate Degree programs with a high school average of 75 or standing within the top 46 % of one's class.Moreover, students are accepted to the College's Associate Degree programs on the basis of a highschool diploma or a GED certificate. Once in the College, there is no differentiation between Bacca-laureate and Associate students. SEEK students fall into a special category: according co Universitypolicy, all students accepted to the SEEK program are admitted as Baccalaureate candidates even ifthey cannot meet the requirements for Baccalaureate status listed above. Once they are enrolled,there is no differentiation between non-SEEK and SEEK students except for assignment to certainremedial courses and to different counselors.

A variety of other admissions policies and practices have contributed to the maximization ofaccess at John Jay. For one, students who submit their applications to the University ProcessingCenter after the deadline for applications has passed are admitted directly to the College as AssociateDegree candidates; their actual degree status is sorted out later. John Jay, along with other CUNYcolleges waives a University regulation which requires that students must first pass the University'sproficiency examinations in reading, writing, and mathematics before they move to upper divisionstatus, i.e., before completing 60 credits. Finally, the College admits transfer students. This cate-gory includes not only students from other colleges inside and outside the CUNY system but also in-service criminal justice personnel, who receive transfer credit for studies completed at their trainingacademies and who can also avail themselves of a partial-tuition waiver program.

Influenced by the successful recruiting activities of the Office of Admissions and Registra-tion, and consistent with the Master Plan of the University', undergraduate enrollment has increasedsteadil

during the past decade. In Fall 1982, it stood at 5,881; in Fall 1990, at 8,067, an increaseof 37K.

The 1992 CUNY Master Plan calls for an increase in enrollment, University-wide, of10.5 % by Fall 1996 and 21 % by 2001.

In its demographic distribution, the College attracts undergraduates from all se*menu of thecommunity. With regard to gender, the number of female students among the entering freshmengrew from 46 % to 49 % during the past decade.

Table 2

ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION OF ALL JJ UNDBRGRADUATES

White

African-Amer.

Hispanic

$ AsianFall 1980

39.9

35.6

22.1

1.5Fall 1985

32.5

36.4

27.1

2.6Fall 1990

29.1

36.4

29.5

3.2

Source: Office of Admissions and Registration, "Ethnic SurveyReport Fall 1990."

With regard to qualifications for admission, slightly more than half of non-SEEK enteringfreshmen qualified for Baccalaureate status under John Jay's admissions criteria as, for exam-ple, in 1982 and 1987:

Source: Committee on the Associate Degree, "Report"(February 1992), 4.

1. Thg City University QL fty J= 1992 Master EIM,August 1992, 12.

Table 3

DSGRBS STATUS OF NON-!BSBK $NTBRING FRSSMMN

FallN

1982%

FallN

1987

Baccalaureate 291 45.7 448 47.0

Associate 43 6.7 59 6.1who couldhave qualifiedas Baccalaureate

Associate 302 47.4 446 46.7

TOTAL 636 99.8 953 99.8

With regard to qualifications for admission among SEEK entering freshmen,

the majorityhad high school averages below 75, suggesting that many would have been admitted as AssociateDegree candidates had they not been accepted by the SEEK Program:

Table 4

HIGH SCHOOL AVERAGES OF SEEK ENTERING FRESHMEN

* Average missing or GE® degree recipientSource: Office of Admissions and Registration

Unabated enrollment growth collided in the late 1980s and early 1990s with a decline in thesize of the full-time faculty, a concomitant rise in sections taught by adjunct instructors, and stasis inmost areas in the size of the College's support staff. Consequently, a number of enrollment man-agement techniques were introduced for the first time in Spring 1991 in order to stabilize enrollmentat 8,500 students, of whom approximately 8,000 were undergraduates. The policy of maintainingenrollment at 8,500 students remained in effect, however, for only three terms; the number wasrevised upward for Fall 1992 in order to generate additional revenues, for the central office of theUniversity allocates lump-sum funds to the colleges on the basis of each one's full time studentequivalent (FTE) enrollment level.

Most undergraduates admitted to John Jay do not pass all three of the University's proficien-cy examinations. Among the 824 students in the Fall 1982 freshman class, 17% passed all proficien-cy . examinations and did not require any remedial, developmental or ESL course work; 28 % re-quired it in two areas; and 29% required it in all three skills. Results among the 1,268

freshmenwho entered in Fall 1987 indicate that the need for remedial, developmental, or ESL work waseven higher: only 9 % passed all proficiency examinations; 28% needed work in one skills area;27% required work in two; and 36% required it in all three skills. 2

Associate Degree candidates do not perform as well as Baccalaureate students on the profi-ciency examinations, mirroring the former's lower admission requirements. Among the non-SEEKfreshmen who entered the College in Fall 1982, 60% of those admitted as Baccalaureate candidatesrequired either none or one remedial course; 44 % of the Associate candidates were in this category.Similarly, among the non-SEEK freshmen who entered in Fall 1987, 52% of those entering as

2. OIR, "Number of Remedial Courses Needed by Entering FreshmanCohort(s]," Fall 1982 and Fall 1987 (October 1991).

38

FallN

1988%

FallN

1989%

FallN

1990%

FallN

1991%

80+ 8 2.2 11 3.2 9 3.1 8 2.7

75-79.9 80 22.5 82 24.4 91 31.4 80 27.5

Under 212 59.8 201 60.0 170 58.8 177 61.075

N.A.* 54 15.2 41 12.2 19 6.5 25 8.6

TOTAL 354 99.7 335 99.8 289 99.8 290 99.8

Baccalaureate candidates needed either none or one remedial course, while 32% of the Associatecandidates were in this category.

1b add to the complexity of addressing the basic skills needs of John Jay 's students, manyspeak, read, and write English as a second language. A study commissioned in 1988 by the Depart-ment of English concluded that approximately 15 % of students would benefit from some form ofESL instruction. Furthermore, data gathered by the College's ESL Resources Center, newly estab-lished in Spring 1992, suggest that as many as 15 % of entering freshmen allocated that term by theUniversity to John Jay for enrollment in the subsequent semester were ESL individuals.

Finally, data compiled in the mid-1980s by the Office of Testing indicate that some John Jaystudents read below the high school level. This lack of preparation is part of a national trend, andinevitably, this too has profound effects on the College's educational programs.

Undergraduate Retention

Class standing data do not have the same meaning at CUNY as they do at a college wheremost students move through the system in four years. Because many students must complete remedi-al work and many students are part-time, a "freshman" may be a second- or third-year student. Butcohort studies indicate that a large attrition rate is heaviest from freshman to sophomore status, andimply that the departure rate is at best offset only modestly among sophomores, juniors, and seniorsby students who either stop out and then return to resume their studies or enter the College as trans-fer students.

Data furnished by the Office of Institutional Research' indicate that only a small proportionof students who enter the College as freshmen eventually earn degrees at John Jay. Some among theentering freshmen stop out and then return, but far more leave for so long a period of time that theymay reasonably be classified as having permanently left John Jay. Furthermore, many who departpermanently do so by the end of their second term of enrollment. It is not known whether thesestudents transfer to other colleges, whether they have achieved their educational goals, or whetherthey have dropped out.

In Fall 1982, a total of 824 entering freshmen enrolled at the College, and with the passage ofseventeen terms (that is, by the end of Fall 1990), 85 (10.3 %) received degrees. Another 45 (5.5 %)were in attendance during the Spring or Fall semesters in 1990. Given their persistence, it is notunreasonable to assume that they too will eventually earn degrees; if so, when added to those whohave already done so, the graduation rate would rise to 15.8% of those who began their studies inFall 1982. The progress of these students has not been uninterrupted: in this combined group of 130students, exactly half have stopped out at least once, returning subsequently to the College to resumetheir studies. Indeed, perhaps others among the Fall 1982 cohort will also return and one day earndegrees, for another 149 (18% of the cohort) have stopped out and then returned at some point,although they were not enrolled during the Spring and Fall 1990 semesters.

On the other hand, a total of 545 students (66.1 % of the Fall 1982 entering freshmen) leftJohn Jay without ever returning. They attended for a number of terms and then left the College,and, with the passage of seventeen terms since they enrolled for the first time, the departures of most

3.

4.

Ibid.

The discussion that follows is based on OIR, "UndergraduateStopouts--Selected Tables for the Entering Cohorts of Fall1982 and Fall 1987" (November 1991).

appear to be permanent.

The majority left early on: of the 545 in question, 249 (45.7% of thissubset of the cohort) attended for only two terms and have since chosen not to return; and by the endof four terms, a total of 388 (71.2% of the subset) left and have not since returned. These 388, or47% of all who entered as freshmen in Fall 1982, have not attended the College since Spring 1984and may reasonably be classified as the minimum number among the Fall 1982 cohort who havepermanently left John Jay. Finally, among the 545 who have left the College and not returned, 532(97.6%) did so by Spring 1987.

Data describing freshmen who entered in Fall 1987 have begun to show a similar pattern. Ofthe total 1,268 who entered as freshmen then, 475 (37.4%) were in attendance in Spring or Fall1990.

Of the remaining 793 (62.5 % of the cohort) who were not in attendance in Spring or Fall1990, 737 left the College and have not returned. The majority left early on: of the 737 in question,487 (66% of the subset) attended for only two terms and chose since not to return; and by the end offour terms, 704 (95.5 % of the subset) left and have not returned. These are 58.1 % of all who en-tered as freshmen in Fall 1987, and indicate a higher rate of departure after four terms than amongthe freshmen who entered in Fall 1982. Whether these students leave permanently, thereby con-forming to the pattern evident among Fall 1982's entering freshmen, or stop back in at some pointremains to be seen.

Students who stop out and later resume their studies in any case have little cumulative impacton graduation rates. The undergraduates from all combined sources who earn Baccalaureate orAssociate Degrees--that is, students who proceed without interruption to their degrees; those whostop out and then return; those who study full-time; and those who do so part-time--have rangedbetween 1986 and 1990 from 6.3 % to 8 % of all enrolled undergraduates in any given academic year. S

Who, then, are the most likely to persist and earn a degree?

Available data indicate thatstudents admitted as Associate Degree candidates are more likely either to stop out or to drop outthan non-SEEK Baccalaureate candidates. For example, 47.2 % of Associate students who beganstudy in Spring 1989 did not return in Fall 1989, in contrast to 31 % of non-SEEK entering Baccalau-reate candidates who did not. Similarly, 23.2% of Associate students who enrolled for the first timein Fall 1989 did not return in Spring 1990, in contrast to the 13.1 % of the entering non-SEEKBaccalaureate candidates who did not. Data for all terms between Fall 1985 and Spring 1990 con-sistently reveal the same pattern (with rates of attrition higher among those who register for the firsttime in Spring terms than in Fall semesters).' The greater tendency of students admitted as Associ-ate Degree candidates to leave the College more quickly than those admitted as non-SEEK Baccalau-reate candidates suggests that the former are less likely to earn degrees than the latter.

Data provided by OIR indicate that the lower a student's high school average, the fewer thecredits earned and the less likely he or she is to earn a Baccalaureate Degree. According to OIR'sstudy, , earlier academic accomplishments at the high school level correlate (in the aggregate) withretention and progress toward a four-year degree. The same correlation exists, moreover, with

5. Office of Admissions and Registration, "Graduation Highlights."

6. Committee on the Associate Degree, "Report" (February 1992), 3.

reference to the Associate Degree, which requires a minimum of 64 credits: the higher the highschool average, the greater the likelihood of reaching 60 credits. ?

It is important to stress, however, that some students admitted with lower qualifications doearn Baccalaureate Degrees. Thus, the 2,344 Baccalaureate degrees awarded between 1986-87 and1990-91 included 516, or 229 b, conferred upon students who entered the College originally as Asso-ciate candidates. 8

When ethnicity is considered, Baccalaureate Degree recipients are divided as follows, indicat-ing that whites exceed their proportion in the overall undergraduate population, while African-Americans approximate their proportion and Hispanics fall below:

7.

8.

Table 5

ETHNICITY OF BACCALAUREATE DEGREE RECIPIENTS

* Data for Asian baccalaureate degree recipients are not available.Source: Office of Admissions and Registration, "Graduation

Highlights"

Finally, students who transfer to John Jay, coming either from another college or as in-serv-ice criminal justice personnel from a training academy, are strongly represented among those whoearn Baccalaureate Degrees:

OIR, "Outcomes for Students who Entered from Fall 1983-Spring1985 and Took Typical Freshman Courses in their First Semester"(March 1992). This study included all 1764 entering students inthe period indicated whose high schools averages are known andwhose course selection indicates that they were most likelyfreshmen. See Appendix E, Table 15.

Office of Admissions and Registration, "GraduationHighlights."

White African-Am. HispanicN N % N

1980-81 N.A 52.4 N.A. 31.0 N.A. 15.31984-85 172 40.0 164 38.0 77 18.01985-86 172 43.0 155 38.8 73 18.21986-87 148 39.1 146 38.5 85 22.41987-88 202 42.0 178 37.0 101 21.01988-89 200 42.0 162 34.0 114 24.01989-90 233 44.0 169 32.0 127 24.01990-91 192 40.0 177 37.0 110 23.0

Table 6

Source: Office of Admissions and Registration, "GraduationHighlights"

Retention at John Jay should ideally be examined with reference to the University's othercolleges, but almost no such comparative data are available. What is known from the early- andmid-1980s is that the five-year persistence rates of students who began as freshmen in 1978 and 1980were about the same for non-SEEK students at John Jay as at the two other senior colleges that admitboth Baccalaureate and Associate candidates. It was higher for SEEK students at John Jay- 9 Morerecently, the University in 1988 cited John Jay's SEEK Program as having the highest rate of SEEKstudents in all senior colleges who earn degrees.

The retention data outlined above have been useful to alert the College to potential problems.Unfortunately, these numbers do not reveal where students go when they leave the College. Forexample, some may transfer to, and succeed at, other CUNY colleges. A more detailed study, withexit interviews, would help to reveal the extent of the dropout problem.

Over time, the College has developed many programs to increase the retention rate.

Theseinclude freshmen orientation and programming days, transfer orientation, readmission interviews andcontracts, pre-freshman and intersession basic skills programs, the ASCENT program

for highschool students, Upward Bound, C-Step grant, Linkage program, monitoring progress in English andMath courses, mayors fair, and an experimental pre-core program. Assessments of these programsand others mentioned in the "Student Services" chapter should be reviewed more systematically sothat the scarce resources can be allocated accordingly.

Undergraduate Admissions gnd Retention:Major Issues o d RRommendations

Considerable debate and ferment periodically arise in the College about its undergraduateadmission policies. Two dominant factors--the growing constraint on resources, and varying inter-pretations of the College's mission--contribute to the formulation of different positions and policyrecommendations.

There are, first, those who believe that no matter how one interprets the College's mission,there simply are inadequate resources to provide a roster of excellent, let alone effective, programs

9. See "Five Year Persistence Rates," Table 16 in Appendix E.

42

BACCALAUREATE RECIPIENTS WHO BEGANAND WHO TRANSFERRED TO JOHN

$ Began as JJstudents

AT JOHN JAYJAY

$ Transferred toJohn Jay

June 1985 55.7 44.2June 1986 56.5 43.5June 1987 55.4 44.7June 1988 55.0 45.0June 1989 50.0 50.0June 1990 52.0 48.0June 1991 50.0 50.0

for so many students, who range from remedial through Master's. Supporting this view is the reali-zation that insufficient numbers of the right courses at the appropriate level are available for thenumber of undergraduates who register in any term. Suggested solutions include reducing thenumber of programs offered; expanding class size; committing every available dollar to restoringthe size of the full-time faculty; reviving past efforts to convince the University to reallocate linesfrom colleges whose enrollments have declined; and reducing the size of the student body.

To some, the College's mission must be read with the emphasis on access, with maintenanceof current enrollment levels and even further growth the priority. Those who advocate this positionemphasize providing exposure to higher education for the maximum number of students possible,arguing that even a term of college is better than none at all. They also argue, accurately, that JohnJay provides access to the only criminal justice programs in the University.

Others

stress that the College is charged by the University to develop excellent, effectiveprograms in criminal justice. They do not object to the commitment to access, but they suggest thatother branches of the University are more centrally charged with it as their mission, are organized toachieve it more successfully, and are not diverted from their charge by the necessity to emphasize amission that focuses on a specific area of study, as John Jay's does. Proponents of this reading ofthe mission do not call for the elimination of the remedial program but rather its stabilization at alevel that will permit available resources to be channeled to rebuild depleted faculties in areas ofstudy related to criminal justice. Advocates of this view suggest that students in greatest need ofremediation study first in other branches of the University to meet their remedial needs, and thentransfer to John Jay to study criminal justice when they are more likely to succeed in such coursework.

Finally, some believe that John Jay must raise its admission standards in order to create ateaching and learning environment more appropriate to a senior college. They take as their modelthe seven CUNY senior colleges that have not requested waivers from the University's policy requir-ing a high school average of 80 Q standing in the top 35 % of one's class Qf a combined SAT scoreof 900 for admission to a senior college. They also cite the one other senior college with a waiverunder which students with 75 high school averages are admitted, but which preserves the require-ment of standing in the top 35 % of one's class. That college, moreover, does not accept studentswith less than a 75 average as Associate Degree candidates.

This debate is at the heart of the College's life. Each of the above points of view has impli-cations that have not been thoroughly analyzed. For example, those that want to reduce the size ofthe student body do not suggest where the concomitant budget cuts will be made. Those who advocate raising admission standards to resemble other CUNY colleges fail to observe that some of thosecolleges do not see higher retention rates than John Jay.

To be profitable, the discussion should beconducted in the context of a comprehensive planning process--that is, in an organized fashion.

Theneed for an integrated planning process at John Jay is discussed elsewhere in this self-study; clearly,one of the first desirable items of business after such a system is inaugurated is this debate, with theformulation of an admissions policy for the next decade in light of the priorities that emerge from thedialogue.

Whatever the course of action adopted, student attrition and progress to graduation areclearly paramount causes for concern, and undoubtedly will continue to be so even after implementa-tion of CUNY's College Preparatory Initiative later in this decade, a joint undertaking with the NewYork City Board of Education to produce high school graduates with stronger academic preparationfor college work.

'Ib be sure, many personal- and academic-support services designed to encourage students topersist are available at the College; nevertheless, a general retention action plan should be de-veloped and implemented. The College recently dismantled its Retention and Academic StandardsCommittee, the College Council voting to replace it with an Undergraduate Academic StandardsCommittee and a task force on retention. The President has established that task force and work hasbegun.

Proposals that the task force might consider include finding ways to make certain that

4 3

enough classes at the appropriate level are scheduled; limiting to four the number of classes forwhich students can register when they are enrolled in remedial reading and writing courses; provid-ing significantly more ESL courses; and evaluating all tutoring services.

A crisis in mid-1991 over the funding of the Associate Degree programs at John Jay, andcontinuing uncertainty in Spring 1992 about permanent funding for them, provided discussion for thefirst time in many years about their effectiveness. This led to the realization that very few AssociateDegrees are actually awarded, ranging from 21 (in 1984-85) to 33 (in 1985-86) in the period from1984-85 to 1989-90. ° As indicated earlier, students admitted as Associate Degree candidates are theleast likely to earn a degree. A joint committee of the Council of Chairs and the Faculty Senate hasrecommended that the College rethink its Associate programs and has suggested consideration of thefollowing alternatives: make no changes; eliminate the Associate programs entirely; reduce thenumber of students admitted as Associate Degree candidates; or reconfigure the content of the pro-grams, redesigning them as terminal degree programs with a vocational orientation instead of con-tinuing to conceive of them as waystations on the road to a Baccalaureate Degree. I i This review iscurrently under way by the Curriculum Committee. Above all, the College should reexamine itspolicy of not differentiating between Baccalaureate and Associate candidates once they begin study atJohn Jay.

The general admissions requirements for John Jay's five Master's programs consist of a 2.7or 3.0 GPA (depending on the program); at least one undergraduate course in statistics; the TOEFLexamination where relevant; and the graduate record examination (GRE). The following refinementsare also employed: a course in statistics during the first year of graduate study for those without oneat the undergraduate level; a 2.5 grade point average for admission to the program in Public Admin-istration for applicants with two years of public service experience; undergraduate work in the socialsciences for matriculation in three of the programs;` and undergraduate course work in forensicscience, when necessary, for students from colleges other than John Jay.

Those who are accepted for graduate study fall into three categories: (1) matriculated, (2)conditional matriculated: those meeting all general admissions criteria but lacking either the requiredundergraduate statistics course or the GRE scores, and (3) nonmatriculated: those wishing to takeone or more special courses, who are admitted based on their undergraduate GPA on a space-avail-able basis.

Graduate Admissions and Retention

Office of Admissions and Registration, "Graduation Highlights."

Committee on the Associate Degree, "Report,"(February 1992), 8.

For the Public Administration Program: 18 hours; for ForensicPsychology: 24 hours, of which at least 12 were in psychology(including experimental psychology) and statistics; forCriminal Justice: 24 hours.

4 4

Most who are accepted are conditional. Of these, 65 % had not presented GRE scores and34% had not had undergraduate work in statistics. These students are eligible to matriculate afterfulfilling certain requirements."

Students with undergraduate averages under the minimum are admitted as conditional stu-dents by the admission committee for each program, which consists of the Dean of Graduate Studies,the Dean for Admissions and Registration, and the faculty coordinator of the individual program.Students admitted under such circumstances may enroll for only six credits a semester and mustmaintain a 3.0 average in order to attain matriculated status. If they fail to do so within two terms,they are not permitted to enroll for additional graduate work.

Finally, nonmatriculated students are accepted one semester at a time if space is available.They must apply for matriculation during the first two semesters of attendance.

Unlike the undergraduate program, the graduate program's enrollment declined during part ofthe previous decade but has since increased: 543 graduate students enrolled in Fall 1984; 479 in Fall1985; 445 in Fall 1986; but for Fall 1987 through Fall 1991 enrollment reached 505, 542, 566, 605,and 654. In its demographic composition, the graduate student body is diverse, surpassing CUNYand New York State averages for minority degree recipients.

Between Fall 1990 and Spring 1991, 20% of matriculated students did not return, a patternconsistent with that in earlier years. According to data furnished by the Dean for Admissions andRegistration, newly enrolled graduate students appear to be a major source of attrition, particularlyin the Criminal Justice program. Indeed, retention figures between the two terms indicated differedfrom program to program:

Table 7

RETENTION RATES IN MASTERS' PROGRAMSBETWEEN BALL 1990 AND SPRING 1991

Program

% of students who did not reenroll

Faculty in the Criminal Justice program have recently examined their program's admissionstandards and have formulated proposals to raise them, because a significant number who have beenadmitted in recent years are underprepared for graduate work in this field and are often unable towrite at the requisite level. At the same time Coordinators of the program argue that greater accessis desirable, and CRJ 710 and CRJ 711, the gate-keeper courses, permit students to prove them-selves.

13. Students admitted without GRE scores must eventually presentthem to matriculate. Those whose undergraduate training isdeficient but who otherwise qualify for admission must removethe deficiencies by completing not more than 15 credits ofgraduate work with a 3.0 average.

criminal Justice 27Public Administration 18Psychology 18Fire Protection Management 11Forensic Science 7

Other F

tunes .Qf Undergraduate and GraduateAdmissions. Registration. W¢ $etention

(1)

After several years of growth, the number of in-service students"' registering at theCollege has declined since 1989:

Table 8

IN-SERVICE STUDENTS, 1985-1991

This development has caused concern because of the obvious connection between in-servicestudents and John Jay's special mission. Conditions cited in an Office of Admissions report toaccount for the downturn include parking problems, not enough classes on a day/evening rotatingbasis, a limited number of majors, a desire for an environment with more adult students, and compe-tition from other institutions, including a "college without walls" chartered by New York State thatallegedly grants large amounts of credit for life experience. These factors, however, were truebefore the decline began in 1989-1990, and others therefore attribute it to the impact of the studentdisruptions in those years and in 1991. The disruptions of Spring 1990 are characterized by some atthe College as particularly damaging to John Jay's reputation among law enforcement personnel:once the police were called on campus to restore order, they were made to feel that their presencewas an embarrassment to the College.

Upon a recommendation made by an ad-hoc faculty committee, the College engaged a part-

time recruiter early in 1992 for outreach in police precincts, and in Spring 1992 began negotiationsfor satellite classes at the Fire Department Academy. These efforts should be expanded, and re-cruitment by the Office of Admissions and Registration should be extended to all local and state lawenforcement agencies, including the New York City Department of Corrections, whose Academydirector reported in Fall 1991 that there is no John Jay recruiting presence either at the Academy . orat the correctional sites. Moreover, the task force on retention should identify initiatives to retain in-service personnel once they have enrolled.

(2)

Students select their courses at John Jay in a registration process conducted in an arenaformat: they procure a card for each course from departmental tables manned by the members of the

Members of the uniformed services concerned with law enforcementand public safety, ire-service students are primarily from the NewYork City Police Department but also include officers of the FireDepartment, Corrections, Transit Police, Housing Police, and thecourts. Civilian employees of these agencies are also sometimesincluded in the in-service designation. In-service employees ofjurisdictions outside New York City also enroll at the College.

AF

N % of student body

1985 1240 21.11986 1525 24.41987 1517 23.91988 1826 27.01989 2114 29.91990 1920 23.71991 1685 21.3

faculty. Some hold that, because of the contact students have with many faculty members during theregistration period, this old-fashioned system has the advantage of instantaneous academic advise-ment (admittedly a a modest level), but it has the disadvantage of making the work of the registrar,the bursar, and others involved in the administrative end of registration cumbersome. For well overa decade, therefore, there has been considerable discussion about replacing the arena format with acomputerized (online) system. Some have asserted in support of an online format that studentswould prefer it because it would speed registration by reducing the number of stations and lines.Yet, 57% of John Jay's students in a 1989 University survey indicated satisfaction with the College'sregistration process; and this is exactly the average percentage across the University's senior collegeswho indicated satisfaction with the systems in place on their respective campuses, which in many ofthe other senior college in CUNY are of the computerized kind."

Sentiment in the College is generally in favor of moving to an online system.

Before doingso, however, several issues must be resolved. First, the College's administrative computing centermust be entirely overhauled and rebuilt, a process that has begun under a new director. Second, theCouncil of Chairs and the Faculty Senate have unanimously taken the position that any online systemintroduced at the College must be one that verifies that prerequisites for courses have been fulfilledbefore cards for requested courses may be issued to students. 1

Assurances have consequently beengiven by the Provost that those who are to design the system will be directed to fashion the technolo-gy for this function. Finally, faculty advisement during registration will still be necessary, but thefaculty's role and the extent of its responsibilities have as yet not been clarified.

In view of the wide interest in moving to an online registration system because of its antici-pated advantages, the College community should remain focused on this goal and seek solutions tothe problems indicated with as much dispatch as possible.

(3) Concern has been expressed in recent years about the practice called De Novo Late Regis-tration, under which students are permitted to register for their entire programs after classes havealready begun. It occurs during the brief late-registration period at the beginning of the term inwhich, also, students who did register on time can add and drop classes. Some members of the facul-ty object to De Novo Late Registration, asserting that classes cannot settle down to the term's workquickly, that late entrants begin the term at a disadvantage, and that the College sends a disturbingmessage to the effect that beginning the term on time is not a serious matter. These concerns bearexamination by the entire College community.

(4)

Of even greater concern, however, is the insufficient number of the right classes at theappropriate level for the number of undergraduate students accepted by the College. Faculty counse-lors routinely report that there are not enough remedial and freshman-level classes; pressure toovertally classes is a well-known feature of the registration process; additional sections (taught byadjuncts) must be added on the last two days of the registration period; and anecdotes aboundabout nonremedial as well as remedial students forced to register for upper-level courses for whichthey are academically unprepared, as well as students in general registering for classes without first

Office of Institutional Research and Analysis of The City Univer-sity of New York, "Tabulations of the 1989 Student ExperienceSurvey of Undergraduates Attending The City University of NewYork" (January, 1991), Table 25.

Data provided by the Office of Institutional Research suggestthat there is a strong correlation between prerequisite fulfill-ment and rates of success in more advanced courses; see OIR,"Outcomes of Undergraduate Coursework as a Function of Prerequi-site Courses" (January 1992).

fulfilling prerequisites. When surveyed as part of the present self-study, 33% of freshmen, 44% ofsophomores, 33% of juniors, 21% of seniors, and 27% whose class standing was not known report-ed that they "knew what courses to take but could not get Most . 17 The problem of an inadequatenumber of classes is yet another reason for the examination of the College's admissions policiesproposed earlier. Moreover, it ought to figure importantly in the deliberations of the task force onretention.

(5) Members of the faculty might profitably be involved in questions of admissions andretention, in view of the effectiveness of the ad-hoc faculty committee on in-service student recruit-ment mentioned earlier. University policy encourages such participation. "The faculty is primarilyresponsible for academic matters, including the criteria for admission and retention of students,"according to the Board of Trustees "Statement of Policy on the Organization and Governance ofCUNY" (1969).

Currently, faculty members participate in admission to John Jay's graduate pro-grams, but a moribund Committee on Undergraduate Admissions should be revitalized.

In sum, sober examination of the College's admissions policies and its retention record is ofthe highest priority. The decade of rapid enrollment growth just concluded should be evaluated bythe College community with forthrightness and a sense of urgency.

17. OIR, "John Jay College Student Survey, Fall 1991" (January1992), Section VI: "The Registration Process."

Chapter Five

PROGRAMS AND CURRICULA

The curriculum at John Jay is largely shaped by the special focus of an institution that pro-vides academic training and facilities for research, primarily in the fields of criminal justice, firescience, and related areas of public safety and public service. Furthermore, the undergraduate cur-riculum manages to provide a liberal arts foundation for all students through general requirements (amaximum of 60 credits) in the humanities, natural science, and social sciences.

The five graduate programs have a similar professional or public service focus, with degreecourses in the fields of criminal justice, forensic science, forensic psychology, public administration,and fire safety management. The idea of community service also informs the curriculum. The Col-lege offers in-service training courses for New York City police officers and for employees ofother city agencies, college courses for inmates at a local correctional facility, and courses leadingto a degree m public administration for military personnel at the West Point Military Academy. JohnJay, also, is one of only three senior colleges in CUNY that offer a two-year Associate Degree.

At John Jay College, recognition of the diversity and pluralistic nature of the student body isevidenced by the wide curricular changes already made at the undergraduate level and by the con-tinuing attention given by the College Curriculum Committee as well as individual departmentsto these issues. The departments of African American Studies and Puerto Rican Studies have developed a range of courses either of purely elective interest or that relate directly to majors. In addi-tion, the study of Spanish language and literature clearly dominates the work of the Department ofForeign Languages. Additionally, the core requirements in history were recently extended to givethose courses a "world" instead of the hitherto purely "western" focus. A separate Ethnic Studiesrequirement achieves the long-sought effect of ensuring the enrollment of students of varyingbackgrounds in classes that might in normal circumstances have been more or less confined to racial-ly or ethnically separated groups. Furthermore, academic departments have addressed questions ofgender through the introduction of specific courses, such as "Women and Crime" and through theintegration of gender-related issues into already established courses.

John Jay College describes itself as a liberal arts college with a special focus. However inaccordance with the Board of Higher Education resolution of 1976, it is the special focus whichdominates. Thus the liberal arts aspect of the curriculum should be judged in the narrowest sense,considering that there are no humanities majors.

Additionally, and as determined by CUNY proficiency examinations upon enrollment, stu-dents may be required to complete certain remedial and developmental courses. There is a greatrange of abilities and preparation among entering students (see Chapter 4, "Admissions andRetention").

Remedial and Developmental Programs

The Undergraduate Curriculum

While the term "remedial" has largely been replaced by "developmental" in the literature, atCUNY these terms have very specific definitions. Remedial courses do not carry any credits; devel-opmental courses carry some credit although less than a standard college-level course. However, theterm "remedial" is applied loosely at the College because of the different definitions of the term.Any discussion of remedial and developmental coursework at the College must start with an agree-ment on definition of terms and a readjustment of the credit awarded. Out of 1,081 sections inFall 1992, 135 were remedial; these include courses in Math, English, Communications Skills, andChemistry. The experimental pre-core program also included remedial courses.

49

One serious problem is that students register for college-level courses before they havecompleted their remediation. Under current rules, it would be difficult for the College to forbid thisbecause recipients of financial aid must take at least four courses. The effect is predictable: Whilesome remedial students achieve success, faculty report experiences with those students in their class-es who are quite unable to follow a syllabus or easily understand the instructions on an examinationpaper. When this happens, the teaching and learning environment in classes suffers from the lack ofpreparedness of the students who are unable to meet the rigor and demands of college work. Thisposes problems to the professor, the qualified students, and the unqualified students, whose self-esteem and dignity might be injured.

Clearly, permitting students immersed in remediation to enroll simultaneously in college-levelcourses should be reevaluated even though John Jay is constrained by financial aid practices. Highfailure rates, a lowering of standards, and all-around frustration are the results of this practice, andits elimination should be a top priority.

Now that an institutional research capacity exists because of the self-study process, an exami-nation of the remedial program's capacity for effectiveness should focus on questions such as thefollowing:

0 Can students who enter the College reading below high school level be helped at John Jay tobecome academically proficient for college-level work?

• Are two-day-a-week classes sufficient for a remedial program?

• Could a substantially enlarged ESL program contribute, in turn, to a successful remedial anddevelopmental program?

• How have other colleges in CUNY dealt with the requirement that remedial students enroll inregular courses in order to receive financial aid?

• Are there successful remedial programs, elsewhere as well as in CUNY, from which we canlearn?

SEEK (Search for Education, Elevation and Knowledge)

0 How can an adequate number of both remedial and lower-level (100-level) classes be scheduledso that students have enough of the right courses in which to register?

This special program was set up by CUNY for students who need academic and/or economicsupport. Depending on eligibility, and chosen by lottery, students can receive funds for tuition,student activity fees, and books, as well as a stipend.

The program, which in 199293 serves 1,100 students at John Jay, offers a six-week Pre-freshman Summer Program, and remedial courses in Communication Skills, English, Speech, andMath.

The professors and counselors use a team-teaching strategy to help students understand thesimilarities and differences in the structure and use of language among their courses. SEEK studentsare given additional support through a SEEK Learning Lab, which offers tutoring in all subjects.

In addition, eight counselors in the SEEK program help move students through many person-al and emotional situations which could, if left unattended, disrupt or halt their academic progress.Statistics show that the graduation rate of John Jay SEEK students exceeds that of all other SEEKprograms in CUNY.

General Education Requirements (Core Curriculum)

The present requirements emerged after several years of committee deliberations and a widecanvassing of opinion throughout the College. Discussion was driven as much by the desire toaccommodate new directions in curriculum planning as by the desire that as many academic depart-ments as possible be represented in the new design. The important point at issue now is whether thislatest redesign of the general education requirements works optimally in the interests of both curricu-lum and students or whether further tinkering could bring improvement.

Although the requirements could be as low as 40 credits for the individual student withmaximum exemptions, this would apply only in very few cases. Given the preparedness of ourfreshmen and transfer students, the norm is closer to the maximum requirement, or 60 credits. Whatthese courses reflect is a deeply traditional model that is relatively non judgmental as to which disci-plines are more or less important. That model is also less subject to the impact of currently favoredideologies and schools of criticism than integrated interdisciplinary curricula tend to be. And itprovides a good foundation for the professionally oriented majors. Moreover, it works to introducestudents from diverse cultural and social backgrounds to the values, traditions, and intellectualconcerns of the society in which they will make their careers.

Considering the student's entire academic career, therefore, almost half of it comprises thegeneral requirements in college skills, arts, sciences, and humanities. Furthermore, given that theaverage major has a requirement of some 39 credits, there remain perhaps eight to ten electives.Thus what some regard as an excessive requirement in general education need not preclude thestudent's broadening of his or her intellectual horizons. Examination of the GER requirements showsthat attention has been paid to issues of gender and cultural diversity in the humanities and socialscience, thus leavening the traditional model. Perhaps there only remains to adjust the GER so thatthe entire block of courses is not completed at the introductory level.

The Undergraduate Majors

As an outcome of the previous (1982) self-study, monitoring and assessment of all majorsunder the coordination of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies and under the control of the CollegeCurriculum Committee has been introduced. These arrangements have been the means of materiallyrevising existing majors, through four-year cyclical reviews, as well as of promoting entirely newmajors to enhance the general curriculum. Thus, five new majors (Criminology, Computer Informa-tion Systems, Legal Studies, Judicial Studies, and Security Management) have been introduced. Andin addition, considerable restructuring and revising have been undertaken in the case of the majors inCriminal Justice, Correction Administration, Deviant Behavior and Social Control, Fire Science,Fire Service Administration, Legal Studies, Security Management, Criminal Justice Administration& Planning, and Government & Public Administration.

The scope of some of the changes is quite extensive, so much so in the case of CriminalJustice that 17 courses were removed in the 1987 revision and some 85 courses added to the listings.Of the current majors, only a third of them closely resemble those that were available a few yearsago.

The inherent workability of the programs, in the interest of students, was as important ascorrecting pedagogical faults or shortcomings.

The most heavily enrolled major is that in Criminal Justice. Its interdisciplinary outline in theCollege Bulletin impresses by its wide array of categories, concentrations, and courses. There arenow as many as 121 separate course listings taught by faculty from ten departments. The whole isdivided into a block of required courses (21 credits), two categories of specialization (A. Founda-tions of Criminal Justice; B. Institutions and Applied Studies), and 19 concentrations (21 credits).The award of the BS or BA depends on which and how many of the categories are chosen by thestudent.

What drove the restructuring of this major was in part a desire to include the greatest

number of departments and faculty as possible, as well as a commitment to as much curricularbreadth as possible. Questions remain whether the interests of students are best served by a schemethat (after requiring 21 other credits) steers them into tracks that set further requirements as to theirchoice of courses. Also, the plan proves to be more restrictive than was intended or appears inas-much as no fewer than 20 courses from the 113 courses in the concentrations have not been offeredin any of the four semesters, Spring 1990 through Fall 1991, and 14 more were offered only once inthat time. Finally, the small number of students opting for many of the concentrations means thatcourses must be mounted for a very few (particularly at the senior seminar level) at a time of con-stricting resources, although this could not have been foreseen at the time of the revision. A propos-al to refine the major has therefore recently passed the College Curriculum Committee. This pro-posed refinement centers on reducing the 19 concentrations to five, and reducing the major from 42to 36 credits. The College Council is now considering the proposal.

The major restructuring in 1988 of the Government and Public Administration major appearsto have produced a very good example of a coherent, focused, and optimally workable major. Thenew program, which is as comprehensive in scope as any student could hope for, is organized in so-called tracks.

Depending upon which track is chosen, students benefit from taking a number ofspecified courses in common, with the remainder to be chosen as electives. Yet expectations cannotbe realized fully in practice owing to the mistake of assuming that because courses are listed in theUndergraduate Bulletin they will be offered to students at a desirable frequency. As in the case of theCriminal Justice major, this has not proven to be the case. Of the 74 separate courses listed, 15 havenot been offered in any one of the four semesters, Spring 1990 through Fall 1991. This has reactedadversely on student choice in all four tracks: Some categories don't exist in practice, some coursesare given too infrequently, and the required course, History 218 (in the Urban Politics & Adminis-tration track), has not been made available by the History Department since Fall 1979. It is recom-mended, therefore, that, in the best interest of students, both the requirements of majors and thescheduling of courses in various departments be better coordinated than is done at present.

As this self-study began, another revision of the Government and Public Administrationmajor was approved, a departure prompted by the splitting up of this jointly administered major intoones separately administered as departmental majors by the two departments involved. What hasbeen approved is (a) a Government mayor (b) a new Judicial Studies major and (c) an entirely sepa-rate BA in Public Administration. In the case of the first, the changes offer wider choices for stu-dents, a more direct encounter with minority and gender courses than in the old single major, and aprogram more directly related to the criminal justice mission of the college.

The new Judicial Studies major provides a comprehensive education in the courts and thejudicial process. Standing together with John Jay's Police Studies and Correctional Studies majors,the Judicial Studies major adds the courts at long last to the curriculum.

The remarks made earlier regarding the "coherent, focused and optimally workable major"might not apply to the new Public Administration major. Here, all existing courses have been re-tained, but 45 new ones have been added to yield 11 "concentrations-of-choice" in which the studentmay choose any three of 62 courses, 19 of which will have to be newly developed by appropriatefaculty. Such an approach to part of the major dilutes the depth and focus that might otherwise havebeen imparted by some of the more apposite concentrations. There is, also, the consideration wheth-er the hard-pressed resources of the College can support such a sweeping revision involving sixdepartments in the development of so many new courses, including three transportation managementcourses, that some argue are unrelated to the discipline's interaction with the College's central mis-sion of criminal justice. Moreover, a number of listed courses have not been offered anywhere in theCollege in the last five years while still others have not surfaced within seven to eleven years. Aless ambitious revision would appear to have been in order here.

A major that has benefited from the periodic reviews now undertaken by the CurriculumCommittee is the BS in Criminal Justice Administration and Planning. Of 35 separate courses listed

52

for this major before the revision as few as seven were carried over into the new (1991) require-ments and as many as 19 (existing or newly devised) courses were added. By all appearances,however, the revision has imparted coherence, relevance, and depth to the majors. On the otherhand, of those majors that have not been revised to date, two or three could benefit from similarreview. It might be well to take another look at the "Cognate Courses" components of the PoliceScience major. Perhaps the tighter, more focused structure observed in the Fire Service Administra-tion major and in the revised Correction major might be employed here.

A reexamination of our adherence to our mission seems to be in order. If it is our intention toafford the best technical/professional instruction to students within their chosen vocations, then therelevant majors should require quite intensive study within rather narrow parameters, broadened asnecessary by contact with other, yet related, courses and disciplines. Such focused instruction shouldbe buttressed by substantive immersion in some upper-level liberal arts courses, of the kind that arenow rare at the College. Some way should be found to effect this if it is also our desire to producethe broadly educated with inquiring and critical minds, to whom we shall commit the care andmanagement of our public service agencies; in other words, to prepare them for life as well as work.The former is best exemplified, naturally enough, in the superb Forensic Science major and is also tobe observed in the Criminology major. The second aspect still needs to be addressed. A better organ-ized and directed schema for the majors might also avoid the expansive approach to the CriminalJustice major referred to above as well as the requirement of two courses out of 24 in the cognatessection of the Forensic Psychology major.

Finally, the self-study process has confirmed that computer and telecommunication technolo-gy is not adequately woven into the various curricula at the College. As criminal justice agencies arebecoming more and more computerized, the College must stay up-to-date in order to prepare stu-dents for their careers.

The Associate Degree Programs

The two-year Associate Degree programs primarily feed into the Baccalaureate programs.Survey data show that the vast majority of students admitted for Associate Degrees have a Baccalau-reate as their ultimate goal.

Students can now transfer from two-year to four-year programs if theycomplete 12 credits with a 2.0 GPA, but no approval is required. Students move from one programto the other without advisement or monitoring.

Naturally, the curricula of the Associate Degree programs reflect this practice. They aremini-versions of the corresponding four-year programs, so that all credits are transferable. In no wayare they designed as terminal degrees. Even the Undergraduate Bulletin states that the AssociateDegree is "a useful halfway mark toward the Baccalaureate Degree."

The requirements for becoming a Baccalaureate candidate should be enforced, and thatpopulation should be monitored and linked to an advisement program which would encourage stu-dents to improve their GPA or stay in the Associate Degree programs. The Curriculum Committeeis now revising these programs with outcomes data provided by the Office of Institutional Research(see Chapter 4, "Admissions and Retention").

The Undergraduate Bulletin

The single most important medium in which a college presents itself to the outside world isits catalogue (see Chapter 10, "Publications"). Accuracy . of text and specificity in descriptions arenecessary ingredients in a publication which purports to inform students of the depth and range ofcollege course offerings. This present study has proceeded by examining the availability and fre

quency of course offerings for each department over the past decade (between Spring 1981 and Fall1991, to be exact).

The work of the Programs and Curricula study team demonstrated that

the John JayCollege catalogue listed courses that were dropped out of the curriculum; were not offered for 10years (71 courses); for 5 years (114 courses); and, for 3 years (151 courses.)'

What needs to be done now is to devise some better method of monitoring at departmentaland administrative levels as well as to inspect and edit before printing to ensure that information ispresented in a simple and consistent style and that misinformation of the kind alluded to above iskept to a minimum. Thus, as a result of this self-study, there is an imperative introduced by theDean of Undergraduate Studies to require departments to reexamine their course listings so that thenext edition of the catalogue will indicate those courses that are offered currently and those "notcontinuously on offer but available as student demand or other considerations allow." A plan to thiseffect was approved by the College Council in Spring 1992.

The Graduate Programs

A distinctive feature of graduate education at John Jay is the very high proportion of regis-trants (around 90%) who enroll for part-time study. This, of course, reflects the fact that the Col-lege's programs have always attracted a large number of working students whose occupations andcareers are in the fields of criminal justice and others of a public service nature. It may be fair tosay, therefore, that John Jay has less need to worship at the shrine of basic research--a traditionalfeature of the graduate school--than to offer a professional training for those engaged in the task ofadministering, managing and reforming our public agencies. And this it does within the narrowcompass of its five degree programs in Criminal Justice, Public Administration, Forensic Psycholo-gy, Forensic Science, and Fire Protection Management. The graduate programs have an enrollmentof 650 and award slightly over 100 Master's Degrees annually. Their strength, as measured bystudent preference, clearly lies in the Criminal Justice, Public Administration, and Forensic Psychol-ogy areas, as only a handful of degrees are awarded annually in both Forensic Science and FireProtection Management. The programs as a whole are governed and monitored by the Committee onGraduate Studies, chaired by the Dean of Graduate Studies, and administered from day to day byone or more graduate coordinators, who provide academic advisement, career counseling, and so on.

Courses in the graduate programs generally contain fewer students than undergraduate class-es. Model syllabi have been devised by which faculty are to tailor their instructions to students, andall course syllabi are available for inspection in the Dean's office. And, to judge by the descriptionand organization of courses and programs, the graduate programs themselves appear to be substan-tive and well managed. Interviews with graduate faculty have indicated that the main challenge in theprogram lies with the academic preparation of the accepted students and their difficulty when en-countering graduate work. For example, over the past four years (1987-91) an average of 57% ofstudents in one of the two introductory, gatekeeping, MA courses in criminal justice did not com-plete the course, as required, with a B or higher grade (the figure was 71 % for Fall 1990 alone).However, the Coordinators of the programs do not see this pass rate as a problem. Instead they seeit as a demonstration of their commitment to both access and adherence to academic standards (seeChapter 4, "Admissions and Retention").

This figure is certain to increase as data for 1992/93 are refer-enced, but will probably be an improvement over the last (1989-90) Bulletin when there were finally 240 such courses (nearly 40%of the total) involved in frequency errors over the years listed.

54

As in the case of the undergraduate programs, though less seriously, improvement could bemade in the management of the courses as they appear in the Graduate 1Bu letim Of some 140 sepa-rate courses (excluding prospectus and comprehensive review courses), 18 have not been offered tostudents in more than ten years. The recommendation that there be a comprehensive reexaminationof catalogue offerings, made earlier in regard to the undergraduate Bulletin , certainly applies here ifthis problem is to be rectified. Also, there are far too many discrepancies (30% of total listings) inthe current (1990-1992) bulletin . Many courses shown as available during 1990 and 1991 in factwere either not on offer or were available at times not stated--even for some cross-listed courses(CRJ/Psy 743, for example) each is shown as available in a different semester. A serious omissionwas discovered with the course listings for Fire Protection Management. Here, only four courses aredescribed even though five additional courses are suggested for the major.

Criminal Justice

The Criminal Justice MA, a course of studies deriving directly from the mission of the Col-lege, requires the completion of either ten graduate courses (30 credits) plus a thesis or--the over-whelming choice of students--twelve courses plus a comprehensive examination. Of these, five (outof six specified courses) are taken as a core requirement, with the remainder selected, subject toguidance, from the entire (some 160 courses) graduate curriculum. In the latter case, however, thereis also provision for the student to specialize in a selected area: 9 credits in Computer Applicationsin Criminal Justice, for example. Thus all students are exposed to the same fundamental componentsof theory and methodology, and systems and policy analysis, while leaving room for some concentra-tion, if desired, in a chosen area of criminal justice studies. Alternatively, students may select non-core courses at random.

The current (1990-1992) Graduate Bulletin lists the very large number of 70 separate coursesin this program's interdisciplinary offerings, although just under half of them have been continuouslyavailable to students over the past five years. Several new courses were introduced in recent years,testimony to the continued growth and updating of the major, as witnessed by the introduction of"The Female Offender in Western Society" (CRJ 779), "Immigration and Crime" (CRJ 774), and agreater emphasis on research methods and applications (leading, one would hope, to more thesisoptions in the future), as well as courses involving computer applications to management and plan-ning. In addition, the Selected Topics (CRJ 790) course allows for faculty experimentation andinnovation from semester to semester. Indeed, many courses become officially listed only after theyhave proven themselves in the 790 category. Moreover, certain other courses were added to thecurriculum between 1985 and 1987 as part of a substantive restructuring and tightening of the ma-jor's core requirements, a move away from the then looser arrangements that militated againstdegree candidates' initial common academic experience. These new arrangements have now beenfully in place for the past four years and should be evaluated in order to assess their effectiveness. Inany one semester, a student of Criminal Justice can expect the wide choice of up to two dozenCriminal Justice courses as well as an even greater number of electives in the popular ancillary fieldsof Forensic Psychology and Public Administration.

Public Administration

The shape of the Public Administration degree curriculum mirrors that of the Criminal JusticeMA--a complement of core courses (8) in addition to electives (3) and specializations (3), although inthis case the specialization is a required block of nine credits. There is no thesis requirement oroption. Of the 40 courses listed by the department, some 27 or so have been continuously availableto students over the past five years. The academic strength of the program is well attested in theformal grant of accreditation at last review (1987) by the National Association of Schools of PublicAffairs and Administration. Field work and research methods play a substantive part in the program

and the several specializations reflect the growing demand of public service employees for expertisein microcomputer applications, productivity measurement, and the like.

Forensic Psychology

According to the College $.l g Book (22nd ed., 1989) the Forensic Psychology program isremarkable in that it is the only one in the country. This major is clearly unique and reflective of theCollege's special mission. This program differs from those discussed above in that there is a required core of seven courses (21 credits) plus four courses to be selected as indicated from 30 or so.A thesis is optional.

Vim Protection Management

The Fire Protection Management program, one of the very few offered across the country,was instituted only a few years ago and has not yet elaborated that array of departmental courses(only four are listed in the current Bulletin) which, added to electives, will bring greater substanceand flexibility to the degree. However, five new Fire Protection Management courses have just beenadded to the curriculum, and the future should now proceed more to the student's advantage. Inci-dentally, the program does not offer a course dealing with the legal aspects of fire protection as theyrelate to employee safety and public protection, a possible area of concern to managers in the field.This area, clearly within the mission of the College, should be evaluated in order to ascertain wheth-er we are addressing those constituencies which need further training in this area.

Forensic Science

The M.S. in Forensic Science program requires 30-33 credit hours depending on whether thethesis or the alternative is chosen. Both options have a complement of 5 required core courses and 12credits of appropriate electives from other courses in the field. The thesis option carries another 3credits while the alternative to the thesis requires students to complete Forensic Science 792-793:Forensic Science Laboratory Research Tutorial I and II. The program is designed to provide ad-vanced education for scientists, scientists in administration, directors, and other professionals em-ployed in crime laboratories and other related areas of forensic investigation. The program is de-signed for students who possess the equivalent of a Baccalaureate Degree in forensic science, chem-istry, or a related scientific field.

Qthei Programs

An Internship program that links academic and professional training is in place at John JayCollege. Students receive credit for a combination of 111 hours of academic work and supervisedwork experience in a variety of government, private, and criminal justice agencies. This programserves two functions. It introduces students to the workplace and helps them to focus on employmentgoals, and it introduces the various criminal justice agencies of the City to John Jay and its students.Additionally, through a grant, a Cooperative Education Program has been developed. Here studentswork two years, which alternate between two semesters of school (for which they earn 6 credits) andtwo semesters in a supervised introduction to Federal agencies. At the end of the program and upongraduating, our students enter such Federal employment, Customs, and the Drug EnforcementAgency without the requisite testing and waiting periods.

Another outgrowth of the general curriculum is the long matured interdisciplinary innovation,the Thematic Studies Program, which serves the small number of students who wish to pursue theirstudies in the non-traditional mode pioneered by that program.

5 6

A certificate program in Dispute Resolution (30 credits of related courses selected from thecurriculum) is also offered.

Graduate courses leading to the MPA are offered at the U.S. Military Academy at West Pointto military personnel and to others residing in the vicinity. In the Spring of 1993, a similar opportu-nity will be available at the New York headquarters of the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Thedegree pursuit by DEA and other employees from nearby criminal justix agencies will be facilitatedby this outreach.

Training Programs

The Office of Special Programs designs, develops, and implements programs, courses, andtraining workshops. They vary in length from a six-hour workshop in Substance Abuse Treatment tothe 440-hour Basic Police Officer training course required for certification by the New York StateBureau for Municipal Police.

The most recent is a course on "Human Dignity in Policing," developed with the Office ofPlanning and Development and the Office of Graduate Studies. The course's aim is to improve thequality of law enforcement and to prevent human rights abuses in emerging democracies in Southand Central America and the Caribbean. Representatives from 14 countries and ICITAP, a divisionof the Justice Department, came to John Jay for a week to help design the course. The first pilotcourse was then taught at the College in June 1992. Trainers are now presenting the course incountries under the purview of ICITAP, and sessions have been completed in Panama, Honduras,and Costa Rica as of this date.

The Office of Special Programs also administers the Police Cadet Program. In this program,cadets attend CUNY associate degree programs and become police officers upon receiving theirdegrees. This program aims at assuring a greater degree of consistency in the quality and content ofthe education of New York's future police.

John Jay's Emergency Psychology Training Program received a special award from theAmerican Psychiatric Association. This program combines academic and experimental training sothat police and others in law enforcement can manage situations which involve the emotionally dis-turbed. As part of the training, an improvisational theater group created real life scenarios so thatstudents could get realistic practice. The Emergency Psychology Training Program illustrated howcooperation between the College and City Police and Mental Health Agencies can benefit.

In all of its training programs, the Office of Special Programs is committed to developing andusing the latest teaching technologies--videotape, electronic survey equipment--in new ways. Forexample, a new telephone system will link quarantined tuberculosis-infected inmates to literacyclasses.

The Criminal Justice Training Center serves the needs of the criminal justice, fire serv-ice, and security communities for continuing education, training, research, and evaluation ofprograms and for access to the latest information on professional development.

Each year the Center conducts training programs for employees of over one hundred differentfederal, state, and local law enforcement agencies as well as for numerous corporations and individ-uals involved in private security. One recent example is the training provided to high-level officersof the Port Authority Police in a Police Command College program. The program, held at WestPoint, encourages critical thinking, problem solving, strategic planning, leadership, and an organiza-tional perspective.

Most recently, the Center has developed and is currently conducting a program to train offi-cers in city, state, and federal agencies to recognize and combat High Intensity Drug Trafficking. Inaddition, the Center has recently conducted the training for the University Chancellor's SecurityInitiative, which is designed to provide professional security personnel on staff at all CUNY cam-puses, replacing contract security services.

The ability of the Center to provide state-of-the-art training in the field of security is possiblein part because of the new modern Security Technology Laboratory which is used to familiarizetrainees with the latest equipment and methodologies in the security field.

All these programs doubtless greatly enhance the reputation of the College far beyond thenetwork of contacts established by the on-campus student body. They appear to meet the needs ofoutside agencies that can benefit from the expertise of the John Jay faculty without detracting fromtheir primary commitments to the College itself.

Recommendations

1. Coordinate freshman instruction, including a review of how credit is assigned for remedial anddevelopmental courses.

2. Alter the GER to provide some requirements in the humanities at the 200 level and use "290" (theexperimental course designation) as a means of introducing courses in the humanities.

3. Continue, in the Curriculum Committee, the process of redesigning the Criminal Justice major sothat fewer concentrations are available.

4. Examine the relevance of many of the cognate courses in the Fire Science, Police Science andForensic Psychology majors.

S. Entirely revise program of monitoring/editing the Undergraduate Bulletin and Graduate Bulb,dropping courses not offered in years.

Chapter Six

OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT

The beginning of a quantitative outcomes assessment potential at the College is to be dated tothe mid-1980s, when the then Provost created a faculty database for the first time and when theOffice of Institutional Research (OIR) was placed under the supervision of the Office of Planningand Development. Subsequent efforts to develop a capacity to measure outcomes foundered becauseof personnel issues, until OIR received a new director in 1990 with a mandate from the Dean ofPlanning and Development to reorganize the Office and refocus its activities according to fixeddeadlines. Shortly after, the College decided to utilize the Middle States self-study process as anopportunity to expand its institutional research activities, and it procured additional funding from theUniversity's central office for that purpose. Accordingly, data generated by the Office of Institu-tional Research have contributed to the present self-study.

The stark example of the recent crisis posed by the threat of losing funding for the AssociateDegree programs demonstrates the College's vulnerability when outcomes assessment does notoccur. Although only a small number of these degrees are awarded each year, the College had neverexamined these programs. Indeed, virtually no one was aware of just how few the number of degreesawarded actually was. Only the prospect of losing funding for students who enter the College be-cause of these programs provoked a serious look at this long-available indicator and what it mightimply about the effectiveness of the Associate Degree programs.

The problem has been not only . a lack of critical alertness to obvious indicators of educationaleffectiveness but also the lack of institutional recognition until the current self-study of the impor-tance of outcomes assessment. Thus, for example, a change in the way in which students are placedin the mathematics remediation sequence in light of findings in an outcomes study by a facultycommittee was stoutly resisted, and instituted only by unilateral action of the Office of Undergradu-ate Studies. On the other hand, another effort by the same office to assess the alleged effectivenessof a communication skills course for students who read at the college level has been successfullyresisted. Finally, efforts by the Office of Planning and Development to procure external funding toestablish an assessment capability at the College were met with pronounced suspicion and even hos-tility.

In recent years the College's efforts toward data collection have accordingly been largely adhoc, with some exceptions. These include the regular series of reports released by the Dean forAdmissions and Registration, which provide numeric profiles on admissions, retention, graduation,and grading practices. Some of these reports, such as the grading report, are issued each semester;others appear annually. Another prominent and routine effort to conduct systematic measurement ofeducational effectiveness is the annual student evaluation of faculty.

The high-water mark for use of computerized student records was probably during the lastMiddle States self-study in 1982, when there was a spate of computer-based institutional researchreports prepared by the Office of Institutional Research. After that self-study was concluded, howev-er, OIR staff increasingly assumed a variety of non-research roles such as maintaining faculty per-sonnel records and performing various data entry tasks.

As valuable as these services may have been, they stunted OIR's role in doing institutionalresearch in support of the academic mission of the college. OIR still conducted a few studies, such asan alumni survey in 1987, but most efforts at outcomes assessments since the mid-1980s have beensmall projects conducted by the interested parties without ready access to the computerized studentdata records or OIR assistance. Hand tallies of a sample of student records have often been themethod used to collect data for these studies.

In 1990, after three years without a director, a veteran administrator was appointed as thedirector of OIR. Since then, the office has been revitalized with fresh resources and direction.During the previous period, the office provided required CUNY, federal, and state reports. Butduring the design phase of the present self-study, it became clear that the College needed the in-house capacity to conduct data analysis to support not only the self-study but also the long-rangeneeds of the College for outcomes data. Zb do so, OIR obtained a CUNY grant with the immediategoal of developing the office's capabilities to assist in the Middle States self-study. The project forthe self-study encompassed a plan to provide OIR with its own capacity to respond quickly to specialrequests for outcomes assessment. This required developing an independent and rapid means toaccess the College's various computerized student records without the assistance of programmers inthe College Computer Center.

The College has maintained extensive computerized files of student academic records andbursar accounts since the early 1970s. These records do not constitute an integrated student informa-tion system, for they are maintained in a variety of storage modes, some of which use thirty-year-oldstorage technology. To make ready access to data feasible, OIR in 1991 developed and tested anintegrated database analysis system which provides ready access to the complex of computerizedacademic student records maintained by the College. This system allows the researcher to quicklymake a custom data set comprised of the subset of students and variables needed for a given study. Itis designed to facilitate assessment of student outcomes by automatically providing many scores ofspecially created variables for analysis of academic success and persistence. The long-term goal ofthe project has evolved to provide the College with a permanent and ready capacity to provide dataon academic outcomes whenever requested.

Much of the data described in the present chapter and elsewhere in this self-study reflectOIR's rapidly developing capacity to provide the data required for outcomes assessment. Not onlycan marked progress be reported in the College's capacity to generate timely data for institutionalresearch but also several prominent examples of actual use of these capabilities can be noted.

Firstis the College Curriculum Committee's use of data generated by OIR for an extensive review of theeffect of prerequisites on advanced courses. Second is the use of outcomes data in 1991 by the jointcommittee of the Council of Chairs and the Faculty Senate to assess the Associate Degree programs.Now that the capability has been developed and has begun to be integrated into College decisions,the office must, with broad consultation, set priorities. Already the requests are exceeding capabilitydue to a small staff. It should be noted, however, that a grant proposal has already been submittedthat will bring in additional resources.

There are also healthy signs that outcomes data are being melded into routine efforts to assessthe educational effectiveness of the College. The most prominent example of this is the CollegeCurriculum Committee's program to periodically review all of the College's majors, begun in 1988.This is without doubt the most ambitious and systematic attempt ever by the College to generateinformation on academic outcomes. These self-studies require the coordinator of a major to conductan extensive review based on an instrument prepared by the Curriculum Committee. The self-studyreports are reviewed by the Curriculum Committee and recommendations are then made for im-provements in the major.

From the beginning of the review of majors, however, a serious shortcoming has been thedearth of firm data on academic outcomes. This is primarily attributable to the lack of a systematicand timely process to gather and report such information. The burden for the collection of such datatherefore fell on the coordinators of the majors, and it is fair to say that this has not been an effectivestrategy. At present, the original instrument and procedures for the self-study of majors are beingrevised. It is anticipated that the coordinators of the majors will rely on the data provided by OIR.

There are other examples of fresh efforts to utilize outcomes data. The Master's program inPublic Administration is designing a database to facilitate advising of its students. Likewise, thecoordinators of the Master's program in Criminal Justice have begun using outcomes data of various

6n

kinds to monitor student progress and changes in curriculum and standards. The Library and Micro-computer Center have both initiated user surveys to assess use of these facilities.

It seems fair to say that the College is now equipped with a newfound capacity to conductsystematic outcomes assessment. However, this capacity will prove useful only if valid outcomesmeasures are devised and tracked. Some selected examples of OIR's capability appear in AppendixF.

Surveys of John Jay Undergraduates and Graduate Students

Computerized records are not the only source of systematically collected data that put JohnJay outcomes into context. Many parts of the picture of the life of students can only be obtained bydirectly asking students about their experiences at the College. One way to do this is by surveyingstudents.

The College has used student surveys at various times in the past to procure informationabout a specific issue. The graduate program in psychology, for example, conducted a survey of itsstudents in 1991. Small surveys of students in several majors have also been conducted as part of theself-study of majors.

Several of the Middle States self-study study teams posed questions that could be answeredonly through a general survey of students. 1b provide data for these committees, a survey of under-graduates was designed by a faculty member and conducted by the Offices of Institutional Researchand Planning and Development during the Fall 1991 semester.

This survey queried respondentsabout a variety of topics, such as the student's registration experience, the usefulness of servicesprovided by the Division of Student Development, and general satisfaction with the College.

Thesampling design was set to produce representative samples of each class (i.e., freshman vs. senior)of students but with disproportionate sampling of juniors and seniors. Although reporting of thesedata has thus far been limited to simple reporting of frequencies, there are many outcomes issueswhich could be explored, such as the effectiveness of faculty advising and the relative amount ofwork students are doing in their courses.

The following findings are culled from the 1991 John Jay student survey results based onfrequencies of responses (for complete results, see Appendix I). Areas that may warrant explora-tion include the following:

40% of seniors indicate they think too few upper-level courses are available31 % of seniors disagree that faculty set high standards42% of seniors disagree that students set high standards31 % of seniors agree that too many courses cover the same material36% of seniors disagree that students are well prepared for the level of the course33 % of freshmen report that they spend somewhat less or a lot less time on school work outside of

class as compared to inside classalmost half of freshmen and about a third of sophomores and juniors say they "can't judge" if theyare satisfied with academic advising and course planning44 % of sophomores report they could not get courses they needed

Some other interesting survey results include the following:

about 40% of students at all levels report they think too much reading is required80% of seniors report that they disagree that there is too much remedial workover 50% of all freshmen and sophomores report they have two or more term papers and,likewise, over 50% of junior and seniors report they have three or more term papers90% of each class report their exams are at least half essay56% of seniors report they have 25 pages or more of written assignments

These are fragments of findings that may be relevant to academic outcomes which can begleaned from results of the survey. Some of them corroborate popular wisdom. Others have impacton outcomes and might be further explored, such as the high percentage of freshmen who report theyspend less time studying than they do in the classroom. Much more can be learned from data col-lected during this survey.

Some items from the survey provide contextual data for outcomes assessment which wouldotherwise be unavailable. For example, the item which asks about degree objective reveals that theAssociate Degree program is irrelevant to the vast majority of students: only 13 % of freshmen and8% of sophomores indicate that their objective is the Associate Degree.

Several important topics could be the themes of special analyses of these data. For example,a good picture of many aspects of the differences between the experiences of day and evening stu-dents or of full-time versus part-time students could be gleaned from these data. The issue of racialtension at the college could be explored by looking at the characteristics of students who think thereis a problem versus those who think there is not. Attitudes of students active in student governmentcould be compared with those of students who are inactive.

The methodology used in this survey proved to be a fairly effective and relatively unobtrusiveway to generate a large of amount of information from representative groups of each class of stu-dents. Some information is efficiently attainable from a large number of students only through suchsurvey techniques. Such a survey might well be conducted by OIR periodically to obtain outcomesand process information otherwise unavailable.

John Jay College Alumni

One important outcomes assessment yardstick is the success of the College's alumni. John Jaygraduates have held positions of prominence in the fields of criminal justice and public service sincethe first class graduated. Its alumni include judges, including a federal judge, hundreds of lawyers, aU.S. Congressman, and state and city legislators.

Locally, nationwide, and internationally, there have been many John Jay graduates who haveserved as police and fire chiefs. The College also has alumni working as investigators and agents inexecutive and managerial levels at numerous federal and international agencies.

In addition, a number of Baccalaureate and Master's Degree recipients, have gone on toobtain PhDs and are active in colleges and universities nationwide. In the private sector, the Col-lege's graduates have attained senior executive positions in many private security management firms.

While the above summary is only a sampling, the alumni directory provides a comprehensivereview of the positions held by the 15,000 women and men who are members of the Alumni Associ-ation. A systematic analysis should be undertaken by the Alumni Office to determine where John Jaygraduates make their careers.

1. Develop definitions of "effectiveness."

Summoa and Recommendations

Above all, the College must first establish benchmarks of success. Outcomes cannot bemeasured without reference to what it is that the institution seeks to achieve. Definitions of "effec-tiveness" and "success" must, of course, be related to the College's mission, goals, and objectives.And, for wide acceptance, they must be developed through a process involving wide internal discus-sion and consultation.

6 2

2. Continue to develop and protect institutional research capabilities at the College.

The recurrence of flagging support for systematic outcomes assessment or the diversion ofOIR resources when the current self-study is concluded should be prevented.

3. Protect the capacity of OIR to provide timely academic outcomes data.

The production of academically relevant outcomes measures should remain OIR's priorityabove all others. A satisfying day will arrive, however, when the requests for institutional researchexceed the staff resources of OIR to provide them. It would be ironic if OIR becomes a victim of itsown success, and the need to handle too many requests results in delays of timely production ofrequests which limit the usefulness of the research. If important research is needed and staff re-sources are already consumed by ongoing projects, a means should be in place to provide additionalsupport to OIR.

4.

Promote and develop the integration of outcomes indicators into decision making at theCollege.

The mere availability of data does not assure they will be used when malting decisions.Organizational habits of reaching decisions based on anecdotal data will not be easy to break.

Norshould one suppose that the availability of data will always make decisions easier.

Nonetheless,adoption and use of valid outcomes measures relevant to the goals of committees, departments,centers, and various offices of the College should be required as a normal part of operations. A newPlanning Committee should work directly with OIR.

5. Conduct a long-term cohort study of correlates of persistence and attrition.

The personal and institutional costs of student attrition are clearly high, and we need to learnmore about the patterns and causes of student failure and success. This knowledge can be obtainedonly through serious cohort studies of the characteristics of successful student careers which draw ondata from both the OIR student data base and surveys of students. As it formulates recommendationsto reduce attrition, the task force on retention described earlier in this self-study should be able toturn to OIR for all relevant information.

6. Develop systematic comparative data.

To be meaningful, outcomes assessment information must be compared with outcomes atcomparable colleges throughout the nation--and particularly to those within the CIJNY system.

7. Expand outcomes assessment for the College's graduate programs.

'Ib date, the efforts undertaken by OIR have been directed exclusively to the undergraduateprogram, no doubt because most students at the College are undergraduates. Similar study andanalysis of its graduate programs should be undertaken in order to strengthen them, too. Someprograms, particularly MA in Public Administration, have already begun this effort on their own.

Chapter Seven

STUDENT SERVICES

Results of two surveys were used in preparing this chapter. In December 1989, The CityUniversity of New York Office of Institutional Research and Analysis administered a 1989 Under-graduate Student Experience Survey to approximately 17,000 undergraduates CUNY wide; 1,000John Jay students were included in the survey, 316 of whom responded. This survey will be referredto as the 1989 CUNY wide Survey. In December 1991, the Office of Institutional Research of JohnJay College administered a General Survey of Undergraduate Students to 865 students, 617 of whomresponded. This survey will be referred to as the 1991 John Jay Survey, and, wherever possible, willbe the primary source of data. (See Appendix I for complete survey results.) When information isprovided for all students from the 1991 John Jay Survey, the data are weighted. Because no dataexist for graduate students, the study team chose to focus on undergraduate responses. For the mostpart, however, the services described below are available to graduate and undergraduate students.

John Jay undergraduate students are a multicultural and multiethnic community. In responseto the 1989 CUNY wide Survey, respondents listed 38 different ethnic backgrounds; 29countries/regions of family origin; six religions and five racial groups. According to the survey, amajority of respondents indicated that John Jay students are friendly (86%) and help each other(69 %). Additionally, they stated that they do not feel out of place at John Jay (849 b); this figure is75 % on the 1991 John Jay survey.

A majority of the students at John Jay can be classified as non-traditional college students.The 1989 CUNY wide Survey reveals almost one fifth of our students were not born in the UnitedStates; over 40 % reported that both father and mother were not born in the United States; and 41.5 %spoke another language in addition to English. The 1991 John Jay Survey further reveals that 27are 25 years old or older.

But the story of John Jay students goes beyond the numbers. Most are the first in their fami-lies to attend college, and therefore sometimes suffer from the lack of a support system when theyundertake college obligations. For many, attending college is a great sacrifice, as they juggle workand family obligations along with their studies. They represent the hope of their families, neighbor-hoods, indeed our city. The College tries to do its part in welcoming and encouraging this popula-tion through its various student services.

Department of Counseling

Advisement gnd Counseling

The Department of Counseling offers a complete range of counseling services for students.The counselors help students plan their class schedules, choose majors, and plan for a career field.Counselors also help students who may be experiencing personal problems, family difficulties,emotional upset, and other personal obstacles that inhibit academic performance. Counseling serv-ices are provided by the counseling faculty, who are trained professionals. Students may also chooseto see a peer counselor or graduate student intern. Student counselors are supervised by departmentalfaculty. During the last year the counselors both increased the number of counseling courses offered(22) and experienced a 20% increase in the number of student contacts (5225). The currentstudent/counselor ratio is approximately 900/1.

According to the 1991 John Jay Survey, approximately 30% of freshman and 49% of seniorsmet with a counselor prior to registration. Of those students who utilized counseling services to plantheir program, 86% of freshman and 98% of seniors reported they were satisfied or very satisfied

6 4

with the service. In addition to academic counseling, approximately 11 % of freshman and 14 % ofseniors indicated that they saw a counselor for personal counseling.

Office of Placement and Career Advisement

The Office of Placement and Career Advisement assists undergraduate and graduate students,as well as alumni, with matters concerning careers. The Career Resources Center provides occupa-tional information through its extensive selection of career- related texts and manuals as well ascomputerized information. Each fall this office sponsors a "Graduate and Professionals Day," whichstudents say they find worthwhile. In fact, they indicated that they would like to see another suchday sponsored in the spring.

Students indicated that they would be better served if the Office of Placement and CareerAdvisement worked more closely with the Internship Office, with academic major advisors, and withthe Alumni Office. Additionally, the job placement computer is scheduled for student use only twohours per day, an inadequate access.

According to the 1991 John Jay Survey, 28% who used Career/Vocational Guidance serviceswere either satisfied or very satisfied, but 55 % could not judge the service; 14 % were satisfied withjob placement services (68% could not judge). Overall, these figures are 25% (62% cannot judge)and 14°16 (68% cannot judge), respectively, for all students.

Office of Undergraduate Advisement

A formal academic advisement program with a new director reports to the Office of Under-graduate Studies. Advisors are volunteers from faculty, HEOs, and other staff, and the program isopen to all lower sophomores on a voluntary basis. Advisors are trained in workshops, some gener-al and some for those who will be advising in-service and transfer students. In Fall 1992, the pro-gram drew 300 students out of 758 who were eligible. There were 86 advisors: 39 teaching facultyand 47 administrators (including the President), HEOs, and other staff.

Financial Services

The Office of Student Financial Services is open to both undergraduate and graduate students.The purpose of this office is to assist students in securing the financial support necessary for theiracademic pursuits. Financial aid is available in the forms of grants, loans, and Work Study. Finan-cial Services Counselors are available to students during specified office hours.

Financial aid is important to John Jay students. According to the 1991 John Jay Survey, 52%needed financial aid to go to College; 47% have some, most, or all of their college expenses paid byfinancial aid. Moreover, 37% worked full time (35 hours per week or more); only 2446 did not workat all. The 1989 CUNYwide Survey further reveals that 51 % had household incomes of $25,000 orless, and 52% indicated that family support was important in helping to pay for college as werestudent earnings from employment during the year (43%) and Veterans Benefits (3496).

According to student responses to the surveys, many are not aware of the financial assistanceprovided at the College; some feel that night students are less informed about these programs.

Health Services

The College Health Office was established in July 1991 to implement the New York StateLaw which requires all students in New York State born on or after January 1, 1957, to presentroof of immunity against measles, mumps, and rubella. The function of the office is to maintain all

immunization forms for State reporting purposes. Additionally, Roosevelt Hospital has made theservices of its Emergency Room and Outpatient Clinic available to members of the John Jay commu-nity for a minimum fee.

Many students in the 1991 John Jay Survey indicated that they could not judge the HealthServices Office (73%); 14% were satisfied and 9 % were dissatisfied.

People with Disabilities

The Office of Disabled Student Services both responds to and seeks out students who qualifyfor special assistance in accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This officeoffers individual counseling, alternative testing, and tutoring. Additionally, three publications, twoauthored by this office and one jointly by PSC and CUNY, are available for informational purposesfor staff, faculty, and students.

In the 1991 John Jay Survey, 11 % indicated satisfaction with the facilities for disabled stu-dents, 2% dissatisfaction, and 82% could not judge. The variety of impediments to movementthroughout the buildings have been a source of concern, however. The issue has been presented atthe College Council, which has supported change. But there is still the perception that the issue hasnot been adequately addressed.

Women's Studies Committee and Women's Center

Interested faculty members have organized and coordinated several women's study programsand seminars at the College through the Women's Study Committee. As a result of the energy of thisgroup, a Women's Center has been established and housed in the Office of Student Services.

Writing Center

The Writing Center provides free tutoring in writing to students of the College. The Centerhas a staff of trained tutors who work with students both on a one-to-one basis and in groups. Atopen hearings, students unanimously praised the facility for the availability of staff members, as wellas materials and equipment in the lab. For the 1991 John Jay Survey, 28% were satisfied with theWriting Center; 65 % could not judge.

Mathematics Resource Center

The Mathematics Resources Center provides tutoring without prior appointment to studentswho need assistance in their mathematics courses. In order to serve students who have been admittedwithout adequate college math skills, it is important that remedial courses and tutoring be coordinat-ed. This is not the case at present. Students expressed the belief that there are not enough tutors.And, in fact, the student government, cognizant of this, allocated funds for additional mathematicstutors for Spring 1992.

Communication Skills Center

The Communication Skills Program at John Jay College offers two remedial courses (Com.101 & 102) and one regular course (Com. 110) and supplemental .tutoring in this facility. During theperiod covering September 5, 1990, to May 9 1991, the Reading and Study Skills Center was openfor a total of 119 days, from 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM Monday through Thursday. These remedialprograms are available for any student who requests and has scheduled tutoring and/or independentstudy.

ESL Resource Center

The ESL Resource Center, established in February 1992, identifies non-native-speaking orlimited-English-proficient students and provides tutorial services and workshops.. The Center is alsoproviding the College with technical assistance in developing an ESL program m the English De-partment and is offering assistance to other departments that have a large population of limitedEnglish-proficient students.

Microcomputer Center

The Microcomputer Center is equipped with 105 desktop computers networked for accessinga wide range of software, including .programming languages, course-related programs, word process-ing, database, spreadsheet, statistical, and desktop publishing. CUNY mainframe computing re-sources, the University library system, and the Internet are easily accessible over the network.

The Center provides students with hardware and software consulting, hands-on workshopsand demonstrations, and technical assistance in using applications packages, learning programminglanguages, and maintaining computer systems designed for the physically challenged. Of the stu-dents surveyed, 40% were either highly satisfied or satisfied with the Lab (55% could not judge).Only less than 2% were dissatisfied.

The Center also goes beyond its mandate by providing technical training for faculty and staffin microcomputers and networking through consulting and workshops.

Child Care Center

The John Jay Child Care Center, which accepts children between the ages of six months andfive years, is open Monday through Thursday, 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM when classes are in session.The Center offers a program designed to provide meaningful experiences for young children. About8% of the students were satisfied with the services; 86% could not judge.

Access and Security

Many students do not view campus security as a problem. Indeed, 58 % of the students sur-veyed felt that campus security was satisfactory; 21 % could not judge. However, when studentswere asked which of 43 problems at John Jay was the biggest, security ranked 23rd. At open hear-ings students expressed the opinion that access to the campus was too easy, and too many people offthe street are admitted. Still, attempts to formalize ID procedures have met with resistance and areoften ignored.

Some students expressed the desire for adequate parking facilities. Parking was voted 12th inthe survey of the biggest problems at John Jay.

67

The Office of Student Activities

This office conducts a series of programs to assist students in planning, developing, andorganizing extracurricular activities. Further, it sponsors an exhibition program for the lobbies ofboth buildings, free films, parties, day trips, fairs, and workshops. The office also coordinates lec-tures, social occasions, and cultural presentation for over 38 student organizations. It providesinformation about campus meetings and events through its publication, the Condenser

The office also administers a typing room for students, available Monday through Friday. Inaddition, it is responsible for the international education. programs and assists out-of-town students inmeeting their housing needs.

Overall, 43 % of the day students were satisfied with available extracurricular student activi-ties; 26% of the evening students were satisfied. Over half in either group, though, could not judge.With a current staff of an assistant to the Dean, one student worker, and one clerical employee, theoffice is severely handicapped in mounting programs for a student body of over 8,000. This officeshould be the center of the John Jay student community, providing a sense of belonging to even thosestudents whose time on campus is limited. It should serve as the informational coordinator for stu-dents at tie College.

Student Government

The Student Council is composed of 24 members, elected at large, each spring, from thestudent body for a one-year term. Student government leaders state that they encourage student par-ticipation in both governance and cultural activities. A total of 20% of the student body voted in theSpring 1991 Student Council election--about the same as the national average; but 75 % had neverspoken with a Student Council Representative; 87% had never attended a Student Council meeting;and 45 % stated that they did not feel that the Student Council represents the student body. Addition-ally, students at open hearings indicated that they felt their student fees were wasted.

Student governments in office in Spring 1989, 1990, and 1991 took an active role in studentdemonstrations. Many members of the College community have therefore developed a suspiciousview of student government activities. Partly in a effort to combat the impression the student gov-ernment is destructive, the 1991-92 student government allocated $50,000 for a range of services,including additional tutors for the Mathematics Resource Center, and purchased electronic bulletinboards for better campus communication.

Students serve on important governance bodies, including the P&B, to insure that inputcomes from all levels of the College community and to allow for the exchange of ideas betweenfaculty and students. While students regularly attend College Council and other meetings, they arenot always fully participatory in their committee assignments.

Student Clubs

Student Council members are responsible for the distribution of the Student Activity Feefunds which support the clubs. Each Student Council-approved club has a faculty advisor. Althoughthere are many clubs actively meeting on campus, 72% of students reported that they do not attendclub meetings. According to a committee survey, the Fashion Club and the Firearms Training Socie-ty are the most active. The Firearms Training Society, which has approximately 90 members,conducts safety lectures and actual hands-on instruction in the use of firearms for recreational activi-

68

ty. The Security and Safety Society, which has approximately 90 members, is a student organizationthat networks with public law enforcement agencies and private security firms. In an institution asculturally diverse as John Jay College ethnic clubs (African, Arab, Asian, Black Students, Carib-bean, Dominican, Haitian, Italian, and Puerto Rican) and religious clubs (Discovery, Islamic, Jew-ish, Seeker's Christian Fellowship, Voices United for God) play an important part in student life.

John Jay students do not spend much time on campus, yet the student government must servetheir needs. There should be consideration given to restructuring the Council to utilize clubs asvehicles for greater student representation. Representatives elected at large could be augmented by aset number of representatives elected by campus religious, ethnic, and social clubs. Additionally, aself-assessment process, directed through the appropriate student activities officer, should be put intoplace.

Recreation and Athletic Programs

John Jay College has in impressive array of intramural programs and recreational activities.All facilities--swimming pool, racquetball courts, gymnasiums, tennis court, and fitness center--areopen to the entire College community. Ten intercollegiate teams currently take the field,

with thebasketball games having the greatest number of spectators. The Cardiovascular Fitness Center isavailable to the entire College community. The Physical Education faculty has encouraged College-wide participation and has provided a sense of community to all who participate; yet only 35 % of thestudents used the athletic facilities according to the 1991 John Jay Survey. Students, faculty, Deans;and the College President can all be found sharing a sense of healthy community participation. Over45% of the students expressed satisfaction with the athletic facilities (47% could not judge). At theopen hearings students also expressed their pleasure with the swimming pool, tennis court, and theP .E. Department table set up weekly in the cafeteria for the purpose of apprising students of intra-mural and ongoing recreational activities. In addition, programs are advertised through two depart-mental publications, Bloodhound S2Qrts News and MILU from he Doghouse , as well as I&&, thestudent newspaper, and the ELhp- by News published by the Office of External Affairs.

Theater and the Arts

The Department of Speech and Theater serves the College community by mounting as manyproductions as its budget will allow. These plays serve important extracurricular, social, education-al, and cultural functions. But 77% of the students surveyed had not attended a John Jay play; and21 % were satisfied with concerts or plays (65% could not judge). Students who are involved indepartmental shows can receive credit for their participation by completing additional written re-quirements. However, most students view participation as extracurricular.

The College has been fortunate to be able to build a professional theater, with a mechanizedorchestra pit and state-of-the-art lighting. Members of the John Jay Community, as well as profes-sionals from the theater world, believe this facility should be lit every night, providing the communi-ty with an additional cultural outlet.

The Department of Art, Music & Philosophy has an art gallery in room 322T. Four exhibi-tions a year, two of student work and two by New York artists, almost all women and minority art-ists, are mounted.

The Office of Student Activities conducts a series of ongoing educational and artistic pro-grams, called the "Quality of Life Program," designed to enhance the environment of the College.This program is particularly suitable because of its contents depicting many different cultural andethnic backgrounds. The art is prominently displayed at the entrance of the two

buildings. Of thestudents surveyed, 81 % had seen the exhibits.

Quality of Faculty-Student Interaction

In answer to a survey question asking students to rate the "best thing about John Jay," theyrated the faculty first. On the same survey, over 65% felt that teachers were fair and 79% felt thatteachers try hard to help students. This underscores the influence that faculty can exert as rolemodels and advisors. Students voiced concern about faculty unavailability for appointments, whichmay be explained in part by the two-day-a-week schedule, and may suggest that faculty fail to meettheir obligations to post and hold regularly scheduled office hours.

Some students voiced their concerns about professors whose English is difficult to understandand others about the fact that the faculty does not reflect the ethnic, cultural, and/or racial diversityof the student body. Few minority faculty was ranked 4 out of 43 as the biggest problem at John Jay.

Both the Athletic Department and the Student Activities Office host activities and eventswhere faculty-student interaction occurs. The College chorale group and the various drama produc-tions also involve faculty/student participation and cooperation for the entire College community.

For three consecutive springs, starting in 1989, a small group of students occupied John Jaybuildings, protesting CUNY tuition increases. This action was part of a University-wide movementthat included nearly all campuses. In addition, protesters at John Jay identified several local issuesincluding perceived faculty and administration insensitivity to minority concerns. Their rhetoric wasangry and personally insulting. Even so, faculty and staff went to great lengths to redesign hours,find alternative classrooms, and continue to teach. To what degree the protesters represented thestudent body at large will never be known, but relations within the community will take time to heal.

Rules for student behavior are clearly stated in Article 1, Section 14, of the Bylaws of theBoard of Trustees of the City University of New York. These rules are explained in both

1

&L-d= H

and The College Bulletin . The College Retention and Standards committee recom-mended, after study, that course syllabi contain clear rules for student behavior. The matter is beingstudied by the Faculty Senate as well.

The Faculty Senate "Better Teaching Seminars" (discussed elsewhere) have addressed theissue of disruptive behavior in the classroom. Currently, the Undergraduate Academic StandardsCommittee is studying this problem.

Student Evaluation of Faculty

Each year the Provost conducts a student evaluation survey of all teaching faculty. Students inclass answer a variety of questions and rate faculty on a ranking scale. The data gathered give someindication of overall classroom performance and are utilized during the P&B process. Statisticalreadouts of the results are shown to faculty members so that they may view student response to theirteaching, as are written comments.

Town Hall Meetings

As a direct consequence of the student takeovers of College buildings, the College commu-nity has initiated a series of formal "lbwn Hall Meetings" where grievances may be aired by theentire College community. Over time, the Town Meetings have developed to include other issues ofimportance which are not necessarily grievances. The Faculty Senate compiles and distributesminutes of these meetings.

In addition, and as a method of capturing student input for

this Middle States self-study,"open hearings" were held. The format of these hearings consisted of manned tables set up in the

7 0

student cafeteria, during a variety of time segments, both day and evening. The need for someone tobe available in a popular student gathering spot, to hear the immediate concerns of students in aninformal, impromptu manner, was clearly demonstrated. It is suggested that this procedure be for-malized, and include a method of reporting the results to the relevant office.

Recommendations

As seen by the organization of this chapter, there is a need for rationalizing the structuredominating student support services. Academic and advisement services are both physically andhierarchically scattered. As part of the planning process, all student-related services, advisement,placement, clubs, etc. should be reexamined and restructured under the appropriate Dean or VicePresident, so as to better serve the student body.

There is a continuing need to provide services for students who attend John Jay duringevening hours. This came about because the day/night schedule (discussed elsewhere) was imple-mented for classes only, without the parallel student service components. A coordinated effort,among both academic and non-instructional offices, to better serve these students is under way.Either the Coordinator of Student Activities or one of the Deans from the Office of Student Devel-opment maintains office hours from 1:00 PM to 9:00 PM on the days when classes are in session. Inaddition, most offices including Admissions, Registrar, Bursar, Health, Financial Aid, and 'Itstingare open until 7:00 PM on Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

A structure should be developed that will bolster the Office of Student Activities with addi-tional space and staff and will attempt to focus all student services in a central location.

Student involvement in Student Council activities should be encouraged, possibly incorporat-ing the club structure into the governance structure. Additionally, in order to ensure student confi-dence, the student government should create a self-assessment process.

It has been suggested that the Health Office should be staffed with medical professionals todeal with student problems. The arrangement with Roosevelt Hospital Emergency Room is limited toacute cases.

In order to serve students who have been admitted without adequate college math skills, it isimportant that remedial courses and tutoring be coordinated. As a way to accomplish this, all aca-demic student services should be organized under the Provost and assigned to the appropriate Dean.

When students enter John Jay for the first time, they receive all of the information regardingadministrative support and student services in a single session. The amount of information is so greatthat many have suggested that orientation activities should continue throughout the first semester.

A major effort to publicize services must be instituted. There must be more written material,such as flyers and pamphlets, distributed; radio announcements in the cafeteria between programscould advertise on-campus activities. The electronic bulletin boards and a planned Student Develop-ment Day will aid this effort.

Efforts should be made to develop a more harmonious atmosphere, one conducive to learn-ing. The College should do more to inform and socialize students as to expected behaviors. This hasbeen a traditional activity of colleges, accomplished through a variety of opportunities for faculty,administrators, and students to interact in informal settings.

Chapter Eight

THE LIBRARY

The Library is located in the College's new Tenth Avenue building.

The facility occ -)iesapproximately 50,000 square feet on two floors, is attractive and well-furnished, and is extensivelyautomated. The 1992 John Jay student survey revealed that 82.5 % of freshmen, 91.7 % of sopho-mores, 84 % of juniors and 83.5 % of seniors are "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the Library.

The Library's professional staff is currently composed of a chief librarian; four technicalservices librarians; and five full-time and three adjunct librarians in public services. Support staffconsists of eight full-time staff members; twelve part-time college assistants; and college work-studystudents who work for an annual total of 2,300 hours. There are two unfilled faculty positions andone unfilled clerical position.

Librarians at John Jay, as at all CUNY colleges, hold faculty status, rank, and title.

Hence,requirements for appointment, tenure, and promotion are like those for all other faculty members.Furthermore, the John Jay Library is included among the academic departments, and like all academ-ic departments it elects representatives to the Faculty Senate, the College Council, and the CollegeCurriculum Committee. Consequently, the Library's staff participates m discussions of all Collegematters, including academic issues. Library faculty, however, do not elect the department's chair asdo the members of all but two of the College's other academic departments. The Chief Librarian,who is by definition the chair of the Department of the Library, is appointed by the President.

JIM Collection

The Library, consonant with its written acquisition policy, has built an exhaustive collectionin the field of criminal justice in support of the College's mission, and serves as the University'sspecialist in this field. Less exhaustive, but nevertheless comprehensive because of their relevanceto criminal justice, are the collections in fire science, public administration, and forensic science.There is also ample material on the history of criminal justice and social history, generally. Less isallocated for holdings in the other humanities, but a considerable amount is spent on the socialsciences because they are central to research and instruction in criminal justice. The Library reportsthe need for more acquisitions in mathematics, the sciences (as distinct from forensic science), litera-ture and literary criticism, philosophy, art, and music. There is, as well, a need for more journalsand other current materials in the field of computer science.

In recent years the Library has devoted approximately 14% of its acquisitions budget to ethnicand gender-related materials. New materials in this area include scholarly works, fiction, and a di-verse collection of ethnic newspapers. The Library has developed handouts for student researchprojects and presented a Better Teaching Seminar in Spring 1992 to introduce its expanding re-sources for the study of cultural pluralism to the faculty.

An acquisitions policy is, of course, affected by financial constraints, and funds for the purchaseof books have in recent years been reduced by as much as one-third.

Accordingly, the Libraryreports that it is now investigating such alternate sources

for acquisitions as matching funds,endowments, and external grants. Another factor that presents a challenge for the Library is thedesire to meet the research needs of the faculty. At least for now, undergraduate needs come first.

A faculty survey on the library was conducted as part of the self-study process. A total of 47% ofthe faculty rated the general collection as excellent or good in a question about the extent to which itmeets their needs; approximately 32% rated the general collection fair to poor; 17% indicated thatthey do not use the collection; and 4.5 % did not respond. With regard to how well the collection

7 2

meets the needs of students, members of the faculty responded similarly in about the same propor-tions.

Faculty satisfaction with book collections in their own fields was somewhat lower. Approximate-ly 3456 described them as good to excellent; 49% rated them fair to poor; 9 % indicated that theydo not use the collection; and 8 % did not respond to the question.

With reference to the collection in law, an area central to the College's mission, approximately67% of all faculty respondents indicated they did not use this collection, and 8 % did not respond tothe question.

However, 22 % of the respondents rated the law collection as good to excellent, andonly 3 % described it as fair. Members of the Department of Law, Police Science, and Criminal Jus-tice Administration rated the collection in law with regard to how it serves faculty's needs as fol-lows: 50 % viewed it as good to excellent; 13 % rated it fair; 31 % indicated that they do not use it;and 6 % did not respond to the question. `

With reference to how it serves students' needs, faculty rated the law collection somewhat morefavorably: approximately 28% described the collection as good to excellent, and less than 1% ratedit fair to poor. About 60% indicated that they could not rank this collection in terms of studentneeds, and 11 % did not respond to the question.

Library acquisitions, according to some at the College, could be improved by systematicallyconsulting the faculty. The guidelines of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)note, however, that "although the scope and content of the collection is ultimately the responsibilityof the library staff, this responsibility can be best fulfilled by developing clear selection policies incooperation with the teaching faculty." It should be noted, however, that the Library regularly asksthe Faculty through "The Week Of and its own newsletter, to make suggestions for acquisitions.The Acquisitions Librarian reports that very few faculty respond. The Acquisitions Librarian selectsfrom a broad range of criminal justice and social science newsletters and journals, as well as thestandard academic sources.

Along with inviting wide faculty input in acquisitions, perhaps the Library Committee (a statuto-ry committee of the College Council) should be charged with systematically consulting faculty onacquisition policy. A process that would allow the Library to monitor the comprehensiveness of thecollection on a continual basis might also profitably be introduced. This would be consistent withACRL guidelines (1986) which state that "the library collection should be continually evaluatedagainst standard bibliographies and evolving institutional requirements...." Standards of measure-ment may already exist in other libraries and may be replicable in a specialized library such as JohnJay's. Here, too, members of the faculty, designated because of familiarity with the literature intheir respective fields, might also contribute by comparing sample components of the library's hold-ings in a specific area against ideal needs.

Bibliographic Instruction

In addition to their other assignments, four full-time members of the Library staff teachbetween 75 and 100 bibliographic instruction classes each year, for courses in a variety of disciplinesthat range from introductory to graduate-level. Sessions are scheduled by individual members of thefaculty with the Library, and designed around specific assignments rather than geared to generallibrary use. Librarians work with instructors to help them develop research and writing assignmentsthat can introduce students to the research process and the John Jay Library.

In addition, the Library holds mini-workshops that provide students with instruction in theuse of specific library tools, such as the CD ROM indexes and the CUNY online catalogue. TheLibrary also has an extensive collection of self-paced workbooks and a large program of librarypublications to assist in research; these are available to all users.

The Library does not employ a formal or systematic means to measure the effectiveness of itsbibliographic instruction program. Although the librarians believe that the quality of bibliographicinstruction is outstanding and cite the informal feedback they have received from both faculty andstudents, routinely gathered empirical data (such as those provided in exit evaluations) would likelybe more reliable. The faculty satisfaction survey conducted as part of the self-study process revealedthat 30% rated the bibliographic instruction program as good to excellent; less than 1 % rated it aspoor to fair; 54% indicated that they could not respond to the question; and 16% did not respond atall to the question.

Library faculty indicate that the present bibliographic instruction program does not meet one ofthe stated goals of the 1982 Middle States self-study Report in that they are unable to provide "somesort of library instruction to all students." Several factors prevent this goal from being fullyachieved: students are not required to take library instruction; the size of the student body , and thenumber of classes scheduled each term have increased significantly without a corresponding increasein the number of librarians available to offer bibliographic instruction sessions; and not all facultywish to avail themselves of this program.

While the concept of bibliographic instruction classes that are scheduled by individual instructorswith the Library is basically sound, there is concern that many students are never involved in thisprogram. Data from the faculty satisfaction survey indicate that 59 % of the faculty never schedule aLibrary class and that another 16% do so only occasionally. Only about 14% of the faculty "al-ways" or "usually" bring their classes to the library for bibliographic instruction, with another 16%"occasionally" bringing a class to the Library.

Tb address this problem, the College might assist the Library with additional resources to enableit to offer more mini-workshops directly to students. These have the advantages of providing stu-dents with an opportunity to select workshops based on their own perceived needs, and of takingstock of faculty concern about sacrificing class time. Additionally, since attendance is on one's owntime, participants may repeat a workshop when necessary.

Reference Services

Other Services

Reference services provided by the Library, according to the amount of use, Faculty Satisfac-tion Survey data, and informal student and faculty comments, are outstanding. The reference librar-ians are regarded in the College community as extremely helpful, competent, proactive in seekingout students who appear to need help, and uniformly pleasant in demeanor.

In response to the question "How well does the reference desk serve student needs?" approx-imately 70% of the faculty rated its performance as good to excellent; 15% of the faculty indicatedthat they were not in a position to evaluate how well the reference desk serves student needs; 10%of the faculty did not respond to the question; and only 5 % rated the reference desk services as fairto poor. Similarly, faculty rated reference desk services high in terms of their own needs. Approx-imately 72% of the faculty rated the services as good to excellent; 10% rated the services as poor tofair; 14% indicated that they do not use these services; and 4 % did not respond.

In the two-year period between 1988-89 and 1990-91, reference desk transactions during atypical week increased by 116%, while overall library use grew by 37%, as measured by exitcounts.

New resources for the reference service therefore appear advisable in order to maintain thequality of service. Additionally, however, the Library might consider training college assistant staffmembers to perform entry-level reference desk services under supervision by professional staff.

Computerization

The Lloyd George Sealy Library is fully automated. A NOTIS system (named CUNY+)links technical services functions, circulation and the on-line public catalogue for the entire Universi-ty. The catalogue provides access to several periodical indexes as well as the total holdings of theUniversity.

John Jay 's nine CD-ROM titles are linked in a LAN, and available on six work stations.Students and faculty perform their own Westlaw searches on a single dedicated terminal; Dialogsearches are done by the reference librarians on requst.

1. Personnel Management

Given the size of the faculty and staff, the Library has a policy of encouraging each person tobe able to perform multiple functions. The Library study team concluded that written job descrip-tions should be developed for the various positions within the library. This will encourage staffmembers to be better informed as to the scope of their responsibilities and avoid role duplication, aswell as allow for greater accountability.

2. Security

Other j%sues And Recommendations

Although major security problems do not appear to afflict the Library, several steps in addi-tion to ones implemented in recent years are worthy of consideration. Such new steps includewindows sealed to prevent equipment or books from being removed through them; computers andother equipment bolted down; and new procedures to insure that books are returned more expedi-tiously by faculty, staff, and students. A door to separate faculty and staff offices from the openaccess areas of the Library should be installed. All books should be tattle-taped as quickly as possi-ble. A security plan, including written rules and regulations, closing procedures, and inventorycontrol practices should be developed and then implemented, in consultation with the Office ofSecurity and enlisting the expertise of members of the faculty in Security. Finally, John Jay Col-lege's library is atypical in that there is no security presence at the exit to deter theft, a condition thatshould be reevaluated.

3. Formal Short- and Long-Term Goals and Objectives

The Library should consider formal identification in writing of both short-term and long-termgoals. This is especially important in a period of fiscal constraint and will enable the Library facultyto better articulate their accomplishments and to identify and document staff and resource needs.

Chapter Nine

This section of the self-study focuses on those aspects of plant and equipment which havebeen identified by the faculty, students, staff, and administration as affecting the learning and teach-ing environment. The study team also addressed space allocation. The study team gathered informa-tion from the following sources: (1) available published materials, (2) elite interviews with adminis-trators with specific responsibility for plant and equipment, and (3) informal interviews with mem-bers of the faculty, staff, and students with an interest in this topic.

Campus Management

All facilities at John Jay College are under the jurisdiction of the Vice President of Adminis-tration, who provides overall direction for campus planning, telecommunications, and maintenanceof the physical plant. His specific areas of responsibility include the Office of Campus Planning andTelecommunication, the Department of Buildings and Grounds, Technical Services,

InstructionalServices, College Safety and Security, and Human Resources.

Campus Overview

PLANT AND EQUIPMENT

The Celege presently occupies two facilities: North Hall and the T Building. North Hall islocated on the northeast corner of West 59th Street and Tenth Avenue, and the T Building is locatedat 899 Tenth Avenue, on the west side of the street between 58th and 59th Streets.

North Hall is a renovated shoe factory and has served as a College building since 1973.

Mostacademic departments and undergraduate student services are located in North Hall, and 60% of theCollege's classes are held there. In addition, student labs, including science, microcomputer, reading, math, and English, are located there. Finally, the faculty and general cafeteria, the Rathskellar,student government offices, and student club offices are found in this facility. The four-story build-ing occupies 296,000 square feet of floor space.

Sections of two floors in the building, formerly the College library, are awaiting funding formajor renovation. This completed space was originally planned to include expanded student activityspace, additional classrooms, and additional faculty and student club offices..

The T Building, the former Haaren High School, was occupied by the College in 1988, aftertotal renovation.

It features a glass-enclosed library, extensive physical education facilities, classrooms, several academic departments, a state-of-the-art theater, and administrative offices.

TheCriminal Justice Center, Office of Special Programs, and several institutes are housed there.

The new building is a success in many ways. It was completed and occupied in under twoyears and was a ground-breaking public-private partnership. It was the first real estate in the statefinanced with Certificates of Participation in a capital lease, resulting in considerable savings for theUniversity.. Finally, the building was given a prestigious Bard Award by the City Club of New Yorkfor its architectural distinction and enhancement of the urban landscape.

The College has been actively working with the appropriate University official to acquirespace and to erect a building adjacent to its new facility. This new building would house all theactivities presently located in North Hall. The new facility would solve most of North Hall's prob-lems, but unfortunately, the current budget crisis has put this plan on hold.

.

7 6

An vsis

The CUNY fiscal crisis has had a direct impact on the College's ability to maintain, reno-vate, and secure its physical plant. The maintenance and security components are understaffed,presently at 80% of their specified needs. In addition, because of the budget the College can under-take only minimal preventive maintenance. According to the Office of Administrative Affairs, de-spite this shortfall, the College is relatively well maintained, 24-hour security is adequately provided,offices, classrooms, and public areas are cleaned regularly, and each area is painted at least onceevery three years.

The expressed feeling of many of the faculty and students is that the North Hall is not as wellmaintained as the T Building.

Many believe that restrooms and public areas in the North Hall build-ing

are not cleaned often enough given their heavy use. When classes begin in North Hall in themorning, the classrooms, restrooms, and commons areas are clean, but within a few hours, despitethe efforts

of an understaffed maintenance crew, the building seems dirty and untidy, creating aninhospitable learning environment, especially for the evening students. Because of the age and heavyuse of North Hall, the Office of Administrative Affairs should reevaluate the use of its limitedmaintenance personnel. Moreover, the College may want to undertake a campaign to sensitize theentire College community to the issue of individual responsibility for the quality of the Collegeenvironment. A new building would solve many problems. Infrastructure problems would be solved,research facilities would be improved, adjunct faculty could be adequately housed, and new lineswould automatically be created for buildings and grounds.

The Office of Administrative Affairs states that the perception that North Hall is not as wellmaintained as the T Building is inaccurate. That office indicated that both buildings receive equalattention. But some state that this is still insufficient. The cause of the problems may be explainedby the age and heavy use of North Hall. North Hall is in dire need of major renovation, especiallyin the commons areas. However, the continuing budget crisis at CUNY has prevented the Collegefrom making these renovations, despite the submission of numerous proposals. For example, theCollege has been waiting for over three years to receive funds to renovate the former library space inthis building.

Despite hundreds of thousands of dollars in repairs, the ventilation system in North Hallremains inadequate and inefficient. Classrooms and offices are either too hot or too cold, or the air isstagnant. Recently, several members of the Sociology Department have complained about particleladen air emanating from the system into their offices. The College has petitioned CUNY on severaloccasions to replace the entire ventilation system.

The College has sometimes been too slow in the planning and implementation of alterations toits existing structures. One example of this situation is access to the T Building for people with disa-bilities. The College was in compliance with the laws of access at the time the original plans for thebuilding were conceived, but people with disabilities find it difficult to gain access to the building, touse the restrooms, and to enter the Library, especially those who use wheelchairs. Only after theMayor's office was contacted by interested faculty was this matter addressed by the College. Now,four years after the College first occupied the T Building, access for people with disabilities is stillnot adequate.

Another area of concern identified by the study team is the College's allocation of space forstudent services. According to the Vice President for Student Development, the current decentralizeddistribution of important offices often inhibits student access to vital information. He believes

thatthe Office of Admissions, Registrar, and Financial Aid should be relocated to the first floor ofNorth Hall to rectify this situation. Moreover, the College has presently allocated limited space forstudent activities, organizations, and clubs, thus limiting the social and intellectual growth of stu-dents outside of class. This sends a negative message to students, according to the Vice Presidentfor Student Development.

The central role of the Office of Administrative Affairs in the planning and allocation ofresources for the College's plant and equipment has become a central issue for many at the College.No College committee currently analyzes space allocation and utilization, nor are there formalmechanisms for discussing the College's plant and equipment. The College community might beserved better if those who are directly committed to the educational process--faculty, students, andadministrators--become more involved with the decision-making and policy-formulating processes.The perception is that space is allocated by political "clout" and/or individual tenacity. Many facultyand chairs say the College offers little space for personal research, and that this will ultimately affectthe College's ability to recruit new faculty. The largest department in the College expressed indig-nation that it is unable to provide offices for visiting dignitaries and/or professors despite the supportof the administration for such appointments. Large departments indicated that they were unable toprovide adequate office space for adjunct faculty. The Faculty Senate has long requested officespace to no avail.

Professional training has always been and continues to be an important aspect of the Col-lege's mission. The Criminal Justice Center and the Office of Special Programs are contacted con-stantly by federal, state and city justice and safety agencies and organizations to tap the College'sintellectual resources for training and related programs. Despite the importance of these endeavorsto the mission of the College and CUNY, these external programs find it very difficult or impossibleto gain access to classroom space. Several faculty and chairs indicate that the lack of availability ofspace has hurt the College's standing within the criminal justice community. Some faculty havestopped sponsoring outside groups or conferences because they find the space allocation process toocumbersome, thus stifling creativity within the College's community.

Recommendations

1.

Th foster and facilitate communication within the College community, the Office ofAdministrative Affairs should circulate a quarterly newsletter, which would keep the communitymore informed of projects in progress, projects completed, projects being planned, new regulations,and new policies.

2. The comprehensive planning process should specifically include the development of poli-cies concerning space allocation (Chapter 11, "Budgeting, Planning, and Resource Allocation").

3. The College should develop a policy for yearly evaluation of space allocation and usage toensure maximum efficiency and effectiveness.

4. The Office of Administrative Affairs should adopt a computer program for space allocationat the College in coordination with the Registrar. It should generate alternatives if first-choice roomsand times are unavailable.

5. The College should continue to develop long-range plans to place student services in areaswhere they are easily accessible.

tions.6.

The College should continue to plan for additional space for student clubs and organiza-

7.

The College should evaluate space availability after registration and wherever possiblemake rooms available for

external programs related to the College's mission and for ancillarystudent activities.

8. The College should undertake a study of traffic flow and facility use in the North Hall, tomaximize upkeep and review staff deployment.

7 8

9. The College should develop a comprehensive, formalized mechanism to facilitate confer-ence management.

10. The College, with support from the faculty and student government, should develop andimplement a campaign to promote a cleaner college environment.

11. Within the constraints of the College's present size, the entire community should supportthe effort to implement Phase II of the Master Plan, which will move all North Hall facilities intonew quarters.

12. When Administrative Affairs assigns meeting rooms, it should also determine furnitureand equipment needs and supply them.

Chapter Ten

PUBLICATIONS

The image that John Jay College projects through its publications and other promotionalmaterials is generally positive. The various materials emphasize, as indeed they should, the profes-sionalism of the College in performing its special mission. In particular, the television program, thespecial-interest journals, the library publications, and the departmental flyers convey the strongimpression--appropriately so--of an institution whose concern for criminal justice and related fields ismatched by its expertise in these areas. The Publications study team submitted a 30-page report, toodetailed for inclusion in a self-study. The recommendations were forwarded to the relevant officesand some have already been adopted. (See Appendix G for a description of the College's publica-tions.)

The Undersraduate Bulletin The Bulletin is handsomely designed and produced, conveying asophisticated image of the College and providing a variety of useful information in compact format.All majors and special programs receive substantial descriptive coverage that includes tables ofrequired and optional courses as well as notes concerning special requirements or restrictions.Grouped by department, individual courses are briefly described, and in addition to the separate listsof faculty found in this section, there appears immediately before the index, a full listing, withacademic degrees, of all full-time faculty and staff. The conspicuous omission of part-time faculty,while understandable given their often temporary status on campus, is possibly misleading since somany courses are taught by adjuncts. Students have the right to examine the academic backgroundsof any instructor at the College, and this oversight thwarts that legitimate concern.

The section of the Bulletin which would most benefit from revision is the General Require-ments for the Baccalaureate Degree. Accompanied by twelve fine-print footnotes, the table thatoutlines the general education requirements provides a relatively ambiguous picture of what a studentshould accomplish at the start of a degree. It is notoriously difficult, even for faculty who are advis-ing students, to correctly interpret the various options implied in the listing. Unlike the sectiondescribing the majors, with its Chinese-menu-style listing of the choices available, the GeneralRequirements table requires sifting through variously numbered, but untitled course listings, oddlyranged credit totals (such as 0-6), and footnotes that refer the reader to other sections of the Bulletinrather than providing a succinct summary of the necessary information. Perhaps the single mostuseful change would be to eliminate the footnotes entirely and in their stead to develop appropriatelyinformative introductory and concluding sections providing the proper context for interpreting thebasic and therefore simple table. The Associate Degree table would benefit from a similar redesign.

The Course Offerings section presents an impressive listing of the many courses offered bythe college, and to the credit of the Bulletin's compilers, the course desc-optons are clear, to thepoint, and fairly uniform in their coverage of course content and purpose. However, each department lists all- the courses it has been authorized to conduct, even ones that have not been offered fora number of years. (see analysis in Chapter 5, "Programs and Curricula.)

The Graduate Bulletin The Graduate Bulletin shares many of the strengths of the Under-graduate Bulletin, providing a useful guide for the graduate student. Like its undergraduate counter-part, it contains photographs that offer a carefully balanced mix of the ethnic, racial, sex, and

agecomponents of the student population. Yet the graduate photographs also depict too many scenes thathave only a peripheral connection with traditional academic activities. The section on AcademicStandards, including the table outlining grades, is more straightforward than that of the UnsierQradu-S Bulletin while the Degree Requirements section eschews a confusing table of requirements infavor of a more easily interpreted Chinese-menu-style outline of the various requirements and op-tions for each degree. The Financial Aid section is also considerably clearer.

8 0

Other sections, however, reflect the same problems as the corresponding sections of theUndergraduate Bulletin. The Course Offerings section appears impressive, but once again, there isno way to ascertain how frequently courses are actually mounted. The index is no better than the onein the Undergraduate Bulletin. Finally, the listing of faculty makes no distinction between under-graduate and graduate faculty, Since the probably inadvertent impression that the graduate faculty isfar larger than it actually is. Since there is no breakdown of faculties by either department or degreeprogram, there is no way for students to easily ascertain with whom they will be studying.

Directory 9f

lasses As a straightforward listing of courses, instructors, and times, theit

is quite usable. However, a number of small changes which would enhance its practicalityand ease of use have been recommended to the Admissions Office. Some have already been adopted.

Official college newspaper/house organ Most conspicuous by its absence from the Col-lege's roster of publications is an official college newspaper or house organ. At present, variousnews-carrying publications, such as Lft LU News. IQ1 jgy Student News. Ik M&9k QL and theLib= Newsl

gr- (there may be others), are produced and distributed by diverse departmentsand/or offices of the College. Each publication reflects the interests of the group that produced it,and most come out on an irregularly scheduled basis. In light of the current budget crunch, and ofthe College's need for an official, regular, reliable, and effective means of communicating with allof its elements (i.e., students, faculty, staff, and administrative officers) at one time, the Collegeshould consider consolidating the aforementioned publications into one weekly, or biweekly houseorgan designed for the entire College community.

Publications Office Three alternatives have emerged from the discussion:

(1) The College should consider appointing a faculty member with proven editorial skills toserve as coordinator of College publications. The appointment should carry three hours of releasedtime per semester and should be renewable each year by mutual consent of the appointee and theCollege.

The coordinator would assemble a small staff of student interns with stalls in editorialwork and layout design, to be drawn from students in John Jay's desktop publishing course and fromtutors in John Jay's Writing Center, as well as from relevant departments at other colleges. Theseinterns would earn college credit for their services. The coordinator and interns would be availableto offer assistance with proofreading, editing, copyrighting, and document design to any departmentor unit of the College wishing to produce publications for both internal and external consumption.All units would be encouraged to use the help of the coordinator and his/her staff, but participationwould probably have to be optional in order to prevent a dangerous concentration of authority and topreserve freedom of expression.

(2)

An alternative suggestion is for the College to form a Faculty Committee on Publica-tions which would meet several times a year to review and evaluate all new publications for style,language, and timeliness and would report their findings and recommendations both to the individualoffices or units that had produced the publications and to an appropriate administrative office (to bedesignated by the College).

(3) An Office of Publications could be structured to take advantage of the strengths of the twoprevious suggestions. The College could centralize all publications and publication budgets within anOffice of Publications, in order to avoid duplication and overlap, enjoy efficiency of scale, andguarantee a consistent style. Individual departments wishing to publish College documents wouldwork with a Director. A faculty committee would review the office's work several times a year.

The John Jay Press It is recommended that the John Jay Press be reactivated.

The Presswas founded in 1976 to publish books of interest to criminal justice academicians and practitioners.In all, twenty-five books were published. After undergoing a series of directorial changes, the Pressceased publishing, and at the present time merely fills orders for existing copies (a function as-signed to Law Enforcement News .

Given adequate resources, the John Jay Press could be a

prestigious asset to the College. Because of its focus on criminal justice and related fields, the Presscould capitalize on the lack of a specialized university press in this area. In addition, with publicsafety currently a prime concern of the public, the government, and the business community, thePress could be a significant resource for public officials who make and implement social policy.

Tofunction effectively as a university press, the John Jay Press would need a director, an administrativeassistant, an editorial board composed of faculty and outside criminal justice experts, and enoughcash resources to provide for manuscript reviews, copy editing, production, promotion, and distribu-tion.

Handbooks Conspicuously absent from the College's roster of publications over the last fiveyears have been a student handbook and a faculty handbook. An updated student handbook wasfinally published in fall 1991. Based largely on the 1986 version, which was a model of clarity andconciseness, the new book is in the same mode. It is questionable, however, given the lack of anofficial College newspaper, whether students other than freshmen are aware of the handbook's exist-ence or have received copies of it. The faculty handbook, which was last produced by a handful ofpersonnel, with no input from the faculty at large, is now being revised by the Provost and will bedistributed in January 1993. It is recommended that handbooks for both students and faculty be a toppriority of the College's publications, that they be available at all times to students and faculty, andthat they be updated at least every two years. A centralized office of Publications could oversee this.

Another handbook is the Guide IQ Academic Advising. whose purpose is to assist faculty andstaff in helping students make appropriate course selections. Recommendations are to (1) update the1989 edition; (2) emend names and numbers of personnel listed in the directory; (3) expand theindex.

Newspapers and newsletters LEX

i w the student newspaper, comes out on an irregularbasis and has a skeletal staff, which must struggle with production as well as writing and editing.Because of its irregular publication schedule, it cannot be relied on by students, faculty, or theadministration as a vehicle for timely announcements of upcoming events, or as a strong communica-tions arm of the College. The study team recommended that the newspaper be published on asemimonthly or at least monthly basis and that it be supported more actively by the College. Severalforms of support were suggested. The editor might be given an opportunity to attend a professionaljournalism workshop or seminar. In addition, he or she might be given academic credit for servingon the paper through the College internship program. The editor should be given two assistants, whomight also receive a lesser amount of academic credit for their work. The staff should receiveextensive training in desktop publishing. Finally, a faculty member with journalism expertise shouldbe given three hours of release time to serve as an advisor to the paper.

Readership of LEX could be increased if the distribution mechanism were strengthened.

Atpresent, the paper is available on a rack in the lobby of each of the College's two buildings. It isrecommended that on the day the paper is published, a table be set up in each building and everystudent be handed a copy as he/she enters the College. Faculty, staff, and administration shouldreceive individual copies in their mailboxes.

A stronger student newspaper would obviate the need for such monthly newsletters as Jbhn JayStudent News and John W News, thereby eliminating duplication of publication effort. The Wee„Of, a weekly update of news for and about faculty, staff, and administration, serves its purposeadequately. The publication could, however, use a new cover and layout design and a page of featurematerial by faculty members.

Classified Information, a newsletter published irregularly by the library, and Networker, a quar-terly newsletter of John Jay's Alumni Association, are exemplary publications from all points ofview. They boast attractive layouts and interesting and well-written content, and they are reflectiveof the college's mission and of its ethnic and cultural diversity. They might well be used as modelsby some of the College's other news-oriented publications.

egg ft= lk " House, the monthly newsletter of the Department of Physical Education andAthletics, features lively news stories but is difficult to read because it contains too many differenttype styles. It is suggested that the editor reduce the number of typefaces and sizes.

Library Publications The Library's many publications (some twenty-one were examined,but there are countless others) are among the most effective in the College.

Attractively designedand well-written, they attempt to meet the diverse needs of the Library's users.

It was found,however, that some of the publications need updating, and it is suggested that the ones dealing withsubjects relevant to the College's areas of specialization be evaluated by the Library once a year forpossible revision. It would also be helpful to users if the Library published a map showing thegeneral locations of library materials.

Publications for Special Interest Groups Outside the College Speaking directly to themission of the College, John Jay publishes two ongoing periodicals whose aim is the professionaliza-tion of the criminal justice community. I" Enforcement News, published 22 times annually, is atabloid-size newspaper for law enforcement officials. Its objective is to raise important issues andprovoke thought among professionals in the law enforcement community. The paper's readers arefound in all 50 states and 13 foreign countries. Criminal Justice Ethics is a scholarly journal foracademics and professionals and is published semiannually. It is designed to focus attention on ethi-cal issues that arise in the criminal justice system. Subscribers are world-wide and include libraries,criminal justice institutions, lawyers, judges, and philosophers. Both publications are supported bysubscriptions.

Law Enforcement News and Criminal Justice Ethics are produced in-house by college staffbut are circulated by subscription to extramural, special-interest audiences composed mainly ofprofessionals in the field. La

Enforcement Mews offers students half-price subscriptions through aseries of announcements strategically placed throughout the College. Criminal

S'g

Ethics nightdo the same, and might also explore the possibility of offering individual instructors offprints orphotocopies (to be paid for by the students) of articles from the publication relevant to their coursesfor use as teaching tools. Copies of current issues of both publications should be prominently dis-played in the Library. And should the College develop its own house organ, bgb publicationsshould use it to advertise their availability and their contents.

Chapter Eleven

BUDGE'T'ING, PLANNING, AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION

Budge_

The tables below illustrate, for the current five-year period, how funds under the directcontrol of the College have been applied in various categories, and from which sources these fundscame to the College. The tables do not include certain overhead costs (e.g., fringe benefits; heat,light, and power), which are paid from funds administered solely by CUNY headquarters and overwhich the College exercises absolutely no control.

Thus,

Table 9, "Uses of Funds," shows how the College has chosen to deploy the fundsunder its direct control (and how it proposes to deploy them during the current year):

In Table 10, "Sources of Funds," the overwhelming majority of the funds denoted "NYState/City" come from the State. Also, the category "Grants and Contracts" shows only residualoverhead amounts (i.e., the difference between the revenue provided by an award and the directexpenses associated with carrying out the award). These residual amounts are applied by the Collegeto meet direct operating expenses.

Table 9

USES OF FUNDS($ 1 000s)

Source: Office of Financial Affairs and Planning

*Instruction:

an part-time teaching faculty plus those units which report to the Vice Presidentfor Academic Affairs and provide direct academic support services (e.g., tutors; microcomputerlaboratories; special remedial programs; etc.), but not including the Library.Research:

the salaries of individuals devoted solely to performing academic research and of indi-viduals assisting faculty members to obtain research grants; does not include the value of researchgrants won by College faculty.Library: includes the College's library and Office of Instructional (Media) Services,Student Services:

the Offices of Student Development, Registrar and Admissions, and Bursar.Administration:

the Offices of the President, Administrative Affairs, External Affairs, Planningand Development, and Financial Affairs.

' 88-'89 ' 89-'90 ' 90-'91 ' 91-'92 ' 92-'93(est.)Instruction 16151.1 17310.8 17207.8 16987.6 16184.8

Research 367.2 403.4 444.3 446.2 417.2

Library 1387.2 1424.1 1380.3 1312.2 1272.2

Student Services 2631.1 2743.1 2822.7 2618.6 2585.9

Administration 8172.8 9073.4 7511.9 7984.5 7607.3

Total 28709.4 30954.8 29367 29349.1 28067.4

Table 10

SOURCES OF FUNDS($'0008)

Source: Office of Financial Affairs and Planning

Table 11

ENROLLMENT

' 88-'89 '89-'90 '90-'91 '91-'92 '92-'93(est.)

Full Time

4963

5403

5798

5984

5984EquivalentStudents*

* Defined as the total number of credits divided by 15.

Source: Office of Financial Affairs and Planning

The impact of New York State's fiscal difficulties and policies upon the College's operatingbudget is clear: State contribution is rapidly decreasing; student contribution (tuition) is rapidly in-creasing. The result is an absolute decrease of 1.2% in operating budget dollars over the five-yearperiod of 1988-89 to 1992-93. The real impact of such a decrease is much greater, of course, be-cause of the cost of living escalator clauses in the College's labor agreements and the effect of infla-tion upon the cost of goods and services. A conservative estimate of the College's real decrease inthe purchasing power of its operating budget over the past five years would be 15 %. This 15 %decrease in resources, in contrast to a 20% increase in enrollment over the same period, brings intosharp focus the College's current financial situation.

Despite the severe cutbacks, the College has managed to provide more sections while keepingdown class size. In addition, student services have expanded during this period. This could beaccomplished only through a variety of stopgap measures, which, if continued in the long-term, willseriously caompromise the College's ability to

fill its mission. These include deferred maintenanceof the p ysical plant, reduced full time faculty and admuustration through retirement incentives, anda freeze on salaries. The reduction of full-time faculty alone has implications for research, advise-ment, and teaching. For example, the Criminal Justice 101 course once taught by the most setiorfaculty is now taught largely by adjuncts.

! 89-'90 ' 90-'91 ' 91-'92 ' 92-'93(est.)

NY State/City 22861.1 23850.3 21465.7 19723.7 16034.5

Tuition 5713.1 6938.1 7757.3 9473.9 11832.7

Grants and 135.2 166.4 144 151.5 200.0Contracts

Total 28709.4 30954.8 29367 29349.1 28067.2

Tax Levy and Tuition

Spending of tax levy and tuition is governed by state law and Board policies. New York Staterequires that all tuition be deposited into a separate account. The state provides CUNY with a budgetbroken down into a base for each college and a lump sum for the University as a whole. The baseamounts cover the cost of full-time personnel and approximately half of the monies spent in theprevious year for College Assistants and the purchase of goods and services (OTPS). The lump sumcovers all Adjunct funds and the remainder of the College Assistant/OTPS costs.

In recent years, the state has made all major changes to the University's budget in the lumpsum categories. Thus, the budget process at the state level no longer makes appropriations directly toindividual colleges. As a result, CUNY has total control over the distribution of discretionary funds.

During the fiscal year, the Vice Presidents and Deans who report to the President receivemonthly reports on College Assistant expenditures versus their allocations. At irregular intervals,they receive reports on OTPS spending versus allocations. All expenditures are accounted for undersystems operated by the College, the University, and the state. All expenditures are subject to anindependent CPA firm audit, which reports the results to the state.

Other Funding Sources

For training programs, individual managers set their budgets and conduct financial activitiesunder procedures administered by the Business Office. The President decides the budget for majorprograms. In June 1990, the P&B voted that half of overhead funds generated by training programswould be made available to the Provost for support of the academic programs of the College. Theremaining half of overhead funds would continue under the President's discretionary authority.

Since 1988, indirect overhead and salary recovery funds generated by research grants havebeen divided into one-third shares, which are under the discretionary control of the President, theProvost, and the department generating the grant.

The Auxiliary Corporation has a Board of Directors (the President, five students, three facul-ty, and two administrators), which makes annual allocations in several broad categories (e.g.,campus-based events, community services, amenities, student recruitment, and registration). ThePresident and the Business Manager are authorized to approve individual expenditures within thesecategories.

For all non-tax-levy sources, the President and Business Manager are accountable for ensur-ing that funds are expended for official purposes only and that proper accounting for all funds takesplace. As with tax levy funds, an independent CPA firm audits annually and issues a report to theState.

1

nin And Resource AII,Qcation

As a result of the self-study, the College has identified decentralized planning as an , impedi-ment to success. When the issue was brought to the President's attention in an interim report by theCoordinating Committee, he directed that a comprehensive process be designed and put into place bythe Office of Planning and Development during the 1992-93 academic year, and that it be reviewedby the College community on an annual basis after its initial two years of operation.

Additionally, the President has directed that the planning process be reasonable and rational,with achievable goals, so that it does not raise unrealistic expectations within the College commu-nity. The President concurs with the members of the study team that the process must be tailored tofit John Jay College, and it must be efficient so as not to waste the time of

those involved. It

96

should use the energy and creativity of the college community to move the mission

forward,

notsimply to plan for planning's sake. An integral part of the process must therefore be a calendarwith deadlines and a mechanism for reporting and accountability.

The ongoing fiscal crisis in New York State has dictated to a large extent the nature of plan-ning at the College. Over the past three years the College has had to make deep cuts in its budget(see Table 10). Unfortunately, this budgetary situation forces the College into a crisis-managementmode that will .very likely continue for the next several years. While some would argue that compre-hensive planning is not particularly relevant during this crisis, others would argue that a long-rangeplan can be an effective tool in managing a fiscal crisis.

While programs will vary based on the goals and objectives of the College, the planningprocess--at least one that works--should be a structured series of steps that can provide some degreeof certainty in this uncertain climate. The process should be consultative, setting goals in light of themission of the College, identifying the current state of affairs, and identifying and analyzing alterna-tive solutions to reach these goals. A strong mission statement (see Chapter 1, "Mission and Goals")must therefore be the cornerstone of any planning process.

History

The College established a formal planning process in 1986, assigning the Office of Planningand Development to coordinate planning. It also reorganized the Business Office under a Director ofFiscal Affairs and Planning. Those offices collaborated in the budget planning process in order tolink funding allocations with College-wide goals and objectives.

In 1987, those offices, in consultation with the Personnel and Budget Committee of theCollege Council, initiated a new process for preparing the annual budget. The process closely con-nected the budget and planning functions so that budget requests and allocations were directly relatedto the College's stated goals and objectives.

The experiment lasted for two years, and was discontinued for three reasons: (1) The processwas geared to new initiatives and programmatic expansion and did not adequately take into consider-ation steady-state situations and contraction. When funding levels for the College were diminished,the process no longer worked. (2) The process was overly cumbersome. (3) The process was per-ceived as being nonconsultative in the final, decision-making, stages. Although it was designed toencompass departmental input, Vice Presidents could act unilaterally in their recommendations tothe President.

The Current System

The College's decentralized planning process includes the following groups:

The Curriculum Committee was mentioned by many as an example of how planning activi-ties can work well in a complex academic setting. Reviewing and developing majors and revising thecore curriculum are functions the Curriculum Committee accomplishes admirably. Yet, as the Deanof Undergraduate studies has pointed out in his capacity as chair, its decisions are not integrated intoan overall plan. The same could be said about other efective but localized planning efforts, such asthe Council of Chairs.

The departmental chairs, the primary hands-on administrators, contribute to planningmostly through their role in scheduling. The Council of Chairs, as an entity, makes decision but isnot integrated into the overall college planning process. If its role were better coordinated with theother planners, the chairs' efforts would have a greater impact on the College.

Yet another example of formal planning is seen within the Office of the Dean of Admissionsand Registration. He has two formal yearly plans: The Admissions and Recruitment Goals for theAcademic Year and Functions and Responsibilities of the Registrar's Office. Both of these docu-ments provide short-term goals and objectives and provide direction for the office. These proc-esses could be improved by input from the College Council's Committee on Undergraduate Admis-sions, which meets infrequently.

Another entity within the College which has an impact on planning and budgeting is theBudget Planning Committee. The committee was established in February 1986 as a subcommitteeof the College Personnel and Budget (P&B) Committee. One of its mandates is to provide facultyinput into the budget process. During the last round of budget negotiations, the committee met withsenior administrators, including the Provost and the Business Manager. The Budget PlanningCommittee has made some progress toward enhanced faculty input, but some of its characteristicslimit its usefulness as a planning agent: (1) The committee focuses primarily on the current academicyear. (2) While the committee provides the important faculty perspective, it is necessarily limited. Inorder to get an overall view, all perspectives must be taken into account. (3) Some faculty not direct-ly involved do not understand why and how resource allocation decisions are made.

On the other hand, the Budget Planning Committee has accomplished an enormous amountsince it was established, stepping in to help the College during crisis. One year, it made helpfulrecommendations to the administration about how to cut $1 million from the budget, a task thatseemed impossible. On another occasion, it devised a plan to cut an additional $1.3 million, whichthe President adopted in part.

The President has established an Advisory Group at the College which is also involved inplanning. The group includes the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost, the Vice Presi-dent for Administrative Affairs, the Vice President for Student Development, the Dean of Admis-sions and Registration, the Director of External Affairs, the Dean of Planning and Development, theDirector of Financial Affairs and Planning, and the Special Assistant to the President. In the springof 1992, the Advisory Group was expanded by the addition of the Dean of UndergraduateStudies and the Dean of Graduate Studies.

The Advisory Group functions as one of the decentralized planning bodies. It advises thePresident throughout the lengthy process of working with the University to develop an annual budg-et. It also creates appropriate strategies for realizing that budget. At the final stages, i.e., when theGovernor and the Legislature respond to the request, the Advisory Group, taking into account therecommendation of the Budget Planning Subcommittee of the Budget Committee, prepares a finalbudget statement for the President. The difficulty this year, and the last several years, is taking intoconsideration both fiscal contraction and University-mandated constant enrollment.

The Group's other planning recommendations are managerial and administrative in nature,based upon the needs of the College. For example, the College has committed itself to an on-lineregistration that requires the -Computer Center to adopt the Student Information System (SIMS).When it became apparent that the targeted date would not be realized because of a series of misseddeadlines, the Advisory Group undertook an overall review of the Computer Center. This resulted inpersonnel changes and restructuring on the supervisory level. These decisions crossed departmentallines, requiring the oversight and decision-making capability of this body.

Student participation is another critical issue. Inviting and encouraging student input isessential to comprehensive planning and resource allocation. While there was student representationon the Budgeting, Planning and Resource Allocation study team, only the first two meetings wereattended by any student, in spite of numerous invitations. This is unfortunate, since the StudentCouncil indicates that, "the College's planning process would improve if there were more studentparticipation."

88

Other entities which do planning at the College are the Provost, the Office of Planning andDevelopment, and the Office of Financial Affairs and Planning.

The Provost allocates personnel lines and determines the budgets of the academic depart-ments, in consultation with the chairs.

The Director of Financial Affairs and Planning oversees all financial planning at theCollege. Because of his fiscal responsibility, he is closely involved in all planning.

The Office of Planning and Development comprises several functions: planning; program-matic development; fundraising; and substance abuse prevention and education. The Dean is thekey advisor to the President on planning activities, particularly new programmatic initiatives at theCollege. As a result of the initial self-study findings, the President has directed that a comprehen-sive, College-wide planning process be developed through this office. The Dean has indicated thatconsultation will take place during the design phase, and provision will be made for input from allCollege constituencies. This new effort at creating a coordinated planning process will be reviewedtwo years after it is operational.

The Dean is also liaison to the Commission on Higher Education and therefore oversees insti-tutional assessment, relying on the Office of Institutional Research for data. This self-study is thenatural precursor of a comprehensive planning process.

Analysis and Recommendations

Through its interview process, the study team collected opinions from both administrationand faculty. In virtually all quarters there is a consensus that planning is too decentralized and lackscoordination. Furthermore, the process for analyzing line and space needs in view of the currentadmissions policy and the overall mission of the College is unclear.

The lack of access and input and participation by faculty in the planning and resource alloca-tion process was raised repeatedly in the interviews conducted with representatives of the FacultySenate and the Council of Chairs.

Instructional staff were only sporadically involved in the resource allocation process prior to1986. With the advent of the Budget Planning Committee, involvement has increased, but moreneeds to be done to bring the instructional staff into the early stages of planning and budgeting sothat their role can be more proactive than reactive. A logical way of getting them involved in thebudget process is to have them become more involved in comprehensive long- and short-term plan-ning at the College. Ideally, the mission should shape planning, which in turn shapes the goals andobjectives which drive budgeting and resource allocation. Reserving instructional staff input untilbudget formulation occurs is far less productive than having faculty advance the mission and helpestablish plans, goals, and objectives. Such a broad undertaking requires specific consultative andreporting systems and broad commitment at every level of the College.

Interviews with the Provost and Dean of Admissions and Registration reflect a somewhatmore positive view of planning and resource allocation, because, within the confines of their respon-sibilities, they engage in planning to some extent. For example, the Provost allocates lines accordingto need, based upon a formula agreed upon by the chairs and the Provost.

The Budgeting, Planning and Resource Allocation study team addressed several possiblemethods of redesigning the current planning, budgeting, and resource allocation processes at theCollege. Each has strengths and weaknesses.

(1) A new committee at the College could be formed. It would have broad representation andwould meet on a scheduled basis to share ideas and recommendations for improving the College.Proposals would be made at committee meetings and a formal mechanism for presidential follow-upwould be arranged. The committee, appointed by the President, would have broad-based member-ship, including the President or his designee as chair, faculty, non-teaching instructional staff, andstudents.

(2) A formal process could be implemented where units within the College are asked forbudget impacts, resource needs, and operational objectives. This information then becomes the basisfor policy decisions and priority resource allocations, which are then communicated back to theunits. Finally, there would be an appeal, or discussion process, which leads to finalization of thebudget and resource allocation. This process would be coordinated by the Office of Planning andDevelopment.

(3) Staff members of the administration can be employed in yet another planning process,which could pro&ce relative consensus and two-way communication. Staff would circulate andgather facts, impressions, and information about College functions and needs. This informationwould then become the basis for resource allocation. Staff would then feed information back to keyCollege personnel for dissemination.

The new planning process will not erode the primary responsibilities of any individuals orconstituencies at the College. For example, it will have to be coordinated with the Budget PlanningCommittee and the Business Office. The objectives of the process would be equitable distribution ofresources to support the priorities of the College as developed by the entire College community andfinally determined by the President.

In order for planning to be successful at John Jay, the institutional culture must change.

Away of accomplishing this would be to invite experts in institutional planning to meet with individualconstituencies and the College community in general. Another good way to enhance a new planningsystem would be to have a retreat. Representatives from the College (a large number--this is not anexecutive conference) spend some time away from the College at a planning session. Priorities areset, resource allocations are explored, and each person leaves the session with an understanding ofhow the College will spend its money and why. This is also the kind of session at which tough ques-tions can be posed and must be answered. This would be a transition from the current decentralizedprocess to a more comprehensive centralized one.

A different kind of planning is the scheduling of all of the many College activities to maxi-mize publicity and attendance. Nowhere is there a long-term summary of activities, so events areinadvertently scheduled simultaneously, thus creating conflicts. The College should develop acomputerized Master Calendar, including scheduling of required activities such as College P&Bmeetings, as well as special events like lectures and cultural activities. Because so many of the activi-ties are noteworthy, the Office of External Affairs, working closely with the Office of Planning andDevelopment, should compile the calendar. Then that office will have all of the information andnecessary lead time to implement public relations activities.

Chapter Twelve

DIVERSITY, PLURALISM AND INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY

The College's diversity is a matter of easily observable fact. John Jay is a heterogeneoussociety of males and females who are a mix of ethnic groups, races, ages, and lifestyles. It includesworking people, students just out of high school, elderly people, single parents, and people withdisabilities.

The College is one of 80 nationwide that is truly ethnically diverse-no one group con-stitutes a majority. This is a strength of the College, because its mission can only be accomplishedwith many points of view making contributions, but it is also a challenge.

The challenge the College faces is to serve these different populations fairly and ensure thatall voices are heard. John Jay attempts to meet that ongoing challenge using several different ap-proaches: through the curriculum, through its hiring and human resource practices, through itsstudent services, and through its outreach and training services.

A Committee on Cultural Pluralism and Diversity, with representatives from faculty, admin-istration, and students, has been an active part of College life. According to the Charter, the com-mittee's mandate is to "organize and promote programs that recognize the contributions of the di-verse peoples who together comprise our academic community [and] address problems of prejudice,insensitivity and bigotry at the College." As evidence of the Committee's usefulness and impor-tance, the College Council recently voted to give it permanent committee status.

The College has made great advances in its curriculum.

The "Programs and Curricula"chapter outlines the multicultural approach the Curriculum Committee has taken in building the corerequirements.

Students must take at least one course in Ethnic Studi°s: "Race and American Socie-ty: The African-American Experience," "Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics in American Society,"or "Race and Ethnicity in America." The catalogue is by no means limited to these courses in itsmulticulturalism, for the study of race, gender, and ethnicity has also amply been incorporated intoseveral of the majors.

The SEEK program, which is composed primarily of minority students, provides specializedclasses and counseling. The Library acquisition policy pays particular attention to questions of diver-sity and pluralism. In recent years about 14 % of its book budget has been expended in these areas,and major efforts have been made to have the newspaper collection reflect ethnic diversity. TheCollege houses an ESL Resource Center, headed by a new director.

As an employer, the College has clearly outlined affirmative action goals as discussed in the"Faculty" chapter, but it also sees hiring practices as a way to help students succeed by showingthem academic success stories. For example, of the 14 top Presidential appointees, 9 are minoritiesor women.

Many student services, described elsewhere in the report, are tailored to the special needs ofcertain groups. Specific resources include the day care center, without which many students, espe-cially women, would not be able to attend; the reading, writing, and math resource centers, whichprovide tutoring and other academic services; counseling and advisement; the Disabled StudentsOffice, which has served as an advocate and a resource; and the 35 clubs, which are professionaland social.

The College is committed to encouraging diversity beyond its walls, too. Through the fol-lowing programs, the College is helping to shape the institutions we serve:

The Police Cadet Corps, coordinated by John Jar, recruits minorities and women into thepolice service from the CUNY community colleges. This goal was also recently identified as the

9 1

New York Police Commissioner's top priority. The Cadets receive training that emphasizes serviceand public safety, and sensitivity to different cultures. Outreach and support is given to those whohave no mentors during the sometimes confusing and intimidating process of becoming a policeofficer.

John Jay also provides training for the Health and Hospital Corporation for its security force.The overwhelming majority of the participants are minorities. All of the security officers must passbasic Peace Officer training, which emphasizes the need for sensitivity and understanding in thehandling of potentially troublesome situations.

In two other programs, John Jay has been reaching out to the community to promote itsvision of diversity and equal opportunity: First, John Jay is an active participant in CUNY's Work-ers Education Initiative. Unions fund classes for workers and retirees in language and math literacy,computer skills, and interpersonal and managerial skills.

The student body is overwhelminglycomposed of members of minority groups, mostly women. Second is the Parent Leadership Pro-gram, which provides parents in eight New York City school districts with training in how to facili-tate greater levels of parental involvement in their schools and communities in order to address theissue of substance abuse and school-based management.

' min

Justice Ethics is a highly regarded academic journal edited and published by theCollege.

Covering the latest research in the area of ethics, it reflects the College's commitment tobringing the highest standards of ethics to criminal justice practices.

All of these programs are staffed by John Jay personnel. By reaching out to practitioners,community members, and fellow academics, the College demonstrates its zeal and creativity inspreading its vision.

Perhaps the College's most demonstrable evidence of integrity is the self-study process itself.Many at the College have welcomed the opportunity to express long-held views about the directionof the College. All members of the community were given the opportunity to present theiropinions--no positions were suppressed or discouraged. Ultimately this is a matter of academicfreedom. With the widely varying backgrounds and points of view at the College this freedom mustbe aggressively defended.

At John Jay, that freedom is alive and well, and the importance of preserving it is a deeplyheld conviction.

Because of the College's special mission, the most controversial topics are dis-cussed on campus:

the death penalty, sexual harassment, police brutality, to name a few.

Andopinions fall throughout the political spectrum--everything from the radical right to the radical left.No group has used its power over the personnel process to create a one-sided or monolithic body.

In an interview with the Coordinating Committee, the President noted that he, too, is permit-ted academic freedom. His views are not necessarily shared by everyone at the College -- he men-tioned his opposition to the death penalty -- yet his right to hold those views and express them is notquestioned.

He has said repeatedly that this freedom should not be taken for granted.

Outsidersoften approach him about faculty who take unpopular or controversial stands, but his only responseis that academic freedom is sacrosanct and that he has no intention of suppressing or trying to influ-ence faculty opinions. The Faculty Senate also praised the President for fostering an atmosphere ofacademic freedom.

When students and outsiders held a series of protests in 1990, they named six specific admin-istrators whom they wanted to see removed from the College. As part of the College's unyieldingcommitment to due process, and reinforced by a petition signed by many faculty members and givento the Board of Trustees, these demands were not met. Having survived such a test because of deci-sive action on the part of the Faculty Senate and the Council of Chairs and the President, the College

9 2

is justifiably proud of its adherence to the principles of fair and just treatment for all members of theCollege community.

Analysis aad Recommendations

When the first draft of the self-study was completed, the chairs of the study teams met todiscuss their findings and share points of view on the College's institutional integrity.

While wehave much to be proud of, some need for improvement emerged from the discussion.

The generalconsensus was that the College probably moves too slowly in its responses to the changing needs ofstudents.

The tradition of peer review of personnel and curriculum matters precludes rapid deci-sions, but John Jay needs to overcome its resistance to change.

Specific areas include scheduling of classes. The College must provide enough of the rightlevel of classes so that students are not forced to take courses that are beyond their skill level oroutside their area of interest. And, while we have a new ESL coordinator, the College is laggingbehind the needs of its students in this effort. So many of our students are not native English speak-ers that ESL has become an essential ingredient to student success. The College must expand itsdefinition of access beyond merely letting students into the school. We must also be prepared toprovide, within reason, what they need to succeed. The College, perhaps, should be more student-driven.

Another area identified was the need to replace the world-renowned experts in the field ofcriminal justice who have retired from the faculty. The College cannot honestly describe itself asbeing on the leading edge of its special field if it does not attract and nurture faculty doing the latestresearch.

One area where there has been improvement is outcomes assessment. The newly revivedOffice of Institutional Research is providing the College with data so that policy decisions can bemade based on facts, not suppositions and anecdotes.

FIFTEEN RECOMMENDATIONS

During the period of College-wide review of the first draft of this self-study, all constituents wereasked to identify .which of the many recommendations seemed the most promising. The followinglist (not in any priority order) emerged from that discussion:

Continue the work of creating a multicultural academic community, one in which all faculty,students, staff, and administrators feel equally welcome and equally effective.

0 Maximize efforts to ensure that academic advisement involves all full-time faculty members andreaches all students.

0 Continue to analyze the reasons for attrition and develop ways to improve retention.

Schedule courses so that all students admitted by the College can take the courses they need at theappropriate level and in

the correct sequence.

Develop policies and practices that will encourage in-service students to enroll in and remain atthe College.

0 Increase the size of the full-time faculty in order to reduce the reliance on adjuncts.

Emphasize the criminal justice mission of the College by recruiting faculty who have a demon-strated record in criminal justice research and publication.

Examine the practice of most faculty teaching only two days a week as it affects advisement,instruction, participation in governance, and communication within the College community.

* Complete the project to revise and strengthen the Associate Degree programs.

0 Implement a comprehensive planning process.

Clarify the College's admission policies and practices, with reference both to CUNY's policiesand to John Jay's special mission within the University.

0 Require outcomes assessment as part of the comprehensive planning process.

* Conduct a biannual survey to identify student concerns.

0 Expand computer technology and telecommunications at the College, with relevant applications toadministrative services, curricula and pedagogy, registration, and advisement.

Pursue North Hall's replacement by Phase II, the expansion of the College campus. Until Phase IIcan be realized, review current space allocations and make all necessary changes.

APPENDIX A

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Goal one: Continue to assess and improve the quality of educationand research in the fields of criminal justice, tire science, andrelated areas of public safety and public service.

1. Improve the integration of the liberal arts and professionalstudies.

2. Improve the Associate Degree programs and their articulationwith the Bachelor's Degree programs.

3. Improve the College's remediation programs to achieve theUniversity's goals of access and excellence.

4. Develop and expand ESL programs and services.

5. Promote the fundamental undergraduate skills -- reading,writing, critical thinking, computation, effectivecommunication, and creative problem solving.

6. Identify and promote fundamental graduate education skills.

7. Enrich the cultural and intellectual lives of students, whileinspiring students to the highest ideals of citizenship andpublic service.

8. Enhance the capacity of our students to succeed in a multi-national, multi-lingual, and multi-cultural environment by in-creasing the awareness and appreciation for the diverse culturaland political forces that shape our society.

10. Allocate resources to best achieve the College's mission.

11. Expand and enhance the academic advisement program to meetthe needs of students.

12. Develop in students the capacity for personal growth andcreative problem solving that results from the ability to acquireand evaluate information.

13. Develop and maintain the faculty, administration, and staffresources necessary for quality education and research.

14. Provide cost-effective, easily accessible informationtechnology resources to support the academic andadministrative operations of the College.

95

Goal Tvos Enhance the academic environment to promote education,research, and professional service, and to encourage and facili-tate the avareness of and appreciation for the diverse cultural,historical, and political forces that shape our society.

1. Encourage and reward excellence in teaching.

2. Encourage and reward research, scholarship, and creativeexpression.

3. Encourage and reward service to the College.

4. Encourage and reward professional service.

5. Balance the goals of education, research, and professionalservice in the tenure and promotion process.

6. Enhance the visibility and viability of liberal arts andpublic service in a college of criminal justice.

7. Encourage joint student and faculty participation and culturalactivities.

8. Promote cultural diversity in faculty recruitment, develop-ment, tenure, and promotion.

9. Encourage expression of and appreciation for cultural diversi-ty in the college community.

lo. Increase participation in organized student activities.

11. Involve alumni more fully in the life of the College.

12. Provide appropriate support to departments and faculty, withrespect to both clerical and technical services and equipmentand supplies.

13. Provide appropriate services for the College communitythroughout the entire academic day.

14. Provide needed access to child care.

15. Assure sufficient attention to issues of cultural diversityand cultural respect in the classroom, while maintaining theprinciple of academic freedom.

16. Put in place the appropriate mechanisms to ensure that stu-dents work through the curriculum in a systematic way.

17. Raise academic standards in light of the Chancellor's CollegePreparatory Initiative.

9 6

Goal Three: Refine the governance structure and associated organ-isational structures and processes to enhance fulfillment of themission of the college.

1. Enable the College's organizational structures and decision-making processes to promote effective communication, decision-making, accountability, and policy implementation.

2. Refine the Committee structure to facilitate faculty participa-tion in the governance of the College.

3. Improve the existing governance structure to reinforce andfacilitate academic participation in setting College priorities.

4. Strive to make existing resource allocation processes respondmore appropriately to changes in student needs, curricularrequirements, and financial resources.

5. Provide for balanced and appropriate participation for faculty,students, and the administration.

Goal Four: Continue to develop a physical environment thatsupports the education of the whole person, and the developmentof community.

1. Manage existing space to reduce classroom crowding.

2. Provide for a safe and secure environment.

3. Provide for an appropriate physical environment for faculty,students, and administrators and the best use of space.

4. Provide for adequate library capacity.

5. Provide appropriate space for student activities and services,physical education, and social activities.

6. Correct basic environmental deficiencies in plumbing, heating,ventilation, and air conditioning.

7. Improve access for the physically challenged.

Goal Five: Reinforce local, national, and international publicand private partnerships, to inspire the highest ideals of citi-zenship and public service, and to confront the challenges ofcrime, justice, and public safety in a free society.

1. Reach out to new populations of potential students.

2. Provide effective and valuable service to agencies and thecommunity.

3. Foster partnerships with institutions and community constituencies.

Office of the President

APPENDIX B

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES

The Bylaws establish the President as the chief executiveofficer with the power to carry out the substantial duties asso-ciated with the general superintendence of the institution.

ThePresident shapes the formal organization of the College by spe-cifically outlining the duties of the administrators and evaluat-ing their performance. These officers serve solely at his dis-cretion.

The Office of the President consists of a small staff, whichassists the President directly in discharging his leadership andadministrative responsibilities.

Gerald Lynch, President of John Jay since 1977, has aninformal, open-door management style, reflecting his long experi-ence at the College and his close relationships with most of thefaculty and administration. He also maintains very close tiesoutside the College, particularly in the political world.

Seven administrative officers, heading the major functionalareas of the College, report directly to the President. Theseconstitute his administrative Advisory Group and are also members of the cabinet. The cabinet also includes other administra-tion department heads and faculty representatives.

Office of Academic Affairs

The Vice President for Academic Affairs is also the Provostand Deputy to the President. The chairs of the academic depart-ments report directly to, and receive direction from, the Provost.

The Dean of Undergraduate Studies, who also reports tohim, works with the academic departments and is responsible forpolicy development and project coordination on all matters relat-ed to undergraduate education. The Dean directly supervises theMicrocomputer Center, the Writing Center, Proficiency Testing,the ESL Resource Center, the Office of Undergraduate AcademicAdvisement, and the January and Summer Basic Skills Programs.

The Dean for Graduate Studies and Research, who also reportsto the Provost, has the ultimate managerial responsibility forthe College's five graduate programs, working closely with thefaculty of involved academic disciplines. The Dean also over-sees four of the College's Research and Training Centers.

9 9

The Provost directly supervises the Office of SponsoredResearch, which provides assistance in developing grant proposalsand oversees the administration of grant awards. He also oversees the Library.

In the fall of 1991, when the Criminal Jus-tice Center was split, separating its training functions from research, the Director of Criminal Justice Research began report-ing directly to the Provost.

The Provost directs a three person support staff (reducedfrom four, due to non-replacement of HEOs participating in EarlyRetirement Incentive). They assist him in the following areas:allocating full-time faculty, allocating class sections to de-partments, monitoring faculty workload, the academic budgets, thescheduling of classes, and keeping personnel files for all full-time and part-time teaching faculty. Additionally, the Provost'sOffice personnel serve as staff to the College Committee onPersonnel and Budget and three Faculty Personnel Review commit-tees.

Office of Administrative Affairs

The Vice President for Administrative Affairs is responsiblefor maintaining the College's physical facilities and for provid-ing non-academic support services. The Dean for Administration,who reports to the Vice President, manages the physical facili-ties through offices responsible for (1) planning and managingchanges to the entire physical plant, (2) operating and maintain-ing the physical plant on a day-to-day basis, (3) providingsecurity for the physical plant, (4) space allocation, workingwith the Registrar who allocates classroom space.

The College,because of its mission, employs its students as its securityforce, with concurrent benefits for the students and the institu-tion.

The Vice President also oversees units .responsible foraudiovisual and other instructional aids; personnel; and print-ing, reprographics, telephone, mail, and messenger services.

Division of Student Development

The Vice President for Student Development directs a groupof offices that function to assist students in their academicendeavors and to enhance their college experience.

The VicePresident is the appointed chair of the Division of StudentDevelopment which comprises the academic units of Counseling andCommunications Skills. He oversees the units charged with admin-istering the College's financial aid programs, providing place-ment services for jobs, supervising the Child Care Center, andguiding a wide range of student extracurricular activities and

10 0

student government functions. The Vice President is assisted by aDean, an Associate Dean, two Assistant Deans, the Director, and asmall support staff. The component offices are staffed by teach-ing faculty, counselors, HEOs, and support staff.

office of Admissions and Registration

The Dean for Admissions and Registration directs two organ-izational units: (1) the Registrar and (2) recruitment and admis-sions. The latter primarily focuses on the admission of enteringfreshmen, graduate students and transfer students and on applyingstandards related to admissions, retention, and awards. TheCollege organizationally separates student assistance from stand-ards enforcement in order to remove the inherent conflict ofinterest.

Office of Planning and Development

The Office of Planning and Development, headed by the Deanfor Planning and Development, oversees planning, institutionalresearch, programmatic development, fundraising, and substanceabuse prevention and education. The Dean supervises the Directorof Institutional Research, the Director of Development and AlumniAffairs, and the Director for the CUNY Substance Abuse Preventionand Education Program. This office is responsible for all re-ports to the University, to the Commission on Higher Educationof the Middle States Association (CHE/MSA), and to all othergovernmental and non-governmental agencies.

The Dean provides advice to the President on planning activ-ities, which are currently decentralized. The Dean also preparesa Master Plan for CUNY and the State Regents and completes Col-lege-wide reports and surveys.

Assisted by the Office of Institutional Research, the Deanmanages institutional evaluation and assessment. InstitutionalResearch also provides data on enrollment factors each semester.

Office of Financial Affairs and Planning

The Director of Financial Affairs and Planning serves as thePresident's advisor on financial management matters. The Officehelps the College achieve its goals and objectives by

(1) ensuring that available funds are allocated and spent inaccordance with the priorities established by the College,

(2) achieving maximum effectiveness and efficiency in pro-viding financial management services to faculty, staff, andstudents, and

(3) communicating budgetary and fiscal information to thePresident, the Budget Planning Committee, and the entire Collegecommunity.

The Office of the Bursar, responsible for collecting approx-imately $8.3 million in tuition and fees each semester, reportsto the Director, as do the Payroll and Purchasing Offices (see"Other Resources," Appendix H).

Office of Bsternal Affairs

The Director of External Affairs is a legislative and commu-nity liaison and runs the College's public relations effort.Publications, the internship program, the Criminal Justice Train-ing Center and the Office of Special Programs also report to thisoffice (see "Other Resources," Appendix H).

Advisory Group

Founded in 1991, the internal advisory group is defined asthe three Vice Presidents, the Dean for Admissions and Registra-tion, the Dean for Planning and Development and the Director ofFinancial Affairs, the Director of External Affairs, the SpecialAssistant to the President and the Deans of Undergraduate andGraduate Studies. This group meets weekly as a management teamto resolve administrative issues and to advise the President.

The Presidents Cabinet

The cabinet includes the Vice Presidents, the Deans, repre-sentatives of the faculty and the heads of the major administra-tive departments. The President informs it of major initiativesand Board policy at weekly meetings.

The group provides a fur-ther exchange of information regarding college activities.

APPENDIX C

FACULTY - SELECTED TABLES

Table 12

Undergraduate Sections Taught by Full-time Faculty vs. Adjuncts

Adjuncts (t)

Full-TimeSemester

Source: OIR

Fall 87 281 (34) 542 (66)Fall 88 295 (34) 577 (66)Fall 89 312 (35) 575 (65)Fall 90 387 (41) 552 (59)Fall 91 442 (45) 513 (55)

Undergraduate Remedial Sections Taught by Full-timeFaculty

Adjuncts (~)

vs. Adjuncts

Full-Time ($)SemesterFall 87 103 (60) 70 (40)Fall 88 107 (59) 76 (41)Fall 89 111 (63) 66 (37)Fall 90 128 (68) 60 (32)

Table 1 3

Adjunct Teaching Hours by CUNY College: Fall 1990

Total Teaching

AdjunctCollege

Hours

Teaching Hours--------- ---------------- --------------

Source: OIR

Baruch 5198 44%

BMCC 6526 57%

Bronx CC 3200 31%

Brooklyn 5669 25%

CSI (LD) 3456 40%

CIS (UD) 1328 40%

Hunter 5607 49%

John Jay 3109 41%

LAG 3477 61%

NYCT 5739 34%

York 2348 44%

Table 14

Tenure Status of John Jay College FacultyFall 1987 and Fall 1991

* Instructor is not a tenure-bearing title. If approved forcontinuous employment, with a fifth reappointment, the Instructorofficially assumes the title of Lecturer.

Source: OIR

1987 1991

Tenured Not Tenured Notor CCE Tenured or CCE Tenured

--------

RANK % N----------

% N--------

%--------

N % N

Professor 96% (75) 4% (3) 99% (90) 1% (1)

Associate 97% (94) 3% (3) 91% (90) 9% (9)Professor

Assistant 39% (26) 61% (41) 61% (23) 39% (15)Professor

Instructor* 0% (0) 100% (0) 0% (0) 100% (0)

Lecturer 94% (15) 6% (1) 82% (14) 18% (3)

CLTs 53% (8) 47% (7) 73% (8) 27% (3)

AVG. TOTAL 78% (218) 22% (63) 81% (225) 19% (35)

APPENDIX D

EVALUATION, REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE

Faculty personnel decisions are governed by CUNY Bylaws andthe current union contracts, and Policy Statements of the Boardof Trustees, which define the functions of a department, itschair and constituent committees; the obligations of the facultymember; the qualifications required of successful aspirants tothe various faculty ranks; criteria for evaluation of facultyperformance; and disciplinary procedures.

The College continues to be guided by these documents in twosignificant ways: in its use of the range of contributions onwhich the faculty member is evaluated and in its acceptance ofthe principle of peer review.

Evaluation criteria of full-time faculty are spelled out ingreatest detail in the union contract. The policy of the Collegehas generally been to pay particular attention to classroominstruction, research/scholarly writing (or creative work), and acategory termed "service to the College."

(1) Quality of classroom instruction is evaluated through aseries of faculty and student classroom observations that becomespart of an overall annual evaluation documented in the individu-al's personnel file, and consulted during all personnel actions.

(2) Research/scholarly writing is usually considered as asingle category and criteria for its assessment tend to be thosedrawn from the discipline represented. For academic departments,traditional standards relating to the originality, as well as thequality, of the research are generally applied. For supportdepartments (Counseling, the Library, Communication Skills),there has generally been a willingness to give credence to pub-lished work that is analytical, or even descriptive, rather thanbased on original research.

(3) "Service to the College" is a catchall category used atJohn Jay to reflect a variety of contributions to the College andits academic programs. While essential to the College, theseservices are not generally recognized as major factors in thepromotion process. But, in some cases, they can tip the balance.

Implementation Of Personnel Process

All personnel actions are initiated at the departmentallevel. In some departments, faculty members are invited to applyfor promotion; in others, individuals initiate the process.

106

(Applications for reappointment and tenure are, of course, auto-matic.) Each department has its own elected personnel committeewhich, relying on the documents described above, evaluates allof its faculty except tenured full professors. The committee isto apply the general standards fairly and consistently, but withdue regard to the particular characteristics of its members.

After departmental approval, cases go first to a reviewcommittee, which is a subcommittee of the College Personnel andBudget Committee (P&B), and then to the attention of the fullCollege P & B. Applicants are represented by their departmentalchairs and by the chairs of whichever review committees addressedtheir cases. This system therefore takes into account overallCollege standards and the specific requirements of each depart-ment.

The recommendations of the College P&B are passed on tothe College President, who makes recommendations to the Board ofTrustees. In practice, the President is almost always guided bythe findings of the College P&B.

The College P&B represents the College as a whole. Chairedby the President, it comprises all department chairs, threeadministrators, three faculty-at-large and two students, allelected by their various constituencies.

John Jay is one of only two CUNY colleges that has studentson the P&B; the other has only one student.

Appeals

Any faculty member who applies for promotion may withdrawhis or her application at any point before its hearing at thefull meeting of the College P&B. This means that an individualwhose application has fared poorly at the departmental or reviewcommittee level can withdraw without prejudice. Such an actionis usually taken to indicate that the applicant has.taken seri-ously the related guidance communicated by the department chair,and it is generally well thought of by the College P&B. Thefaculty member who withdraws from consideration for reappointmentor tenure by the College P&B thereby determines to complete hisor her service at the college at the close of the current academ-ic year.

Under rules of confidentiality which govern the personnelprocess, it is the department chair who discusses the departmen-tal committee's action and provides guidance to an unsuccessfulcandidate. The Provost, serving as the President's designee,discusses the actions of the College P&B with a candidate.

Anyone who has an application denied has the right to appealin person before the full meeting of the College P&B to presenthis or her case in some detail. The Committee then take a voteon the appeal, which is, again, advisory to the President.

Acandidate who is unsuccessful at this point has the right toappeal directly to the President. If this final appeal is unsuc-cessful, the candidate has the right of access to the variouscomplaint, grievance, and arbitration procedures detailed insection 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Source: OIR

APPENDIX E

ADMISSIONS AND RETENTION - SELECTED TABLES

Table 15

Students Who Entered from Fall 1983-Spring 1985Whose High School Averages Are Known

And Who Enrolled inin Their

Typical Freshman CoursesFirst Semester

No. Students < 71 55471-74 48675-79 48180+ 243ALL 1764

% who earned < 71 3230 credits 71-74 47

75-79 5780+ 67

% who earned < 71 1660 credits 71-74 27

75-79 3780+ 54

% who earned < 71 1190 credits 71-74 19

75-79 2680+ 46

% who earned < 71 7Bac. Degree 71-74 14(128 credits) 75-79 19

80+ 38ALL 17

Table 16

FIVE YEAR PERSISTENCE RATES

* Persisted=the sum of those who were retained or who graduated,in either case at their original college or at another college inthe University

Source: Office of Institutional Research and Analysis,The City University of New York, "Update on StudentPersistence: A Report on the 1978 and 1980 Cohorts,"Draft (November 1988)

College % Persisted Through 1983/1985*

John Jay Non-SEEK '78 33.6Non-SEEK '80 32.5

SEEK ' 78 33.6SEEK ' 80 28.4

NYC Tech Non-SEEK '78 29.5Non-SEEK '80 30.2

SEEK ' 78 21.7SEEK ' 80 22.9

Stat. Isl. Non-SEEK '78 33.6Non-SEEK '80 30.3

SEEK ' 78 21.1SEEK ° 80 22.8

APPENDIX F

SOME SELECTED EXAMPLES OF OIR'S CAPABILITY

A capacity to produce data will prove useful only if validoutcome measures are devised and tracked. Such measures can beas simple as noting the graduation or enrollment rates of variousprograms at the college. But understanding the dynamics ofstudent success requires a variety of indicators that providepictures of what is going on at various stages in the academiclife-cycle of a John Jay student. Several pictures of studentoutcomes that might be useful in monitoring and improving thework of the College are provided here, as examples of the newlydeveloped capacity for assessment of educational effectiveness atJohn Jay.

A cautionary note must, however, be sounded: data developedexclusively within John Jay are not as instructive as those thatpermit comparisons with other institutions in the CUNY environ-ment.

Graduation Rates as a Function of High School Preparation

John Jay's curriculum is based oy a traditional four-yearmodel of a bachelor's degree program. Successful student out-comes, from normal advancement in coursework to conferral of adegree, presume traditional expectations of collegiate levelacademic skills. If any set of outcomes can be used as a bench-mark for the highwater mark of the College's success in meetingits undergraduate mission it would be the relative success ofstudents who enter the college with traditional collegiate prepa-ration.

A glance at any profile of our student body, however, showsthat John Jay serves relatively few students who could be said tobe traditionally prepared for college. A crude overview of thenumber of such students who enroll at the College can be obtainedfrom an OIR study of all students who entered from Fall 1983through Spring 1985 whose high school averages are known a2d whotook typical freshman courses during their first semester. About14% of the 1764 students in the study had high school averages of

1. All at the College are well aware, however, that most stu-dents take more than four years to earn a degree.

2. OIR, "Outcomes for Students who Entered from Fall 1983-Spring1985 and Took Typical Freshman Courses in their FirstSemester," March 1992.

80 or better and about 16% passed all three CUNY proficiencyexaminations. In contrast, about 14% entered having passed noproficiency tests and had high school averages of 70 or lower.

Because of dramatically different levels of preparationpresented by John Jay students, aggregate indicators of perform-ance usually obscure what is really going on. For example, if wetrack students who entered from Fall 1983 through Spring 1985 andwho began their studies at John Jay taking typical freshmancourses, we find that 17% have thus far earned a bachelor'sdegree. But knowing that 17 percent of all students who enter asfreshman eventually earn a baccalaureate degree does not tellmuch about where problems may lie and where improvement may come.A more revealing picture can be obtained by breaking down classattainment and graduation rates by high school preparation. Doingso, we see significant differences which are related to levels ofpreparation. About 7% of the students who entered as freshmanfrom Fall 1983 through Spring 1985 with either high school aver-ages of 70 or below have graduated, compared to 38% of thesestudents with high school averages of 80 or better.

Similar though less marked differences in graduation ratesare found as a function of entering CUNY proficiency test scores.Students who entered having passed none of the CUNY exams graduated at the same rate as students with high school averages below70, or 7%. A quarter, or 25%, of those who passed all threeexams have graduated.

The combined effect of proficiency tests and high schoolaverage on class attainment draws out even greater differences inrelative graduation rates between the least and most preparedstudents.

Of those who began with no proficiency tests passedand low high school averages, 10% attained junior status and 2%have graduated. For students who entered with high school aver-ages of 80 or better also having passed two or all three of theCUNY proficiency exams, 65% attained junior status and 45% havegraduated.

CUNY Proficiency Tests and Academic Progress

For the 80% or so of the College's freshmen who initiallyfail one of more of the three CUNY proficiency skills exams, therequirement to pass all three before earning 61 credits poses amajor hurdle. Thus, the combined pass rate for all three effec-tively represents a ceiling on the number of students who canpersist toward a degree.

Consider, for example, what happens with students who beganas freshmen in Fall 1987 since the outcome scores for thesestudents should have settled by this time. By the Summer of1991, 38% of those students had passed all three exams. Of those

who entered having passed no exams, 14% had passed all three bythis time. This rises to 26% for students who entered with oneexam passed and 47% for those who entered with two exams passed.

In order to remain at a CUNY college after earning 60 cred-its, students who initially fail an exam must retake it. Overall,about half retake the writing exam, two-thirds retake the mathexam and three-fourths retake the reading exam.

Ultimate passrates on these retakes vary from 46% on the math exam to 61% onthe writing exam and 76% on the reading exam.

Pass rates onretakes of the writing exam are higher than for the math exam butfewer students retake the writing exam so that the present passrates for these two exams are about the same.

Table 17

CUNY Proficiency Test Outcomesfor Entering Freshmen in Fall 1987

(data through Spring 1990)

Outcomes in Nath Skills Courses

Source: OIR

As important as passing these exams is to a student'sprogress, relatively little attention about patterns of studentsuccess with these exams and the relationship between course andCUNY exam outcomes is known. This might be a future avenue ofinstitutional research.

If success on the CUNY proficiency tests in writing and mathposes a ceiling on persistence, so does completion of the basicEnglish and Math skills courses. Although there is no prescribedtime in the four-year BA program by when students should havecompleted Math 108 and English 102, as there is for the CUNYexams, it seems likely that delayed completion of these coursesposes obstacles, particularly in view of the fact that the formeris a prerequisite for statistics and the latter is the prerequi-site for the two literature courses in the general educationrequirements.

Math Writing Reading

Students who passed exam on first try 32 35 68students who retook exam 65 53 76

$ students who passed exam on retest 46 61 70$ of all students who ultimately pass 52 54 83

Again consider outcomes for the entering cohort from Fall1987. Of the 393 students who are still active or graduated fromthat cohort, we see that after eight regular semesters 62% havecompleted their second math course. Only a few more,

67%, havecompleted their first math course. About three in four students(77%) who are still active from the 1987 cohort have passed theirmath proficiency exam. Here are the percentages for key mathoutcomes for the freshmen entering cohort of Fall 1987 as of Fall1991:

Presumably if students have initially failed the CUNY profi-ciency exam in math, their success in the prescribed series ofmath courses should better equip them to pass the math proficiency exam. The evidence of this effect can be seen if we look atthe percent of students who have passed the CUNY Proficiency examafter having passed a given math course in the series compared tothose who have not passed the same course. It appears that mostof the added benefit is attained with the completion of Math 104or Math 105.

Table 18

Math outcomes as of Fall 1991for the Persisting Students

of the Entering Cohort of Fall 1987

Passed Math 104 or Math 105

67$Passed Math 108 or Math 141

62%Passed CUNY Proficiency in Math

77%

Source: OIR

Table 19

$ Passing CUNY Math Exam Who Initially Failed Itas a Function of Outcome in Math Courses

(Fall 1987 Entering Cohort)

$ passing CUNY math examwho took course and...

$ who passed __-------------__----__-Course course

-------------passed------

did not pass------------

n

Math 100 66$ 32$ 6$ (311)Math 103 67 66 17 (709)Math 104 71 80 45 (390)Math 105 77 88 47 (182)Math 108 85 89 71 (301)

An analysis similar to the above could be conducted usingEnglish courses and the writing proficiency exam. (4) EarnedCredit Ratios: Credits Attempted Per Credit Earned

Earned Credit Ratios: Credits Attempted Per Credit Earned

Another indicator of student progress toward the degree isthe student's success in efficiently earning credits. The bache-lor's degree programs of the college are designed as four yearprograms requiring a student to complete 128 credits.

Presuma-bly, a fully prepared student should be able to do this by at-tempting 128 credits and earning 128 credits. Few students,however, manage to accomplish this. We need telltale indicatorsof student progress that chart student efficiency in earningcredits.

One way to measure this is the ratio of credits hoursattempted to credits earned, which ideally should be one to one.

Several things are striking when such ratios are inspected.Students who enter with no proficiency tests passed attempt anaverage of 2.5 credit hours to earn one credit. But even thebest prepared students attempt on average 1.6 credit hours foreach credit earned. At that rate, even a student who requires noremediation would attempt 48 credit hours to earn 30. If, howev-er, we examine the earned credit ratio of only those students whograduate, we discover that they attempt only 1.1 credit hours foreach credit earned. This pattern holds no matter whether theybegan at the college requiring extensive remediation or none.

CUNY Exams

Credits attempted perPassed Upon Entry

per credit earned-----------------

All students

Graduates

Table 20

------------------------

This picture suggests that a key to graduation is for students tomaintain a low earned credit ratio. As shown below, this patterndistinguishes graduates from non-graduates from the freshmanyear.

0 2.5 *************************1 2.1 *********************2 1.8 ******************3 1.7 *****************

0 1.1 ***********

2 1.1 ***********3 1.1 ***********

Total 2.1 *********************

Table 21

Earned Credit Ratios(Credits Attempted/Credits Earned)

-----------------------------------

Source: OIR

Latest class standing attained

Frosh Sophs Juniors Seniors GradsEarned creditratio as a . . Lower freshman

2.3

1.3

1.3

1.2

1.2Upper freshman

2.2

1.3

1.2

1.2

1.1Lower sophomore

1.6

1.2

1.2

1.1upper sophomore

2.0

1.2

1.2

1.1Lower junior

1.8

1.2

1.1Upper junior

2.3

1.3

1.1

A measure such as the earned credit ratio can be used as atelltale of problems in the pace of individual student progresstoward the degree. It could even be adapted to assess the dis-tribution of resources required to produce successful outcomesfor various sub-groups of students and tracked for improvement.This sort of indicator might prove useful in many ways in out-comes assessment.

APPENDIX G

COLLEGE PUBLICATIONS

Students and/or Prospective Students The Undergraduate andGraduate Bulletin are, of course, publications of primary impor-tance. Serving as a de facto contract between the student and theCollege, they describe the student's degree requirements and givedetailed information on each course offered by the College. Inaddition, the Bulletins provide information about financial aidand scholarship programs, student services, ancillary educationalprograms, and other functions of the College. Finally, the Bulle-tins are a vital representation of the college to the world atlarge, and play a significant role in establishing the image ofthe College to a variety of audiences. The Bulletins are comple-mented by the Directory of Classes. published at the beginning ofeach semester to list each course being offered, and bookletspublished by individual academic departments to highlight coursesand provide detailed information about the particular discipline.

Numerous brochures and pamphlets are produced by the Libraryand the Microcomputer Lab to assist students with assignments.While these publications chiefly address the academic program,still other publications are aimed at other aspects of studentlife. Both the Physical Education Department and the Division ofStudent Development, for example, provide publications describingthe various services offered to students. The Department ofPhysical Education and Athletics publishes a monthly newsletter,Tales from the Dog House. which chronicles athletic events andother news; the department also issues fact sheets, flyers, gameprograms, and specialized brochures on such services as theCardiovascular Fitness Center. The Division of Student Develop-ment produces such publications as the Student Handbook, testingguides, directories of college services, and flyers in otherspecialized areas.

On a College-wide basis, John Jay students are kept abreastof events and activities through three publications: The L,EX

' ew , the student newspaper; John Jay Student News. a monthlynewsletter focusing on events; and John "y News. a monthlynewsletter devoted to news stories concerning the College.While some of the aforementioned publications--most notably theBulletin and the publications concerning individual academicdisciplines--are used for student recruitment, the college'sOffice of Admissions also produces a variety of materials thatare intended specifically to augment the recruitment effort.These include advertisements in local and national publications,booklets, direct-mail pieces, and other promotional literature.

Faculty and/or Staff

The most frequently produced publi-cation in this category is T11g Week Of.. This weekly newsletteris designed to keep faculty and staff informed of college events,faculty/staff news and notes, administrative announcements,special meetings, and the like. The minutes of the College Coun-cil and the Faculty Senate describe the ongoing governance of thecollege. Probably the most widely used internal publication isthe telephone directory, which lists faculty, staff, and collegeoffices and departments in alphabetical order with their tele-phone and room numbers. John Jay personnel also receive morespecialized information from other publications, such as Classi-fied Information: The_ Library Newsletters which reports newacquisitions for the Library's collections. The Office of Spon-sored Programs produces a quarterly publication, Grants Update.to advise faculty and staff of research opportunities. The Officeof Institutional Research periodically disseminates informationon internal studies and surveys of the college. The Office ofUndergraduate Studies produces The Guide to Academic Advising,which is used to assist College personnel involved in academiccounseling.

The General College Community Publications of interest tothe general College population, aimed both at students and atCollege personnel, include The L, Review (the aforementionedstudent newspaper) and Jon Jay's Finest. an annual collection ofexemplary student writings. Many of the publications produced bythe Library and the Microcomputer Lab (both of which are prolificin their production of helpful publications), as well as by thePhysical Education Department, are utilized by the entire Collegecommunity. In addition, the general College community is theprimary focus of the John Jay Press's recent publication, Educat-ing for Justice: _A Brief History o€ John Jay College. This workby John Jay faculty member Gerald Markowitz was published tocoincide with the College's 25th anniversary celebration.

Special Interest Groups Outside the College

speaking di-rectly to the mission of the College, John Jay publishes twoongoing periodicals whose aim is the professionalization of thecriminal justice community. Law Enforcement News

publishedtwenty-two times annually, is a tabloid-size newspaper for lawenforcement officials. Its objective is to raise important issuesand provoke thought among professionals in the law enforcementcommunity. The paper's readers are found in all fifty states andthirteen foreign countries. Criminal Justice Ethics is a scholar-ly journal for academics and professionals and is published semi-annually. It is designed to focus attention on ethical issuesthat arise in the criminal justice system. Subscribers are world-wide and include libraries, criminal justice institutions, law-yers, judges, and philosophers. Both publications are supportedby subscriptions.

Members of the John Jay community also serve as editors ofother scholarly publications published at the College whichtarget specialized interests. These journals include: &dvances inForensic Psychology AD_4 Psychiatry, the Journal Qf_ Psycholinguis-

Research,

Police Studies: Tag International Review 2f PqligeDevelopment,

Radical, History Review. and Science M gocietv.The Criminal Justice Center has produced specialized publicationsthat report the results of funded resear,:h.

External special-interest groups are also reached by the John Jay Press, throughsales of its back-list inventory of criminal-justice-relatedbooks and monographs. A significant specialized constituencyoutside the college is the Alumni Association. This audience isdirectly

served by

Y= Net worker. a semi-annual newsletter

con-ta_'.ning alumni news and notes, feature stories, and a wealth ofphotographs.

General Public John Jay produces two half-hour televisiontalk-show programs, aired on WNYC-TV, that are available to thecity's population at large. Criminal Justice covers topics inthe criminal justice field through in-depth interviews withpolicy makers and academics. Everything Else deals with a widevariety of subjects, such as how to avoid a mid-life financialcrisis, AIDS, adult illiteracy, and women's legal rights. Thegeneral public is also the target audience when the Collegerecruits students or personnel through space advertisementsthat appear in such newspapers as The New York Times, The NewYork Daily News, and other mass-market publications, and throughradio advertising.

John Jay Telephone Diroctory This standard publication isclearly and attractively laid out, and has recently been updated.The directory fails to explain how to reach the operator and howto call Information. A one-page summary describing how to usesome of the basic features of the Phone Mail system would be auseful addition. Some terminology in the front-page listing ofacademic, administrative and departmental offices is obscure.For example, the College cafeteria is listed as the "StudentDining Hall." The directory should list the Faculty Senate,Council of Chairs, University Faculty Senate, and the John JayChapter of the Professional Staff Congress.

The Directory should be updated at least once a year (thelast directory was in use for more than two years), and allfaculty and staff should be contacted individually by mail toascertain if their listing for the new book is correct. (That hasnot been done in the past.) Also, faculty and staff should beable to procure copies for their home as well as their officeuse. Under present distribution arrangements, a second copy isnotoriously difficult to come by.

Centers and Institutes

APPENDIX H

OTHER RESOURCES

Academic

The Criminal Justice Research-Center was established for theconduct and dissemination of interdisciplinary applied researchrelated to crime control issues and criminal justice agency opera-tions.

The Fire science Institute serves the fire science, firetechnology and public safety sectors. Its focus is fire protec-tion, education, training, and research.

The Toxicology Research and Training Center provides toxi-cology education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels,and promotes toxicology research within the College and in collaboration with other institutions. It is staffed by a directorand two associate directors.

The Center on Violence and Human survival is a decentralizedresearch center designed to deepen understanding of violence.Faculty are drawn from campuses throughout the University.

TheCenter sponsors research projects, seminars, and small workingconferences. It publishes a numbered series of "OccasionalPapers" and plans to publish an annual.

The institute on Alcohol and substance Abuse was founded toprovide training in the treatment and alleviation of alcohol andsubstance abuse. It coordinates courses in the different disciplines that prepare students for the certification granted by NewYork State as a Credentialed Alcoholism Counselor (CAC). TheInstitute also presents seminars, workshops and conferences ontopics such as Alcoholism and the Clergy, Alcoholism and theCriminal Justice System, and Alcoholism and Special Populations.

The Institute for Criminal Justice Ethics seeks to encourageincreased sensitivity to the necessity of ethical behavior amongthose who enforce our system of criminal justice and to fosterconsideration of moral issues in the education of criminal jus-tice professionals. The Institute publishes Criminal JusticeEthics , a semiannual journal.

Dispute Resolution

The 'expertise of the Program Coordinator in the area ofdispute resolution is a resource the entire College calls upon.In addition to the credit-bearing courses, leading to a certificate, the coordinator was called on during the time of studentunrest in order to help ease tension. The tenets of dispute reso-lution played a major role in the design of the College's TownHall Meetings.

Academic Sugport

Office of instructional services

This office provides audiovisual services to faculty, admin-istration, students and staff. It publishes the 'V Preview , aweekly listing of suggested programs and provides a listing ofits collection of 700 titles for College and community use.

Itruns the broadcast studio. The bulk of its services is to stu-dents and faculty in the classroom. Special attention is givento multiculturalism in the curriculum. The titles in its collec-tion reflect the needs of the courses. The staff has a director,secretary, technicians, and work-study students. This office hasbeen repeatedly praised by the faculty for its sense of service.Despite the difficulty of moving equipment from building tobuilding, the staff is efficient and polite.

CUNY Bubstance Abuse Prevention Program

This program is a University-wide effort run by John Jay toprevent and educate about substance abuse. The program hasevolved in three major areas:

(1) Extensive substance abuse prevention and interventionactivities benefit all of the students enrolled at CUNY. Theyinclude courses, resource materials, hotlines, counseling, peerleadership programs and treatment referrals.

(2) A network has been established between the Universityand public and private high schools by establishing a trainingprogram for counselors and other personnel in these schools.

(3) A series of grants aimed at providing leadership forparents of public school children in the area of substance abusehas been awarded to this office.

Office of Financial Affairs and Planning

Headed by a director, this office oversees payroll and pur-chasing and the Bursar. The office enjoys a College-wide regardfor its integrity. Over the years, however, the office has loststaff, almost depleting its middle management stratum. While thisstrategy has set an example for the College with respect tobudget cuts, it has proven to be costly in its own way. In par-ticular, the purchasing area, which serves the entire College,has the reputation for slow service.

External Affairs

The Office of External Affairs has oversight responsibilityfor the publication of the Quarterly, College catalogues, re-cruitment materials, and college advertising. It also preparespress releases, as the College's public relations arm.

It isresponsible for legislative affairs and community relations. Itcoordinates commencement and two major outreach programs: theannual Christmas Party for community children and the Camp Hopeweekend. The Director reports to the President and oversees theCriminal Justice Training Center, the Fire Science Institute, theInternship and Cooperative Education Program, and the Office ofSpecial Programs.

Personnel

Administrative

The Office of Human Resources serves the almost 1,000 full-and part-time members of the College faculty and staff in mattersof employee and labor relations, benefits, and pensions. In addition this office provides a full range of employment and staffingservices for the civil service staff. Human Resources interactswith all College administrative and academic offices and servesas liason to CUNY Offices of the Vice Chancellor for Faculty andStaff Relations and University Personnel. Personnel maintains theCollege data base within the City University Personnel System,and is responsible for the College portion of the monthly Chan-cellor's and University Reports to the CUNY Board of Trustees.Through their introduction to the College of the City's WorkExperience Program (WEP), this office is amplifying John Jay'sstaff services. The 75 to 100 WEP participants are unemployedpublic assistance recipients who receive a small daily stipendthrough the New York City Human Resources Administration forworking half-time at the College. Here they gain meaningful jobexperience, skill training, counsel and referral to educationalor employment opportunities at John Jay or elsewhere.

12 2

Administrative Computer Center

The Administrative Computer Center provides local computingsupport to the administration, and academic support services.For example, the regular student evaluations of faculty are processed through this office. It also provides access to the Uni-versity Computer Center, which makes a range of services avail-able to all colleges in CUNY. These resources include capabili-ties for interactive computing, statistical programming, and textediting.

For some years now, there has been College-wide concernabout the efficiency and effectiveness of the Center, which oncereported to the Vice President for Administrative Affairs. Duringthe past year, a new Director began reporting to the Dean forAdmissions and Registration and a process has now begun to im-prove the Center's capabilities and performance. Among its goalsare the implementation of a computerized registration system--nowthat methods and a timetable have been adopted, success seemslikely.

Alumni Association

The Association publishes a quarterly, T-b& Networker , andsponsors a series of special events and programs, keeping membersinformed about the activities of the College and its graduates.It has recently expanded its services to include workshops ontopics of interest to members, such as Dispute Resolution.

Facilities

The College's new building has provided all members of theCollege community with greatly improved facilities:

The Art Studio is a large room used for drawing and painting.There are approximately 25 easels and 25 taborets. Faculty teachart courses incorporating the artistic contributions from differ-ent cultures. Effectiveness is measured by the site use and thenumber of students enrolled. The kiln room contains three kilns,and sculpture and ceramic equipment. A gallery displays student,staff, and faculty work.

The College has two music rooms, one piano lab with soundreproducing equipment, 13 electric pianos, and four practicerooms with pianos.

The broadcast studio has provided facilities for productionof hundreds of criminal justice programs for public television.One of the fatalities resulting from budget cutbacks has been theelimination of the production of the show "Criminal Justice

12 3

Close-up." The program has provided the general public in-depthdiscussion of a wide array of issues and enabled the College toenhance its reputation.

The Theater now enables the College to initiate large-scaleconferences and seminars for criminal justice agencies as well asdramatic presentations (See Chapter 7, "Student Services").,

The new building icludes a complete sports and athleticfacility that is used for classes, intramural sports and to servemembers of the John Jay community. Additionally, members of thepolice and fire departments are able to join at reduced rates.These state-of-the-art facilities are an important part of theCollege outreach to police and fire departments of the city (See"Student Services").

Conference Room assignments are coordinated in the office ofAdministrative Affairs; they provide space for meetings, semi-nars, conferences, and special events. Eight rooms have a totalcapacity of 743.

The Richard L. Connolly Residence, Long Island UniversityBrooklyn Center is the dormitory used by John Jay. It has studyareas, laundry, recreation areas, and a cafeteria.

Currently,twenty-five John Jay students are residents.

The College isattempting to add dormitories so it can attract students nation-wide and internationally.

Analysis And Recommendations

Most of the criticism of the College's resources arisebecause they are not integrated into the College. For example,most of the centers and institutes do not share their researchand contacts with the College at large. Because of this, there isa fear that services are duplicated because of a lack of broadoversight. The College needs a mechanism to ensure efficiency andmonitor levels of activity.

Centers and institutes report to different administrativeofficers. These officers should be more proactive in assistingthe centers and institutes to achieve their goals. The appropri-ate Dean might oversee the preparation of detailed annual reportsincluding the payroll status of its staff and their releasedtime, if any, and a summary of the year's accomplishments. Thesecan then be measured against the use of resources and congruencywith the College's mission. As in many schools, these officestend to become entrenched and protective, thereby limiting effec-tiveness (by not disseminating results) and preventing oversight.

A related concern is that a "sense of service," epitomizedin some offices, does not permeate all offices which were estab-lished to provide support for College activities. Because re-

12 4

sources are scarce in the current fiscal climate, an atmosphereof protectionism has pervaded the College. Sometimes servicesare withheld or barriers are erected for no apparent reason otherthan instinctive hoarding. For example, several faculty andadministrators interviewed commented on the fact that it is verydifficult to gain access to a conference room. The Middle StatesCoordinating Committee itself has found that scheduling a meetingroom can be a lengthy ordeal. Changing the attitude from "pro-tection" to "service" is not easy, but would go a long way towardimproving morale and the quality of life.

The Office of External Affairs has been criticized for notsharing the College's successes with the outside world. Facultyand administration often mention that their professional triumphsdo not seem to be appreciated because the College has not estab-lished an effective, ongoing public relations program. Thisoffice has many internal responsibilities and its attention fromexternal affairs per se may be diverted. If academic programs andstudent services in this office were placed under the appropriateVice Presidents, External Affairs would be free to pursue moreaggressively its responsibilities outside the College.

APPENDIX I

John Jay College Student SurveyFall 1991

Gail Hauss, DirectorOffice of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New York

January, 1992( OIR 92-1)

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal Justice

John Jay College Student SurveyFall 1991

A survey requested by several of the Middle State's self-studycommittees was administered on Thursday, December 5, 1991 to studentswho attended a sample of undergraduate classes which met in thethird and eighth period.

Classes receiving the survey were selected through a multi-stageprobability sampling design. The sampling frame was comprised of allthe undergraduate classes scheduled in periods three and eight on thesame day. This effectively minimized the chance of students beingselected for the sample more than once and assured proportionalselection of day and evening students. Classes were stratified by levelwith disproportionate sampling of upper level classes to maximize thenumber of juniors and seniors included in the sample. A total of 35classes were included in the sample, in which 971 students were enrolledat the beginning of the Fall term. Of these classes, 29 participated inthe survey, in which 865 students were enrolled at the beginning of theterm, yielding 617 respondents.

Given the sampling design, the sub-samples of students at each classlevel, say Freshman or Senior, should be representative samples of allstudents at each level. Thus percentages shown in most tables areprobably within plus or minus five percentage points of how all John Jaystudents at that level would have answered the item shown by the table.NOTE: General population estimates from the percentages shown shouldNOT be made since such estimates can only be made using a specialweighting scheme. The percentages reported by class level should sufficefor most needs.

The tables are presented in the following sections: THE ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE;IMPRESSIONS OF THE COLLEGE; THE LIBRARY; PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS;PREPARATION FOR REGISTRATION; THE REGISTRATION PROCESS; SERVICES,FACILITIES, EXTRA CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES; STUDENT GOVERNANCE. Allvariables in the survey are presented in table format; although somevariables can be included in more than one area, they appear in only one.Readers, then, are encouraged to review all the sections.

The tables in each section have the identical format. The variableabbreviation appears in the left hand margin followed by a briefdescriptive phrase. The variable abbreviation is also written in thesurvey (a copy of which is included) next to the item to which itrefers. Class standing appears across the top of the page. The possibleresponses appear down the left margin of the page; a response of"Missing" means the student did not indicate an answer for the item.

Class standing was determined by the total number of credits earned asreported by the student on the survey. Students who did not indicatecredits earned in the survey have been included in the tablesunder the heading "Standing Unknown".

For all tables, the number of students responding by class standing is:

FRESHMAN - 103 (16.7%)SOPHOMORE - 121 ( 19.6%)JUNIOR - 156 ( 25.3%)SENIOR - 170 ( 27.6%)STANDING UNKNOWN - 67 ( 10.9%).

Section I: The Academic Experience

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.1)

SAT7 - SATISFACTION WITH ACADEMIC ADVISING/COURSE PLANNING----------------------------------------------------------

SAT8 - SATISFACTION WITH FRESHMAN ORIENTATION---------------------------------------------

SAT10 - SATISFACTION WITH ADVISOR AVAILABILITY----------------------------------------------

SAT18 - SATISFACTION WITH CLASSROOM FACILITIES----------------------------------------------

130

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 9.7 14.9 12.2 12.4 16.4SATISFIED 20.4 31.4 30.1 34.7 25.4DISSATISFIED 8.7 5.8 10.9 9.4 1.5VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 5.0 7.1 7.1 1.5CANT JUDGE 54.4 41.3 37.8 32.4 44.8MISSING 3.9 1.7 1.9 4.1 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 27.2 19.0 17.3 10.0 16.4SATISFIED 27.2 34.7 26.3 24.7 35.8DISSATISFIED 5.8 6.6 4.5 4.1 1.5VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 . 8 1.9 4.7CANT JUDGE 34..E 38.8 47.4 52.9 34.3MISSING 2.9 2.6 3.5 11.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 11.7 11.6 11.5 5.3 17.9SATISFIED 60.2 70.2 61.5 62.9 53.7DISSATISFIED 12.6 9.9 11.5 16.5 6.0VERY DISSATISFIED 1.0 . 8 3.2 4.1 4.5CANT JUDGE 11.7 6.6 7.7 7.1 7.5MISSING 2.9 . 8 4.5 4.1 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 17.5 19.0 15.4 18.2 19.4SATISFIED 19.4 30.6 28.8 33.5 31.3DISSATISFIED 8.7 10.7 12.2 11.2 4.5VERY DISSATISFIED 4.9 5.0 7.7 5.9 3.0

CANT JUDGE 47.6 34.7 33.3 28.8 32.8MISSING 1.9 2.6 2.4 9.0

COURSES - NUMBER OF COURSES THIS SEMESTER-----------------------------------------

ASSIGN1 - TERM PAPER ASSIGNMENT-------------------------------

TYPEEXAM - TYPE OF EXAMS IN COURSES-----------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

1 2.9 5.0 1.3 2.9 3.0

2 8.7 15.7 17.3 22.4 10.4

3 18.4 8.3 11.5 11.2 9.0

4 37.9 40.5 26.9 28.2 43.3

5 25.2 19.8 27.6 22.4 28.4

6 3.9 7.4 11.5 10.6 3.07 2.6 1.8

MISSING 2.9 3.3 1.3 . 6 3.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

ALL ESSAY EXAMS 8.7 13.2 15.4 12.9 13.4

MOSTLY ESSAYS 21.4 27.3 38.5 31.8 25.4

HALF AND HALF 56.3 49.6 37.2 43.5 49.3

MOSTLY OBJECTIVE 8.7 6.6 5.1 7.6 4.5

ALL OBJECTIVE 2.9 1.7 . 6 . 6 6.0

NO EXAMS 1.0MISSING 1.0 1.7 3.2 3.5 1.5

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NONE 11.7 11.6 4.5 4.7 . 7.5

1 22.3 18.2 16.7 17.6 26.9

2 25.2 24.0 20.5 18.2 20.9

3 35.9 43.0 55.8 54.7 34.3MISSING 4.9 3.3 2.6 4.7 10.4

ASSIGN2 - BOOK REVIEW ASSIGNMENT

ASSIGNS - OTHER WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT

ASSIGN4 - ORAL PRESENTATION ASSIGNMENT

PAGES - PAGES OF WRITING ASSIGNMENTS

a

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

1-24 53.4 40.5 42.9 34.7 41.825-49 17.5 26.4 30.8 32.4 19.450-74 4.9 9.1 9.0 14.1 4.575-99 1.0 1.7 1.9 2.4 1.5100+ 3.9 4.1 2.6 7.1 6.0NONE/DONT KNOW 11.7 14.9 7.1 4.7 16.4MISSING 7.8 3.3 5.8 4.7 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NONE 28.2 32.2 31.4 35.3 35.81 22.3 22.3 16.7 19.4 10.42 15.5 13.2 8.3 8.8 10.43 15.5 18.2 18.6 12.4 23.9MISSING 18.4 14.0 25.0 24.1 19.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NONE 50.5 48.8 40.4 32.9 47.81 18.4 17.4 26.3 28.2 17.92 1.9 11.6 6.4 10.0 4.53 13.6 10.7 6.4 9.4 13.4MISSING 15.5 11.6 20.5 19.4 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NONE 8.7 12.4 9.6 13.5 9.01 7.8 21.5 12.8 13.5 9.02 11.7 12.4 19.9 17.1 14.93 64.1 46.3 44.2 44.1 58.2MISSING 7.8 7.4 13.5 11.8 9.0

TIME - TIME SPENT ON SCHOOL WORK IN AND OUT OF CLASS----------------------------------------------------

REMSATI - SATISFACTION WITH REMEDIAL WRITING--------------------------------------------

REMSAT2 - SATISFACTION WITH REMEDIAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS COURSES-----------------------------------------------------------------

REMSAT3 - SATISFACTION WITH REMEDIAL MATH-----------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

A LOT MORE OUT 31.1 37.2 26.3 33.5 35.8SOMEWHAT MORE OUT 9.7 19.0 18.6 27.6 19.4SAME OUT AND IN 24.3 19.0 34.0 22.4 22.4SOMEWHAT LESS OUT 22.3 15.7 13.5 9.4 10.4A LOT LESS OUT 10.7 7.4 5.8 5.3 10.4MISSING 1.9 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.5

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER TOOK REM 46.6 61.2 64.7 71.8 43.3HELPFUL 36.9 33.1 26.3 18.8 34.3NOT HELPFUL 3.9 3.3 5.1 4.1 3.0MISSING 12.6 2.5 3.8 5.3 19.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER TOOK REM 41.7 56.2 62.2 68.2 50.7HELPFUL 37.9 32.2 32.1 24.7 29.9NOT HELPFUL 12.6 9.9 3.8 4.1 9.0MISSING 7.8 1.7 1.9 2.9 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER TOOK REM 47.6 63.6 69.9 73.5 47.8HELPFUL 35.0 31.4 26.3 20.0 38.8NOT HELPFUL 2.9 4.1 1.3 2.9MISSING 14.6 .8 2.6 3.5 13.4

ACEXP1 - I HAVE NO BACKGROUND FOR MY COURSES--------------------------------------------

ACEXP2 - STUDIED HOW MALE/FEMALE DIFFERENCES RELATE TO COURSE-------------------------------------------------------------

ACEXP3 - STUDIED HOW RACIAL & ETHNIC FACTORS RELATE TO COURSE-------------------------------------------------------------

ACEXP5 - STUDENTS WELL PREPARED FOR THE LEVEL OF COURSE-------------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 7.8 21.5 17.9 18.2 10.4AGREE 45.6 52.9 44.2 41.8 28.4DISAGREE 28.2 12.4 21.2 20.6 34.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 16.5 10.7 12.2 14.7 14.9MISSING 1.9 2.5 4.5 4.7 11.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 5.8 7.4 5.8 7.1 4.5AGREE 31.1 47.1 27.6 30.0 22.4DISAGREE 34.0 23.1 40.4 37.6 38.8STRONGLY DISAGREE 28.2 19.8 24.4 21.2 23.9MISSING 1.0 2.5 1.9 4.1 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 4.9 12.4 11.5 8.8 11.9AGREE 67.0 59.5 60.3 50.0 49.3DISAGREE 16.5 22.3 18.6 25.3 14.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 8.7 4.1 7.1 10.6 4.5MISSING 2.9 1.7 2.6 5.3 19.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 2.9 8.3 3.8 3.5 13.4AGREE 18.4 14.9 12.8 11.8 16.4DISAGREE 50.5 45.5 50.0 45.3 31.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 26.2 31.4 32.7 36.5 25.4MISSING 1.9 . 6 2.9 13.4

ACEXP6 - ENDED UP TAKING COURSES NOT NEEDED-------------------------------------------

ACEXP7 - TEACHERS TRY HARD TO HELP STUDENTS UNDERSTAND COURSE-------------------------------------------------------------

ACEXP8 - INSTRUCTORS EXPECT TOO MUCH OF STUDENTS------------------------------------------------

ACEXP9 - READING ASSIGNMENT IS CHALLENGING AND INTERESTING----------------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 7.8 10.7 4.5 7.6 11.9AGREE 19.4 24.0 19.9 16.5 23.9DISAGREE 58.3 51.2 57.1 58.8 35.8STRONGLY DISAGREE 12.6 13.2 16.0 11.8 11.9MISSING 1.9 . 8 2.6 5.3 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 9.7 14.0 12.2 7.6 7.5AGREE 20.4 23.1 18.6 11.2 14.9DISAGREE 36.9 38.0 33.3 34.1 37.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 30.1 23.1 35.3 41.2 25.4MISSING 2.9 1.7 . 6 5.9 14.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 25.2 26.4 19.9 18.8 31.3AGREE 54.4 60.3 60.9 60.6 43.3DISAGREE 11.7 6.6 14.1 10.6 11.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 5.8 5.0 3.2 3.5 1.5MISSING 2.9 1.7 1.9 6.5 11.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 20.4 28.1 25.0 26.5 22.4AGREE 57.3 63.6 57.1 52.4 43.3DISAGREE 15.5 6.6 12.8 10.6 14.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 4.9 .8 3.8 3.5 7.5MISSING 1.9 . 8 1.3 7.1 11.9

ACEXP10 - SYLLABI PROVIDED FOR COURSES ARE CLEAR------------------------------------------------

ACEXP11 - TOO MANY COURSES WERE UNAVAILABLE-------------------------------------------

ACEXP13 - TOO MUCH READING ASSIGNED-----------------------------------

ACEXP14 - TOO FEW UPPER LEVEL COURSES OFFERED---------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 3.9 6.6 17.9 15.3 4.5AGREE 16.5 15.7 18.6 25.3 17.9DISAGREE 58.3 59.5 51.3 48.2 43.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 15.5 15.7 9.6 8.8 16.4MISSING 5.8 2.5 2.6 2.4 17.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 9.7 15.7 14.1 13.5 9.0AGREE 34.0 33.1 24.4 27.6 29.9DISAGREE 47.6 41.3 51.3 45.3 35.8STRONGLY DISAGREE 5.8 7.4 9.6 8.8 10.4MISSING 2.9 2.5 .6 4.7 14.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 27.2 38.8 29.5 32.4 31.3AGREE 58.3 50.4 57.7 52.4 40.3DISAGREE 10.7 7.4 8.3 7.1 9.0STRONGLY DISAGREE 1.9 1.7 2.6 2.9 3.0MISSING 1.9 1.7 1.9 5.3 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 25.2 28.9 25.6 11.8 19.4AGREE 16.5 26.4 19.9 19.4 9.0DISAGREE 39.8 33.1 37.2 35.3 34.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 17.5 10.7 15.4 28.2 22.4MISSING 1.0 .8 1.9 5.3 14.9

ACEXP15 - MOST STUDENTS ARE BETTER PREPARED THAN I AM-----------------------------------------------------

ACEXP17 - COURSES SEEM TOO EASY FOR COLLEGE------------------------ ------------------

GENATT4 - STUDENTS SET HIGH STANDARDS OF ACHIEVEMENT----------------------------------------------------

GENATT5 - PROFESSORS SET HIGH STANDARDS OF ACHIEVEMENT------------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 19.4 17.4 14.1 10.6 19.4AGREE 59.2 61.2 65.4 54.1 44.8DISAGREE 11.7 14.0 10.9 24.1 7.5STRONGLY DISAGREE 2.9 2.5 7.1 7.1 4.5MISSING 6.8 5.0 2.6 4.1 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 10.7 11.6 11.5 7.6 13.4AGREE 55.3 56.2 50.6 45.9 44.8DISAGREE 19.4 17.4 21.8 31.2 11.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 5.8 7.4 12.8 11.2 6.0MISSING 8.7 7.4 3.2 4.1 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 1.9 . 8 3.8 3.5 1.5AGREE 6.8 6.6 5.1 10.6 11.9DISAGREE 57.3 50.4 60.9 60.0 40.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 33.0 41.3 28.8 23.5 32.8MISSING 1.0 . 8 1.3 2.4 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 2.5 3.2 3.5 4.5AGREE 8.7 9.9 10.3 7.1 16.4DISAGREE 59.2 60.3 56.4 54.1 43.3STRONGLY DISAGREE 25.2 24.8 28.8 31.8 22.4MISSING 6.8 2.5 1.3 3.5 13.4

GENATT6 - TOO DIFFICULT TO BE A GOOD STUDENT--------------------------------------------

GENATT10 - TOO MUCH REMEDIAL WORK---------------------------------

GENATT9 - TOO MAFY COURSES COVER THE SAME THING-----------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 4.9 12.4 3.8 1.8 4.5AGREE 24.3 4.1 7.1 11.2 10.4

DISAGREE 44.7 47.1 45.5 41.8 38.8

STRONGLY DISAGREE 19.4 29.8 36.5 38.8 17.9MISSING 6.8 6.6 7.1 6.5 28.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 1.0 7.4 1.3 2.9 3.0AGREE 9.7 6.6 5.8 7.1 14.9DISAGREE 51.5 47.9 52.6 42.9 32.8

STRONGLY DISAGREE 28.2 33.1 38.5 44.1 26.9

MISSING 9.7 5.0 1.9 2.9 22.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 1.9 6.6 6.4 4.1 9.0

AGREE 11.7 21.5 20.5 27.6 10.4

DISAGREE 68.0 53.7 56.4 54.1 44.8

STRONGLY DISAGREE 10.7 13.2 11.5 9.4 9.0

MISSING 7.8 5.0 5.1 4.7 26.9

Section 11: Impressicns of the College

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992( OIR 92-1.2)

GENATT3 - STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT RACES GET ALONG-------------------------------------------------

GENATT12 - RACIAL TENSIONS AT COLLEGE

GENATT13 - OFTEN FEEL OUT OF PLACE

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 4.9 5.0 5.1 7.1 7.5AGREE 12.6 13.2 10.3 15.9 9.0DISAGREE 44.7 48.8 50.6 44.1 28.4STRONGLY DISAGREE 33.0 28.1 32.1 31.2 31.3MISSING 4.9 5.0 1.9 1.8 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 15.5 14.9 14.7 10.6 16.4AGREE 58.3 63.6 57.1 60.0 46.3DISAGREE 13.6 9.1 14.1 14.7 10.4STRONGLY DISAGREE 3.9 5.0 11.5 12.9 3.0MISSING 8.7 7.4 2.6 1.8 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 4.9 5.8 11.5 14.7 6.0AGREE 14.6 14.9 14.1 21.2 14.9DISAGREE 43.7 46.3 43 6 40.0 35.8STRONGLY DISAGREE 32.0 27.3 27.6 21.2 17.9MISSING 4.9 5.8 3.2 2.9 25.4

PROBLEM - BIGGEST PROBLEM AT JOHN JAY-------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NO PROBLEM 12.6 5.0 1.3 . 6 9.0FEW MINORITY 3.9 5.0 5.1 7.6 1.5

FACULTYCAFETERIA 1.0 . 8 2.6ADM BUREAUCRACY 1.9 . 8 2.6 2.9 3.0

POOR STUDENTS 2.9 . 8 1.9 1.8

PT/EVENING SERVICES 3.9 6.6 9.0 7.6 9.0

PARKING 1.0 1.7 2.6 2.9 1.5

COMMUTING 1.0 3.3 . 6

STUDENT ATTITUDE 4.9 4.1 5.1 7.6 4.5

RACIAL ISSUES- 3.9 . 8 2.6 3.5FACULTY

RACIAL ISSUES- STUDENTS 1.7 3.2 3.5TAKEOVER 1.7 2.6 1.8FINANCIAL CONCERNS 1.0 5.0 3.2 2.4 3.0TOO MUCH WORK 1.0 . 8 2.6 . 6SERVICES FOR . 8 . 6 1.2TRANSFER STUDENTS

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT . 8 . 6STUDENT GOV-COUNCIL 1.0 . 8 3.8 . 6FACULTY FULL-TIME 4.9 3.3 3.8 2.9 3.0CLASSES OVERCROWDED 1.9 3.3 1.3 . 6CAMPUS HOUSING 1.3 . 6ADJUNCTS . 6SUMMER PROGRAM . 6 . 6NORTH HALL . 8 1.3 1.2COMMUNICATION 2.9 2.5 3.5BETWEEN ADM-STUDENTS

POOR INCENTIVES . 6REGISTRATION 5.8 3.3 5.8 4.7 1.5ADMISSIONS . 8 1.2CANT GET CLASSES 5.8 4.1 4.5 . 6 3.0POOR ADMINISTRATION 1.0OF MAJORS

REMEDIATION . 6 . 6TOO FEW COUNSELORS 1.9 1.3 1.2GETTING OUT . 6

LIBRARY 1.0 . 8 1.9 1.2NO CULTURAL DIVERSITY . 8 .6NOT ENOUGH WRITTEN 1.0 . 6 . 6ASSIGNMENTS

CLASSROOM SPACE . 8SECURITY 1.0 . 8 . 6 1.5SIZE 1.0 . 8SCHEDULING . 6COPS IN CLASS . 6 1.5GETTING A JOB 1.0 1.2ACCOMMODATING 1.0

SMOKERSCLASS DISRUPTIONS . 8 . 6MISSING 30.1 36.4 26.3 30.6 58.2

BEST - BEST THING ABOUT JOHN JAY--------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NOTHING 1.0 5.8 2.6 2.9 1.5FACULTY 13.6 9.9 19.2 15.3 19.4SPECIAL COLLEGE 5.8 6.6 9.6 7.6 4.5LIBRARY 4.9 5.0 3.2 2.9D/E CLASS SCHEDULE 4.9 9.1 9.0 15.3 3.0STUDENT DIVERSITY 1.9 4.1 5.1 2.9 6.0STUDENT FORUM FOR 1.9 _DISCUSSION

STUDENTS HAVE 1.9 2.5 1.3COMMON INTERESTS

STUDENTS GET ALONG 4.9 3.3 2.9 1.5PREPARATION FOR 1.9 .8 1.3CAREER

SUPPORT SERVICES 3.9 1.3 . 6 1.5FACILITIES 1.0 3.3 1.9 1.2 3.0LEARNING 2.9 5.0 1.9 1.8 1.5ENVIRONMENT

ACCEPTANCE OF TRANSFER 1.2CREDITS

CURRICULUM 4.9 4.1 4.5 1.8LOCATION 1.0 . 8 2.4EXTRA CURRICULAR . 6PROGRAMS

CAFETERIA 1.9 . 8 1.3ADMISSIONS . 6EASY TO GET GOOD 1.0GRADES

SMALL SCHOOL 1.0AFFORDABLE . 6MISSING 39.8 38.8 36.5 40.6 58.2

Section III: The Library

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.3)

LIB1 - FIND ASSIGNED BOOKS--------------------------

LIB2 - USE RESERVE MATERIALS----------------------------

LIB3 - RELAXATION AND SOCIALIZING---------------------------------

LIB4 - COURSE-RELATED RESEARCH-------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 33.0 24.8 23.1 22.4 16.4

RARELY 16.5 20.7 21.8 11.8 13.4

ONCE IN A WHILE 25.2 27.3 26.3 30.0 28.4

OFTEN 23.3 24.8 27.6 34.1 16.4

MISSING 1.9 2.5 1.3 1.8 25.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 37.9 38.0 43.6 41.8 37.3

RARELY 26.2 26.4 20.5 24.1 19.4

ONCE IN A WHILE 20.4 19.0 25.0 21.2 9.0

OFTEN 11.7 11.6 8.3 11.2 9.0

MISSING 3.9 5.0 2.6 1.8 25.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 17.5 16.5 15.4 12.4 16.4

RARELY 15.5 16.5 17.9 14.1 11.9

ONCE IN A WHILE 32.0 28.9 29.5 22.9 13.4

OFTEN 34.0 36.4 35.9 48.8 37.3

MISSING 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.8 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 10.7 9.9 9.6 7.1 10.4

RARELY 18.4 14.0 9.6 11.2 13.4

ONCE IN A WHILE 27.2 28.1 34.6 20.6 11.9OFTEN 40.8 42.1 43.6 60.6 40.3

MISSING 2.9 5.8 2.6 . 6 23.9

LIB5 - STUDYING AND READING---------------------------

LIB6 - PERSONAL RESEARCH------------------------

LIB7 - VISIT LIBRARY

LIBS - MICROFICHE MACHINES--------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 12.6 - 13.2 16.7 8.2 17.9SATISFIED 35.0 38.8 37.2 40.6 29.9DISSATISFIED 4.9 11.6 12.8 10.0 3.0VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 1.7 3.2 3.5 4.5CANT JUDGE 42.7 32.2 29.5 37.1 23.9MISSING 1.0 2.5 . 6 . 6 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

ONCE OR TWICE 13.6 13.2 16.7 10.6 22.4ONCE A MONTH 22.3 15.7 16.7 15.3 6.0ONCE A WEEK 25.2 25.6 21.2 27.1 20.9A FEW TIMES A WK 22.3 26.4 29.5 27.6 22.4EVERYDAY 16.5 14.9 12.8 17.6 11.9MISSING 4.1 3.2 1.8 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 26.2 25.6 25.0 22.4 31.3RARELY 16.5 24.8 23.7 20.6 13.4ONCE IN A WHILE 31.1 24.0 29.5 28.2 11.9OFTEN 25.2 24.0 21.2 27.6 19.4MISSING 1.0 1.7 . 6 1.2 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEVER 16.5 14.0 15.4 12.4 20.9RARELY 18.4 14.0 11.5 11.2 10.4ONCE IN A WHILE 20.4 18.2 28.8 21.8 14.9OFTEN 42.7 51.2 42.9 54.1 31.3MISSING 1.9 2.5 1.3 . 6 22.4

LIB9 - COMPUTERIZED CD-ROM SEARCH---------------------------------

LIB10 - INSTRUCTION ON USE OF LIBRARY-------------------------------------

LIB11 - COMPUTERIZED CARD CATALOG---------------------------------

LIB12 - AVAILABILITY OF MATERIALS---------------------------------

1 A rZ

3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 16.5 24.0 24.4 20.6 13.4

SATISFIED 34.0 34.7 41.7 41.8 31.3

DISSATISFIED 6.8 5.0 6.4 5.3 3.0

VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 2.5 3.2 2.4

CANT JUDGE 36.9 29.8 23.1 26.5 31.3

MISSING 1.9 4.1 1.3 3.5 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 19.4 14.0 14.1 14.7 11.9

SATISFIED 21.4 27.3 28.2 41.8 20.9

DISSATISFIED 3.9 4.1 5.8 2.9

VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 1.7 2.6 1.8 1.5

CANT JUDGE 50.5 50.4 48.7 38.2 43.3

MISSING 1.0 2.5 . 6 . 6 22.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 12.6 13.2 12.8 13.5 13.4SATISFIED 40.8 47.1 49.4 47.6 22.4

DISSATISFIED 21.4 12.4 21.8 19.4 22.4

VERY DISSATISFIED 5.8 12.4 6.4 10.0 4.5CANT JUDGE 17.5 9.9 9.6 8.8 13.4MISSING 1.9 5.0

11,

. 6 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 18.4 20.7 19.2 13.5 11.9

SATISFIED 39.8 38.0 41.0 48.2 31.3

DISSATISFIED 14.6 11.6 15.4 12.9 10.4

VERY DISSATISFIED 5.8 9.1 5.8 6.5 1.5

CANT JUDGE 20.4 17.4 18.6 15.9 23.9

MISSING 1.0 3.3 2.9 20.9

LIB13 - COPY MACHINES

LIB14 - EVENING HOURS---------------------

LIB15 - WEEKEND HOURS---------------------

LIB16 - READING SPACE---------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 15.5 13.2 16.0 11.2 10.4SATISFIED 30.1 33.1 34.0 31.8 19.4DISSATISFIED 6.8 7.4 11.5 20.6 9.0VERY DISSATISFIED 7.8 7.4 5.1 10.0 6.0CANT JUDGE 37.9 36.4 31.4 25.3 34.3MISSING 1.9 2.5 1.9 1.2 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 17.5 22.3 17.9 13.5 19.4SATISFIED 45.6 42.1 43.6 51.8 28.4DISSATISFIED 1.9 5.8 8.3 10.0 7.5VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 5.0 3.2 5.9 1.5CANT JUDGE 28.2 21.5 25.6 17.6 20.9MISSING 2.9 3.3 1.3 1.2 22.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 15.5 19.0 18.6 15.3 22.4SATISFIED 61.2 55.4 56.4 61.8 40.3DISSATISFIED 4.9 6.6 13.5 12.4 4.5VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 5.0 3.8 3.5CANT JUDGE 12.6 11.6 7.7 5.9 11.9MISSING 1.9 2.5 1.2 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 23.3 19.8 18.6 17.6 19.4SATISFIED 52.4 55.4 58.3 58.2 34.3DISSATISFIED 5.8 6.6 12.8 11.2 4.5VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 4.1 1.9 6.5 1.5CANT JUDGE 13.6 11.6 8.3 4.1 14.9MISSING 1.9 2.5 2.4 25.4

LIB17 - TEMPERATURE

LIB18 - LIBRARY LIGHTING

LIB19 - LIBRARY NOISE

SAT6 - SATISFACTION WITH LIBRARY--------------------------------

5

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 20.4 19.0 14.7 9.4 19.4SATISFIED 49.5 43.0 53.2 48.2 34.3'DISSATISFIED 9.7 17.4 14.1 17.6 9.0VERY DISSATISFIED 8.7 12.4 12.2 18.8 6.0CANT JUDGE 10.7 5.8 5.8 4.1 7.5MISSING 1.0 2.5 1.8 23.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 26.2 24.8 21.8 15.9 20.9SATISFIED 54.4 58.7 62.8 65.3 37.3DISSATISFIED 7.8 5.0 9.0 8.8 7.5VERY DISSATISFIED 1.0 4.1 1.3 4.7 1.5CANT JUDGE 8.7 5.0 5.1 2.4 10.4MISSING 1.9 2.5 2.9 22.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 42.7 40.5 42.3 40.6 47.8SATISFIED 39.8 51.2 41.7 42.9 41.8DISSATISFIED 7.8 2.5 5.8 7.1VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 2.5 3.8 5.3 3.0CANT JUDGE 5.8 3.3 5.8 2.4 4.5, ;MISSING . 6 1.8 3.0

-------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 24.3 22.3 19.2 15.9 22.4SATISFIED 57.3 57.9 63.5 61.8 40.3DISSATISFIED 3.9 6.6 9.0 11.8 3.0VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 4.1 1.9 4.7 4.5CANT JUDGE 8.7 6.6 6.4 2.9 9.0MISSING 2.9 2.5 2.9 20.9

ACEXP4 - MISSING BOOKS AND PAGES IN LIBRARY-------------------------------------------

ACEXP12 - HAVE THE LIBRARY SKILLS---------------------------------

ACEXP16 - NEED MORE INSTRUCTION IN HOW TO USE THE LIBRARY---------------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 15.5 9.1 11.5 11.2 14.9

AGREE 38.8 33.1 34.0 25.9 43.3

DISAGREE 26.2 33.9 37.2 38.8 14.9

STRONGLY DISAGREE 16.5 21.5 15.4 21.2 13.4

MISSING 2.9 2.5 1.9 2.9 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 16.5 24.8 20.5 34.1 17.9

AGREE 53.4 47.9 58.3 41.2 38.8

DISAGREE 18.4 19.0 14.7 17.1 22.4

STRONGLY DISAGREE 8.7 5.8 5.1 2.4 6.0

MISSING 2.9 2.5 1.3 5.3 14.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 4.9 14.0 10.3 14.1 10.4

AGREE 17.5 13.2 19.9 22.4 16.4

DISAGREE 44.7 41.3 45.5 42.4 41.8

STRONGLY DISAGREE 29.1 28.9 23.7 17.1 16.4

MISSING 3.9 2.5 . 6 4.1 14.9

Section IV: Personal Characteristics

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.4)

GENATT11 - EXPECT TO TRANSFER-----------------------------

SEX

FEMALE

48.5 46.3 55.1 47.6 46.3MALE

51.5 52.1 44.9 52.4 25.4MISSING

1.7

28.4

AGE

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

16-22 68.9 54.5 46.2 28.2 44.823-24 10.7 14.0 16.7 20.0 13.425-29 6.8 12.4 16.0 25.3 4.530-39 8.7 14.9 17.3 17.6 7.540+ 3.9 2.5 3.2 8.2MISSING 1.0 1.7 . 6 . 6 29.9

ETHNIC - ETHNICITY

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

BLACK 39.8 38.0 35.3 32.9 35.8WHITE 22.3 24.8 30.8 36.5 9.0ASIAN OR PAC ISL 1.9 3.3 2.6 2.9HISPANIC 27.2 20.7 21.2 20.0 16.4OTHER 4.9 5.8 7.1 4.1 7.5DOUBLE . 8 . 6MISSING 3.9 6.6 2.6 3.5 31.3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 7.8 8.3 3.2 1.8 7.5AGREE 18.4 9.9 6.4 7.6 9.0DISAGREE 36.9 40.5 42.3 41.2 28.4STRONGLY DISAGREE 30.1 35.5 42.9 45.3 25.4MISSING 6.8 5.8 5.1 4.1 29.9

KIDS - NUMBER OF CHILDREN

WHOURS - HOURS EMPLOYED PER WEEK

FINAID - FINANCIAL AID STATUS

DEGOBJ - CURRENT DEGREE OBJECTIVE

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

0 OR MISSING 78.6 76.9 81.4 88.2 91.01 15.5 14.0 13.5 7.1 3.02 4.9 6.6 3.8 2.93 1.7 1.3 1.24 . 8 . 69+ 1.0 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NOT SPECIFIED 12.6 - 6.6 1.3 2.4 9.0ASSOCIATE 12.6 8.3 3.8 . 6 6.0BACHELORS 63.1 73.6 87.8 94.1 43.3MASTERS 11.7 10.7 5.8 2.4 9.0MISSING . 8 1.3 . 6 32.8

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NOT EMPLOYED 31.1 15.7 18.6 20.0 26.91-19 9.7 11.6 10.9 7.1 7.520-34 24.3 24.8 25.6 27.1 14.935+ 34.0 47.9 43.6 45.9 19.4MISSING 1.0 1.3 31.3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NONE 42.7 45.5 57.1 62.9 29.9SOME 24.3 20.7 19.9 14.1 6.0MOST OR ALL 32.0 33.1 23.1 22.9 31.3MISSING 1.0 . 8 32.8

CREDITS - CREDITS EARNED------------------------

0-12

47.613-27

52.428-43

44.644-60

55.461-76

48.177-93

51.994-110

49.4111+

50.6MISSING

100.00

TRANS - TRANSFER STATUS-----------------------

GPA - GRADE POINT AVERAGE

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

-------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

>1 . 61.0-1.4 1.01.5-1.9 1.9 . 82.0-2.4 7.8 7.4 7.7 2.9 3.02.5-2.9 21.4 32.2 25.6 28.2 1.53.0-3.4 18.4 27.3 32.7 44.1 9.03.5-4.0 16.5 16.5 22.4 19.4 4.5MISSING 33.0 15.7 10.9 5.3 82.1

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NO 72.8 65.3 45.5 42.4 44.8YES 25.2 33.1 53.8 55.9 17.9MISSING 1.9 1.7 .6 1.8 37.3

MAJ - MAJOR

SIT1 - FULL-TIME OR PART-TIME STUDENT-------------------------------------

SIT2 - FINANCIAL AID NEED-------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

FOS . 8PSC 1.0 . 8 .6BEH 2.9 1.7 3.2 6.5 1.5CIS 1.0 . 8 1.3 1.5CJP 1.9 1.9COA 2.9CRJ 18.4 28.9 31.4 34.7 20.9CRM 4.9 6.6 3.8 1.2FOS . 8FPM . 6FIS . 6FOS 1.0 . 8 1.3 2.4 3.0FPM . 6GOV 2.9 3.3 3.8 3.5LAW 1.2LGL 9.7 16.5 22.4 22.9 9.0PAD .8 4.5 . 6 1.5PSC 11.7 14.0 9.0 10.6 3.0PSY 8.7 6.6 5.8 9.4 6.0SEC 1.9 2.5 1.9 . 6NO MAJOR 12.6 5.0 1.3 1.8 4.5MISSING 18.4 9.9 7.1 3.5 49.3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNY TOWN

USUALLY FULL-TIME 75.7 71.9 73.1 65.9 49.3USUALLY PART-TIME 19.4 22.3 23.7 28.2 14.9MISSING 4.9 5.8 3.2 5.9 35.8

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

NEED FIN AID 63.1 54.5 50.6 40.6 41.8DONT NEED AID 27.2 26.4 39.7 38.2 14.9MISSING 9.7 19.0 9.6 21.2 43.3

SITS - DAY AND/OR EVENING STUDENT---------------------------------

DAY STUDENT DAY AND EVENING EVENING STUDENT MISSING

SIT4 - STUDENT AND/OR WORKER----------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STUDENT 25.2 14.9 16.0 17.6 19.4STUDENT WHO WORKS 20.4 18.2 20.5 20.0 6.0WORK AND GO TO 43.7 53.7 51.3 51.2 29.9SCHOOLMISSING 10.7 13.2 12.2 11.2 44.8

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

43.7 32.2 42.3 31.2 19.425.2 33.1 26.9 37.6 16.426.2 28.9 25.6 23.5 26.94.9 5.8 5.1 7.6 37.3

Section V: Preparation for Registration

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.5)

REG1 - MET WITH COUNSELOR TO PREPARE FOR REGISTRATION

REG2 - TALKED WITH NON-JJ FRIENDS---------------------------------

REG3 - CONSULTED INFORMATION PROVIDED

REG4 - MET WITH FACULTY ADVISOR IN MAJOR

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 39.8 21.5 19.2 13.5 26.9VERY HELPFUL 32.0 47.9 55.8 61.2 47.8SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 19.4 22.3 19.2 18.8 19.4NOT HELPFUL 2.9 3.3 . 6 . 6MISSING 5.8 5.0 5.1 5.9 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 62.1 51.2 48.1 42.9 55.2VERY HELPFUL 19.4 23.1 28.2 30.0 23.9SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 10.7 20.7 16.0 19.4 13.4NOT HELPFUL 4.9 2.5 3.8 1.8 1.5MISSING 2.9 2.5 3.8 5.9 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 78.6 - 74.4 67.9 63.5 74.6VERY HELPFUL 9.7 9.1 15.4 15.3 14.9SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 2.9 6.6 7.1 10.6 3.0NOT HELPFUL 3.9 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.5MISSING 4.9 8.3 8.3 9.4 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 42.7 48.8 53.8 56.5 43.3VERY HELPFUL 20.4 22.3 15.4 12.9 20.9SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 25.2 19.8 21.8 17.6 25.4NOT HELPFUL 6.8 5.0 3.2 4.1 3.0MISSING 4.9 4.1 5.8 8.8 7.5

REG5 - TALKED WITH OTHER JOHN JAY STUDENTS------------------------------------------

REG6 - READ THE REGISTRATION NEWSPAPER--------------------------------------

REG7 - MET WITH SOPHOMORE ADVISOR---------------------------------

REG8 - TALKED TO PROFESSORS---------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 87.4 76.0 79.5 80.6 83.6VERY HELPFUL 2.9 6.6 7.7 4.1 1.5SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 1.9 9.9 2.6 4.1 3.0NOT HELPFUL 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.2MISSING 4.9 4.1 7.1 10.0 11.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 56.3 49.6 42.3 40.6 50.7VERY HELPFUL 10.7 25.6 30.8 29.4 17.9SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 22.3 19.8 16.7 18.2 20.9NOT HELPFUL 6.8 . 8 3.8 1.8 1.5MISSING 3.9 4.1 6.4 10.0 9.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 26.2 ?.5.6 25.6 29.4 32.8VERY HELPFUL 34.0 38.8 33.3 32.4 37.3SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 30.1 27.3 27.6 26.5 20.9NOT HELPFUL 4.9 . 8 5.1 5.3 1.5MISSING 4.9 7.4 8.3 6.5 7.5

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 62.1 - 61.2 66.0 61.8 64.2VERY HELPFUL 22.3 20.7 16.7 18.2 20.9SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 12.6 12.4 9.0 11.8 9.0NOT HELPFUL 1.3 1.2MISSING 2.9 5.8 7.1 7.1 6.0

REG9 - USED THE CATALOG-----------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT DO THIS 10.7 7.4 3.8 2.9 7.5VERY HELPFUL 54.4 61.2 69.9 74.7 62.7SOMEWHAT HELPFUL 32.0 25.6 22.4 18.2 25.4NOT HELPFUL 1.9 1.7 . 6 . 6MISSING 1.0 4.1 3.2 3.5 4.5

Section VI: The Registration Process

Office of I nstitutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.6)

REG10 - KNEW WHAT COURSES I WANTED & MANAGED TO GET THEM--------------------------------------------------------

DID NOT HAPPEN

56.3

64.5

51.3.

33.5

56.7HAPPENED 43.7 35.5 48.7 66.5 43.3

REG11 - KNEW WHAT COURSES TO TAKE BUT COULD NOT GET MOST--------------------------------------------------------

DID NOT HAPPEN

67.0

56.2

67.3

78.8

73.1HAPPENED 33.0 43.8 32.7 21.2 26.9

REG12 - FIGURED OUT WHAT COURSES TO TAKE WHILE THERE----------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT HAPPEN

90.3

94.2

95.5

97.1

86.6HAPPENED

9.7 5.8 4.5 2.9 13.4

REG13 - TOOK WHATEVER COURSES FIT MY SCHEDULE OR AVAILABLE----------------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT HAPPEN

80.6

83.5

81.4

87.6

80.6HAPPENED 19.4 16.5 18.6 12.4 19.4

REG14 - CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT TO TAKE-----------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

DID NOT HAPPEN

90.3

97.5

96.2

98.2

92.5HAPPENED

9.7 2.5 3.8 1.8 7.5

Section VII: Services, Facilities, Extra Curricular Activities

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992( OIR 92-1. 7)

SAT1 - SATISFACTION WITH MICRO-COMPUTER LAB-------------------------------------------

SAT2 - SATISFACTION WITH BOOK STORE-----------------------------------

SAT3 - SATISFACTION WITH CHILDRENS CENTER-----------------------------------------

SAT4 - SATISFACTION WITH WRITING CENTER

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 1.9 5.0 3.2 1.2 7.5SATISFIED 4.9 3.3 1.9 4.1 4.5DISSATISFIED 1.9 . 6 1.5VERY DISSATISFIED . 6 1.5CANT JUDGE 88.3 90.1 89.7 88.8 71.6MISSING 2.9 1.7 5.1 4.7 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 21.4 21.5 19.9 11.8 26.9SATISFIED 59.2 57.9 48.1 52.9 47.8DISSATISFIED 8.7 9.1 13.5 18.8 9.0VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 8.3 13.5 11.8 9.0CANT JUDGE 3.9 1.7 1.3 2.4 1.5MISSING 2.9 1.7 3.8 2.4 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 10.7 22.3 19.2 15.3 26.9SATISFIED 16.5 23.1 26.9 22.9 19.4DISSATISFIED 1.9 2.5 1.8 1.5VERY DISSATISFIED 2.5 1.3 1.2 1.5CANT JUDGE 68.9 49.6 50.0 56.5 44.8MISSING 1.9 2.6 2.4 6.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 11.7 11.6 12.8 7.6 7.5SATISFIED 12.6 19.8 16.7 17.1 19.4DISSATISFIED 1.9 3.3 1.9 . 6VERY DISSATISFIED 5.8 . 8 1.3 1.8CANT JUDGE 67.0 62.8 65.4 69.4 59.7

41MISSING 1.0 1.7 1.9 3.5 13.4

SAT5 - SATISFACTION WITH CAFETERIA----------------------------------

SAT9 - SATISFACTION WITH FACILITIES FOR DISABLED------------------------------------------------

SAT11 - SATISFACTION WITH PERSONAL PROBLEM COUNSELING-----------------------------------------------------

SAT12 - SATISFACTION WITH CAREER/VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE----------------------------------------------------

164

2

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 3.9 5.0 5.1 2.9 10.4SATISFIED 3.9 8.3 5.1 8.2 4.5DISSATISFIED 1.0 1.9 1.8VERY DISSATISFIED 1.0 .8 1.8CANT JUDGE 86.4 83.5 85.3 81.2 68.7MISSING 3.9 2.5 2.6 4.1 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 1.9 5.8 5.1 4.7 10.4SATISFIED 8.7 8.3 10.3 8.8 10.4DISSATISFIED 3.9 .8 1.9 2.9VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 1.7 3.8 2.4 1.5CANT JUDGE 79.6 81.0 76.3 76.5 64.2MISSING 2.9 2.5 2.6 4.7 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 6.8 9.1 9.6 10.6 9.0SATISFIED 12.6 19.8 12.8 17.6 16.4DISSATISFIED 2.9 4.1 7.7 6.5 4.5VERY DISSATISFIED 1.9 2.5 9.6 7.6 1.5CANT JUDGE 73.8 62.0 57.7 54.7 52.2MISSING 1.9 2.5 2.6 2.9 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 9.7 12.4 12.8 5.9 16.4SATISFIED 57.3 49.6 46.2 45.9 46.3DISSATISFIED 16.5 14.0 16.7 16.5 17.9VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 5.8 7.7 11.2 6.0CANT JUDGE 11.7 18.2 15.4 18.2 6.0MISSING 1.9 1.3 2.4 7.5

SAT13 - SATISFACTION WITH HEALTH SERVICES

SAT14 - SATISFACTION WITH PLACEMENT SERVICES--------------------------------------------

SAT15 - SATISFACTION WITH EXTRA-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES-----------------------------------------------------

SAT16 - SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE IN GENERAL--------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 31.1 23.1 17.9 17.1 29.9SATISFIED 51.5 62.8 59.6 57.6 47.8DISSATISFIED 8.7 9.1 12.8 10.6 7.5VERY DISSATISFIED 1.0 3.8 7.1CANT JUDGE 5.8 4.1 3,8 5.3 4.5MISSING 1.9 . 8 1.9 2.4 10.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 2.9 5.0 2.6 2.9 11.9SATISFIED 11.7 6.6 7.7 8.2 6.0DISSATISFIED 5.8 3.3 7.7 2.4 4.5VERY DISSATISFIED 3.9 1.7 9.0 7.1 1.5CANT JUDGE 72.8 82.6 71.2 77.1 62.7MISSING 2.9 . 8 1.9 2.4 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 2.9 5.8 7.1 5.3 4.5SATISFIED 8.7 13.2 7.7 8.8 9.0DISSATISFIED 7.8 7.4 7.1 10.6 7.5VERY DISSATISFIED 4.9 5.8 7.1 6.5 9.0CANT JUDGE 73.8 66.9 69.9 67.6 56.7MISSING 1.9 .8 1.3 1.2 13.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 13.6 14.9 11.5 10.6 23.9SATISFIED 23.3 17.4 22.4 18.8 17.9DISSATISFIED 3.9 1.7 6.4 2.9VERY DISSATISFIED 2.9 2.5 1.9 4.1CANT JUDGE 54.4 63.6 55.1 60.6 49.3MISSING 1.9 2.6 2.9 9.0

SAT17 - SATISFACTION WITH CONCERTS, PLAYS, ETC.-----------------------------------------------

SAT19 - SATISFACTION WITH ATHLETIC FACILITIES

SAT20 - SATISFACTION WITH CAMPUS SECURITY

SAT21 - SATISFACTION WITH CAMPUS PARTIES

166

4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 15.5 19.8 13.5 16.5 16.4SATISFIED 26.2 28.9 34.0 27.6 26.9DISSATISFIED 1.0 3.3 3.2 1.8 3.0VERY DISSATISFIED 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.8CANT JUDGE 53.4 44.6 43.6 49.4 41.8MISSING 2.9 1.7 4.5 2.9 11.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 9.7 13.2 9.0 7.6 13.4SATISFIED 54.4 50.4 46.2 43.5 40.3DISSATISFIED 6.8 11.6 11.5 11.8 9.0VERY DISSATISFIED 5.8 5.8 3.8 13.5 6.0CANT JUDGE 21.4 16.5 25.6 20.6 22.4MISSING 1.9 2.5 3.8 2.9 9.0

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 1.9 8.3 5.1 3.5 11.9SATISFIED 11.7 14.0 12.2 14.7 13.4DISSATISFIED 6.8 8.3 8.3 8.2 9.0VERY DISSATISFIED 6.8 10.7 5.1 9.4 4.5CANT JUDGE 70.9_ 57.9 67.3 61.2 53.7MISSING 1.9 . 8 1.9 2.9 7.5

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

VERY SATISFIED 4.9 5.8 7.1 5.3 11.9SATISFIED 19.4 14.9 17.3 21.8 17.9DISSATISFIED 2.9 5.8 5.1 4.7 1.5VERY DISSATISFIED 1.9 . 8 1.9 3.5CANT JUDGE 68.9 70.2 66.0 61.2 56.7MISSING 1.9 2.5 2.6 3.5 11.9

D02 - ATTENDED COLLEGE COMMITTEE MEETING----------------------------------------

D03 - ATTENDED JJC LECTURE OR PRESENTATION------------------------------------------

D05 - ATTENDED COLLEGE COUNCIL MEETING--------------------------------------

D06 - ATTENDED STUDENT CLUB MEETING-----------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 20.4 25.6 21.2 26.5 13.4NO 77.7 67.8 75.6 70.6 62.7DONT RECALL 1.0 3.3 2.6 2.4 6.0MISSING 1.0 3.3 . 6 . 6 17.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 10.7 4.1 7.1 4.7 1.5NO 85.4 89.3 90.4 92.4 73.1DONT RECALL 1.9 3.3 1.3 1.8 4.5MISSING 1.9 3.3 1.3 1.2 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 16.5 19.0 23.7 21.2 25.4NO 79.6 76.0 73.7 76.5 52.2DONT RECALL 1.0 1.7 1.3 1.2 3.0MISSING 2.9 3.3 1.3 1.2 19.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 9.7 6.6 9.6 10.6 7.5NO 87.4 86.0 88.5 85.9 70.1DONT RECALL 1.9 5.0 1.3 2.4 4.5MISSING 1.0 2.5 . 6 1.2 17.9

D07 - ATTENDED JJC PLAY OR CONCERT----------------------------------

D08 - BOUGHT FOOD IN THE CAFETERIA----------------------------------

D09 - USED THE ATHLETIC FACILITIES----------------------------------

D010 - ATTENDED TOWN MEETING----------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 11.7 21.5 17.3 17.1 11.9

NO 83.5 74.4 79.5 80.0 64.2

DONT RECALL 1.9 1.7 1.3 1.2 3.0

MISSING 2.9 2.5 1.9 1.8 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 14.6 10.7 11.5 12.9 7.5

NO 83.5 85.1 84.6 82.9 68.7

DONT RECALL 1.0 2.5 1.3 2.4 1.5

MISSING 1.0 1.7 2.6 1.8 22.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 82.5 77.7 79.5 81.2 58.2

NO 15.5 19.0 19.9 17.6 22.4

DONT RECALL 1.0 . 8 . 6 3.0

MISSING 1.0 2.5 1.2 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 35.0 40.5 39.7 32.4 25.4NO 62.1 52.9 60.3 65.3 55.2

DONT RECALL 1.9 2.5 . 6 1.5MISSING 1.0 4.1 1.8 17.9

DO11 - READ THE JOHN JAY NEWS

D012 - READ THE LEX REVIEW--------------------------

D013 - READ JOHN JAY STUDENT NEWS---------------------------------

D014 - LOOKED AT EXHIBITS IN THE LOBBIES----------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 40.8 47.9 51.9 60.0 29.9NO 54.4 47.1 43.6 38.2 46.3DONT RECALL 1.9 4.1 3.2 1.2 3.0MISSING 2.9 . 8 1.3 . 6 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 58.3 63.6 56.4 58.2 37.3NO 35.0 29.8 37.2 35.3 38.8DONT RECALL 5.8 5.8 3.8 5.3 3.0MISSING 1.0 . 8 2.6 1.2 20.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 80.6 86.8 84.0 85.9 67.2NO 15.5 9.9 13.5 13.5 11.9DONT RECALL 2.9 1.7 2.6 4.5MISSING 1.0 1.7 . 6 16.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 63.1 71.9 67.3 69.4 41.8NO 32.0 21.5 30.1 26.5 35.8DONT RECALL 2.9 4.1 1.9 2.9 3.0MISSING 1.9 2.5 . 6 1.2 19.4

Section Vlll: Student Governance

Office of Institutional ResearchJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeThe City University of New YorkJanuary 1992(OIR 92-1.8)

VOTE - VOTE IN THE STUDENT COUNCIL ELECTION-------------------------------------------

DO1 - SPOKE WITH STUDENT COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE-----------------------------------------------

D04 - ATTENDED STUDENT COUNCIL MEETING--------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

KNEW WHO 1 7.8 19.0 20.5 21.2 4.5VOTED FOR

DIDNT KNOW WHO 4.9 11.6 5.8 7.6 4.5I VOTED FOR

DIDNT KNOW 20.4 15.7 7.1 10.0 14.9ABOUT ELECTION

DIDNT KNOW 26.2 21.5 32.1 27.1 10.4ABOUT CANDIDATE

DIDNT VOTE 9.7 12.4 13.5 18.2 7.5UNABLE TO VOTE 5.8 8.3 6.4 7.1WASNT HERE 22.3 7.4 12.2 2.4 32.8MISSING 2.9 4.1 2.6 6.5 25.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 9.7 5.0 3.8 5.3 6.0NO 88.3 89.3 92.9 90.6 71.6DONT RECALL 1.0 2.5 2.6 2.4 3.0MISSING 1.0 3.3 . 6 1.8 19.4

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

YES 13.6 23.1 23.1 19.4 7.5NO 81.6 71.1 74.4 74.7 70.1DONT RECALL 2.9 2.5 2.6 4.1 4.5MISSING 1.9 3.3 1.8 17.9

GENATTI - STUDENT COUNCIL REPRESENTS STUDENT BODY-------------------------------------------------

GENATT2 - STUDENT COUNCIL REPRESENTS MY INTERESTS-------------------------------------------------

GENATT7 - STUDENTS INFLUENCE JJ DECISIONS-----------------------------------------

GENATTS - LIKE TO BE MORE INVOLVED IN STUDENT GOV-------------------------------------------------

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 8.7 - 12.4 9.6 2.9 11.9AGREE 30.1 29.8 33.3 38.8 26.9DISAGREE 40.8 33.1 32.1 32.4 17.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 14.6 15.7 21.2 20.0 11.9MISSING 5.3 9.1 3.8 5.9 31.3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.8 4.5AGREE 46.6 33.9 32.1 34.7 34.3DISAGREE 24.3 31.4 37.8 34.7 17.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 9.7 19.0 20.5 22.9 11.9MISSING 16.5 12.4 6.4 5.9 31.3

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 1.9 3.3 1.9 1.8 6.0AGREE 39.8 30.6 26.9 27.6 26.9DISAGREE 29.1 35.5 41.7 38.8 23.9STRONGLY DISAGREE 11.7 18.2 22.4 24.7 13.4MISSING 17.5 12.4 7.1 7.1 29.9

FRESHMAN SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR STANDINGUNKNOWN

STRONGLY AGREE 1.0 9.9 7.7 7.1 6.0AGREE 44.7 33.1 36.5 38.8 34.3DISAGREE 31.1 38.8 37.8 34.1 16.4STRONGLY DISAGREE 12.6 9.1 14.1 14.1 11.9MISSING 10.7 9.1 3.8 5.9 31.3

JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

A General Survey

of

John Jay Undergraduates

This survey is very important to youand to John Jayl

What is it about?

As you may know, this year the college's accreditation is beingreviewed by the Middle State's Association. This only happensevery ten years and is one of the most important events in thelife of a college. The results determine whether or not JohnJay's degree programs are approved by the state and federalgovernment. As part of this event, next semester John Jay will bevisited by a team of distinguished people from other colleges. Toprepare for their visit, many faculty members and students arehelping to conduct a 'self-study' of the college to find out howwell the college is serving you and your fellow students.

This survey is part of that 'self-study' and allows you toparticipate in the effort. You are not asked to identifyyourself and it is crucial that you be honest in your responses.You should also be sure to complete all items.

Thank you for participating!

Please do not put your name orsocial security number on this booklet.

YOUR PREPARA T10N FOR REGISTRA TION Tlll ; SEMESTERWe are interested in how you prepared fi)r registering this sernesler.

In this section and thosethat follow, check the bo.r that best describes you or enter the information requested.

Check how helpful each of the following was in preparing for registration:

l did this and it was .

.

.

.1 did

----------- ___----------------- _____not

very

s mrwhat

notdo this

helpful

helpful

helpful

.

Who; happened when you went to registration? Check any of the following which describehow you felt or what happened to you during registration:

[ 3

I knew what courses I wanted and managed to get them.[ )

I already knew what courses I wanted but couldn't get most of them. . .

.[ 3 I didn't really know when I went there but figured it out while I was there.;

( 3

I ended up taking whatever courses fit ary schedule or I could get.[ 3 Basically, I was confused about what to take when I went to registration.

YOUR SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE SERVICESFor each of the college services and facilities listed below, show your level of satisfaction with itby checking the aj~propriate box from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. If you have not usedthe service or facetity, please check that you can't judge it.

microcomputer labsatairfirycd

I )sati.*fied

[ 3

diua&fiad[ 3

dtoufled( 3

de[ 1

campus book store [ 3 [ 3 [ 3 [ ) [ 3:Children's Center I ) [ ) ( ) [ 3 [ )

writing center [ 3 1 3 [ ) [ 3 [ 3cafeteria [ ) ( ) ( ) [ 3 [ 3.

Library [ 3 [ 3 [ 3 ( ) ( I

academic advising/course planning [) [ ) [ 3 [ ) [ 3.Freshman/new student orientation [ 3 (3 [ 3 [ 3 [ 3facilities for disabled students [ 3 [ 3 [ 3 [ 3 [ ).

availability of your advisor I ) [ 3 [ 3 [ 3 ( 3;personal problem counseling ( I 13 [ 3 [ 3 ( )career/vocational guidance [ 3 13 1 3 13 [ 3

student health services I ) 1 3 13 I ) [ 3job placement services [ 3 [ 3 [ ) [ 3 [ )

extra-curricular activities ( ) [ 3 I ) I ) [ 3the college in general [ I [ I I ) 1 3 [ 3concerts, plays, etc. 13 [ I [ I [ ) [ 3classroom facilities [ ) [ I I ) [ ) [ ).athletic facilities [ ) [ 3 ( ) [ ) ( )

campus security [ 3 I ) [ ) [ 3 ( 3campus parties I ) I ) [ 1 1 3 I )

I met with a counselor from the Counseling Dept [ ) [ ) [ ) [ 1.I talked with non-John Jay friends or relatives ( ) [ ) [ ) [ ):".

I consulted information provided by my major [ ) [ ) [ ) [ 3

I met with a faculty advisor in my major ( ) [ ) [ ) [ )I talked with other John Jay students [ ) [ ) [ I ( ).

I read the registration newspaper [ 3 [ ) I ) [ 3I met with my sophomore advisor [ ) ( 3 [ 3 [ 3~

I talked to my professors [ 3 [ 3 [ ) [ 3.I used the catalog ' [ I [ I [ ) [ ) .

YOUR ACADEMIC WORK THIS SEMESTERIn this section we are interested in jour experiences u: J,,hn Jav this semester.

How many courses are you taking this semester?

courses

What kind of exams do you have in those courses? Essaysor objective exams (e.g., multiple choice, true/false)?

[ I all essay exams

t I mostly essay exams

( I about half and half

[ I mostly objective exams

[ I all objective exams

[ I I don't have any exams this semester

How about assignments besides exams? Indicate how many of each ofthe following you are assigned this semester:

About how many pages of writing assignments would you say you have submitted

pagesi n your courses this semester?

(Estimate the number of double spaced

( l don't know

typed pages. one such page is about 250 words).

[ I none

About how much time do you spend on school work outsideof the classroom (reading, studying, doing research, etc.) ascompared to the time you spend in class?

[ I a lot more time outside than inside the classroomt I somewhat more time outside than in the classroomt I about the same time outside and inside the classroom[ I somewhat less time outside the classroom than inside

( I a lot less time outside than inside the classroom

YOUR SATISFACTION WITH REMEDIAL COURSESJohn Jay provides remedial courses (e.g., ENG 099, MATH 100, COMM 101) to help you improve youracademic skills. For each of the following areas, indicate how much you think these courses helped you:

I've never

I've taken

I've taken suchtaken such

s

h a cpur.Te

a tour e but 'ta course

an

it hepe

wasn't elpJul

writing

( I

[ I

t Icommunication skills

t I

[ I .

[ Imath

[ I

( I

[ I

none 1 2 3+

term paper [ I [ I t I [ I ,book review ( I t I t I [ I .

other written assignment [ I t l [ l ( loral presentation ( I [ I I I [ 1

YOUR VIEWS ABOUT YOUR ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE THIS SEMESTERB(ised on your erheriences tlri.r .cerrrester, host , much chi)-uu agree car disagree tivith thefullurving statements?

YOUR INVOLVEMENT WITH

ACTIVITIES AT JOHN JAYHere we'd like to know something about your activities at John Jay.

Did you vote in the last Student Council election?

[ ]

Yes, I voted and knew who I was voting for

I I

Yes, I voted but didn't really know who I was voting for

( I

No, I didn't vote because I didn't know about it

[ I

No, I knew about it but didn't know enough about the candidates to vote

( I

No, I didn't bother to vote because it doesn't really make any difference( I

No, I wanted to vote but wasn't able to

I l

No, I wasn't here last semester

Check whether or not you have done the things on the list below this semester .

strongly stronglyagree agree disagree duagree

I really do not have the background I need for some of the courses I am taking. [ I [ I I I IWe've studied how differences between men and women relate to the course topic. ( I I I ( I [ I

We've studied how racial and ethnic factors are related to the course topic. I I ( l [ I ( 1Missing books and pages in the library are a real problem this semester. [ I [ I ( I I ]iStudents in my classes seem well prepared for the level of the course. [ I ( l [ ] [ ]( .I've ended up taking any courses I could get rather than those 1 need. [ I I I [ ] 1 liMy teachers try hard to help students understand the course material. ( I [ I [ I ( I

I nstructors expect too much of students for the level of the courses. I I ( I [ I ( lThe reading assigned in my courses is challenging and interesting. ( l [ I I I [ ].

The syllabi or course outlines provided for courses are clear. ( ] I I [ I [ IToo many courses -that I needed this semester were unavailable. [ l [ I [ l (

I have the library skills I need to complete my assignments. [ I ( I ( I [ I

There is so much reading assigned I can't'get it all done. ( I I I I I ( IThere are too few upper level courses offered in my major. [ I [ ] I ] I lMost students in the class are better prepared than I am. [ I [ I [ I I ]

I need more instruction in how to use the library. [ I [ I I I I Ioverall my courses seem too easy for college. ( l [ I ( ] [ ]~

don'(_ -Yes no recall .

I spoke with a student council representative ( I I I [ II attended a meeting of a college committee ( I [ I I I

I attended a JJC lecture or presentation ( I [ 1 [ II attended a student council meeting I ] I I ( lI attended a college council meeting ( I [ I [ I

I attended a student club meeting ( I I I I II attended a JJC play or concert [ I ( I I I

I bought food in the cafeteria I I I I [ ];.I used the athletic facilities I I ( I [ 3-

1 attended a Town Meeting [ I [ I [ II read the John Jay News I ] ( I I I

I read the lex Review I I [ I I II read the John Jay Student News [ I [ ] [ I

I l ooked at exhibits in the lobbies ( I [ I [ ]

YOUR USE OF THE LIBRARYIn this section „ ,e are interested in Your eipcriences with the John Jay lihran , this semester.

This semester, how much do you use the library for each of the following:

one in'

never

rarely

a .-'gate

often

find assigned books, articles for courses use reserve materials for courses relaxation and socializing course-related research studying and reading personal research

How often would you say you have visited the library this semester?

[ I once or twice during the semester

[ I once a month or so

( I once a week or so

I I a few times per week

[ I almost every day I have been at school

I n this section indicate whether you are satisfied with the variousaspects of the library listed below. If you are unfamiliar withthe item please indicate that you can't judge it.

YOUR GENERAL ATTITUDES ABOUT THE COLLEGEBased on your overall experience at John Jay, please check how much you agree ordisagree with eac o the following statements:

strongly stronglyagree agree disagree disagru

The Student Council does a good job representing the interests of the student body,

I I

( I

[ I

[The Student Council does a good job-representing my own interests as a student.

( I

[ I

[ I

(I.

students from different racial and ethnic groups get along well at John Jay.

[ I

[ I

[ I

[ 1John Jay students set high standards of academic achievement for themselves.

[ l

[ I

[ I

[ I`John Jay professors set high standards of academic achievement for students.

[ 1

[ l

( I

[Doing what it takes to be a good student is just too difficult for me.

[ I

( I

( IStudents have influence over decisions that are made at John Jay.

[ l

[ I

( I

I ifI would like to be more involved in student government.

[ I

( I

[ I

I YToo many courses cover the same information.

( I

( I

( I

( 1I've had to take too much remedial work.

I I

[ I

[ l

I I1 expect to transfer to another college.

( I I I [ I ( IThere is racial tension at the college.

[ I

I l I I I ]1 often feel out of place at John Jay.

[,I

I I [ I I I

sated satisfied distadsfied dtttaZV

edcan't

judge-

microfilm/microfiche machines [ I { I I l [ I ( Icomputerized CD-ROM searching [ I ( I [ I I I [ Iinstruction on use of library [ I I I [ I I I I I

computerized card catalog t I [ I ( I I I ( Iavailability of materials [ I ( l I l ( I I I.

copy machines [ I [ ] [ ] [ I ( Ievening hours [ I [ I [ I [ I I Iweekend hours ( I ( I [ I I I I Ireading space ( I I I ( I I I ( I ,

temperature I l [ I [ I [ I I Ilighting [ I [I [I II [I

noise [ I [I II I l Il

( I ( I I I [ II I [ I ( I 1 I( I [ I I I ( I( I I I I l 1 I[ I I I I I I I1 I ( l 1 l [ l

SOME THINGS WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUne following information is needed to interpret the results of the survey.Your responses will be grouped with other students.

Your sex:

( I female [ I male

Your age:

1 1 16-22

[ 1 23-24 ( 1 25-29( 1 30-39

1 1 40+

Which racial or ethnic category best describes you?

[ I BlackI I While

[ l

Asian or Pacific Islander[ ) Hispanic( I Other:

. _ How many children under the age of six do you care for?

-

childrenI I none

How many hours a week are you employed this semester?

hours per week[ I

not employed

What portion of your college expenses is paid

by financial aid (loans, grants, ete)?

[ I

none

[ I

some

[ I

most or all

What is your current degree objective at John Jay?

[ I

nonelhol applicable[ I

Associate's degree[ I

Bachelor's degree[ l

Master's degree

How many credits have you earned so far?

credits

Are you a transfer student?

( I no

( I yes

What is your current GPA?

What is your major?

I haven't declared one yet

Check the statement in each group below which best describes your situation:

Please provide written comments on the back page.

[ I I'm usually a full-time student [ I I need financial aid to be here

L I I'm usually a part-time student [ I I don't need financial aid to be here

L I I'm a day student ( I I'm a student

[ I I'm here for both day and evening classes [ I I'm a student who works[ I I'm an evening student ( I I work and go to school

YOUR CHANCE TO SAY WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT JOHN JAY!(You didn't think you'd get away without an essay part did you?)

What would you say is the biggest problem at John Jay?

What would you say is the best thing about John Jay?