Fifth Year Maintenance Report - University of Minnesota

AACSB INTERNATIONAL
FIFTH YEAR MAINTENANCE REPORT
2009
__
i

Transmittal Note
LSBE has created an AACSB-dedicated intranet Web site for our accreditation review at
http://lsbetech.d.umn.edu/portal/
Login username = aacsb
Password = aacsb2009
On this site you will find the following documents:
• LSBE AACSB Annual Reports
• LSBE 5-Year Strategic Plan
• Policy Manuals for Faculty (including LSBE Faculty Evaluation Policy)
−
−
UEA Union Contract
Departmental Policies for Tenure and Promotion (See Management Studies for
current Marketing policies, but also note that Marketing Department policies are
in process for approval.)
− Dean’s Travel Fund Policies
− Faculty Research Support Policies
• Reviews of Special LSBE Programs
− CEE (Center for Economic Education)
− CED (Center for Economic Development)
− BBER (Bureau of Business and Economic Research)
− Financial Markets Program
On this Web site you will also find the following components of this report:
• AACSB Fifth Year Maintenance Report (Fifth Year Report, Executive Summary)
• Assurance of Learning Tables (BBA, BAcc, MBA Duluth, MBA Rochester)
• LSBE Vision and Mission Statement
• Peer and Aspirant Schools
Cover photographs: James Steinkamp for Perkins + Will; James@SteinkampPhotography.com
■
The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal
access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed,
religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status,
veteran status, or sexual orientation.
__
i

Table of Contents
Transmittal Note ..........................................................................................................................i
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ ii
Table of Tables .......................................................................................................................... iii
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... iv
I. Situational Analysis ................................................................................................................. 1
A. Factors That Shape Our Mission and Operations .................................................................. 1
1. University of Minnesota..................................................................................................... 1
2. University of Minnesota Duluth ......................................................................................... 1
3. Labovitz School of Business and Economics .................................................................... 1
B. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats ............................................................ 2
1. Strengths........................................................................................................................... 2
2. Weaknesses ...................................................................................................................... 4
3. Opportunities .................................................................................................................... 4
4. Threats .............................................................................................................................. 5
C. Degree Programs Included in the Accreditation Review ........................................................ 6
II. Mission Statement ................................................................................................................. 6
A. Our Statement ....................................................................................................................... 6
1. Mission .............................................................................................................................. 6
2. Vision ................................................................................................................................ 7
3. Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 7
B. Changes in Our Mission Statement ....................................................................................... 8
C. How Our Mission Statement Is Updated and Communicated to Key Stakeholders ............... 8
D. Comparison Groups: Peer, Aspirant, and Competitor Schools ............................................. 9
1. Peer Schools ..................................................................................................................... 9
2. Aspirant Schools ............................................................................................................... 9
3. Competitor Schools ......................................................................................................... 10
III. Strategic Management Planning Process ........................................................................... 11
IV. Assessment Tools and Procedures ..................................................................................... 13
A. Background.......................................................................................................................... 13
B. BBA, BAcc, and MBA Program Learning Goals .................................................................... 13
1. BBA Program Learning Goals .......................................................................................... 13
2. BAcc Program Learning Goals ......................................................................................... 14
3. MBA Program Learning Goals ......................................................................................... 15
C. Overview of Assessments at LSBE ....................................................................................... 16
D. Summary of Results ............................................................................................................ 17
__
ii

1. BBA ................................................................................................................................. 17
2. BAcc ................................................................................................................................ 34
3. MBA Duluth ..................................................................................................................... 36
4. MBA Rochester ............................................................................................................... 46
E. Other Assessment Activities and Resulting Changes Made by LSBE ................................... 52
V. Financial Strategies ............................................................................................................. 54
VI. New Degree Programs ........................................................................................................ 59
VII. AACSB Tables ..................................................................................................................... 60
AACSB Table 9–1: Summary of Faculty Sufficiency Using Student Credit Hours,
FALL 2008 ....................................................................................................................... 61
AACSB Table 9–1: Summary of Faculty Sufficiency Using Student Credit Hours,
SPRING 2009.................................................................................................................... 65
AACSB Table 10–1: Summary of Faculty Intellectual Contributions and Qualifications
FALL 2009 ........................................................................................................................ 70
AACSB Table 10–1: Summary of Faculty Intellectual Contributions and Qualifications,
SPRING 2009.................................................................................................................... 76
AACSB Table 10–2: Calculations Relative to Deployment of Qualified Faculty,
FALL 2009 ........................................................................................................................ 82
AACSB Table 10–2: Calculations Relative to Deployment of Qualified Faculty,
SPRING 2009.................................................................................................................... 87
Table of Tables
Table 1. UMD and LSBE Student Ethnicity, 2008 ...................................................................... 4
Table 2. Degree Programs Included for Accreditation Review ................................................... 6
Table 3. BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment ................................................................. 20
Table 4. BAcc Program Learning Goals Assessment ............................................................... 35
Table 5. MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth ................................................................. 38
Table 6. MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester ........................................................... 47
Table 7. Outline of Major Changes Since Accreditation ........................................................... 52
Table 8. Labovitz School of Business and Economics Financial Strategies 2008-09 ............. 55
__
iii

Executive Summary
The Labovitz School of Business and Economics at the University of Minnesota Duluth has been
pursuing continuous improvement and outstanding performance since it was created in 1974.
The Bachelor of Business Administration, the Bachelor of Accounting, and the Masters in
Business Administration degrees have been offered since the school’s inception. Many years of
hard work to achieve excellence in our programs culminated in our initial accreditation by
AACSB International (AACSB) in 2000.
Since 2000, LSBE has intensified its efforts towards achieving excellence. LSBE has also
worked toward assessing and documenting that achievement, using a comprehensive assurance
of learning system, as documented in the Fifth Year Maintenance Report. Careful attention has
been devoted to defining, measuring, and managing our portfolio of faculty resources. We seek
to insure that our teaching faculty meet rigorous academic and professional qualifications while
at the same time we maintain a proper mix of participating and supporting faculty.
Special attention has been given to clearly outlining program objectives, developing a college
committee structure to best manage those objectives, and building on our relative strengths. New
outreach components—as well as strong, specialized programs that meet recruiter needs—have
been initiated and well-received by students, faculty, and recruiters.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
University of Minnesota Mission Statement
The University of Minnesota, founded in the belief that all people are enriched by understanding,
is dedicated to the advancement of learning and the search for truth; to the sharing of this
knowledge through education for a diverse community; and to the application of this knowledge
to benefit the people of the state, the nation, and the world.
The University's mission, carried out on multiple campuses and throughout the state, is threefold:
Research and Discovery – Generate and preserve knowledge, understanding, and creativity by
conducting high-quality research, scholarship, and artistic activity that benefit students, scholars,
and communities across the state, the nation, and the world.
Teaching and Learning – Share that knowledge, understanding, and creativity by providing a
broad range of educational programs in a strong and diverse community of learners and teachers,
and prepare graduate, professional, and undergraduate students, as well as non-degree-seeking
students interested in continuing education and lifelong learning, for active roles in a multiracial
and multicultural world.
__
iv

Outreach and Public Service – Extend, apply, and exchange knowledge between the University
and society by applying scholarly expertise to community problems, by helping organizations
and individuals respond to their changing environments, and by making the knowledge and
resources created and preserved at the University accessible to the citizens of the state, the
nation, and the world.
In all of its activities, the University strives to sustain an open exchange of ideas in an
environment that embodies the values of academic freedom, responsibility, integrity, and
cooperation; that provides an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from racism, sexism, and other
forms of prejudice and intolerance; that assists individuals, institutions, and communities in
responding to a continuously changing world; that is conscious of and responsive to the needs of
the many communities it is committed to serving; that creates and supports partnerships within
the University, with other educational systems and institutions, and with communities to achieve
common goals; and that inspires, sets high expectations for, and empowers the individuals within
its community.
University of Minnesota Duluth Mission Statement
UMD serves northern Minnesota, the state, and the nation as a medium-sized comprehensive
university dedicated to excellence in all of its programs and operations. As a university
community in which knowledge is sought as well as taught, its faculty recognizes the importance
of scholarship and service, the intrinsic value of research, and the significance of a primary
commitment to quality instruction.
At UMD, a firm liberal arts foundation anchors a variety of traditional degree programs, outreach
offerings, and selected professional and graduate studies. Active learning through internships,
honors programs, research, and community service promotes the development of skills, critical
thinking, and maturity sought by society. Demanding standards of performance for students,
faculty, and staff make UMD attractive to students with strong academic potential.
The campus contributes to meeting the cultural needs of the region and serves as a focal point for
the economic development of the region through community outreach and through an emphasis
on the sea-grant and land-grant components of its program.
UMD significantly contributes to enhancing the national stature of the University of Minnesota
by emphasizing quality programs central to the University and the distinctive mission of UMD
within the University system.
Providing an alternative to both a large research-oriented university and to a small liberal arts
college, UMD seeks students looking for programs that emphasize personalized living and
learning experiences on a medium-sized campus of a major university.
__
v

University of Minnesota Duluth
UMD's Fall 2008 enrollment was 11,366 with approximately 38% of the students from the Twin
Cities area and an additional 49% from the rest of Minnesota.
UMD's Fall 2008 Enrollment
Undergraduate 9,341
Graduate 735
Professional 365
Non-degree 925
Total 11,366
Source: All Student Profile Fall 2008, UMD Institutional
Research
UMD Fall, 2008 Total Headcount
Freshman 2,867
Sophomore 2,136
Junior 1,915
Senior 2,423
Masters 735
Professional 365
Non-degree 925
Total 11,366
Source: All Student Profile Fall 2008, UMD Institutional
Research
The UMD enrollment distribution for Fall 2008 by college was:
UMD Enrollment Distribution, Fall 2008
College
Total
Swenson College of Science and Engineering 2,453
College of Education and Human Service Professions 2,128
College of Liberal Arts 2,182
Labovitz School of Business and Economics 2,041
Continuing Education 941
School of Fine Arts 712
Graduate School 544
College of Pharmacy, Duluth 215
Medical School Duluth 150
Source: All Student Profile Fall 2008, UMD Institutional Research
FIVE YEAR SUMMARY
Major highlights from the five year period include:
• BBA majors increased at a growth rate of 9% (from 2004 to 2008).
• BAcc majors increased at a growth rate of 59% (from 2004 to 2008).
• The number graduating from our MBA program grew by 71%. (The number was 14 in
2004–05, and was 24 in 2007–08.)
• International travel trips for students (e.g., China, Bulgaria, and India) have significantly
enhanced global awareness in the BBA, BAcc, and MBA programs.
• Our mission statement, program objectives, and strategic plan were evaluated and revised
based on input from all relevant stakeholders.
• LSBE managed difficult enrollment pressures by creating enrollment targets for upper
division and increasing the automatic GPA admission criteria for admission to candidacy.
• LSBE instituted a new degree requirement which prevents students from graduating who
do not maintain at least a 2.00 in all major course work.
__
vi

• A separate Marketing Department was formed to reduce inefficiencies and administrative
workload due to the size of the original Management Studies Department (which had
included the marketing faculty).
• Assurance of Learning processes, including embedded assessment and the Major Field
Test (MFT), have yielded improvements to curriculum design and delivery.
• Faculty productivity and performance were monitored constantly, via the Digital
Measures software reporting system. Program definitions of academically and
professionally qualified faculty were developed and monitored. Definitions of
participating and supporting faculty were developed and monitored. Changes in faculty
development and composition were made, and most targets were met.
• A visit was made to one of our aspirant schools to learn how they incorporate
sustainability into their curriculum.
• Responding to demand, a new major in Health Care Management was started in 2006.
• An LSBE laptop requirement initiative was implemented. (To prepare our students for
the 21 st century workplace, all LSBE students enrolled in Fall 2009 will be required to
have a laptop or tablet computer.)
• In 2003, the school was renamed the Labovitz School of Business and Economics after
$4.5 million was donated by Joel and Sharon Labovitz. In May of 2008, LSBE moved
into a new state-of-the-art Gold Level LEED-certified building (the first LEED academic
building in the state of Minnesota). The building provides needed new facilities for our
expanding programs, excellent teaching space, and is environmentally friendly.
Areas for continuous improvement include:
• Managing growth of BBA and BAcc majors within constraints of budget and economic
pressures.
• Recruiting finance faculty and meeting academically-qualified goals in the area of
finance.
• Fine-tuning the Assurance of Learning processes to further discover issues which need to
be resolved. This may involve reducing the number of objectives for our programs.
• Recruiting a more diverse student body. Even though LSBE has a representation of
ethnicities similar to UMD, more diversity is needed; 91% of LSBE students are white.
• Need to effectively incorporate sustainability into our programs.
EFFECTIVE PRACTICES
The Labovitz School of Business and Economics has demonstrated effective practices in the
following areas:
• High quality faculty, staff and administrators. Over 85% of our faculty have a PhD or
other terminal degree (including ABDs) in their chosen field.
• Strong faculty who win many teaching awards. For example, within a cohort of
approximately 38 eligible faculty, over the last 30 years we have had eight Morse Award
__
vii

winners (recognition by the University of Minnesota of its most distinguished scholarteachers).
• Strong outreach component. Our Center for Economic Development, Center for
Economic Education, and the Bureau of Business and Economic Research are all award
winning centers which provide outstanding service and outreach to the region and the
world. Complete assessment reports of each center, including accomplishments, can be
found on our AACSB-dedicated website (details below).
• Strong student active-learning components. In the last reporting period, 41% of
graduating BBA students had completed an internship, while 39% of graduating BAcc
students had done so. In addition, approximately 50 students are actively involved in the
VITA Tax Preparation Program each year, and the Student-to-Business Initiative has
included over 400 student participants since 2003.
• Financial Markets Program provides students with real-world experience in the financial
services industry. Under the guidance of a professional Program Director and a Board of
Advisors drawn from the financial community, students manage an active portfolio of
over $200,000, making and implementing investment decisions.
• Partnering with stakeholders. The interest and involvement of the business community
with the School has been expanding. Participation in advisory boards, providing services
to student groups, classroom speaking, financial donations, and internship activity are all
indicators of effective and growing stakeholder involvement.
FACULTY MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Processes and policies for effective management and development of full time and part time
faculty are found in the accompanying statements as well as on our AACSB-dedicated Web site
for our accreditation review:
Login username = aacsb
Password = aacsb2009
On this site you will find the following documents:
• LSBE Faculty Evaluation Policy
• UEA Union Contract
• Departmental Policies for Tenure and Promotion
• Dean's Travel Fund Policies
• Faculty Research Support Policies
__
viii

__
ix

I. Situational Analysis
A. Factors That Shape Our Mission and Operations
1. University of Minnesota
The University of Minnesota (UM) currently has five campuses located in Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Duluth, Rochester, Morris, and Crookston. It is governed by an autonomous Board of Regents
that enacts policies governing the institution, controls expenditures, and officially acts on staff
changes. The Graduate School is a unique collegiate unit of the University of Minnesota. It has
University system-wide responsibility for graduate education, and the Graduate School faculty
consists of all faculty within the system who hold appointments in the programs under its
jurisdiction.
2. University of Minnesota Duluth
The University of Minnesota Duluth (UMD) became a coordinate campus of the University of
Minnesota by legislative act on July 1, 1947. Total enrollment was about 1,400 in 1947; this has
grown to 11,366 for Fall Semester 2008. The University of Minnesota Duluth mission states that
―UMD serves northern Minnesota, the state, and the nation as a medium-sized comprehensive
university dedicated to excellence in all of its programs and operations.‖ This mission also states
that at UMD, ―a firm liberal arts foundation anchors a variety of traditional degree programs,
outreach offerings, and selected professional and graduate studies.‖ The primary mission of the
institution is to provide undergraduate education. UMD describes its niche as providing an
attractive alternative to both large research universities and small liberal arts colleges.
UMD currently offers 13 bachelor degrees in 77 majors, and it is accredited by the Higher
Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. In addition to
the two-year program at the School of Medicine and a College of Pharmacy program, UMD
offers graduate programs in 22 different fields. An Associate Dean of the Graduate School at the
UMD campus serves as the link between UMD graduate programs and the Dean of the
University Graduate School. Each of the Graduate School programs at UMD is currently
administered by a Director of Graduate Studies (DGS). However, UMD is officially creating its
own Graduate School unit which will hold primary responsibility for graduate programs on
campus.
3. Labovitz School of Business and Economics
The Labovitz School of Business and Economics (LSBE) was created as a separate school on
December 16, 1974. The School offers undergraduate degrees in accounting and business
administration, as well as an MBA in two locations—Duluth and Rochester.
__
1

LSBE is organized into five departments: Accounting, Economics, Finance and Management
Information Sciences, Management Studies, and Marketing. LSBE also has the following
academic and outreach programs:
• The Financial Markets Program is designed to provide students with an educational
experience that can be directly applied to the Financial Services Industry.
• The Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) collects, analyzes, and
disseminates information regarding the economy of Duluth, Northeast Minnesota, and the
State of Minnesota, provides specific research to identify economic problems and
opportunities in Minnesota, and acts as a catalyst which generates research from faculty,
staff and students within the School.
• The Center for Economic Development (CED) strengthens the viability of the region by
assisting entrepreneurs and businesses to grow and succeed.
• The Center for Economic Education (CEE) works to improve the quality and quantity of
economic literacy and education in K–12 classrooms throughout the world.
B. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
In order to gain insight into our current situation, a series of meetings were held, with the LSBE
Administrative Committee and the LSBE Board of Advisors, in April of 2007. During those
meetings a SWOT analysis was conducted. The following briefly summarizes the results of that
analysis.
1. Strengths
Our strongest relative advantages and distinct competencies, as compared with competitor
institutions, are starred ().
High quality faculty, staff, and administrators.
− Over 85 percent of our faculty have a PhD or other terminal degrees (including
ABDs) in their chosen field, and most have experience in business, management
and research.
Faculty are held in high regard by students.
−
Teaching evaluations of LSBE faculty are some of the highest at UMD, and a
number of faculty have been nominated by students for faculty awards. For
example, among the current faculty, Drs. Aggarwal, Pierce, O’Brien, Castleberry,
and Anderson are winners of the Horace T. Morse Award—the top undergraduate
teaching award within the UM system. One of our faculty members recently won
the university-wide President’s Award for Outstanding Service. Several of our
faculty have also won the campus-wide Blehart Distinguished Teaching Award,
as well as national awards for teaching.
Strong outreach component (CED, CEE, BBER—for a detailed review of each of these
programs see the LSBE AACSB intranet Web site).
__
2

− Each year the CED works with more than 900 of the approximately 8,500
companies in Northeastern Minnesota, facilitating more than $20 million in loans,
and assisting in the creation, retention, and stabilization of more than 3,000 jobs.
− The CEE works to improve the quality and quantity of economic literacy and
education in K–12 classrooms throughout Minnesota.
− Funded by a special appropriation of the Minnesota Legislature, private contracts,
and research grants, each year the BBER is actively involved in supporting
regional industry and development through economic analysis and research
projects.
Strong student active-learning component (Internships, VITA Tax Preparation Program,
Student to Business-Initiative [SBI Program] in Marketing and Accounting).
− Over the last five years, LSBE has had an average of 121 students completing
internships each year, with over 1,800 internships since 1992. These internships
have occurred in all majors. In the last reporting period, 41% of graduating BBA
students had completed an internship, while 39% of graduating BAcc students had
done so.
− The VITA program assists low income individuals in preparing their income
taxes, and has had an average of 50 BAcc student participants for each of the four
most recent years.
− By coordinating efforts with the CED, our Student to Business Initiative (SBI)
program offers LSBE students the opportunity to partner with area companies and
to gain practical business experience. Over 400 students have participated in SBI
projects since 2003.
Developing strong specialized programs of study (e.g., Financial Markets Program, Health
Care Management).
−
The Financial Markets Program provides students with an educational experience
that can be directly applied to the Financial Services Industry. With the support
of the local financial community, program participants directly apply learned
ideas, theories, and tools through opportunities such as the Bulldog Fund.
Students are challenged to make strategic investment decisions which are applied
to an active portfolio of more than $200,000. (For more on this program, see the
LSBE AACSB intranet Web site.)
− In our Health Care Management Program, over 65 students have completed
internships since the program started in 2005, with approximately 73 graduates to
date. Students have accepted positions such as revenue auditor, benefits analyst,
and account executive, in such organizations as Mayo Clinic, Fairview Corporate,
and CIGNA Behavioral Health.
New LSBE building provides needed room, excellent teaching space, and is environmentally
friendly.
−
The building achieved LEED Certification at the Gold level, and is the first LEED
academic building in the state of Minnesota. This certification conforms well to
our just-developing program goal of sustainability.
__
3

• Good relationships among faculty, staff, students, and administrators in LSBE. It is not
uncommon for the various populations to interact on and off campus.
• Outstanding LSBE reference librarian for archival and research support for our programs.
Business Librarian Jim Vileta’s Web site was chosen by the American Marketing
Association as the best site for marketing research links in an international competition.
• Duluth community is attractive to faculty recruits. We have remarkable recreational,
historical, and cultural opportunities, and Minneapolis and St. Paul are just two hours
away.
2. Weaknesses
• Lack of diversity in the student body.
− The following chart from the Campus Data Book (March 2008) indicates the
ethnic breakdown of UMD and LSBE. A lack of diversity creates a threat for
LSBE as companies indicate an increasing desire for a diverse workforce.
TABLE 1. UMD AND LSBE STUDENT ETHNICITY, 2008
Ethnicity UMD LSBE
White 87.6% 91.4%
Asian American 2.6% 2.4%
Listed as ―International‖ 1.9% 2.2%
Undefined 4.6% 1.4%
African American 1.2% 1.0%
Hispanic 0.9% 0.8%
American Indian 1.2% 0.8%
• As a result of rapid growth, the demand for courses has not always matched the
availability of course offerings.
− Some students have had trouble accessing required and elective courses. This has
sometimes adversely affected the ability of students to graduate in a timely
manner. However, it should be noted that waiting lists were greatly reduced in
Fall of 2008.
• We have not yet formally added sustainability components to our programs.
3. Opportunities
• Demand for health care is growing in the U.S. It is expected that health care costs will
double in the next ten years and consume approximately 20 percent of the U.S. GDP. 1
LSBE has begun to tap into this opportunity with our Health Care major.
• There is an increasing emphasis and interest in the environment and our school is located
near some of the most valuable natural resources in the nation (e.g., Lake Superior,
1 Keehan, S., Sisko, A., Truffer, C., et al. Health spending projections through 2017: the baby-boom generation
is coming to Medicare. Health Affairs. 2008; 2: W145–55.
__
4

Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, Superior National Forest, the Mesabi Iron
Range, and the Duluth Complex mineral deposits).
• UMD recently announced that Mindy Granley will be UMD’s Campus Sustainability
Coordinator, and LSBE has added ―sustainability‖ as one of the learning objectives in our
mission statement. A sustainability interest group of 32 UMD faculty and staff (including
15 LSBE faculty members) was recently recognized as an Interdisciplinary Graduate
Group by the University of Minnesota Graduate School.
• We are part of the University of Minnesota system, whose ―brand‖ helps to attract
students, faculty, and staff, and which provides access to research, library resources, and
grant funding.
• There are many LSBE alumni who have not yet been tapped as resources for LSBE.
−
LSBE alumni participate in the school as Professor for a Day, Advisory Board
members, classroom speakers, adjunct professors, information providers, and
financial contributors.
• Great Lakes Maritime Research Institute grants (established in 2004) are available for
faculty. To date, 12 LSBE faculty have participated by applying and/or receiving grants.
• There is a global interest in collaborating with U.S. schools of business; LSBE has
received offers to collaborate with schools in Poland, Uzbekistan, India, China, and
elsewhere.
• There could be an increase in jobs in the Duluth metro area during the next five years, as
a number of business owners will retire and/or sell their businesses.
−
Fuse Duluth, a part of the Duluth Chamber of Commerce, has developed the
College Connection Program. Thirty students from UMD have participated.
Participants are matched with a mentor who helps them in their career.
• LSBE has established a connection to a number of international schools and programs—
study abroad opportunities for students and opportunities for faculty exchange—in
Poland, Ukraine, and Slovenia.
• We see increasing interest in entrepreneurship and small business among students and in
the region. LSBE is poised to respond to this demand, and recently received a $226,000
endowment to promote entrepreneurship and business education for our students.
• We note an increasing interest in our MBA degree, with the number graduating with an
MBA growing 71% from 2004 to 2008. We also see opportunities in the health care
connection and in an increased interest in the program on the Iron Range.
• There is an increasing interest in sustainability. Our school facility positions us to take
advantage of interest in sustainability with our new Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Gold Level certified building.
4. Threats
• Minnesota and the U.S. are increasingly represented by a more demographically diverse
population. Organizations desire a more demographically diverse workforce. Although
we do have a very diverse faculty, students in our programs do not have a great deal of
demographic diversity.
__
5

• On-line programs in business are expanding. As these programs get better recognized and
perhaps accredited, demand for in-person education could decline.
• National and regional business school programs are moving into the area.
−
Bethel University recently started a weekend/online MBA program in Duluth, and
Saint Mary’s University and the College of St. Scholastica have started MBA
programs in Duluth.
• The Carlson School is doubling the size of its undergraduate business program. Since
there has been pent-up demand for entrance into the Carlson School over the years, it is
possible that some of our better students might start at, or transfer into, the Carlson
School.
• The high school cohort is shrinking. This trend is troubling for all higher education
institutions, and there is no reason to expect that LSBE would be impacted more or less
than business schools at other universities.
C. Degree Programs Included in the Accreditation Review
TABLE 2. DEGREE PROGRAMS INCLUDED FOR ACCREDITATION REVIEW
Degree Program Number of Graduates in Previous Year (2007–08)
BAcc 76
BBA 391
MBA Duluth 9
MBA Rochester 17
Note: 2008–09 figures won’t be known until the end of summer session, after this report is due at
AACSB. The 2008–09 figures will be available for the Assessment Team during their October visit.
II. Mission Statement
A. Our Statement
In the spirit of continuous improvement, LSBE has revised its mission statement as appropriate.
Our current mission statement, unanimously approved November 15, 2007 by the LSBE Senate,
reads as follows:
1. Mission
Our mission is to contribute to the intellectual and personal growth and development of
individuals to enhance their competence in business and management. We achieve our
mission through teaching, intellectual contributions, and service activities. Our primary focus
is on undergraduate teaching. We offer high-quality undergraduate programs to students
primarily from Minnesota. Additionally, we offer part-time evening and weekend MBA
programs to practitioners in selected regions in Minnesota. Our secondary focus is on
intellectual contributions. We place primary emphasis on discipline-based intellectual
__
6

contributions, but also value contributions to teaching and practice. We also provide
community, professional, and institutional service and outreach with an emphasis on
community service and outreach and the interface of these activities with teaching and
intellectual contributions.
2. Vision
Our vision is to be recognized as a School with a first-rate faculty that provides rigorous,
demanding undergraduate and graduate programs in business and management, as well as
quality intellectual contributions and outreach programs. We will achieve this vision by having
our faculty, students and staff demonstrate mutual respect for one another and by providing
educational opportunities for a diverse student body. Our graduates will promote the School
and give back to the School.
3. Objectives
The goal of the School is to prepare students to assume responsible positions in business and
other organizations. These objectives focus on core skills that are critical to success in one’s
career, and on knowledge and skills that provide an understanding of the process of management.
The School’s educational programs are designed to:
• Develop and enhance the following core skills:
− Communication
− Quantitative skills
− Information technology
− Collaborative work
− Decision making
• Develop an understanding of how the following management-specific areas are relevant
to, and impact organizations:
− Core areas of business
− Economic principles and policies
− Laws and ethics
− Diversity
− Technology
− Environmental Sustainability
− Global trends
The intellectual and outreach activities of the School are conducted to:
• Encourage and provide opportunities for faculty to make peer-reviewed and other
intellectual contributions that serve students, peers, and the public.
• Connect students, staff, and faculty with external constituents to stimulate the creation,
dissemination, and application of business and economics knowledge and information.
__
7

• Provide programs that improve the practice of business and economic development in the
region while offering outreach and experiential-based learning opportunities.
• Share the expertise of the School with organizations in the immediate and extended
regions.
Finally, in the spirit of continuous quality improvement, and in order to keep the School and its
programs and course offerings as current and relevant as possible, the School stands ready to
examine changes in programs (additions or deletions) and the development of new programs,
when opportunities arise from whatever source.
B. Changes in Our Mission Statement
This new statement includes several changes from the version that was in place at the time of our
initial accreditation:
• Our mission now states that we aim to contribute to both the intellectual and personal
growth of individuals. In the last version, we simply stated ―growth.‖
• We explicitly state that our primary focus is undergraduate teaching, rather than simply
―teaching.‖
• We note our primary emphasis is on ―discipline-based intellectual contributions.‖
• We added a Vision Statement.
• As an addition to our objectives, our educational programs are designed to provide our
students with an understanding and appreciation of the relationship between
organizations and the environment (including sustainability).
C. How Our Mission Statement Is Updated and Communicated to Key
Stakeholders
Various forms of evidence suggest that our key stakeholders (students, faculty, staff, the
University administration, members of our Board of Advisors, recruiters of our students, alumni,
and the regional business community) are in agreement with and supportive of our mission. First,
these stakeholders were involved in LSBE mission development and adoption. The LSBE Board
of Advisors as well as the LSBE senate members (which includes faculty, staff, and students)
were given multiple opportunities to react to the proposed changes. Second, in November of
2006 the new mission statement came before the LSBE Senate. Results of a vote indicated
unanimous approval and adoption of the mission statement as our driving force. Third, beginning
in Fall 2007, we have been making an effort to insure that our stakeholders are aware of our
mission statement, using the following methods:
• LSBE senate members use the document many times during the year during committee
deliberations, senate agenda items, etc.
• The mission statement is a frequent agenda item when the LSBE Board of Advisors
meets.
• Students see the mission statement displayed on the plasma screen in the atrium of LSBE.
• It is featured on the LSBE web page.
__
8

• It is prominently displayed in a plaque in the new LSBE building.
• Recruiters of LSBE students are made aware of this statement via contacts with the UMD
Career Placement Office.
D. Comparison Groups: Peer, Aspirant, and Competitor Schools
Comparison schools were chosen by the LSBE Accreditation Team, with input from the LSBE
Administrative Committee. Information used in making these determinations included extensive
use of the AACSB Knowledge Services Business School Profiles, personal knowledge about
programs and schools, phone calls and emails to administrators and faculty at potential schools,
and information about the schools from their own web pages.
1. Peer Schools
Peer schools were identified as those who are similar to LSBE in the following ways: number of
undergraduate business students; number of masters business students; number of full-time
business faculty; number of FTE business faculty; percent of business faculty with a PhD;
number of students on campus; and type of programs offered, so as not to choose those with PhD
programs. The following are our peer schools:
University of Alabama: Huntsville
University of Northern Iowa
Western Kentucky University: Bowling Green
University of Massachusetts: Dartmouth, North Dartmouth
Youngstown State University (Ohio)
Eastern Washington University: Cheney, Spokane
University of Wisconsin: Eau Claire, Whitewater
2. Aspirant Schools
Aspirant schools were identified as schools that have demonstrated excellence in one or more
areas in which LSBE is considering making improvements or developing programs of study. The
following are our aspirant schools:
• University of Colorado: Denver
• University of Missouri: Kansas City
Our new strategic plan calls us to explore opportunities for introducing the concept of
sustainability in LSBE activities and programs. With that in mind, the University of Colorado,
Denver was chosen because it has a strong dedication to sustainability. Sustainability is
incorporated into their curriculum and their Web page indicates that all colleges, schools, and
programs have sustainability infused in them. In March of 2009, one of our faculty members
flew to Denver for a full-day visit with faculty, staff, and administrators in the School of
__
9

Business, with the express purpose of learning from their sustainability experiences. An
extensive document was created from that visit that defines terms, outlines best practices, and
makes suggestions for LSBE, as well as reports on many of the University of Colorado
initiatives. The report was distributed to the LSBE Dean, Associate Dean, and to the
Undergraduate and Graduate Committees. One charge for the committees for 2009–10 is to find
ways to incorporate sustainability into our BBA, BAcc and MBA curriculums.
Our new Strategic Plan also calls for us to establish a major in entrepreneurship in the BBA
program as well as programs aimed at sustainable entrepreneurship in the community. With that
goal in mind, University of Missouri at Kansas City was chosen because it has a strong
entrepreneurship program. Dean Knudsen has gathered a great deal of information about the
Kansas City program from the former dean of that school.
3. Competitor Schools
Competitor schools were chosen because LSBE competes with them in some significant way,
either for students, or for faculty, or both. All are located within 200 miles of UMD. Competitor
schools include the following:
MINNESOTA
College of St. Scholastica, Duluth
Minnesota State University at Mankato
Minnesota State University at Moorhead
St. Cloud State University
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
University of Saint Thomas, St. Paul
NORTH DAKOTA
North Dakota State University, Fargo
University of North Dakota, Grand Forks
WISCONSIN
University of Wisconsin:
Eau Claire
Madison
Milwaukee
River Falls
Superior
__
10

III. Strategic Management Planning Process
Our mission statement does drive the strategy of LSBE. As noted previously, the School and the
Board of Advisors are constantly reminded of our mission statement. All potential strategic
priorities are carefully evaluated in the context of our mission statement.
The strategic management planning process is an ongoing activity at LSBE. The five-year
strategic plan, discussed by the LSBE Senate in the 2008–09 academic year, was the result of a
process that involved all the major stakeholders of the School. The process was initiated through
an online posting system (WebVista) in the fall of 2006. All the members of the LSBE Senate
(faculty, staff, and students) were asked to suggest strategic priorities for LSBE during the next
several years. Suggestions from the WebVista discussion by Senate members included the
following:
• Perhaps it is time to develop a major or program in entrepreneurship.
• We should develop deeper and more substantive international requirements,
opportunities, and programs. For example: more partnerships with foreign schools
(preferably south of the 50th parallel); more opportunities for faculty exchanges and other
faculty development activities; a cross-functional international business major/minor;
International-content briefings: a new type of ―Professor for a Day‖ event focusing on
international business topics; an MBA international event—a site visit (our own, or in
partnership with that of other programs), International recruiting for the MBA program.
• In some areas, it would be fruitful to include students from other schools within UMD.
For example, possibly include both graphic artists and business students in an advertising
class. Similarly, include both engineers and business students in new product
development or entrepreneurship classes.
The LSBE Board of Advisors was also given the opportunity to provide suggestions during their
regularly scheduled meeting in April 2006. Suggestions included the following:
• Monitor changing environment of other business schools. Especially those who are going
to a three-year business program, instead of a two year program like we have.
• Market the product, especially in the Twin Cities. Also, differentiate our degrees from
those offered by St. Scholastica.
• Offer better guidance to students on meaningful liberal arts courses they should take.
• Be aware of the fact that baby boomers in our area are retiring and selling out their
businesses. If the businesses have to be sold (because of not being able to find qualified
people), the jobs could leave the region. Look into ways to link LSBE with the business
community for replacement of these individuals. These retirements will increase in
number over the next five years. (Management succession).
• Need better guidance for students about what upper level courses they should take.
• Might consider offering an Economic Planning Conference with the business community
(like BBER did in the past).
__
11

• Lots of LSBE students are from the Twin Cities. They leave and go back there when they
graduate. Should we do more to try to attract students from local high schools?
We also sought feedback from recruiters during the 2007 Job Fair at UMD. We met face to face
with representatives from 23 companies who recruit our students, and shared with them a copy of
the LSBE Educational Objectives. We asked them this question: Are these the objectives LSBE
should have? We then probed with the following: 1. Are there other objectives we should
consider adding? 2. Are there objectives listed here that we should delete or change? We also
gave them a copy of the objectives and asked them to share the objectives with others in their
firm, to perhaps reflect upon them further after the job fair, and to pass along any thoughts.
The results of this investigation suggest LSBE employers think these are the correct objectives.
No one had any to add, nor were there any suggestions for changes needed in the objectives
themselves. A few company representatives commented on how some of the objectives were
particularly important (oral and written communication skills, problem solving and decision
making). One representative asked us to make sure our students realized that instant messaging is
not the best way to contact managers. One representative said that any ―people skills‖ are
welcome, especially on the company’s internal side (dealing with fellow employees).
A draft of a proposed strategic plan was completed by the Dean of LSBE at the end of Fall 2007.
The draft was based on the newly revised mission, vision, and objectives of LSBE, as well as
campus strategic priorities. The LSBE Board of Advisors discussed the draft at their regularly
scheduled meeting on January 31, 2008. A number of suggestions were made by the board
members. Subsequently, the Administrative Committee of LSBE discussed the strategic plan at a
breakfast meeting on April 16, 2008. A number of suggestions were made. The suggestions from
the Board and the Administrative Committee were incorporated in a redraft and presented to the
LSBE Board at their meeting on April 24, 2008. Several suggestions were made and revisions
drafted before the plan was presented to the School’s Student Organizations Coordinating
Committee (SOCC) for their comments. The strategic plan draft was discussed in the LSBE
Senate at the Fall 2008 meeting. A revised draft of the Strategic Plan is being drafted and will be
presented as an action item at the Fall 2009 LSBE Senate meeting.
__
12

IV. Assessment Tools and Procedures
A. Background
LSBE has engaged in extensive assessment of its educational objectives, at both the
undergraduate and graduate levels, and for all degree programs (BBA, BAcc, MBA). These
assessments have involved most faculty in LSBE, both as members of committees and as faculty
actually conducting the assessments in their courses.
The LSBE Undergraduate Committee is given responsibility to develop assessments for the BBA
and BAcc, while the LSBE Graduate Committee develops assessments for the MBA degree. The
LSBE Assessment Committee has oversight of this process, and retains documentation of all
activities.
The first step in assessment was to agree upon educational objectives. While LSBE has always
had a list of educational objectives, we took this opportunity to fine tune our list and to write
objectives that were actually measurable. This sounded easy, but proved difficult to do, involving
many semesters of work by committees, subcommittees, and departments. The result of this
work, to date, is a set of objectives that are clearer and lend themselves to measurement in some
way. (Inspired by our commitment to continuous improvement, objectives are constantly being
evaluated and revised.) As per feedback from members of our AACSB review team, both the
Undergraduate and Graduate Committees in LSBE have been charged with the task for 2009–10
of reviewing our learning goals, with the possibility of reducing the number of goals we are
trying to achieve.
B. BBA, BAcc, and MBA Program Learning Goals
1. BBA Program Learning Goals
The overall goal of the BBA Program of the School is to prepare students to assume responsible
positions in business and other organizations.
The specific goals of the BBA Program are as follows:
• Develop and enhance core skills. More specifically, our students will
− communicate ideas effectively in written and oral form,
− acquire quantitative knowledge and skills that can be used to evaluate situations,
− acquire skills in the use of information technology,
__
13

−
−
demonstrate the ability to work effectively in a team, and
integrate knowledge to effectively recommend solutions to problems.
• Develop management-specific knowledge and skills. More specifically, our students will
− acquire knowledge of the core areas of business: accounting, finance, human
resources, production and operations management, information technology,
marketing, organizational behavior and management, and strategic management,
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of economic trends on organizational
activities
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of law and ethics on business
behavior and organizational activities,
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of diversity issues and trends on
organizational activities
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of technological trends on
organizational activities,
− recognize, describe and interpret the potential interaction between environmental
sustainability and organizational activities, and
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of global trends on organizational
activities.
2. BAcc Program Learning Goals
The overall goal of the BAcc Program of the School is to prepare students to assume responsible
positions in business and other organizations.
The specific goals of the BAcc Program are as follows:
• Develop and enhance core skills. More specifically, our students will
− communicate ideas effectively in written and oral form,
− acquire quantitative knowledge and skills that can be used to evaluate situations,
− acquire skills in the use of information technology,
− demonstrate the ability to work effectively in a team, and
− integrate knowledge to effectively recommend solutions to problems.
• Develop management-specific knowledge and skills. More specifically, our students will
− acquire knowledge of the core areas of business: accounting, finance, human
resources, production and operations management, information technology,
marketing, organizational behavior and management, and strategic management,
− understand the principles and practices of professional accounting,
− produce and interpret financial data for decision making,
− recognize, describe and interpret the impact of economic trends on organizational
activities
__
14

−
−
−
−
−
recognize, describe and interpret the impact of law and ethics on business
behavior and organizational activities,
recognize, describe and interpret the impact of diversity issues and trends on
organizational activities
recognize, describe and interpret the impact of technological trends on
organizational activities,
recognize, describe and interpret the potential interaction between environmental
sustainability and organizational activities, and
recognize, describe and interpret the impact of global trends on organizational
activities.
3. MBA Program Learning Goals
The overall goal of the MBA Program of the School is to prepare students to be business leaders.
The specific goals of the MBA Program are as follows:
• Develop and enhance core skills. More specifically, our students will
− communicate complex ideas effectively in written and oral form,
− utilize quantitative knowledge and skills to diagnose and evaluate complex
situations,
− demonstrate use of information technology tools and skills to diagnose and
evaluate complex situations,
− demonstrate the ability to work effectively in a team, and
− integrate knowledge and skills effectively to examine, diagnose, evaluate, and
recommend solutions to complex problems.
• Develop management-specific skills. More specifically, our students will
• acquire advanced knowledge of the core areas of business: accounting, finance, human
resources, operations and marketing,
• integrate their understanding of the core areas of business: analyze issues and develop
recommendations that reflect the cross-functional nature of management processes in
changing environments,
• analyze issues and develop recommendations that simultaneously meet organizational
objectives and also consider the needs of primary stakeholders (e.g., employees,
customers, shareholders),
• analyze the external environment of an organization, and assess the potential impact of
external trends on that organization in the following areas:
a. economic activity
b. law and ethics
c. diversity (demographic, cultural, and social)
d. technology
e. environmental sustainability
f. global issues
__
15

C. Overview of Assessments at LSBE
LSBE has always assessed its programs with regard to educational objectives. In the past, this
effort took several forms. Both the Undergraduate and Graduate Committees regularly sought to
document the coverage of various topics (e.g., ethics, global issues, diversity, etc.) through
survey results reported by those who teach in LSBE programs. For example, all who taught core
courses in the BBA program were asked to document the number of hours spent covering ethics.
This was repeated for all educational objectives. In terms of core courses in each discipline, the
faculty who taught that course would get together and talk about what was being covered and
what should be covered. For example, the marketing faculty met several times to discuss whether
a project should be included in the Principles of Marketing course, and if so, what that project
should entail. In this way, an attempt was made to insure the course was relevant, up-to-date, and
that all BBA and BAcc students were getting the same coverage, regardless of which section of a
course they took. Finally, the courses required for our degree programs were assessed by asking
faculty what topics should be covered in those courses, and then confirming that the material was
actually being covered. For example, using an extensive survey, faculty were queried about the
math skills our students need. This information was then forwarded to the UMD Department of
Mathematics and Statistics to insure that all sections of Math 1160 (the required math course for
BBA and BAcc students) covered that material.
As is evident from this discussion, our prior assessment methods focused mostly on making sure
the topical coverage was adequate and that relevant topics were being covered in all sections,
regardless of who was teaching the course. As we moved to the new AACSB standards, we
realized that we needed to assess not only coverage, but also mastery of the topics. Thus, a more
formalized assessment process was needed. Faculty, administrators, and staff thoroughly
investigated various methods of achieving such assessments by talking to colleagues at other
schools, reading articles on assessment, learning how the university assesses programs for central
accreditation, and attending AACSB conferences and specialized training sessions.
It admittedly took us some time before the faculty ―came on board‖ to the idea of assessment,
and began to see assessment, not as an onerous task, but as something that could actually help
our programs. We believe that most faculty now recognize the value of assessment. This is
evidenced by their eagerness to work on assessment projects.
For each degree program, faculty have created an assessment timeline, outlining when and how
each objective will be measured. This timeline is occasionally revised. If, for example, one
assessment reveals a particular deficiency or weakness in either the instrument or in the
assessment results themselves, then that objective may be assessed sooner than the assessment
timeline originally required.
__
16

In addition to the formal assessments of objectives, a curriculum mapping of the BBA and BAcc
learning objectives was conducted in late Spring 2008. This mapping revealed where the various
objectives were being covered in both core and elective courses. This mapping also displayed
objectives broken down by relevant levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (recognize, describe, and
interpret). This curriculum data will be further analyzed in Fall of 2009 to see if some objectives
are not being covered effectively.
D. Summary of Results
Along With Curriculum, Program, Policy and Operational Improvements Resulting from the
Assessment Program
The following tables provide details on the assessment activities for each degree program. The
tables are followed by a summary of the findings. Complete details of all assessments (including
all measures and findings) can be found in the Assessments Folder, available at the time of the
campus visit. It should be noted that assessment is a continuous activity with a clearly laid-out
system for reporting to the Assessment Committee. As a result, some activity that has already
occurred will not be shown in these tables (e.g., the formal review of assessment instruments
during Spring of 2009 in preparation for the Fall 2009 administration of those assessments). This
follows from the fact that the Assessment Committee gets the complete results only after the
administration of assessments is complete and assessments have been approved by the
appropriate committee.
1. BBA
Overall, our students performed well in the assessments. It should be noted that even in those
positive situations where the target outcomes were achieved, faculty have proposed and
implemented changes in order to improve student performance in the future, as the following
discussions will reveal. Thus, we are committed to continuous improvement, even if we have
achieved our target outcomes.
In the most recent assessment measurements, students scored well (and met the targeted
assessment outcomes) in the following areas:
• Communicate ideas effectively in written and oral form.
− However, faculty have identified a number of changes to the instruments they will
use in the next iteration. They have also identified areas of change that will be
implemented in future offerings of the course (e.g., more emphasis on teaching
mechanics, transitions in oral communications).
• Demonstrate the ability to work effectively in a team.
− To improve students’ skills in this area, one faculty member is exploring better
ways in which team skills can be taught to all students.
• Integrate knowledge to effectively recommend solutions to problems. Minor changes in
the administration of the instrument have been proposed for future assessments.
__
17

• Acquire knowledge of core areas of business.
− As measured by the Educational Testing Service (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT)
in Business, our students have very successfully met this goal (the LSBE mean
response was higher than the mean responses for all schools in all nine core
areas). However, when LSBE assessed core areas with class-embedded measures,
results varied, as will be discussed.
• Acquire knowledge of marketing.
− Most of the targets were achieved. Faculty have verified the ten dimensions to be
assessed, have revised the instrument, and will implement the new instrument in
the next formal administration.
• Acquire knowledge of strategic management.
− After the initial assessment, faculty changed focus (in the course) from merely
providing students with awareness to providing students with understanding of
Porter’s Five Forces. Later assessment indicates that this change was successful in
achieving the desired outcomes.
• Recognize, describe and interpret the impact of economic trends and ethics on business
behavior and organizational activities. The faculty offered suggestions for future
assessments of these issues.
There were areas where the desired outcome measures were not totally met and where significant
changes were needed:
• Acquire quantitative knowledge and skills that can be used to evaluate situations.
− Students did very poorly in the assessment. As a result, faculty have now
implemented changes in curriculum (mandatory math placement based on ACT
math scores, instead of suggested math placement).
• Acquire skills in the use of information technology.
− Students did poorly in the 2005, 2007, and 2008 assessments. Assessment
instruments have been revised and the coverage of topics is being improved as
instructors are working together to create consistency in the offering. The LSBE
laptop requirement is also part of the proposed solution to the problems identified,
and has been implemented. The course has been modified based on all of our
assessments and is being field-tested during the Summer 2009 offering.
• Acquire knowledge of accounting.
−
When measured using our own instruments, students achieved only some of the
desired outcomes. Changes in the assessment instrument as well as requiring all
accounting faculty to cover the required concepts have been implemented.
Ongoing discussion and monitoring among accounting faculty are occurring.
• Acquire knowledge of finance.
−
When measured using our own instruments, students achieved only some of the
desired outcomes. As a result, finance faculty changed the emphasis placed on
various topics in the course. After pre-testing the new strategy, the finance faculty
determined that the problem was more in the assessment instrument itself. The
faculty are in the process of making the necessary changes to the instrument.
__
18

• Acquire knowledge of human resources.
− When measured using our own instruments, students achieved almost all of the
desired outcomes. Based on the findings, the HR faculty have decided to increase
curricular emphasis on areas where the post-test scores didn’t reach desired levels.
A pre-test of this new strategy will be implemented in Fall 2009, well before the
next formal assessment period for this area.
• Acquire knowledge of production and operations management.
− When measured using our own instruments, students achieved only one of the
four assessment targets. Faculty have revised the assessment instrument and pretested
it in 2008. Production Operations Management (POM) faculty continue to
monitor the situation and discuss what needs to be done before the next formal
assessment.
• Acquire knowledge of organizational behavior and management.
− When measured using our own instruments, two of four targets were achieved.
Changes in the instruments were made and the faculty suggested that some
changes in teaching should occur, but those changes have not yet been identified
or implemented.
• Recognize, describe and interpret the impact of law, diversity issues, technological
trends, and global trends on business behavior and organizational activities.
− The main problem seemed to lie in our assessment methodology. A number of
specific suggestions were made to improve the way we measure these issues in
future assessments (see chart for details). Also, the assessment included
suggestions for informing faculty who teach core courses about how to
incorporate these issues. These suggestions have not yet been communicated.
• Recognize, describe and interpret the potential interaction between environmental
sustainability and organizational activities.
− The assessment suggests that sustainability needs to be incorporated more fully
into the curriculum. This process has been started with the recent visit to another
campus to learn how they incorporate sustainability. (See details elsewhere in this
report, for example activity discussed under the University of Colorado as an
Aspirant School).
__
19

TABLE 3. BBA PROGRAM LEARNING GOALS ASSESSMENT
Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
1. Communicate
ideas effectively
in written
& oral form
Message writing pre-test/posttest,
measured along nine key
dimensions of writing skills in
FMIS 3141 (Business Communications).
Oral skills –
Fall 2005
Written
skills –
Spring 2006
In eight items, the posttest
results are higher
than pre-test results (the
one that went down
slightly was for ―correctness
in names, dates, figures,
and other facts.‖).
Continue to administer a message-writing
pre-test/post-test.
Eliminate the current writing mechanics
test. Instead, develop a
10-item multiple choice test that
could be administered separately
as a pre-test and be incorporated
into the final exam as a post-test.
Some of the items could address
writing mechanics; others could
address important content elements
of written, oral and interpersonal
communication. Begin
to research methods by which
oral communication could be assessed
apart from questions included
in a multiple choice test.
Continue to include
grammar/punctuation
(writing mechanics)
as course element;
review commonly
made errors
early in course; integrate
review of and
exercises using these
and other elements
throughout the
course; continue to
evaluate students’
work for content,
structure, and mechanics.
A new assessment
instrument has been
developed by the faculty
teaching Business
Communication.
The new instrument
was utilized in Fall
Semester 2008 and
results will be made
available early in
Spring Semester
2009. There is ongoing
monitoring and
discussion among faculty
teaching Business
Communication
regarding both content
and assessment
instrument. These
discussions did not
occur prior to assessment
activities
associated with Assurance
of Learning
standards.
5-minute oral presentations in
FMIS 3141 (Business Communications).
Assessment tool
used was an 11-criteria instrument.
Spring 2008
No student’s presentation
was evaluated as unacceptable.
9 of the 11 criteria
were deemed to be
satisfactorily met (more
than 70% rated acceptable).
However, 2 criteria
were rated unsatisfactory.
The first was the criteria
for ―Transitions‖ (simply
stated, students moved
from slide to slide in PowerPoint
without using
oral transitions). The
second was the criteria for
―Confidence‖ (hands
__
20
It was recommended that ―Attitude‖
be added as a criterion in
the next round of oral communication
assessments.
―Transitions‖ should
be given more time
for discussion in both
the written and oral
communication segments
of FMIS 3141.
A discussion with
students should occur
about the way in
which individual factors
contribute to the
overall perceived
level of ―Confidence‖
and more detailed
feedback should be
The discussion with
students about the
way in which individual
factors contribute
to the overall perceived
levels of ―Confidence‖
occurred in
Fall 2008.

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
shaking, limited eye contact
during the presentation,
etc.).
given. ―Confidence‖
should be more
clearly defined for
students prior to the
next assessment of
oral communication
proficiency.
23 sets of business emails
(pre- and post-) were analyzed
using the new 8-point assessment
instrument that faculty
members in Business Communication
developed in 2007.
Fall 2008
21 students’ scores
showed improve-ment in
the post-test compared to
the pre-test. 2 students’
scores stayed the same
and no students’ scores
fell.
The instructors found that some
students did not take the assessment
seriously. They often
copied the pre-test emails and
made a few insignificant changes
in post-test. To deal with this
problem, the following solutions
will be implemented:
The use of different scenarios
for the pre-test and the posttest.
Both scenarios should
call for the same type of genre.
The assessment writing tasks
will be made into assignments/quizzes
to encourage
students to put their best efforts
into the writing.
Students’ organizational
strategies still
need to be improved.
Therefore, future
teaching will focus
more on guiding students
to learn the
skill of analyzing
writing situations at
the workplace, so
that they will be capable
of producing effective
writings in
various situations.
Future teaching of
the course will also
place more emphasis
on teaching mechanics,
such as grammar
and punctuation, will
continue to emphasize
the significance of
formality in routine
emails and will continue
to emphasize
the significance of
document design in
business communication.
The changes in both
the assessment
measurement and
the course content
will be implemented
in Fall 2009.
2. Acquire
quantitative
knowledge and
skills that can
be used to
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in Econ 2030 (Applied
Statistics for Business and
Economics).
Spring 2008 Unacceptable. Only 1
question met and exceeded
the target. Also,
three of the questions on
the post-test (23.5%) had
No change in assessment instrument
recommended at this
time.
The LSBE Undergraduate
Committee
recommended that
mandatory placement
based on ACT math
UMD Math Department
instituted mandatory
placement
based on ACT math
scores in Fall 2008.
__
21

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
evaluate situations.
lower post-test scores
than pre-test scores.
Pre-test scores were below
pure guessing (

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
dents scoring higher than
7 in the post-test of >
70%).
will be made available
during Spring
Semester 2009.
Fall 2007
The Fall 2007 results were
similar to those in the Fall
of 2005. The only target
that was reached was a
pre-test pooled mean
score of < 5.
Two questions in the assessment
instrument will be revised to be
more challenging on the assessment
pre-test. Three questions
will be revised that appear to be
too difficult for students on the
assessment post-test.
The topics covered in
the FMIS 2201 preand
post-test instruments
do not appear
to need significant
revision. However,
improvements continue
to be needed in
the course delivery
process. The new
LSBE laptop requirement
coming in Fall
2008 is likely to have
some significant impacts
on the ways in
which the course will
be delivered.
There is ongoing
monitoring and discussion
among faculty
teaching FMIS
2201 regarding both
content and assessment
instrument.
These discussions did
not occur prior to assessment
activities
associated with Assurance
of Learning
standards.
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in FMIS 2201
Fall 2008
The Fall 2008 results were
similar to the Fall 2005
and Fall 2007 results.
The only target that was
reached was a pre-test
pooled mean score of

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
gether to create better
consistency in the
course content and
delivery.
The Management Information
Sciences faculty members are
proposing that FMIS 2201
course content and delivery be
modified to make the material
more relevant to current business
needs.
Spring 2009
The course modification
is based upon
the purchase of a Dell
PowerEdge 2900
server. It will be used
to provide students
with a virtualized controlled
learning environment
for creating
web pages, wikis,
blogs, podcasts and
other online capabilities.
The course modification
will be fieldtested
during Summer
session 2009. If
successful, it will be
implemented for all
students in FMIS
2201 beginning Fall
2009.
4. Demonstrate
the ability to
work effectively
in a team.
MGTS 4443 (Teams course)
assessed this via a survey. All
LSBE students were invited to
respond. Also, LSBE faculty
were surveyed to determine
their assessment of students’
team-related knowledge and
skills.
Spring
and
Fall 2007
Generally acceptable.
Students rated themselves
more highly than
faculty rated them on
every skill that was assessed
by both samples.
Faculty averaged slightly
agree (5.07/7) on the
quality of group project
outcomes in their courses,
but are less sure (4.30/7)
that students are learning
to work collaboratively as
a result of those group
projects. Students do not
believe that group project
experiences are helping
them obtain desirable internships
and jobs.
LSBE should identify a list of key
skill areas within Teamwork that
can then be directly taught in the
core curriculum. The list used in
these surveys might need to be
amended. After teaching these
skills, more thorough measurement
of them would be beneficial.
In addition to student selfreport
of these skills, other
measures might include:
Faculty assessment of the key
skill areas (with an a priori expectation
that they will be expected
to assess them).
Direct observation and measurement
of some representative
sample of groups actually
functioning, by a select faculty
member or two.
Structured peer assessment of
these skills in a representative
sample of LSBE student project
groups. The peer assessment
would be structured and super-
With the exception of
one faculty member
who teaches Groups,
LSBE faculty have not
focused on teaching
group skills. Instead,
LSBE faculty have assumed
that students
are learning them indirectly
from working
in groups on course
projects. Perhaps a
more focused way in
which team skills
could be taught
within the BBA and
BAcc curriculum
should be considered.
Finally, students
should be
aware of the key
skills areas they are
expected to develop,
and of the professional
benefits for
__
24

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
vised by a faculty member.
mastering them, regardless
of occupational
choice.
5. Integrate
knowledge to
effectively recommend
solutions
to problems.
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481 (Strategic Management).
Spring 2008
Results were adequate.
Given the 5-scale rubric
that was developed to assess
this case, the desired
score of 3 (acceptable)
was achieved.
To ensure consistency of communicated
expectations, it is
suggested that in the future,
the students are given the assessment
rubrics before completing
the assignment.
The rubrics should be enhanced
to include full descriptions
of the 2 (poor) and 4
(good) scores, to make it more
clear the differentiators between
each of the levels.
In the future, multiple assessors
should be used, at least
two per assignment, so that reliability
scores can then be
computed. If inter-rated reliability
is not sufficient, rewritten
rubrics, additional examples, or
training can be created to increase
the reliability of the assessment.
The more detailed
appendices specified
by Goel helped the
students be more
specific in their evaluation
of alternatives,
leading to better justifications
for their recommendation.
This
format should be
used for this assignment
in the future.
Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
1. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of business.
Educational Testing Service
(ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in
Business
Academic
year 2002–
2003
LSBE mean responses
were significantly better
than the mean responses
for all business schools
taking the ETS MFT in
Business in six of the eight
assessment indicators
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
are recommended.
No changes were implemented.
__
25

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
(Management, Quantitative
Business Analysis,
Finance, Marketing, Legal
& Social Environment and
International Issues.)
Academic
year 2007–
2008
LSBE mean responses
were significantly better
than the mean responses
for all business schools
taking the ETS MFT in
Business in all nine assessment
indicators.
Results cannot be compared
with 02/03 results,
since changes were introduced
in the MFT in Business
in 2006.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
are recommended.
No changes were
needed.
1a. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business: Accounting,
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in ACCT 2001 (Principles
of Financial Accounting).
Fall 2006
The results showed that
two of the four targets
were reached. A pre-test
pooled mean score was
+2. The
post-test pooled mean
score target and the percentage
of students scoring
70% or higher on the
post-test target were not
met.
The objectives of the course need
to be reevaluated for the next assessment
iteration. Once the department
has agreed upon the
ten objectives, ten representative
questions will be written and approved
by the department. These
questions will be piloted the
semester prior to the next assessment
iteration. All instructors
of ACCT 2001 will integrate
the improved concepts into the
course. All instructors of ACCT
2001 will utilize this assessment
instrument in both pre- and posttests
in the course.
No changes were
recommended to the
course or the concepts
taught within
the course.
There is ongoing
monitoring and discussion
among faculty
teaching Principles
of Financial Accounting
regarding
both content and assessment
instrument.
These discussions did
not occur prior to assessment
activities
associated with Assurance
of Learning
standards.
Furthermore, not all instructors
covered the approved concepts
upon which the test instrument is
based nor did all instructors integrate
the post-test in to their final
exam for credit. In the next round
of assessments, all instructors
__
26

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
will be required to cover the
agreed upon objectives and to integrate
the post-test in to the final
exam. In other words, faculty
within the Accounting Department
have agreed to take the assessment
of Financial Accounting
seriously in the next rounds.
1b. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of business:
Finance.
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in FMIS 3601 (Corporate
Finance).
Fall 2007 The pre-test score of 3.1
met the target of < 5. The
post-test score of 5.3 fell
short of the target of > 7.
The 2.2 point change from
pre- to post-test exceeded
the targeted change of >
+2. Finally, the percentage
of students scoring
70% or higher on the posttest
was not met.
One question on the assessment
instrument was determined to be
too ambiguous in relation to the
way the topic is covered in other
classes. In two questions, the
available answers were determined
not to be very representative
of the basic concepts covered
in those areas. These three
questions will be modified for the
next assessment round.
Comparing the preand
post-test results
for individual questions,
the instructors
noticed that students
seemed to have a
very uneven background
and showed
only mild improvement
in areas where
they have strong prior
knowledge. In areas
where they had weak
prior knowledge, students
showed low
pre-test scores and
considerable improvement
on the
post-test. Therefore,
the instructors decided
to take advantage
of the students’
prior knowledge by
shifting more attention
from areas where
they have strong prior
knowledge into areas
where they had weak
prior knowledge.
The Corporate Finance instructors
decided to test the generalizations
mentioned above
before shifting emphasis on
course content within FMIS
Fall 2008
Questions in both areas
on the spring 2008 FMIS
3601 mid-term exam, students
scored between
75–80% correct.
Improve the quality of the questions
in the pre-test and post-test
exams
The instructors concluded
that these
mid-term results
show no discernable
relationship between
__
27

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
3601. In the 2007 analysis,
the question dealing with the
time value of money showed
considerable improvement in
the post-test compared to the
pre-test, while the question
dealing with stock and bond
valuation showed very little improvement.
1c. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of business:
Human Resources
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in MGTS 3801 (Human
Resource Management)
Fall 2007
Three of the four targets
were met. The only item
that was not met was that
the pre-test pooled mean
score was not 50% of the
students answered correctly in
the pre-test. The faculty agreed
that these items should be reviewed
before the next round of
assessment–2010. Since the
test has only been administered
once, the HR faculty has agreed
to administer the test again before
the 2010 assessment period
to determine the stability of the
test. If, after the 2 nd administration,
it appears that these items
need modification, they will be
made before the 2010 assessment
period
prior knowledge (pretest)
and the extent
of eventual improvement
(post-test) as
suggested by the initial
assessment results.
Therefore, they
decided there was no
need to alter the allocation
of class time
among topics in FMIS
3601.
There were three
questions that had
post-test scores below
the target of 70%.
However, since the
post-test scores on
these three questions
were fairly close to
the 70% target, the
HR faculty decided to
increase curricular
emphasis on these
points, but not to engage
in large scale
changes in the curriculum
as a result of
these findings.
The proposed
changes needed in
the assessment measurement
will occur
prior to the next assessment
iteration,
scheduled for Fall
Semester 2010. This
new instrument will
be pre-tested during
Fall Semester 2009.
There is ongoing
monitoring and discussion
among faculty
teaching Human
Resource Management
regarding both
content and assessment
instrument.
These discussions did
not occur prior to assessment
activities
associated with Assurance
of Learning
standards.
1d. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business:
Production and
Operations
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in FMIS 3301 (Production
and Operations Management)
Fall 2006
Only one of the four targets
were met (the pretest
pooled mean score
was less than 5).
The instructors of FMIS 3301 involved
in this assessment activity
identified some areas of concern
with respect to the test instruments
which was used. They
found that five questions on the
There was meaningful
discussion regarding
the course content
material and the
means, if any, by
which the course con-
The faculty members
teaching Production
and Operations Management
developed a
revised assessment
instrument. The in-
__
28

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
Mgmt.
instrument appeared to be too
easy and that five questions appeared
to be too difficult. However,
there was discussion as to
how the instrument could be improved
to remedy these shortcomings.
tent could be improved.
strument was utilized
during Fall Semester
2008 and the results
will be made available
during Spring
Semester 2009.
There is ongoing
monitoring and discussion
among faculty
teaching Production
and Operations
Management
regarding both content
and assessment
instrument. These
discussions did not
occur prior to assessment
activities
associated with Assurance
of Learning
standards.
1e. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business: Information
Technology
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in FMIS 2201 (IT in
Business).
Fall 2005
and Fall
2007
See results shown earlier
in this table.
1f. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business:
Marketing
1g. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business: Organizational
Behavior and
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in MKTG 3701 (Principles
of Marketing)
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in MGTS 3401 (Organizational
Behavior and Management)
Fall 2006
Fall 2005
Three of the four targets
were achieved. The pretest
pooled mean score
was < 5, the post-test
pooled mean score was >
7, and the change in
pooled mean score was >
+2.
Two targets were achieved
in the administration of
this assessment instrument.
The pre-test mean
score was < 5 and the
change in student perfor-
The pre-test scores were high on
three questions of the instrument.
The Marketing faculty will
review these questions for possible
revision before the next
course assessment will be done
(Fall 2009).
The instructors of MGTS 3401
concluded that one question on
the instrument is very good, two
questions are close to being
good, two questions are too easy
and one question is simply bad.
The Marketing faculty
is satisfied with the
course content, so no
change in course content
is being recommended.
The results of four
questions on the instrument
suggest that
Organizational Behavior
and Management
faculty should con-
No changes were
needed.
__
29

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
Management mance was > +2. However, there was no recommendation
as to how the instrument
could be improved, given
these findings.
sider teaching improvements.
However,
no specific recommendations
were
made with respect to
these improvements.
1h. Acquire
knowledge of
the core areas
of Business:
Strategic Management
Pre-test/post-test of key constructs
in MGTS 4481 (Strategic
Management)
Fall 2007
Three of the targets were
achieved. The only one
not met was that the pretest
pooled mean score
was not < 5.
Two questions on the instrument
will be reworded in order to eliminate
problematic wording of the
current questions and two questions
on the instrument will be
replaced with new questions before
the next assessment round
(Fall 2010). In addition, it was
decided to voluntarily re-administer
the revised test instrument in
the Fall of 2008 to ensure the
test instrument better captures
what the instructors want it to before
the next round to formally
administer it.
The instrument included
a question
that required familiarity
with Porter’s
Five Forces. Students
claimed to
broadly understand
the concept. However,
after discussion
of Porter’s Model in
one of the courses, it
became clear that
students were familiar
with the term, but
did not really understand
it in detail. In
the future, instructors
will need to focus on
shifting students’
knowledge from
awareness to understanding
with respect
to Porter’s Five
Forces.
Changes in the instrument
and in the
course content have
been made.
Fall 2008
A case study was used to
measure the achievement
of this goal. The target
was a median and mean
of 3 or above on a 5-point
scale. The desired results
were obtained.
It is recommended that students
in the future be given the assessment
rubrics before completing
the assignment. It is also
recommended that in the future
multiple assessors should be
used to analyze the case so that
reliability scores can then be
computed. Finally, more detailed
information in the appendices
should be given in the future.
Additional examples
or training should be
given to increase the
reliability of the assessment.
__
30

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
2. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the impact
of economic
trends on
organizational
activities.
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify economic
trends and interpret them with
respect to opportunities or
threats on the company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recognizing
economic trends
was 4.0, for describing
economic trends was 3.0,
for interpreting the impact
of economic trends was
3.0 Thus, the results were
barely acceptable.
It was recommended that, for future
assessments, each assessor
take on one of the three criteria
and analyze that specifically for
all of the papers, rather than assessing
all three for a subset of
the papers.
Aside from being the
first topic in the list of
analysis topics for the
appendices, there is
essentially no mention
of economic
knowledge of any sort
being required for
this assignment. The
requirement for assessing
economic
knowledge and understanding
must be
stressed in more detail
in the instructions.
3. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the impact
of law on
business behavior
and organizational
activities.
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify legal trends
and issues and interpret them
with respect to opportunities or
threats on the company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for The median
score for recognizing
the impact of law was 2.0,
for describing the impact
of law was 2.0, for interpreting
the impact of law
was 1.0. Thus, the results
were unacceptable.
It was suggested that the assessment
be limited to one or two
sections from the same instructor,
so that one can compare
―apples to apples.‖
In the future, it was
suggested that instructions
for the requirements
that students
discuss the impact
of law be made
much more explicit.
4. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the impact
of diversity
issues and
trends on organizational
activities.
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify economic
trends and interpret them with
respect to opportunities or
threats on the company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recognizing
the impact of diversity
issues and trends was
1.0, for describing the
impact of diversity issues
and trends was 1.0, for
interpreting the impact of
diversity issues and trends
was 1.0. Thus, the results
were unacceptable.
In the future, cases or scenarios
used for this assessment should
be modified in such a way to incorporate
diversity issues at the
organizational/firm level, and
that specific instructions be provided
to ensure that these issues
are addressed.
The instructions given
to students regarding
the impact of diversity
issues and trends
must be made much
more explicit in order
to yield a set of results
which would be
a fair indicator of
awareness or mastery
of the diversity construct.
5. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the im-
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify technologi-
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recog-
It was recommended
that the course design
and delivery pro-
__
31

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
pact of technological
trends on
organizational
activities.
cal trends and interpret them
with respect to opportunities or
threats on the company
nizing the impact of technological
trends was 2.0,
for describing the impact
of technological trends
was 2.0, for interpreting
the impact of technological
trends was 2.0. Thus,
the results were unacceptable.
vide more explicit
consideration of
technological trends
and that the instructions
given to students
for the case
analysis be made
much more explicit
regarding the expectations
of technological
trends discussion,
as well.
6. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the potential
interaction
between
environmental
sustainability
and organizational
activities
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify sustainability
trends and issues and interpret
them with respect to
opportunities or threats on the
company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recognizing
the potential interaction
between environmental
sustainability and
organizational activities
was 2.0, for describing the
potential interaction between
environmental sustainability
and organizational
activities was 2.0,
for interpreting the potential
interaction between
environmental sustainability
and organizational
activities was 1.0. Thus,
the results were unacceptable.
The assessment team should include
core curriculum instructors
who integrate the environmental
sustainability in substantial ways
in their courses.
It is recommended
that the Undergraduate
Committee determine
if and where
environmental sustainability
is addressed
in the core
program.
7. Recognize,
describe and interpret
the impact
of global
trends on organizational
activities
Part of the case write-up in
MGTS 4481. Students were instructed
to identify global issues
and trends and interpret
them with respect to opportunities
or threats on the company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recognizing
the impact of global
trends was 2.0, for describing
the impact of
global trends was 2.0, for
interpreting the impact of
global trends was 2.0.
Thus, the results were unacceptable.
It appears that too much is being
asked of students in one paper.
Therefore, it is suggested that in
the future, two or three of the
seven perspectives from the
learning objectives be assessed
each year, rather than doing all of
them at once. By rotating
through the perspectives, students
would be able to focus
more intention on the focal topics
All faculty teaching international
courses
should be given a
copy of the School’s
learning objectives
with respect to global
issues. This should
help faculty understand
what we expect
the students to know.
A group discussion
__
32

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
BBA Program Learning Goals Assessment
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
and not be spread too thin on all
of the perspectives.
The instructions for the assignment
should be made much more
explicit regarding the expectations
of the global perspectives’
impact on organizational activities.
with all of the faculty
members who teach
international classes
should be organized
to discuss these
learning objectives
and to help each
other understand
what is going on in
other international
courses and how
these courses can
work together.
8. Recognize,
describe and
interpret the
impact of ethics
on business
behavior and
organizational
activities.
Part of case write-up in MGTS
4481. Students were instructed
to identify ethical
trends and issues and interpret
them with respect to opportunities
or threats on the company.
Spring 2008
For this rubric (3) is defined
as acceptable. The
median score for recognizing
the impact of ethics
was 4.0, for describing
the impact of ethics was
3.0, for interpreting the
impact of ethics was 3.0.
Thus, the results were acceptable.
The scope of the assignment
should be limited to one or two
industries. Students should be
provided the rubrics that will be
used in evaluating their work.
Rather than use one large case to
cover all seven perspectives, perhaps
a series of shorter cases
could be assigned focusing on
each of the individual perspectives.
Faculty teaching our
core courses need to
be sure to spend time
in their classes helping
students not only
recognize and describe
ethical issues,
but also interpret the
impact of those issues
on the organization
and business
behavior.
__
33

2. BAcc
Overall, considering all assessments conducted, the conclusion is that our BAcc students
performed well. Since the BAcc degree includes all the program learning goals of the BBA
degree, all of the assessment results described are applicable to the BAcc degree as well. The
assessment samples as reported in these tables included both BBA and BAcc students.
The BAcc degree includes two additional learning goals. The results of those assessments will
now be discussed:
• Understand the principles and practices of professional accounting.
− Students did not perform well in these assessments. After careful analysis it was
decided that some assessment questions need to be revised. Also, Accounting
faculty members decided that more class time needs to be devoted to some of the
concepts and principles on which students scored poorly. While some of these
changes have been implemented, more discussion among the Accounting faculty
needs to occur.
• Produce and interpret financial data for decision making.
− This learning goal was assessed using several methods. Students did extremely
well in an assessment using a financial reporting project in ACCT 3110, and no
changes were deemed necessary in either the assessment instrument or the
program. However, it was determined that two assessment questions should be
analyzed further. More discussion among the Accounting faculty needs to occur.
− Students also performed quite well when assessed using a financial ratio analysis
project in ACCT 3110. However, faculty decided that more attention needs to be
paid to preferred stock in the teaching of ACCT 3102. Faculty also need to
emphasize the definition of residual equity. These changes are currently being
implemented.
__
34

TABLE 4. BACC PROGRAM LEARNING GOALS ASSESSMENT
BAcc Program Learning Goals Assessment
Learning
Measurement/
Date Last
Changes needed in the assessment
Goals
Methodology
Measured
Results
measurement
All BBA learning goals are part of the BAc learning goals and are reported with the BBA assessment outcomes.
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
Understand
the principles
and
practices of
professional
accounting.
Accounting definition-concept type teststudents
will take a 20-question test
consisting of definitional and conceptual
type questions in ACCT 4160 (Auditing).
Spring
2008
As a group, students performed
acceptably (> or = to
70% correct) on 7 of the 20
questions. However, the students’
overall performance
was evaluated as unacceptable
(< 60% correct).
The wording on some questions that
students performed very poorly on
needs to be revised. Also, some of the
questions appear to be too detailed
and need to be replaced or revised. Finally,
there may be some retention issues
related to those concepts and
principles that are not regularly applied
or further discussed in subsequent
courses. One suggestion to deal with
this potential problem was to conduct
the assessment at the completion of
ACCT 3101 and ACCT 3102 (Intermediate
Accounting I & II). Further discussion
among the faculty teaching these
courses need to occur.
Accounting faculty
members teaching
the two Intermediate
Accounting courses
may need to devote
more class time to
discuss those fundamental
accounting
concepts and principles
that students
appear to have difficulty
in understanding.
More time is
being devoted
to the
concepts
identified.
Produce and
interpret financial
data
for decision
making.
1. Students will complete a financial
reporting project covering the entire
process of financial statement preparation
given in ACCT 3110 (Accounting Information
Systems). The instrument
used for this assessment is the package
of ―System Understanding Aids‖
(SUA). By successfully completing this
SUA project, students will also finish a
complete set of financial reporting
projects covering the entire process of
financial statement preparation.
Fall
2008
As a group students performed
satisfactorily with an
average percentage accuracy
rate of 91.53%. The SUA instrument
has three components.
They are:
(1) sales and cash receipts in
the Accounting revenue cycle.
(2) purchase and cash disbursements
in the expenditure
cycle.
(3) preparation of unadjusted
trial balance, adjusting entries,
closing entries, post
closing trial balances and four
major financial statements.
Faculty members within the Accounting
Department will continue to search for
alternate accounting financial reporting
projects covering the entire business
process to be used as an alternate assessment
instrument. However, the
SUA project was deemed to be very acceptable
and will continue to be used
as an assessment tool for now.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
are recommended.
No changes
were implemented.
2. Financial ratio analysis project –
students will compute and interpret a
list of financial ratios using financial
statement data for two similar real-life
companies given in ACCT 3102 (Intermediate
Accounting). Students analyzed
financial statements of two major
corporations and discuss their findings.
Spring
2008
Results were quite acceptable.
On 10 out of 12 questions
students achieved a
score of greater than 70%.
Faculty discussed the possibility of using
an all objective format in assessing
the Intermediate II course.
More attention needs
to be paid to preferred
stock in the
teaching of ACCT
3102. Also, faculty
need to emphasize
the definition of residual
equity.
Faculty are
making the
required
changes
needed in
terms of
course content.
__
35

3. MBA Duluth
Overall, the assessment results for the MBA Duluth students are very encouraging. For example,
the Major Field Test (MFT) results provided by the Educational Testing Services (ETS) over the
last three years show that our students score very high (generally above the 90 th percentile)
compared to students nationwide in terms of advanced knowledge of accounting, finance, human
resources, and marketing.
Students also scored well and met the assessment targets in the following areas:
• Skill in communicating complex ideas effectively in written and oral form.
• Utilization of quantitative knowledge to diagnose and evaluate complex situations.
• Ability to work effectively in a team.
• Acquisition of advanced knowledge of operations.
• Ability to integrate understanding of core areas of business (analyze issues and develop
recommendations that reflect the cross-functional nature of management processes in
changing environments).
• Ability to analyze the external environment and assess the potential impacts of ethics.
Assessments in Spring 2007 suggested students might have difficulty in integrating knowledge
and skills to examine, diagnose, evaluate and recommend solutions to complex problems. To
assess the validity of this finding, in Spring 2008 students were again assessed with regard to
examining complex problems. The desired assessment outcome results were obtained. Further
assessment will help us determine if this is an issue that needs to be resolved or if the 2007
findings were merely the result of the assessment methodology utilized. The 2008 results suggest
that it was a methodological issue only. However, to be sure the expectations in this area are
clear, rubrics will be distributed to the student with the assessment assignment. This is an area
that the Graduate Committee will closely monitor.
Assessments in Spring 2007 and Spring 2008 showed that students did not demonstrate the
ability to thoroughly analyze the external environment and assess the potential impacts of
economic trends, legal trends, diversity, technology trends, environmental sustainability, and
global trends. It should be noted that sustainability was only recently added to our program and
we are currently exploring ways to incorporate the issue in our curriculum (other sections in this
Fifth Year Maintenance Report provide more details on the sustainability objective). The
Graduate faculty met and discussed the issues raised in these assessments. It was concluded that
the problem perhaps lay with the expectations conveyed in the directions for the assignment as
compared to the rubrics used in the assessment instrument. New instruments and instructions,
based on these discussions, were administered in Spring 2009. At that time, the rubrics were
also shared with the students in order to make expectations clear. These results are not in the
tables since they have not been fully analyzed or presented to the Graduate Committee.
__
36

Spring 2008 results also showed students had difficulty in analyzing issues and developing
recommendations that considered the needs of primary stakeholders (e.g., employees, customers,
shareholders). This will be made more explicit in the instructions and monitored in the next
administration of the assessment.
__
37

TABLE 5. MBA LEARNING ASSESSMENT GOALS - DULUTH
Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
1. Communicate
complex ideas
effectively in written
form.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2007
Good; the desired results were
obtained (4.1).
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in
the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2008
Adequate; the desired results
were obtained (3.4).
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in
the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
2. Communicate
complex ideas
effectively in oral
form.
Assessed using the MBA Oral
Communication Assessment
Instrument (OCAI) in MBA 8111
(Business, Government and
Society).
Assessed using the newlycreated
Oral Presentations
evaluation form.
Spring
2008
Fall 2008
Adequate
.
Results are currently being
analyzed
One item (structure) in the OCAI was
less than clear in meaning. Therefore,
it is recommended that this item be
removed from the instrument.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended.
Committee
decided to
change the
way they assess
oral
communications.
Created
a new assessment
instrument.
3.Demonstrate
use of information
technology
tools and skills to
diagnose and
evaluate
complex situations,
Assessed using modules for a
series of skills in Microsoft Excel
and Microsoft Power-Point,
using a tool called Skills Assessment
Manager (SAM) in
MBA 8211 (Data Analysis and
Statistics for Managers). All
students were required to take
a pre-test and a post-test in
these two areas.
Fall 2006
The Excel pre-test average
score was 57.54 and the PowerPoint
pre-test score was
47.29. The post-test score for
Excel was 86.4 and for Power-
Point was 86.2. This was
viewed as significant improvement
in learning in these two
technology skills areas.
Since the results that were obtained
are excellent, no change is recommended
to the assessment measure.
However, the SAM instrument is no
longer available. As a result, alternative
ways of measuring the utilization of
quantitative knowledge and skills to diagnose
and evaluate complex situations
is being sought.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed
in the program.
Currently
looking
for a new assessment
instrument.
4. Utilize quantitative
knowledge
and skills
to diagnose and
evaluate complex
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2007
Adequate; the desired results
were obtained (3.2)
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in
the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed
__
38

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were
implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
situations.
in the program.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2008
Adequate; the desired results
were obtained (3.2).
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in
the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed
in the program.
5. Demonstrate
the ability to
work effectively
in a team.
Assessed using the student
peer evaluation form in MBA
8211 (Data Analysis and Statistics
for Managers)
Fall 2008
Good. For the class as a
whole, the average on each of
the dimensions on a five-point
scale was as follows:
a. Met group deadlines (4.43).
b. Coordinated parts of the
group project (4.36).
c. Assumed individual responsibility
in the group (4.50).
d. Gave constructive feedback
to group members (4.36).
e. Negotiated collective goals
with other group members
(4.33).
f. Effectively contributed to
group meetings (4.48).
The results and the instrument should
be discussed with Dr. Anne Cummings,
the LSBE resident expert on Teams, to
see if the instrument needs to be revised
in the future to get more discrimination
on the scales.
In the short run,
continue using the
present instrument
as a way of assessing
students’ team
work skills.
No change is
recommended
or needed.
6. Integrate
knowledge and
skills to examine
, diagnose, evaluate,
and recommend
solutions
for complex
problems.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411
(Policy Formulation and Implementation).
Spring
2007
Spring
2008
Barely acceptable (2.9). Can
identify but not analyze (prioritize)
problems. Can define
many alternatives, but poor at
describing the risks and benefits,
as well as choosing one
and justifying the choice.
Adequate; the desired results
were obtained (3.1).
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in
the assessment measure. However, the
rubrics help clarify what is required and
will be handed out to help students understand
the expectations.
Determine if this is
true in other
courses, as well. If
so, consider including
it explicitly in
part of the curriculum.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
this course.
Decided to
reassess in
Spring of
2008 to see if
the findings
were correct.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
__
39

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
1. Acquire advanced
knowledge
of Accounting.
Measured in the MBA-level Major
Field Test (MFT) provided by Educational
Testing Services (ETS)
January
2007
The mean test score of our
students (261.3) was significantly
above the mean for all
examinees (250.3). The LSBE
MBA mean score in accounting
(66) was considerably
above the mean for all students
in all institutions taking
the MBA MFT (50.8).
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
The mean score was 273,
putting LSBE above the 95%
percentile compared to the
average for all MBA programs
in this country that administer
the test.
April
2008
The LSBE mean score in accounting
was 77, which is in
the top 5% of all institutions
administering this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The mean score was 264,
putting LSBE between the
90% and 95% percentile
compared to the average for
all MBA programs in this
country that administer the
test. The LSBE mean score in
Accounting was 64, which is
in the top 10 percent of all institutions
administering this
test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
2. Acquire advanced
knowledge
of
Finance.
Measured in the MBA-level Major
Field Test (MFT) provided by Educational
Testing Services (ETS)
January
2007
The mean test score of our
students (261.3) was significantly
above the mean for all
examinees (250.3). The LSBE
MBA mean score in finance
(52) was significantly above
the mean for all students in
all institutions taking the MBA
MFT (45.2).
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
__
40

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
April
2008
The LSBE mean score in
finance was 63, which is in
the top 5% of all institutions
administering this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in
Finance was 57, which is in
the top 10 percent of all institutions
administering this test
nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
3. Acquire advanced
knowledge
of Human
Resources.
Measured in the MBA-level Major
Field Test (MFT) provided by Educational
Testing Services (ETS)
January
2007
The mean test score of our
students (261.3) was significantly
above the mean for all
examinees (250.3). The LSBE
MBA mean score in human
resources (70) was significantly
above the mean for all
students in all institutions
taking the MBA MFT (57.4).
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
April
2008
The LSBE mean score in human
resources was 76, which
is in the top 5% of all institutions
administering this test
nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in Human
Resources was 65,
which is in the top 15 percent
of all institutions administering
this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
4. Acquire advanced
knowledge
of Operations.
Assessed using pre- and post-test
analysis plus concise case study
in MBA 8311 (Operations Management)
Spring
2007
Adequate. Post-test improvement
results goals were
achieved and concise case
study result goals were also
achieved.
Since the results were acceptable, no
change was recommended.
Since the results
were acceptable, no
change was recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Assessed using pre- and post-test
analysis plus concise case study
in MBA 8311 (Operations Management)
Fall 2008
Adequate. Once again, posttest
improvement results
goals were achieved and concise
case study result goals
Since the results were acceptable, no
change was recommended.
Since the results
were acceptable, no
change was recommended.
No changes
were needed.
__
41

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
were also achieved.
5. Acquire advanced
knowledge
of Marketing.
Measured in the MBA-level Major
Field Test (MFT) provided by Educational
Testing Services (ETS)
January
2007
The mean test score of our
students (261.3) was significantly
above the mean for all
examinees (250.3). The LSBE
MBA mean score in marketing
(62) was considerably above
the mean for all students in
all institutions taking the MBA
MFT (56.2).
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
April
2008
The LSBE mean score in marketing
was 72, which is in the
top 5% of all institutions administering
this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in Marketing
was 70, which is in the
top 5 percent of all institutions
administering this test
nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely successful,
no changes
were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
6. Integrate
understanding
of the core
areas of business:
analyze
issues and develop
recommendations
that reflect the
cross-functional
nature
of management
processes in
changing environments.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2007
Overall, consideration of
these areas was weak (2.8) ;
only organizing was adequate.
Consider rewording the expanded description
of the Process of Management
with terminology more consistent with
the way it is described in Strategy Implementation
Additional assessments
will suggest
whether it is needed
to include instruction
on basic management
principles
as an explicit part of
the curriculum.
Assessment
instrument
change accomplished,
also reworked
due to
changes in
wording of the
objective.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2008
Adequate; the desired results
were obtained. (The results
appear poor (2.8) due to one
particularly poor paper in this
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended in the assessment
measure. However, will hand
out rubrics to be sure students under-
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change is
recommended in
No changes
were needed.
__
42

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
area. The median is above 3. stand expectations. this course.
7. Analyze issues
and develop
recommendations
that simultaneously
meet
organizational
objectives and
also consider
the needs of
primary stakeholders
(e.g.
employees,
customers,
shareholders)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2007
Poor (1.1) . No explicit analysis
of affect on internal or external
stake-holders, only on
the performance of the firm.
Consider rewording the expanded description
of ―Understanding of Organizations‖
portion of the objectives.
Change the assignment
directions to
make it more clear
that internal and external
stakeholder
analysis is expected.
If results are not improved,
then consider
emphasizing
this more in the
Business Policy
course.
Assignment
directions
were changed
to meet new
statement of
objectives,
and the goal
was reevaluated
in
Spring 2008.
8. Analyze the
external environment
of an
organization
and assess the
potential impacts
of economic
trends.
9. Analyze the
external environment
of an
organization
and assess the
potential im-
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2008
Spring
2007
Spring
2008
Spring
2007
Poor (2.2), but no direct reference
to considering stakeholders
was stated in the assignment.
Poor (2.0)
Poor (2.0).
Poor (2.0)
Monitor during next review. This finding
could be due to slightly different emphasis
by the instructor. In the future, will
monitor that this objective is explicitly
addressed in the assignment. Also rubrics
will be handed out with the assignment.
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
No changes needed
at this time.
Consider bringing
MBA goals and objectives
more in line
with LSBE goals and
objectives.
No changes needed.
Consider bringing
MBA goals and objectives
more in line
with LSBE goals and
objectives.
Will monitor in
the next review.
Alignment of
goals and objectives
accomplished.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
Alignment of
goals and objectives
accomplished.
__
43

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
pact of legal
trends.
10. Analyze
the external
environment of
an organization
and assess
the potential
impact
of ethics.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed in MBA 8111 (Business,
Government and Society)
Spring
2008
Spring
2008
Poor (2.2).
Adequate
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
An assessment of ethics may be better
assessed in the capstone MBA course,
MBA 8411 (Policy Formulation and Implementation)
No changes needed.
All MBA faculty are
encouraged to include
real and meaningful
discussions
of ethical issues
when they teach
their courses, in order
to solidify lessons
learned in the
MBA 8111 course.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
An assessment
of ethics
has been embedded
in the
MBA 8411
capstone
course.
11. Analyze
the external
environment of
an organization
and assess
the potential
impacts
of trends in diversity
(demographic,
cultural
and social).
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2008
Spring
2007
Spring
2008
Poor (2.2)
Adequate (3.2)
Poor (2.5).
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
No changes needed.
Consider bringing
MBA goals and objectives
more in line
with LSBE goals and
objectives.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
Alignment of
goals and objectives
accomplished.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
__
44

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Duluth
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
12. Analyze
the external
environment of
an organization
and assess
the potential
impact
of technology
trends.
13. Analyze
the external
environment of
an organization
and assess
the potential
impacts
of environmental
sustainability.
14. Analyze
the external
environment of
an organization
and assess
the potential
impact
of global
trends.
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Assessed using company analysis
assignment in MBA 8411 (Policy
Formulation and Implementation)
Spring
2007
Spring
2008
Spring
2008
Spring
2007
Spring
2008
Poor (2.6)
Poor (2.1)
Poor (2.1).
Poor (2.0)
Poor (1.8).
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
Need better format and directions for
the assignment, and in the expectations
understood by students. Provide rubrics
to students.
Consider bringing
MBA goals and objectives
more in line
with LSBE goals and
objectives.
No changes needed.
Improvement expected
in the future
as students become
more aware of these
issues over the next
few years and as the
University begins
implementing more
courses related to
the issue of environmental
sustainability.
Consider bringing
MBA goals and objectives
more in line
with LSBE goals and
objectives.
No changes needed.
2009.
Alignment of
goals and objectives
accomplished.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
Start looking
in Fall of 2009
for ways to incorporate
sustainability.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
Alignment of
goals and objectives
accomplished.
Changes in
assessment
instruments
made and
administered
in Spring
2009.
__
45

4. MBA Rochester
As the table indicates, the assessment results for Rochester were very similar to those for the
Duluth MBA program. Only the differences between the two programs are highlighted here:
• Results suggest students have no difficulty in analyzing issues and developing
recommendations that simultaneously meet organizational objectives and also consider
the needs of primary stakeholders.
• Students generally scored above the 90% in the Major Field Test (MTF) results provided
by the Educational Testing Services (ETS) over the last two years (Rochester was not
assessed in 2007, and hence the data is over two years instead of three years).
__
46

TABLE 6. MBA LEARNING ASSESSMENT GOALS - ROCHESTER
Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
1. Communicate
complex ideas effectively
in written form.
2. Communicate
complex ideas effectively
in oral form.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Videotaped class presentations.
A communications
expert is grading the presentations.
Fall 2007
Spring
2009
Good; desired results were obtained
(4.3).
Currently analyzing results.
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended
in the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
3. Utilize quantitative
knowledge and
skills to diagnose
and evaluate complex
situations.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007
Good; the desired results were obtained
(4.0).
Since the desired results were obtained,
no change is recommended
in the assessment measure.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended in
this course.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
4. Demonstrate use
of information technology
tools and
skills to diagnose
and evaluate
complex situations.
Assessed using modules for
a series of skills in Microsoft
Excel and Microsoft
Power-Point, using a tool
called Skills Assessment
Manager (SAM).
Spring
2008
Good. Scores were 92% for Excel
Intermediate, 90% for PowerPoint
Intermediate, 81% for PowerPoint
Beginner, 89% for Excel Beginner.
Since the results that were obtained
are excellent, no change is recommended
to the assessment measure.
However, the SAM instrument
is no longer available. As a result,
alternative ways of measuring the
utilization of quantitative knowledge
and skills to diagnose and evaluate
complex situations is being sought.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended.
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed in
the program.
Currently looking
for a new
assessment instrument.
5. Demonstrate the
ability to work effectively
in a team.
Assessed using student
peer evaluation form in
MBA 8211 (Data Analysis
and Statistics for Managers)
Spring
2008
Adequate. For the class as a
whole, the average on each of the
dimensions on a 5-point scale was
as follows:
a. Met group deadlines (4.84)
b. Coordinated parts of the group
project (4.75)
c. Assumed individual responsibility
in the group (4.83)
d. gave constructive feedback to
group members (4.70)
e. Negotiated collective goals with
other group members (4.68)
f. Effectively contributed to group
The results and the instrument
should be discussed with Dr. Anne
Cummings, the LSBE resident expert
on Teams, to see if the instrument
needs to be revised in the future
to get more discrimination on
the scales.
In the short run,
continue using the
present instrument
as a way of assessing
students’
teamwork skills.
No change is
recommended
or implemented.
__
47

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP AND ENHANCE CORE SKILLS
meetings (4.75)
6. Integrate knowledge
and skills to
examine, diagnose,
evaluate, and recommend
solutions
for complex problems.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007
Adequate; the desired results were
obtained (3.5).
Continue being specific with instructions
to students to encourage them
to be methodical and thorough in
their recommendations.
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended in
this course
Since the desired
results
were attained,
no changes
were needed.
Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
1. Acquire advanced
knowledge of accounting.
Measured in the MBA-level
Major Field Test (MFT) provided
by Educational Testing
Service (ETS).
April
2008
The mean score was 273, putting
LSBE above the 95% percentile
compared to the average for all
MBA programs in this country that
administer the test. The LSBE
mean score in accounting was 77,
which is in the top 5% of all institutions
administering this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
change is recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The mean score was 264, putting
LSBE between the 90 and 95th
percentiles compared to the average
for all MBA programs in the
country that administer the tests.
The LSBE mean score in Accounting
was 64, which is in the top 10
percent of all institutions administering
this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
changes were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
2. Acquire advanced
knowledge of
Finance.
Measured in the MBA-level
Major Field Test (MFT) provided
by Educational Testing
Service (ETS).
April
2008
The mean score was 273, putting
LSBE above the 95% percentile
compared to the average for all
MBA programs in this country that
administer the test.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
change is recommended.
No changes
were needed.
__
48

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in Finance
was 57, which is in the top 10 percent
of all institutions administering
this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
changes were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
3. Acquire advanced
knowledge of Human
Resources.
Measured in the MBA-level
Major Field Test (MFT) provided
by Educational Testing
Service (ETS).
April
2008
The mean score was 273, putting
LSBE above the 95% percentile
compared to the average for all
MBA programs in this country that
administer the test.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
change is recommended.
No changes
were needed.
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in Human
Resources was 65, which is in the
top 15 percent of all institutions
administering this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
changes were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
4. Acquire advanced
knowledge of Operations.
5. Acquire advanced
knowledge of Marketing.
Assessed using pre-and
post-test analysis plus concise
case study in MBA
8311 (Operations Management)
Measured in the MBA-level
Major Field Test (MFT) provided
by Educational Testing
Service (ETS).
Summer
2008
April
2008
Adequate. Post-test improvement
results were achieved and concise
case study results also achieved.
The mean score was 273, putting
LSBE above the 95% percentile
compared to the average for all
MBA programs in this country that
administer the test.
No changes were recommended.
No changes were
recommended.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
change is recommended.
No changes
were implemented.
No changes
were implemented.
Spring
2009
The LSBE mean score in Marketing
was 70, which is in the top 5 percent
of all institutions administering
this test nationwide.
Since the results
were extremely
successful, no
changes were recommended.
No changes
were needed.
6. Integrate understanding
of the core
areas of business:
analyze issues and
develop recommendations
that reflect
the cross-functional
nature of manage-
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007
Adequate; the desired results were
obtained (3.4)
__
49
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended in
this course.
Assessment instrument
was
changed, based
on previous assessments
in
Duluth.

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
ment processes in
changing environments.
7. Analyze issues
and develop recommendations
that simultaneously
meet
organizational objectives
and also consider
the needs of
primary stake-holders
(e.g. employees,
customers, shareholders)
Fall 2007
Adequate. The desired results
were obtained (3.6).
Since the desired
results were obtained,
no change
is recommended in
this course.
Assessment instrument
was
changed, based
on previous assessments
in
Duluth.
8. Analyze the external
environment of
an organization and
assess the potential
impacts of economic
trends.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007
Poor (2.8). Results are better than
previous assessments in Duluth,
but still not adequate. Possible interpretation:
1) This is a peripheral part of the
course, and assumes the students
understand how to research the
external environment.
2) Instructions may not have been
specific enough, especially with
respect to demographic and social/cultural
trends. Also, global
issues overlap some of the other
categories.
3) The assignment was given out
towards the end of the class, when
the focus had moved away from
the external environment and towards
individual firm performance
and strategy. (These comments
are also applicable for numbers
10-13 below.
Students should be given the rubrics
and an example to make sure
they understand assignment.
Need meeting of
graduate faculty to
discuss what is
being taught.
Graduate faculty
have met
and discussed.
Student will be
given rubrics
and an example.
9. Analyze the external
environment of
an organization and
assess the potential
impact of legal
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007 Adequate (3.3). None needed, but the students
should be given the rubrics and an
example to make sure they understand
assignment.
None needed.
None needed.
__
50

Learning Goals
Measurement/
Methodology
Date Last
Measured
MBA Learning Assessment Goals - Rochester
Results
Changes needed in the assessment
measurement
Other changes
needed (program,
course)
How changes
were implemented
CATEGORY: DEVELOP MANAGEMENT-SPECIFIC SKILLS
trends.
10. Analyze the external
environment
of an organization
and assess the potential
impact of
ethics.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007 Adequate (3.3). None needed, but the students
should be given the rubrics and an
example to make sure they understand
assignment.
None needed.
None needed.
11. Analyze the external
environment
of an organization
and assess the potential
impacts of
trends in diversity
(demographic, cultural
and social).
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007 Poor (1.9). Students should be given the rubrics
and an example to make sure
they understand assignment.
Need meeting of
graduate faculty to
discuss what is
being taught.
Graduate faculty
have met
and discussed.
Student will be
given rubrics
and an example.
12. Analyze the external
environment
of an organization
and assess the potential
impact of
technology trends.
13. Analyze the external
environment
of an organization
and assess the potential
impacts of
environmental sustainability.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007 Poor (2.8). Students should be given the rubrics
and an example to make sure
they understand assignment.
Fall 2007 Poor (2.1). Students should be given the rubrics
and an example to make sure
they understand assignment.
Need meeting of
graduate faculty to
discuss what is
being taught.
Need meeting of
graduate faculty to
discuss what is
being taught.
Graduate faculty
have met
and discussed.
Student will be
given rubrics
and an example.
Graduate faculty
have met
and discussed.
Student will be
given rubrics
and an example.
14. Analyze the external
environment
of an organization
and assess the potential
impact of
global trends.
Assessed using company
analysis assignment in MBA
8411 (Policy Formulation
and Implementation)
Fall 2007 Poor (2.3). Students should be given the rubrics
and an example to make sure
they understand assignment.
Need meeting of
graduate faculty to
discuss what is
being taught.
Graduate faculty
have met
and discussed.
Student will be
given rubrics
and an example.
__
51

E. Other Assessment Activities and Resulting Changes Made by LSBE
In addition to the BBA, BAcc, and MBA course-embedded assessment activities reported above,
LSBE has also responded positively to other assessment results and issues. These assessments
were based on student exit interviews, surveys of former students, suggestions and concerns
gathered from current and former students, comments from employers, internal assessment of
our programs and majors by LSBE faculty and staff, and suggestions from our Board of
Advisors. Here we briefly outline some of the major changes that have occurred since our
accreditation, based on this assessment activity.
TABLE 7. OUTLINE OF MAJOR CHANGES SINCE ACCREDITATION
Issue Discovered through Non-course-embedded
Assessment Activity
LSBE Response
• LSBE MBA students were having difficulty in
registering for their required classes.
• It was recognized that relations with LSBE
alumni were relatively inactive and the
amount of donor funds coming into LSBE
from alumni and others was relatively low.
• Prospective LSBE MBA students were often
unaware of the potential benefits of being a
graduate of an AACSB accredited program.
• Students in the LSBE Rochester MBA
Program requested that online syllabi be
made available to them.
• It was recognized that there were many
opportunities available in the regional and
state markets for students with a major in
Health Care Management.
• It was recognized that LSBE needed
innovations in MBA curriculum but did not
want to change the core curriculum
constantly to just reflect ―hot topics.‖
• It was recognized that alumni and other
friends of LSBE had inadequate information
about activities and developments within
LSBE to feel connected to LSBE.
• LSBE MBA students, in exit interviews,
expressed a need for an MBA student
handbook.
This difficulty was eliminated by the creation of the U
of MN online registration process. (2004)
A full time LSBE Development Director was hired. He
has been very successfully in obtaining donor funds
through naming opportunities in the new LSBE
building and for scholarship opportunities for LSBE
students. (2004)
New promotional materials emphasizing in part the
benefits of accreditation were developed by
Westmoreland Flint and are currently in circulation.
(2004)
Faculty members have placed syllabi for Rochester
MBA students online two weeks prior to the beginning
of class. (2004)
A new faculty member was hired to plan and
implement an LSBE major in Health Care
Management. (2004)
Added a number of elective courses that focus on soft
skills (e.g., Improvisational Theatre in Business), and
global experiences (India and China). (2004)
A professionally produced newsletter was developed
and is published twice yearly to provide current
information to alumni and other friends of LSBE.
(2005) Also, occasion newsletters are produced for
MBA students.
An LSBE MBA student handbook was created and
distributed to all current and incoming MBA students.
(2004)
• It was recognized that an MBA orientation MBA orientation sessions were initiated and continue
__
52

Issue Discovered through Non-course-embedded
Assessment Activity
session could benefit students enrolled in
LSBE MBA programs.
to be held. (2004)
LSBE Response
• MBA students complained about difficulty in
obtaining pre-requisite courses.
• Experienced the problems associated with
high enrollments (e.g., large waiting lists,
students unable to get into required courses,
etc).
• Students expressed an interest in learning
more about the ―real business world‖ and
about opportunities in their fields.
• Based on exit interviews, it was recognized
that a change in the graduate level
accounting course was needed in order to
improve the quality of the LSBE MBA
Programs.
• It was recognized that the structure of the
Management Studies department which
included Organizational Management,
Human Resources, Strategic Management,
and Marketing was inefficient and awkward.
• Student interest in the LSBE Health Care
Management major grew quickly requiring
additional faculty members to service the
program.
• It was recognized that many students taking
the Principles of Economics courses as a
beginning freshman were having difficulties
with the quantitative and mathematical
elements of the courses.
• Determined that LSBE graduation rates need
improvement.
• Determined that LSBE students could benefit
from additional course work in Statistics.
• EBI results (EBI test given every two years,
most recent was June 2009) revealed that
LSBE MBA students fared very well compared
to peers. Many items have improved over the
__
53
Worked with UM Continuing Education to adapt their
online Certificate in Applied Business to meet our
MBA upper-division pre-requisites. Developed courses
in finance and marketing. (2005) This was later
dropped due to low enrollments. Also, revised
prerequisites and partnered with the UW consortium
to allow their courses to meet our prerequisities.
Created enrollment targets for upper division and
increased the automatic GPA admission criteria for
admission to candidacy. (2006)
LSBE helped implement a mentorship program called
―College Connection‖ that matches students with
local business professionals. (2006)
A new and improved graduate level accounting class
was implemented. (2006)
The Marketing faculty were removed from the existing
structure and placed in a new Marketing Department.
(2006)
A second Health Care Management faculty member
was hired and adjunct faculty members are used to
help service the program. (2006)
In order to register for Principles of Economics
courses students must have completed at least 15
college credits and are strongly advised to include
MATH 1160 as part of the those 15 credits. (2006)
30–60–90-credit milestones were created. Those
students identified as being off track are being
contacted by LSBE Student Affairs staff for solutions
to get back on track. (2007)
Modified statistics limitation so that any upper
division statistics class that is not equivalent to ECON
2030 can be used as an upper division non-LSBE
elective. (2007)
A new MBA elective course was created called
Managing Information Technology that is now offered
at both Duluth and Rochester. (2007)

Issue Discovered through Non-course-embedded
Assessment Activity
years. In the 2007 administration, it was
found that student did not do as well as we
had hoped in the Learning Outcome ―Use and
Manage Technology‖ (even though it was an
improvement over 2005 measures).
• It was recognized that conditional admission
to LSBE MBA Programs would be viewed as
positive by prospective students and could
have a beneficial effect on number of
students within the program.
• Discovered that some students were
receiving degrees with having less than ―C‖
average in all major course work.
• Identified an increase in the number of
students that were being dismissed at the
end of their freshman year.
• LSBE recognized the need to incorporate
more technology in our curriculum.
• It was recognized that it would be beneficial
for LSBE students to have more exposure to
leadership training before graduating.
LSBE Response
MBA students also now have a mandatory technology
training and assessment program upon entering the
program. (2008)
Conditional admission to the LSBE MBA Programs has
been implemented. (2007)
Created additional degree requirement for graduation
—students must have at least a 2.00 in all major
course work. (2008)
LSBE Student Affairs staff now contacts all freshmen
who are subject to dismissal for spring semester and
advises them on how to formulate a strategy to regain
good academic standing. (2008)
LSBE laptop requirement initiative was implemented.
(2008)
A pilot program in leadership was provided to a small
number of LSBE students by the LifeSkills Center for
Leadership. (2009)
V. Financial Strategies
Strategic Priorities for 2008–09
In the 2007–08 annual report, ten strategic priorities were listed for the Labovitz School of
Business and Economics which became the strategic priorities for 2008-09.
The LSBE strategic priorities for 2008–09 included:
1. Improve graduation rates.
2. Maintenance of AACSB International Accreditation.
3. Obtain funding for additional faculty and staff positions.
4. Take advantage of the move to new LSBE building.
5. Increase opportunities for international experiences for faculty and students.
6. Significantly increase amount of funds from external sources for scholarships and
programs.
7. Create opportunities for LSBE students to learn to work in a diverse world.
8. Implement a Health Care Management Track in the MBA Program.
__
54

9. Explore opportunities for implementation of the concept of sustainability in LSBE
activities and programs.
10. Establish a major in Entrepreneurship in the Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA)
Program and programs aimed at sustainable entrepreneurship in the community.
Financial strategies for the 2008–09 priorities are shown in Table 8.
TABLE 8. LABOVITZ SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS FINANCIAL STRATEGIES 2008-09
Activity
1. Improve
Graduation
Rates
2. Maintenance of
Accreditation
3. Faculty and
Staff Position
Requests
4. Take Advantage
of the move to
the new LSBE
building
Start
Date
July
2008
March
2000
July
2008
July
2008
5. International July
6. External
Funding
7. Diversity
opportunities
8. Health Care
Management
Track in the
MBA program
2008
July
2008
July
2008
July
2008
9. Sustainability July
10. Establish a
Major in
Entrepreneurship
2008
July
2008
First Year Cost or Revenue
Continuing Annual
Cost or Revenue
Faculty and staff time. Faculty and staff time. LSBE
Faculty and staff time.
Ongoing accreditation
expenses ($4000). PTR
Chair visit expenses Fall
2008 ($1500).
Faculty: $657K+fringes.
Staff: $160K+fringes.
Faculty and staff time.
Funds needed not known at
this time.
Faculty and staff time. Travel
costs.
First year goal: $500K
Faculty and staff time.
Some expenses.
One additional faculty
member sometime in the
next five years.
Faculty and staff time.
Some seed money.
Faculty and staff time.
Development expenses.
Faculty and staff time.
Ongoing accreditation
expenses. PTR visit
expenses fall 2009.
Ongoing plus salary
and fringe increases.
Faculty and staff time.
Continuing funding
needed not known at
this time.
Faculty and staff time.
Travel costs.
Increase to $1M a year
by 2013.
Faculty and staff time.
Some expenses.
Source or
Disposition of
Funds
LSBE, Vice
Chancellor for
Academic
Administration
(VCAA).
VCAA
LSBE&VCAA
LSBE&VCAA
Donors
$100K plus fringes. VCAA
Unknown at this time.
One additional faculty
member at $100K plus
fringes.
LSBE&VCAA
LSBE
LSBE&VCAA
LaBounty
Endowment
__
55

1. Improve Graduation Rates
To date (August 2009), the graduation rates for 2008–09 are not available. We expect the report
to be available in late September, or early October. The LSBE Student Affairs staff has
continued to implement the plan referred to in the 2007–08 annual report.
2. Maintenance of AACSB International Accreditation
The 2008-09 strategic priorities emphasized Assessment of Learning, Faculty Sufficiency, and
Faculty Qualifications as the three major areas of focus.
Assessment of Learning. As reported in more detail elsewhere in this 2009 Fifth Year
Maintenance Report, LSBE has a mature assessment process with learning goals for each degree
program, as well as measurement plans and processes. Several assessments have been
completed, as well as ―closing the loop‖ in terms of impact on the School’s degree programs.
Faculty Sufficiency. As can be seen from AACSB Table 9-1 for Spring 2009 (presented in
Section VII of this report), the School meets standard 9 for participating faculty overall (85.2%),
for all disciplines (except for Business Communications and Business Law), and for all programs
and locations.
Faculty Qualifications. AACSB Table 10-1 for Spring 2009 (presented in Section VII of this
report) shows that the School meets standard 10 for Academically Qualified faculty (AQ) and for
Academically Qualified plus Professionally Qualified faculty (AQ+PQ) overall (74.9% and
98.1%), for all disciplines except Finance (47.7% and 84.1%) and Miscellaneous (0% and
100%), and for all programs and locations. The problem in Finance is one tenured faculty
member who has lost the Academic Qualification. This situation will be improved in 2009–10
when the Finance discipline will be staffed with four 100% AQ faculty members, two 100% PQ
faulty members, and one Other, resulting in 57% AQ and 85.7% AQ+PQ. In the future, unless
the faculty member who is classified as Other becomes AQ, or unless the Finance Discipline is
expanded, the School will not be able to meet the AQ+PQ criterion. (The School does not expect
the Miscellaneous category to change as the Director of Internships does not have research
expectations.)
Aspirant Schools. At the request of LSBE, AACSB approved two aspirant schools different from
those earlier requested for the maintenance visit. The new schools are the University of
Missouri, Kansas City and the University of Colorado, Denver.
__
56

3. Obtain Funding for Additional Faculty and Staff Positions
In the spring of 2008, LSBE, along with the other collegiate units at UMD, was asked to give
back to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Administration (VCAA) $23,000 in cash (taken out in
FY09). Shortly thereafter, the collegiate units were asked to give up an additional amount of
funds. For LSBE this amounted to $102,000 for FY09. Subsequently, all units were asked to
prepare plans for an 8% retrenchment for FY10. This amounted to $610,000. At the same time,
UMD and the University of Minnesota announced a hiring pause. As of August 2009, it is
unclear whether the 8% retrenchment will be for FY10 alone, or also for FY10 and FY11. Any
amounts that include personnel also include fringe benefit costs.
Given this difficult financial situation, LSBE Administrators and Department Heads have
committed much time and effort to planning and decisions about the 8% cut in budget. Despite
difficulties, it is our view that LSBE has fared relatively well in terms of faculty positions. LSBE
was able to replace a tenure-track marketing professor. (The new faculty member has been hired
and will start fall 2009.) Also, LSBE was given permission to hire three Academically Qualified
term finance faculty for fall of 2009. (All have been hired.) At the same time, the School has
been given permission to search for two tenure-track finance faculty for fall 2010. LSBE was
also granted a term position in Business Communication for fall 2009. (This faculty member has
been hired.) In addition, the teaching area for a faculty member in the Management Studies
Department has been changed from Human Resource Management to Organization Behavior;
permission to search for a replacement faculty in Human Resource Management has been
granted.
No additional administrative positions were granted to the School.
It should be mentioned that part of the retrenchment plan for LSBE was to increase faculty
teaching load from 15 to 18 credits per academic year, starting with academic year 2009–10.
However, the campus administration has recently announced plans to fund a reduction of one
course per tenure track faculty for academic year 2009–10, and LSBE departments have been
asked to start planning for this reduction in teaching load.
4. Take Advantage of the Move to New LSBE Building
The building has already been used for community events as well as school and university
events. The building has received much attention in the Duluth community and has raised
awareness of the School and its programs nationally and internationally. The Dean has made two
presentations on the building—one at the 2009 Annual Meeting of AACSB International, and the
other at the recent AASCB Conference on Sustainability.
__
57

5. Increase Opportunities for International Experiences for Faculty and Students
In the fall of 2008, LSBE participated in an EU/US grant application with the University of
Ljubljana in Slovenia. This grant proposes a faculty and student exchange program. (As of this
writing there has been no decision on the application.)
LSBE hosted three visiting scholars from China; these scholars represented the disciplines of
Economics, Accounting, and MIS. Also, a group of LSBE students spent a month in China at
Nankai University in May/June of 2009 with an LSBE faculty member who is Chinese. (This
represents the second exchange of this kind for LSBE students and faculty.)
The Dean of LSBE continued working as an AACSB Accreditation Mentor with the Faculty of
Economics (FELU) at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia. The Dean also was assigned as a
Mentor for the Zagreb School of Economics and Management (ZSEM) in Croatia. One of the
LSBE faculty members in Marketing taught a course at Dongguk University in Soul, Korea.
Another Marketing faulty member—the Executive Director of the Association of Consumer
Research (ACR)—co-chaired an annual conference of ACR at the Indian School of Business in
Hydrabad, India.
6. Significantly Increase Amount of Funds from External Sources for Scholarships and
Programs.
Scholarships. By the end of December 2008, the School had exceeded the goal of $250,000 for
scholarships under the UMD ―Reaching Higher Scholarship Initiative.‖ The amount raised was
close to $500,000.
Continuous Improvement Fund. By the end of academic year 2008–09 this fund had reached
$800,000. The goal is to reach $1,000,000 by the end of the academic year 2010–11.
Financial Markets Program. Unfortunately, little progress has been made toward the goals of this
fundraising effort. Although all available effort during the past year was used to manage the
program portfolio, this management effort helped provide an excellent learning experience for
students.
7. Create Opportunities for LSBE Students to Learn to Work in a Diverse World
In April of 2009, Dr. M.V. Badgett (Associate Professor of Economics and Public Policy, and
Director of the Center for Public Policy and Administration at the University of Massachusetts)
visited LSBE. She spoke to students, faculty, and members of the business community on the
issue of diversity.
__
58

Also in April, Dave Anderson (founder of the ―Famous Dave’s‖ restaurant chain) addressed
students and faculty as part of the School’s annual Professor for a Day spring event. Mr.
Anderson spoke of his journey to success as a Native American entrepreneur. Prior to Mr.
Anderson’s visit, a group of students from LSBE attended a weekend workshop called
―Leadership from the Heart.‖ This workshop was sponsored by LSBE and conducted by the
LifeSkills Center for Leadership, founded by Mr. Anderson.
8. Implement a Health Care Management Track in the MBA Program
No progress was made on this strategic objective.
9. Explore Opportunities for Introducing the Concept of Sustainability in the LSBE Activities
and Programs.
The Annual Report for 2007–08 stated that the LSBE building would be LEED certified at the
Silver level. However, the building came in as a LEED certified building at the Gold level!
There is considerable interest in incorporating sustainability in the activities of the School. One
of the School’s faculty members has organized a campus-wide group to explore ideas around
sustainability under the auspices of the University of Minnesota Graduate School.
The task force mentioned in the 2007–08 Annual Report has not yet been appointed, but one of
the School’s faculty members has recently visited the University of Colorado, Denver (one of
our aspirant schools) to learn about their sustainability efforts. The task force is expected to
commence this coming fall.
10. Establish a Major in Entrepreneurship in the Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA)
Program and Programs Aimed at Sustainable Entrepreneurship in the Community
Planning for these important initiatives may have been delayed by the University’s financial
situation, but several faculty members in the School are actively gathering information about
programs around the country.
VI. New Degree Programs
LSBE has incorporated no new degree programs since our AACSB accreditation.
__
59

VII. AACSB Tables
This section contains the following tables relating to professional and academic qualifications,
intellectual contributions, and deployment of qualified faculty:
• AACSB Table 9–1: Summary of Faculty Sufficiency Using Student Credit Hours
FALL 2008 (Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
• AACSB Table 9–1: Summary of Faculty Sufficiency Using Student Credit Hours
SPRING 2009 (Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
• AACSB Table 10–1: Summary of Faculty Intellectual Contributions and Qualifications
FALL 2008 (Date Range: January 1, 2004 - December 31, 2008)
• AACSB Table 10–1: Summary of Faculty Intellectual Contributions and Qualifications
SPRING 2009 (Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
• AACSB Table 10–2: Calculations Relative to Deployment of Qualified Faculty
FALL 2008 (Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
• AACSB Table 10–2: Calculations Relative to Deployment of Qualified Faculty
SPRING 2009 (Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
__
60

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, FALL 2008
Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Name Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson PQ Supporting 117.0 sch
Rodger Brannan AQ Participating 168.0 sch
Loren Erickson PQ Participating 401.0 sch
Arlene Hammarlund PQ Supporting 177.0 sch
Fu-Jen Hsiao AQ Participating 207.0 sch
Gerui Kang AQ Participating 279.0 sch
Jerry W. Lin AQ Participating 327.0 sch
Charles Reichert PQ Supporting 117.0 sch
Karen Salmela PQ Participating 696.0 sch
Gregory Trudeau AQ Supporting 183.0 sch
Total Accounting 2078.0 sch 594.0 sch >= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (77.8%)
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Patricia Merrier AQ Participating 168.0 sch
Junhua Wang AQ Participating 249.0 sch
Total Business Com 417.0 sch 0 sch
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson PQ Supporting 291.0 sch
Mark Jennings PQ Supporting 267.0 sch
Thomas Reed PQ Supporting 273.0 sch
Alan Roline 1 AQ Participating 119.0 sch
Randall Skalberg 2 AQ Participating 321.0 sch
Terry Trogdon PQ Supporting 180.0 sch
Total Business Law 440.0 sch 1011.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB not met (30.3%)
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque AQ Participating 1026.0 sch
Curt Anderson AQ Participating 60.0 sch
Bulent Anil AQ Participating 138.0 sch
1 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Independent Study and
Internship student credit hours (8 sch) during Fall 2008.
2 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) taught Accounting (Tax) courses (321 sch) during Fall 2008.
__
61

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, FALL 2008
Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Name Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
David Doorn AQ Participating 573.0 sch
Pamela Gipe AQ Supporting 432.0 sch
Christopher McIntosh AQ Participating 507.0 sch
Maureen O'Brien AQ Participating 297.0 sch
Bedassa Tadesse AQ Participating 366.0 sch
Neil Wilmot AQ Participating 1200.0 sch
Total Economics 4167.0 sch 432.0 sch >= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (90.6%)
FINANCE
Joe Artim PQ Participating 108.0 sch
Saiying Deng 3 AQ Participating 0.0
Manjeet Dhatt O Participating 246.0 sch
Laila Lunde PQ Supporting 75.0 sch
Timothy Seelos PQ Supporting 108.0 sch
James Vizanko PQ Participating 708.0 sch
Shee Wong AQ Participating 123.0 sch
Yibo Xiao AQ Participating 231.0 sch
Minhua Yang AQ Participating 315.0 sch
Total Finance 1731.0 sch 183.0 sch
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Mary Gabrys PQ Supporting 42.0 sch
Kathy Johnson PQ Supporting 42.0 sch
Jill Klingner 4 AQ Participating 210.0 sch
Jennifer Schultz AQ Participating 15.0 sch
Total Health Care Management 225.0 sch 84.0 sch
MIS
Nik Hassan AQ Participating 102.0 sch
Seung Lee AQ Participating 51.0 sch
Dahui Li AQ Participating 486.0 sch
Total MIS 639.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (90.4%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (72.8%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
3 Saiying Deng (Finance) was on parental leave for most of Fall 2008 and taught no classes.
4 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) also taught in POM (102 sch) during Fall 2008.
__
62

Name
AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, FALL 2008
Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David AQ Participating 195.0 sch
Jennifer Mencl AQ Participating 420.0 sch
Stephen Rubenfeld AQ Participating 234.0 sch
Total Management-HR 849.0 sch 0 sch
MANAGEMENT-ORG
David Beal PQ Supporting 78.0 sch
Geoffrey Bell AQ Participating 96.0 sch
Patricia Borchert AQ Participating 324.0 sch
Anne Cummings AQ Participating 210.0 sch
Sanjay Goel AQ Participating 216.0 sch
Xin Liang AQ Participating 249.0 sch
Alexandra Luong AQ Supporting 183.0 sch
Jon Pierce AQ Participating 270.0 sch
Total Management-Org 1365.0 sch 261.0 sch
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 5 AQ Participating 117.0 sch
Carlos Castillo PQ Participating 594.0 sch
Stephen Castleberry 6 AQ Participating 186.0 sch
John Kratz PQ Participating 156.0 sch
Ahmed Maamoun AQ Participating 333.0 sch
Linda Rochford AQ Participating 243.0 sch
Steven Sharkey PQ Supporting 90.0 sch
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 7 AQ Participating 1.0 sch
Jim Wrobleski PQ Supporting 177.0 sch
Total Marketing 1630.0 sch 267.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (83.9%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (85.9%)
5 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) (78 sch) and MBA (Rochester) (39 sch) programs during Fall 2008.
6 Stephen Castleberry (Marketing) also taught in the MBA (Rochester) program (42 sch) during Fall 2008.
7 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) taught only in the MBA (Duluth) program (1 sch) during Fall 2008.
__
63

Name
AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, FALL 2008
Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas
Total Miscellaneous
PQ Participating 33.0 sch
33.0 sch 0 sch
POM
Rodrigo Lievano 8 AQ Participating 297.0 sch
Henry Person PQ Participating 1134.0 sch
Total POM 1431.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 15005.0 sch 2832.0 sch >= 75% requirement for P for AACSB met (84.1%)
AACSB Table 9–1, Fall 2008, reflecting the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs.
MBA-DULUTH
Praveen Aggarwal AQ Participating 78.0 sch
Ryan Goei 9 AQ Supporting 62.0 sch
Rodrigo Lievano AQ Participating 66.0 sch
Rajiv Vaidyanathan AQ Participating 1.0 sch
Total MBA-Duluth 145.0 sch 62.0 sch >= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (70.0%)
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal AQ Participating 39.0 sch
Stephen Castleberry AQ Participating 42.0 sch
Total MBA-Rochester 81.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met (100.0%)
8 Rodrigo Lievano (POM) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) program (66 sch) during Fall 2008.
9 Ryan Goei taught only in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
__
64

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Name
Qualification
Participating or
Supporting
Credit Hours if
Participating
Credit Hours if
Supporting
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson PQ Supporting 120.0 sch
Rodger Brannan AQ Participating 417.0 sch
Loren Erickson PQ Participating 714.0 sch
Arlene Hammarlund PQ Supporting 177.0 sch
Fu-Jen Hsiao AQ Participating 456.0 sch
Gerui Kang AQ Participating 255.0 sch
Jerry Lin 1 AQ Participating 0.0
Charles Reichert PQ Supporting 135.0 sch
Karen Salmela PQ Participating 531.0 sch
Gregory Trudeau AQ Supporting 120.0 sch
Total Accounting 2373.0 sch 552.0 sch
Qualification Ratios
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(81.1%)
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Bonnie Edwards PQ Supporting 255.0 sch
Patricia Merrier 2 AQ Participating 0.0
Junhua Wang AQ Participating 180.0 sch
Total Business Com 180.0 sch 225.0 sch
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson PQ Supporting 270.0 sch
Thomas Reed PQ Supporting 561.0 sch
Alan Roline 3 AQ Participating 148.5 sch
Randall Skalberg 4 AQ Participating 309.0 sch
Total Business Law 457.5 sch 831.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB not met
(44.4%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB not met
(35.5%)
1 Jerry Lin (Accounting) was on a Single Semester Leave during Spring 2009.
2 Patricia Merrier (BComm) is on a Phased Retirement Agreement and did not teach Spring 2009.
3 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Internship student credit hours
(9 sch) during Spring 2009.
4 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) taught Accounting (Tax) courses (309 sch) during Spring 2009.
__
65

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Name
Qualification
Participating or
Supporting
Credit Hours if
Participating
Credit Hours if
Supporting
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque AQ Participating 225.0 sch
Curt Anderson AQ Participating 534.0 sch
Bulent Anil AQ Participating 891.0 sch
David Doorn AQ Participating 453.0 sch
Christopher McIntosh AQ Participating 453.0 sch
Maureen O’Brien 5 AQ Participating 0.0
Timothy Seelos PQ Supporting 399.0 sch
Bedassa Tadesse AQ Participating 354.0 sch
Neil Wilmot AQ Participating 966.0 sch
Total Economics 3876.0 sch 399.0 sch
Qualification Ratios
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(90.7%)
FINANCE
Joe Artim PQ Participating 54.0 sch
Manjeet Dhatt O Participating 372.0 sch
Laila Lunde PQ Supporting 81.0 sch
James Vizanko PQ Participating 360.0 sch
Shee Wong 6 AQ Participating 225.0 sch
Yibo Xiao AQ Participating 447.0 sch
Minhua Yang AQ Participating 318.0 sch
Total Finance 1776.0 sch 81.0 sch
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Jill Klingner 7 AQ Participating 246.0 sch
Jennifer Schultz 8 AQ Participating 303.0 sch
Total Health Care
Management 549.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(95.6%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(100.0%)
5 Maureen O’Brien (Economics) as Head of the Department of Economics, had no student credit hours for Spring 2009.
6 Shee Wong (Finance) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) (69) and the MBA (Rochester) (60 sch) programs during Spring 2009.
7 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) also taught in POM (156 sch) during Spring 2009.
8 Jennifer Schultz (Health Care Management) also taught in Economics (183 sch) during Spring 2009.
__
66

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
Name
MIS
Nik Hassan 9 AQ Participating 18.0 sch
Seung Lee AQ Participating 141.0 sch
Dahui Li 10 AQ Participating 0.0
Total MIS 159.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(100.0%)
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David AQ Participating 465.0 sch
Jennifer Mencl AQ Participating 360.0 sch
Laurie Pinther PQ Supporting 99.0 sch
Stephen Rubenfeld 11 AQ Participating 291.0 sch
Total Management-HR 1116.0 sch 99.0 sch
MANAGEMENT-ORG
Geoffrey Bell 12 AQ Participating 159.0 sch
Patricia Borchert 13 AQ Participating 0.0
Anne Cummings AQ Participating 225.0 sch
Sanjay Goel AQ Participating 354.0 sch
Allen Harmon PQ Supporting 120.0 sch
Kjell Knudsen 14 AQ Participating 45.0 sch
Xin Liang AQ Participating 267.0 sch
Jon Pierce AQ Participating 417.0 sch
Jim Stauber PQ Supporting 84.0 sch
Total Management-Org 1467.0 sch 204.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(91.9%)
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(87.8%)
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 15 AQ Participating 237.0 sch
9 Nik Hassan (MIS) taught only in the MBA (Duluth) program (18 sch) during Spring 2009.
10 Dahui Li (MIS) was on Single Semester Leave during Spring 2009.
11 Stephen Rubenfeld (Management-HR) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) program (51 sch) during Spring 2009.
12 Geoffrey Bell (Management-Org) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) program (39 sch) during Spring 2009.
13 Patricia Borchert (Management-Org) taught in the UMD Study in England Program during Spring 2009.
14 Kjell Knudsen (Management-Org) is Dean of the Labovitz School and taught only in the MBA (Rochester) program (45 sch) during Spring 2009.
15 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) also taught in the MBA (Rochester) program (42 sch) during Spring 2009.
__
67

AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Name
Qualification
Participating or
Supporting
Credit Hours if
Participating
Credit Hours if
Supporting
Qualification Ratios
Carlos Castillo PQ Participating 474.0 sch
Stephen Castleberry AQ Participating 198.0 sch
John Kratz PQ Participating 246.0 sch
Ahmed Maamoun AQ Participating 234.0 sch
Linda Rochford AQ Participating 141.0 sch
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 16 AQ Participating 174.0 sch
Jim Wrobleski PQ Supporting 180.0 sch >= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
Total Marketing 1704.0 sch 180.0 sch (90.4%)
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas PQ Participating 75.0 sch >= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
Total Miscellaneous 75.0 sch 0 sch (100.0%)
POM
Rodrigo Lievano AQ Participating 264.0 sch
Henry Person PQ Participating 969.0 sch
Total POM 1233.0 sch 0 sch
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 14965.5 sch 2601.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(100.0%)
>= 75% requirement for P for AACSB met
(85.2%)
AACSB Table 9–1, Spring 2009, reflecting the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs.
MBA-DULUTH
Geoffrey Bell AQ Participating 39.0 sch
Nik Hassan AQ Participating 18.0 sch
Stephen Rubenfeld AQ Participating 51.0 sch
Rajiv Vaidyanathan AQ Participating 2.0 sch
Shee Wong AQ Participating 69.0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
Total MBA-Duluth 179.0 sch 0.0 sch (100.0%)
16 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) also taught in the MBA (Duluth) program (2 sch) during Spring 2009.
__
68

Name
AACSB TABLE 9–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY USING STUDENT CREDIT HOURS, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Participating or Credit Hours if Credit Hours if
Qualification Supporting Participating Supporting
Qualification Ratios
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal AQ Participating 42.0 sch
Kjell Knudsen AQ Participating 45.0 sch
Shee Wong AQ Participating 60.0 sch
Total MBA-Rochester 147.0 sch 0 sch
>= 60% requirement for P for AACSB met
(100.0%)
__
69

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson MA, 2002 2008 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Rodger Brannan PhD, 1989 1989 100.0 YES 1 0 1 5 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Loren Erickson MBA, 1985 2001 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Arlene Hammarlund MBA, 2006 2008 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
M Prof Acc,
2007 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 4 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Fu-Jen Hsiao (ABD)
Gerui Kang PhD, 2009 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 2 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Jerry W. Lin PhD, 1994 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 4 11 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Charles Reichert MS, 1983 2006 29.0 YES 0 9 0 0 20 0 UG
Karen Salmela MBA, 1991 1998 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Gregory Trudeau EDD, 2001 2003 29.0 YES 0 0 1 2 1 0 UG
Total Accounting 1 9 6 24 21 2
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Patricia Merrier 1 PhD, 1979 1979 50.0 YES 1 13 1 0 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Junhua Wang PhD, 2007 2007 100.0 YES 0 1 2 6 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Total Business Communications 1 14 3 6 0 0
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson JD, 1995 2005 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Mark Jennings JD, 1977 2002 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Terry Trogdon JD, 1998 2003 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
1 Patricia Merrier (Business Communications) is on a 50% Phased Retirement Agreement and taught Fall Semester only during 2008-2009.
__
70

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
UG, RES, SER and
ADM
Alan Roline 2 JD, 1987 1993 100.0 YES 1 8 1 4 0 2
LLM, 1996
Randall Skalberg 3 JD, 1988 2001 100.0 YES 1 6 3 3 1 3 UG, RES and SER
Thomas Reed JD, 1992 2008 43.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Total Business Law 2 14 4 7 1 5
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque PhD, 2001 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 5 13 1 0 UG, RES and SER
Curt Anderson PhD, 1981 1980 100.0 YES 0 56 0 3 0 16
UG, NCR, RES, SER
and ADM
Bulent Anil PhD, 2007 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 1 0 3 UG, RES and SER
David Doorn PhD, 2003 2004 100.0 YES 1 11 2 18 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Pamela Gipe (ABD)
MPublic Affairs,
1996 2007 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Wayne Jesswein PhD, 1969 1968 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADM
Christopher McIntosh PhD, 2006 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 4 5 UG, RES and SER
Maureen O'Brien PhD, 1983 1983 100.0 YES 2 7 1 3 0 1
UG, RES, SER and
ADM
Bedassa Tadesse PhD, 2003 2003 100.0 YES 0 0 13 17 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Neil Wilmot (ABD) MA, 2002 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 4 UG and SER
Total Economics 3 74 21 55 5 30
FINANCE
Joe Artim MBA, 1991 2001 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 1 UG and SER
Saiying Deng 4 PhD, 2005 2005 50.0 YES 0 2 2 11 0 0 UG, RES and SER
2 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Independent Study and Internship
student credit hours during Fall 2008.
3 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) was Academically Qualified to teach Accounting (Tax) courses during Fall 2008.
__
71

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Manjeet Dhatt PhD, 1995 2000 100.0 YES 0 0 1 0 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Laila Lunde MBA, 1999 2003 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Timothy Seelos MA, 1982 2005 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
James Vizanko MBA, 1981 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
UG, GR, RES, SER
Shee Wong PhD, 1983 1982 100.0 YES 0 4 3 3 0 1 and ADM
Yibo Xiao (ABD) MBA, 2001 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Master of
Minhua Yang (ABD) Business, 2003 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 1 0 UG and SER
Total Finance 0 6 6 14 1 2
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Mary Gabrys MS, 1996 2005 7.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Kathy Johnson MS, 1996 2005 7.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Jill Klingner 5 PhD, 2006 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 2 3 1 2 UG, RES and SER
Jennifer Schultz PhD, 2001 2004 100.0 YES 0 8 7 35 0 0
UG, RES, SER and
ADM
Total Health Care Management 0 8 9 38 1 2
MIS
Nik Hassan PhD, 1995 2002 100.0 YES 0 0 7 13 0 1
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Seung Lee PhD, 1998 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 6 9 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Dahui Li PhD, 2002 2002 100.0 YES 0 0 15 43 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Total MIS 0 0 28 65 0 1
4 Saiying Deng (Finance) was on parental leave for most of Fall 2008 and taught no classes.
5 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach POM classes during Fall 2008.
__
72

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David PhD, 2001 2001 100.0 YES 0 2 4 7 1 2 UG, RES and SER
Jennifer Mencl PhD, 2004 2006 100.0 YES 0 3 3 20 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Stephen Rubenfeld PhD, 1977 1981 100.0 YES 0 0 1 2 1 5
UG, GR, RES and
SER
Total Management-HR 0 5 8 29 2 7
MANAGEMENT-ORG
David Beal BS, 1963 2001 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
6 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs during Fall 2008.
7 Stephen Castleberry (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Rochester) program during Fall 2008.
__
73
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Geoffrey Bell PhD, 1999 2001 100.0 YES 0 3 4 10 0 0
Patricia Borchert PhD, 2006 2005 100.0 YES 0 1 1 9 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Anne Cummings PhD, 1997 2004 100.0 YES 0 5 1 10 0 9 UG, RES and SER
Sanjay Goel PhD, 1995 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 7 15 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Kjell Knudsen PhD, 1973 1979 100.0 YES 1 0 0 0 1 0 GR and ADM
Xin Liang PhD, 2007 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 2 11 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Alexandra Luong PhD, 2001 2008 14.0 YES 0 0 3 3 1 0 UG
Jon Pierce PhD, 1977 1976 100.0 YES 0 15 9 20 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Total Management-Org 1 26 27 78 2 10
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 6 PhD, 1998 1998 100.0 YES 5 17 7 27 2 45
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Carlos Castillo MBA, 1996 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Stephen Castleberry 7 PhD, 1983 1992 100.0 YES 4 15 5 10 0 2 UG, GR, RES and

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
SER
John Kratz MBA, 1992 1997 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 1 UG and SER
Ahmed Maamoun PhD, 1999 2006 100.0 YES 2 1 0 1 1 0 UG and SER
Linda Rochford PhD, 1989 1992 100.0 YES 2 27 0 0 0 2 UG, RES and SER
Steven Sharkey MBA, 2008 2008 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 8 PhD, 1993 1993 100.0 YES 2 8 1 13 1 45
Jim Wrobleski MBA, 2001 2002 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Total Marketing 15 68 13 51 4 95
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas PhD, 1976 1992 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADM
Total Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0
POM
Rodrigo Lievano 9 PhD, 1975 1994 100.0 YES 0 5 2 5 0 6
UG, GR, RES and
SER
Henry Person PhD, 1974 1974 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Total POM 0 5 2 5 0 6
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 23 229 127 372 37 160
AACSB Table 10–1, Fall 2008, reflecting the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs.
MBA-DULUTH
Praveen Aggarwal PhD, 1998 1998 100.0 YES 3 15 6 22 2 20 UG, GR, RES, SER
8 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
9 Rodrigo Lievano (POM) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
__
74

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, FALL 2008
(DATE RANGE: JANUARY 1, 2004 - DECEMBER 31, 2008)
Date of First
Appointment to
School
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
Rajiv Vaidyanathan PhD, 1993 1993 100.0 YES 2 7 1 13 1 23
Total MBA-DULUTH 05 27 11 38 4 46
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
and ADM
Ryan Goei 10 PhD, 2003 2006 10.0 YES 0 0 2 0 1 0
Rodrigo Lievano PhD, 1975 1994 100.0 YES 0 5 2 3 0 3 UG, GR, RES,SER
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal PhD, 1998 1998 100.0 YES 3 15 6 22 2 20
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Stephen Castleberry PhD, 1983 1992 100.0 YES 4 11 5 9 0 2 UG, GR, RES,SER
Total MBA-ROCHESTER 7 26 11 31 2 22
10 Ryan Goei was Academically Qualified and taught only in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
__
75

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Number of Contributions
1 Jerry Lin (Accounting) was on Single Semester Leave during Spring 2009.
2 Patricia Merrier (Business Communications) is on a 50% Phased Retirement Agreement and taught Fall Semester only during 2008-2009.
3 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Independent Study and Internship student credit
hours during Spring 2009.
__
76
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson MA, 2002 2008 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Rodger Brannan PhD, 1989 1989 100.0 YES 1 0 1 5 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Loren Erickson MBA, 1985 2001 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Arlene Hammarlund MBA, 2006 2008 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
M of Prof Acc,
2007 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 4 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Fu-Jen Hsiao (ABD)
Gerui Kang PhD, 2009 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 4 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Jerry W. Lin 1 PhD, 1994 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 4 11 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Charles Reichert MS, 1983 2006 29.0 YES 0 7 0 0 20 0 UG
Karen Salmela MBA, 1991 1998 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Gregory Trudeau EDD, 2001 2003 29.0 YES 0 0 1 1 1 0 UG
Total Accounting 1 7 6 25 21 2
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Bonnie Edwards EDD, 1991 2009 43.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Patricia Merrier 2 PhD, 1979 1979 50.0 YES 1 13 1 0 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Junhua Wang PhD, 2007 2007 100.0 YES 0 1 2 5 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Total Business Communications 1 14 3 5 0 0
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson JD, 1995 2005 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Thomas Reed JD, 1992 2008 43.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
UG, RES, SER and
Alan Roline 3 JD, 1987 1993 100.0 YES 1 6 1 5 0 2 ADM
Randall Skalberg 4 LLM, 1996 2001 100.0 YES 1 5 3 3 1 3 UG, RES and SER

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
JD, 1988
Total Business Law 2 11 4 8 1 5
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque PhD, 2001 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 6 11 1 0 UG, RES and SER
Curt Anderson PhD, 1981 1980 100.0 YES 0 54 0 3 0 18
UG, NCR, RES, SER
and ADM
Bulent Anil PhD, 2007 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 1 0 3 UG, RES and SER
David Doorn PhD, 2003 2004 100.0 YES 1 11 2 18 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Wayne Jesswein PhD, 1969 1968 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADM
Christopher McIntosh PhD, 2006 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 4 6 UG, RES and SER
UG, RES, SER and
Maureen O'Brien PhD, 1983 1983 100.0 YES 2 7 1 3 0 1 ADM
Timothy Seelos MA, 1982 2005 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Bedassa Tadesse PhD, 2003 2003 100.0 YES 0 0 13 17 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Neil Wilmot (ABD) MA, 2002 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 4 UG and SER
Total Economics 3 72 22 53 5 33
FINANCE
Joe Artim MBA, 1991 2001 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 1 UG and SER
Manjeet Dhatt PhD, 1995 2000 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Laila Lunde MBA, 1999 2003 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
James Vizanko MBA, 1981 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
__
77
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Shee Wong 5 PhD, 1983 1982 100.0 YES 0 4 3 3 0 1
Yibo Xiao (ABD) MBA, 2001 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Minhua Yang (ABD) M Bus, 2003 2008 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 1 0 UG and SER
4 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) was Academically Qualified to teach Accounting (Tax) courses during Spring 2009.
5 Shee Wong (Finance) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs during Spring 2009.

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Total Finance 0 4 3 3 1 2
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Jill Klingner 6 PhD, 2006 2006 100.0 YES 0 0 2 3 1 2 UG, RES and SER
Jennifer Schultz 7 PhD, 2001 2004 100.0 YES 0 8 6 33 0 0
UG, RES, SER and
ADM
Total Health Care Management 0 8 8 36 1 2
MIS
Nik Hassan 8 PhD, 1995 2002 100.0 YES 0 0 7 13 0 1
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Seung Lee PhD, 1998 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 6 9 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Dahui Li 9 PhD, 2002 2002 100.0 YES 0 0 15 43 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Total MIS 0 0 28 65 0 1
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David PhD, 2001 2001 100.0 YES 0 2 4 6 1 2 UG, RES and SER
Jennifer Mencl PhD, 2004 2006 100.0 YES 0 3 3 20 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Laurie Pinther MA, 2001 2009 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Stephen Rubenfeld 10 PhD, 1977 1981 100.0 YES 0 0 1 1 1 5
Total Management-HR 0 5 8 27 2 7
UG, GR, RES and
SER
MANAGEMENT-ORG
Geoffrey Bell 11 PhD, 1999 2001 100.0 YES 0 3 4 11 0 0 UG, GR, RES, SER
6 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach POM classes during Spring 2009.
7 Jennifer Schultz (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach Economics classes during Spring 2009.
8 Nik Hassan (MIS) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009
9 Dahui Li (MIS) was on Single Semester leave during Spring 2009.
10 Stephen Rubenfeld (Management-HR) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
__
78

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
__
79
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
and ADM
Patricia Borchert 12 PhD, 2006 2005 100.0 YES 0 1 1 9 0 1 UG, RES and SER
Anne Cummings PhD, 1997 2004 100.0 YES 0 5 1 9 0 4 UG, RES and SER
Sanjay Goel PhD, 1995 1999 100.0 YES 0 0 7 15 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Allen Harmon MBA, 1978 2000 14.0 YES 0 2 0 0 0 0 UG
Kjell Knudsen 13 PhD, 1973 1979 100.0 YES 1 0 0 0 1 0 GR and ADM
Xin Liang PhD, 2007 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 2 11 0 0 UG, RES and SER
Jon Pierce PhD, 1977 1976 100.0 YES 0 15 9 20 0 0 UG, RES and SER
M Industrial
Jim Stauber
Safety, 1982 2009 14.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
Total Management-Org 1 26 24 75 1 5
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 14 PhD, 1998 1998 100.0 YES 6 15 7 27 2 46
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Carlos Castillo MBA, 1996 2007 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
UG, GR, RES and
SER
Stephen Castleberry PhD, 1983 1992 100.0 YES 4 15 4 10 0 2
John Kratz MBA, 1992 1997 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 1 UG and SER
Ahmed Maamoun PhD, 1999 2006 100.0 YES 2 1 0 1 1 0 UG and SER
Linda Rochford PhD, 1989 1992 100.0 YES 4 33 0 1 0 2 UG, RES and SER
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 15 PhD, 1993 1993 100.0 YES 3 7 1 14 1 46
Jim Wrobleski MBA, 2001 2002 29.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG
11 Geoffrey Bell (Management-Org) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
12 Patricia Borchert (Management Studies) taught in the UMD Study in England program during Spring 2009.
13 Kjell Knudsen (Management-Org) is the Dean of the Labovitz School of Business and Economics and was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA
(Rochester) program during Spring 2009.
14 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Rochester) program during Spring 2009.
15 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Total Marketing 19 71 12 53 4 97
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas PhD, 1976 1992 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADM
Total Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0
POM
Rodrigo Lievano PhD, 1975 1994 100.0 YES 0 5 2 4 0 6
UG, GR, RES and
SER
Henry Person PhD, 1974 1974 100.0 YES 0 0 0 0 0 0 UG and SER
Total POM 0 5 2 4 0 6
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 27 223 120 354 36 160
AACSB Table 10–1, Spring 2009, reflecting the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs.
MBA-DULUTH
Geoffrey Bell PhD, 1999 2001 100.0 YES 0 3 4 11 0 0
Nik Hassan PhD, 1995 2002 100.0 YES 0 0 7 13 0 1
Stephen Rubenfeld PhD, 1977 1981 100.0 YES 0 0 1 1 1 5
Rajiv Vaidyanathan PhD, 1993 1993 100.0 YES 3 7 1 14 1 46
Shee Wong PhD, 1983 1982 100.0 YES 0 4 3 3 0 1
Total MBA-DULUTH 3 14 16 42 2 53
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
UG, GR, RES and
SER
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
__
80

Name
Highest Earned
Degree & Year
AACSB TABLE 10–1: SUMMARY OF FACULTY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS, SPRING 2009
Date of First
Appointment to
School
(Date Range: July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2009)
Percent of Time
Dedicated to
the School's
Mission
Acad
Qual
Prof
Qual
Other
Learning &
Pedagogical
Research
Number of Contributions
Discipline-
Based
Scholarship
Contributions to
Practice
PRJ OIC PRJ OIC PRJ OIC
Normal
Professional
Responsibilities
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal PhD, 1998 1998 100.0 YES 6 15 7 27 2 46
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Kjell Knudsen PhD, 1973 1979 100.0 YES 1 0 0 0 1 0 GR and ADM
Shee Wong PhD, 1983 1982 100.0 YES 0 4 3 3 0 1
UG, GR, RES, SER
and ADM
Total MBA-ROCHESTER 7 19 10 30 3 47
__
81

AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, FALL 2008
(Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
Name Qualification
AQ - % of
time devoted
to mission
PQ - % of
time devoted
to mission
Other - % of
time devoted
to mission
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson PQ 29.0
Rodger Brannan AQ 100.0
Loren Erickson PQ 100.0
Arlene Hammarlund PQ 29.0
Fu-Jen Hsiao AQ 100.0
Gerui Kang AQ 100.0
Jerry W. Lin AQ 100.0
Charles Reichert PQ 29.0
Karen Salmela PQ 100.0
Gregory Trudeau AQ 29.0
Total Accounting 429.0 (59.9%) 287.0 (40.1%) 0.0 (0.0%)
Qualification Ratios
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (59.9%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Patricia Merrier 1 AQ 50.0
Junhua Wang AQ 100.0
Total Business Com 150.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson PQ 29.0
Mark Jennings PQ 14.0
Thomas Reed PQ 43.0
Alan Roline 2 AQ 100.0
Randall Skalberg 3 AQ 100.0
Terry Trogdon PQ 14.0
Total Business Law 200.0 (66.7%) 100.0 (33.3%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (66.7%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
1 Patricia Merrier (Business Communications) is on a 50% Phased Retirement Agreement and taught Fall Semester only during 2008-2009.
2 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Independent Study and Internship
student credit hours during Fall 2008.
3 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) was Academically Qualified to teach Accounting (Tax) courses during Fall 2008.
__
82

Name
AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, FALL 2008
(Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
Qualification to mission to mission to mission
Qualification Ratios
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque AQ 100.0
Curt Anderson AQ 100.0
Bulent Anil AQ 100.0
David Doorn AQ 100.0
Pamela Gipe AQ 14.0
Wayne Jesswein PQ 100.0
Christopher McIntosh AQ 100.0
Maureen O'Brien AQ 100.0
Bedassa Tadesse AQ 100.0
Neil Wilmot AQ 100.0
Total Economics 814.0 (89.1 %) 100.0 (10.9%) 0.0 (0.0%)
FINANCE
Joe Artim PQ 100.0
Saiying Deng 4 AQ 50.0
Manjeet Dhatt O 100.0
Laila Lunde PQ 29.0
Timothy Seelos PQ 29.0
James Vizanko PQ 100.0
Shee Wong AQ 100.0
Yibo Xiao AQ 100.0
Minhua Yang AQ 100.0
Total Finance 350.0 (49.4%) 258.0 (36.4%) 100.0 (14.1%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (89.1%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB not met (49.4%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB not met (85.9%)
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Mary Gabrys PQ 7.0
Kathy Johnson PQ 7.0
Jill Klingner 5 AQ 100.0
Jennifer Schultz AQ 100.0
4 Saiying Deng (Finance) was on parental leave for most of Fall 2008 and taught no classes.
5 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach POM classes during Fall 2008.
__
83

AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, FALL 2008
(Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
to mission to mission to mission
Name Qualification
Total Health Care
Management 200.0 (93.5%) 14.0 (6.5%) 0.0 (0.0%)
Qualification Ratios
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (93.5%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
MIS
Nik Hassan AQ 100.0
Seung Lee AQ 100.0
Dahui Li AQ 100.0
Total MIS 300.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David AQ 100.0
Jennifer Mencl AQ 100.0
Stephen Rubenfeld AQ 100.0
Total Management-HR 300.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
MANAGEMENT-ORG
David Beal PQ 14.0
Geoffrey Bell AQ 100.0
Patricia Borchert AQ 100.0
Anne Cummings AQ 100.0
Sanjay Goel AQ 100.0
Kjell Knudsen PQ 100.0
Xin Liang AQ 100.0
Alexandra Luong AQ 14.0
Jon Pierce AQ 100.0
Total Management-Org 614.0 (84.3%) 114.0 (15.7%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (84.3%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 6 AQ 100.0
Carlos Castillo PQ 100.0
Stephen Castleberry 7 AQ 100.0
6 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs during Fall 2008.
7 Stephen Castleberry (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Rochester) program during Fall 2008.
__
84

AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, FALL 2008
(Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
to mission to mission to mission
Name Qualification
John Kratz PQ 100.0
Ahmed Maamoun AQ 100.0
Linda Rochford AQ 100.0
Steven Sharkey PQ 14.0
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 8 AQ 100.0
Jim Wrobleski PQ 29.0
Total Marketing 500.0 (67.3%) 243.0 (32.7%) 0.0 (0.0%)
Qualification Ratios
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (67.3%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas PQ 100.0 >= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB not met (0.0%)
Total Miscellaneous 0.0 (0.0%) 100.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) >= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
POM
Rodrigo Lievano 9 AQ 100.0
Henry Person PQ 100.0
Total POM 100.0 (50.0%) 100.0 (50.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 3957.0 (73.6%) 1316.0 (24.5%) 100.0 (1.9%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (50.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (73.6%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (98.1%)
MBA-DULUTH
Praveen Aggarwal AQ 100.0
Ryan Goei 10 AQ 10.0
Rodrigo Lievano AQ 100.0
Rajiv Vaidyanathan AQ 100.0
Total MBA-Duluth 310.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
8 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
9 Rodrigo Lievano (POM) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
10 Ryan Goei was Academically Qualified and taught only in the MBA (Duluth) program during Fall 2008.
__
85

Name
AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, FALL 2008
(Date Range: July 1, 2008 - December 31, 2008)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
Qualification to mission to mission to mission
Qualification Ratios
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal AQ 100.0
Stephen Castleberry AQ 100.0
Total MBA-Rochester 200.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
__
86

AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, SPRING 2009
Name Qualification
AQ - % of
time devoted
to mission
ACCOUNTING
Colin Anderson PQ 29.0
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
PQ - % of Other - % of
time devoted time devoted
to mission to mission
Rodger Brannan AQ 100.0
Loren Erickson PQ 100.0
Arlene Hammarlund PQ 29.0
Fu-Jen Hsiao AQ 100.0
Gerui Kang AQ 100.0
Jerry W. Lin 1 AQ 100.0
Charles Reichert PQ 29.0
Karen Salmela PQ 100.0
Gregory Trudeau AQ 29.0
Total Accounting 429.0 (59.9%) 287.0 (40.1%) 0.0 (0.0%)
Qualification Ratios
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (59.9%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS
Bonnie Edwards PQ 43.0
Patricia Merrier 2 AQ 50.0
Junhua Wang AQ 100.0
Total Business Com 150.0 (77.7%) 43.0 (22.3%) 0.0 (0.0%)
BUSINESS LAW
Juhl Halvorson PQ 29.0
Thomas Reed PQ 43.0
Alan Roline 3 AQ 100.0
Randall Skalberg 4 AQ 100.0
Total Business Law 200.0 (73.5%) 72.0 (26.5%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (77.7%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (73.5%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
1 Jerry Lin (Accounting) was on Single Semester Leave during Spring 2009.
2 Patricia Merrier (Business Communications) is on a 50% Phased Retirement Agreement and taught Fall Semester only during 2008-2009.
3 Alan Roline (Business Law) as Head of the Department of Accounting, was responsible for the administration of Independent Study and Internship
student credit hours during Spring 2009.
4 Randall Skalberg (Business Law) was Academically Qualified to teach Accounting (Tax) courses during Spring 2009.
__
87

Name
AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
Qualification to mission to mission to mission
Qualification Ratios
ECONOMICS
Pedro Albuquerque AQ 100.0
Curt Anderson AQ 100.0
Bulent Anil AQ 100.0
David Doorn AQ 100.0
Wayne Jesswein PQ 100.0
Christopher McIntosh AQ 100.0
Maureen O'Brien AQ 100.0
Timothy Seelos PQ 29.0
Bedassa Tadesse AQ 100.0
Neil Wilmot AQ 100.0
Total Economics 800.0 (86.1%) 129.0 (13.9%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (86.1%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
FINANCE
Joe Artim PQ 100.0
Manjeet Dhatt O 100.0
Laila Lunde PQ 29.0
James Vizanko PQ 100.0
Shee Wong 5 AQ 100.0
Yibo Xiao AQ 100.0
Minhua Yang AQ 100.0
Total Finance 300.0 (47.7%) 229.0 (36.4%) 100.0 (15.9%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB not met (47.4%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB not met
(84.1%)
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
Jill Klingner 6 AQ 100.0
Jennifer Schultz 7 AQ 100.0
Total Health Care
Management 200.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
5 Shee Wong (Finance) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs during Spring 2009.
6 Jill Klingner (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach POM classes during Spring 2009.
7 Jennifer Schultz (Health Care Management) was Academically Qualified to teach Economics classes during Spring 2009.
__
88

Name
AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
Qualification to mission to mission to mission
Qualification Ratios
MIS
Nik Hassan 8 AQ 100.0
Seung Lee AQ 100.0
Dahui Li 9 AQ 100.0
Total MIS 300.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
MANAGEMENT-HR
Jannifer David AQ 100.0
Jennifer Mencl AQ 100.0
Laurie Pinther PQ 14.0
Stephen Rubenfeld 10 AQ 100.0
Total Management-HR 300.0 (95.5%) 14.0 (4.5%) 0.0 (0.0%)
MANAGEMENT-ORG
Geoffrey Bell 11 AQ 100.0
Patricia Borchert 12 AQ 100.0
Anne Cummings AQ 100.0
Sanjay Goel AQ 100.0
Allen Harmon PQ 14.0
Kjell Knudsen 13 AQ 100.0
Xin Liang AQ 100.0
Jon Pierce AQ 100.0
Jim Stauber PQ 14.0
Total Management-Org 700.0 (96.2%) 28.0 (3.8%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (95.5%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (96.2%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
8 Nik Hassan (MIS) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
9 Dahui Li (MIS) was on Single Semester leave during Spring 2009.
10 Stephen Rubenfeld (Management-HR) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
11 Geoffrey Bell (Management-Org) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
12 Patricia Borchert (Management Studies) taught in the UMD Study in England program during Spring 2009.
13 Kjell Knudsen (Management-Org) is the Dean of the Labovitz School of Business and Economics and was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA
(Rochester) program during Spring 2009.
__
89

Name
AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
AQ - % of
time devoted
PQ - % of
time devoted
Other - % of
time devoted
Qualification to mission to mission to mission
Qualification Ratios
MARKETING
Praveen Aggarwal 14 AQ 100.0
Carlos Castillo PQ 100.0
Stephen Castleberry AQ 100.0
John Kratz PQ 100.0
Ahmed Maamoun AQ 100.0
Linda Rochford AQ 100.0
Rajiv Vaidyanathan 15 AQ 100.0
Jim Wrobleski PQ 29.0
Total Marketing 500.0 (68.6%) 229.0 (31.4%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (68.6%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
MISCELLANEOUS
Duane Kaas PQ 100.0 >= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB not met (0.0%)
Total Miscellaneous 0.0 (0.0%) 100.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) >= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
POM
Rodrigo Lievano AQ 100.0
Henry Person PQ 100.0
Total POM 100.0 (50.0%) 100.0 (50.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
GRAND TOTAL
Grand Total 3979.0 (74.9%) 1231.0 (23.2%) 100.0 (1.9%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (50.0%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (74.9%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (98.1%)
AACSB Table 10–2, Spring 2009, reflecting the MBA (Duluth) and MBA (Rochester) programs.
MBA-DULUTH
Geoffrey Bell AQ 100.0 >= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
Nik Hassan AQ 100.0
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
14 Praveen Aggarwal (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Rochester) program during Spring 2009.
15 Rajiv Vaidyanathan (Marketing) was Academically Qualified to teach in the MBA (Duluth) program during Spring 2009.
__
90

AACSB TABLE 10–2: CALCULATIONS RELATIVE TO DEPLOYMENT OF QUALIFIED FACULTY, SPRING 2009
(Date Range: January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009)
Name Qualification
AQ - % of
time devoted
to mission
PQ - % of
time devoted
to mission
Other - % of
time devoted
to mission
Qualification Ratios
Stephen Rubenfeld AQ 100.0
Rajiv Vaidyanathan AQ 100.0
Shee Wong AQ 100.0
Total MBA-Duluth 500.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
MBA-ROCHESTER
Praveen Aggarwal AQ 100.0
Kjell Knudsen AQ 100.0
Shee Wong AQ 100.0
Total MBA-Rochester 300.0 (100.0%) 0.0 (0.0%) 0.0 (0.0%)
>= 50% requirement for AQ for AACSB met (100%)
>= 90% requirement for AQ + PQ for AACSB met (100.0%)
■
__
91