Accreditation
Accreditation
The Carroll School of Management believes business school graduates should be equipped to handle the changing needs of the business community as well as the world community in which we live.
The Carroll School of Management at Boston College ranks among the world’s leading business schools. It offers a rigorous, transformative academic experience that integrates the study of management with the liberal arts, while developing the skills of critical thinking and fostering ethical leadership. Part of a vibrant, Jesuit Catholic university, the Carroll School draws inspiration and direction from our centuries-old religious and intellectual heritage. We maintain an enduring conviction that successful management education in the 21st century must combine excellence in teaching and research with reflection and action. The Carroll School educates the whole person in an atmosphere that is inclusive, ethical, caring, collaborative, and respectful of all, consistent with Boston College’s institutional mission and motto of “Ever to Excel.”
To fulfill its mission and promote successful outcomes for all its graduates, the Carroll School establishes learning goals to ensure that upon graduation, students will be:
- Ethical reasoners;
- Team players;
- Critical thinkers;
- Adept in quantitative analysis; and
- Knowledgeable in business (both in general business concepts and specific disciplines).
Contact Us
Ethan Sullivan
Senior Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs
Fulton Hall 315
617-552-0459
AACSB Assessment of Student Learning
The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation represents the highest standard of achievement for business schools, with less than 5 percent of the more than 16,000 business degree granting schools worldwide earning AACSB accreditation. The AACSB evaluates business programs according to the highest standards, and examines all aspects of a school’s academic program, including teaching, curriculum, student learning, institutional development, global awareness, and academic research quality.
The AACSB accreditation standards challenge post-secondary educators to pursue excellence and continuous improvement throughout their business programs. The process uses internal self-assessment and external peer review to confirm delivery of a quality management education and achievement of the school’s mission. The standards are strict, and achieving AACSB accreditation is a comprehensive process. Generally, it takes a lot of work and time to meet all of the AACSB accreditation standards. This rigorous process is well worth the investment, as it is commonly understood in the business industry that AACSB accreditation is one of the world’s most selective and rigorous types of evaluation for business schools.
The AACSB’s mission and vision is to foster engagement, accelerate innovation, and amplify impact to transform business education for global prosperity.
Students will be ethical reasoners and be able to recognize ethical dilemmas.
Students will be able to both contribute to and lead teams to achieve their goals.
Students will be critical thinkers.
Students will be adept in quantitative analysis.
Students will have knowledge in business by demonstrating competence in and understanding of general business concepts and their specific disciplines.
NECHE Assessment of Student Learning
Boston College is deeply committed to providing the highest quality educational experiences for all students. The New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE) Assessment process requires all programs to.:
- Be clear and specific about the learning goals it sets for its students
- Develop measures to determine the degree to which each of its goals is being met
- Have a standard process for assessing the learning outcomes for students and recommending appropriate adjustments in the program
The Carroll School has a systematic plan for ongoing assessment of its undergraduate management programs. These Continuous Improvement processes are shared in the E-1-A forms below.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
- Accounting graduates should have developed:
- Critical problem solving and decision making skills
- Research ability
- Collaborative and leadership skills
- Communication and reporting skills
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
— ETS MFT Management test results
— Departmental senior survey of majors' satisfaction with program and placement and salary information in April
— Departmental senior survey of majors' satisfaction with program and placement and salary information in April
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
— Department faculty review annually
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
Graduates should have developed:
- An understanding of legal procedures
- An understanding of the legal environment of business
- Preparation for law school training
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?
— Annual MFAT Management test
— Annual senior survey
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
— The entire department faculty discuss results at an annual meeting dedicated to the undergraduate program.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
We expect Finance graduates to have understanding in the following areas:
- Major investment, financing and governance decisions (e.g., capital structure, mergers and acquisitions, dividend, board of directors, etc) of corporations;
- The risk and return tradeoffs in investment and how to evaluate basic financial products (e.g., stocks, bonds and derivatives);
- The role of financial institutions/intermediaries (e.g., investment and commercial banks, asset management companies) in the financial system;
- The role of financial markets in the economy and the need for efficient regulations.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?
The School annually administers an assessment of learning outcomes for our undergraduate students. For example, in Spring 2009, 227 seniors in the Carroll School’s capstone Strategy and Policy course were given a multiple choice test with 120 questions, roughly equally divided among nine management disciplines. This test is administered widely in undergraduate business schools throughout the U.S. Carroll School students as a whole outperformed a comparison group of 564 schools (comprising 83,323 students), with a mean scaled score of 165 compared to the national average of 151.6. Half of BC students scored above 166 compared to only 20% of students nationally.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
Department committee (led by Chair) reviews the outcome of the exam annually
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
We expect graduates to:
- Understand how to analyze the linkages between information technology (IT), innovation, business strategy, and competitive advantage;
- Possess the (a) technical skills (related to programming and databases) and (b) managerial concepts needed to effectively plan, develop, and implement IT;
- Understand how to promote more effective use of IT in organizations, taking into account how IT aligns with an "organization's" strategic focus, culture, business processes, etc.;
- Appreciate the broader ethical and societal implications of the burgeoning application of information technologies.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
- Posted on the Accreditation website
- In the Department brochure. This is distributed at events about the IS concentration such as Concentration Day, Admitted Students days.
- In the University course catalog
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well
- Beginning in the spring semester 2012, questions were added to:
- the Systems Analysis and Design course evaluation requesting feedback regarding the IS Concentration on objectives 1 through 4 (see Attachment A),
- two sections of the Computers for Management (IS portion) course regarding objectives 1, 3, and 4 as met in that course,
- the Social Media & Web 2.0 for Managers course regarding objectives 1 through 4 as met in that course,
- the Information Systems, Security Management, & Forensics course regarding objective 4 as met in that course.
- Beginning in the spring semester 2012, client evaluations directed at objectives 2 and 3 were requested for the Systems Analysis and Design Projects.
- Beginning in the spring semester 2012, a question on the final exam addressed learnings related to objectives 2 and 3, which were the main focus of the learning goals assessment for this year.
- Beginning in the spring semester 2012, materials and role plays addressing agile systems development were added to the Systems Analysis and Design curriculum.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
After the results of the surveys are available (summer), the Department Chair and 1-2 others in the department review and make recommendations for changes.
We will use the optional questions from the course evaluations as follows:
We will examine the absolute levels of the results and also look at the differences across questions. If a level is below 4.0, that would mean that that area will require relatively more emphasis. If the level exceeds 4.5, the assumption would be that emphasis and student learning in that area meets our objectives. Anything between 4.0 and 4.5 would be considered adequate but would be assessed for improvement to increase the level to 4.5 and above. (Note – Levels initially scored above 4.5 would, as a matter of course, be assessed for improvement to take into account advances in the IS field. ) If most or all of the levels are significantly below 4.0, the department will assess the course for a possible redesign or, in the case of an elective, consider either a redesign or replacement of the elective with one that would better meet the learning goals.
As we collect course evaluation data from subsequent semesters, we will continue with the above procedure but then will add cross semester comparisons (controlling for instructor) to determine if changes made have improved the attainment of the learning goals.
We would also consider the relationship between the optional evaluation questions relating to learning objectives and Questions 8 (rating of instructor as a teacher), 13 (effort required), and 14 (overall rating of the course) on the standard University evaluation. Discrepancies would have to be carefully examined. For example, if the course is primarily aimed at the acquisition of technical skill and the course is rated as requiring less relative effort, then it would not be surprising that learning objective 2 would not reach the expected level. If it did happen to reach a high level that, too, would raise questions about the students’ understanding of the knowledge and skill required to meet the objective.
In the case of Systems Analysis and Design, we have added an additional client project assessment instrument, which has simple face validity, a final exam question to get to some of the detail regarding objectives 2 and 3, and additional course content. This will allow us to compare the levels of the course evaluation questions that relate to objectives 2 and 3 to the client impressions and to the students' own narratively based understanding of their attainment of those two objectives. If the client impressions differ from the students’ ratings (e.g. – the client ratings are noticeably lower than the student ratings on the same ordinal scale), then the course instructor would be required to investigate the reasons behind that discrepancy. If the student narratives show substance as determined by the course instructor, then the course evaluation levels would be expected to be high, and so on.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
Management and leadership concentrators will:
- Develop an appreciation for the fundamentals and complexity of successful leadership.
- Identify exemplary leadership in themselves and others.
- Demonstrate skills of effective leadership.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
- Assessment of final paper in MB127 for Management Leadership concentrators
- Analysis of data from electronic survey administered to all concentrators
- Analysis of relevant data from BC senior survey
- Review of MFAT scores
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
— Department Continuous Improvement Committee composed of three faculty members review data annually
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
We expect graduates to:
- Understand and be able to apply the key building blocks of marketing: marketing research and analysis, consumer behavior analysis, segmentation and targeting, developing marketing strategy (product strategy, promotion strategy, pricing strategy, distribution strategy, budgeting and ROI projections, implementation and assessment.
- Possess the necessary knowledge, skills and tools needed to make informed strategic marketing decisions in a rapidly changing, highly uncertain marketplace,
- Understand how to promote more effective use of marketing in organizations, taking into account how marketing aligns with an "organization's" strategic focus, culture, competencies, business processes, etc.
- Make decisions that take into account the broader ethical and societal implications of marketing strategies.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
- Accreditation website
- In the Department brochure. This is distributed at events about the Marketing concentration such as the Marketing In-Gathering (evening for Marketing majors), Admitted Students Days, Marketing Career Night.
- In the University course catalog
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
- MFAT Senior Assessment scores
- Marketing Department specific questions included on the common Senior Survey
- Annual Senior Marketing Major Survey
- Survey of recent Marketing alumni
- Course evaluation questions from the concentration’s senior capstone course, Applied Marketing Management.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
— After the results of the surveys are available (summer), the Department Chair and 2-3 others in the department review and make recommendations for changes.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence? (Have there been any recent changes to your curriculum or program? Why were they made?)
Our previous assessment process was not as formal, but guided us towards the following recent changes:
- Introduced an elective on Marketing Planning and Implementation to improve student skills in developing and implementing a marketing program
- Began a new initiative to re-engineer the introductory Marketing course (Principles of Marketing) and to strengthen the rigor of the course
- Hired an additional full-time lecturer with strong capabilities in all four of the key outcomes outlined in Question 1.
- Improved the undergraduate Marketing Analytics course to strengthen our undergraduate coverage of objectives 1 and 2 in question 1.
- Added content to our undergraduate core class and a refresher of that content in our Applied Marketing course to link more strongly to MFAT topics.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
— Graduates in operations management should have achieved the following:
— Comprehensive understanding of theories and concepts in Operations Management
— The ability to use concepts and techniques to analyze management problems
— Ability to exercise managerial judgment
— Ability to use quantitative techniques
— Ability to understand complex managerial decision-making environment
— Appreciation of role of operations in an organization
— Understanding of the interrelationship between functional areas
— Ability to apply a global perspective
— Understanding of the ethical issues arising from globalization
— Practical communication and interpersonal skills
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
- Independent faculty panel evaluates the required consulting projects from the central concentrator's course, MD375
- Analyze Operations Management subscores on MFAT exam for Operations concentrators
- Administer senior survey asking for self-evaluation of learning
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
— 3-member "Continuous Improvement" committee reviews all results annually and makes appropriate recommendations to department
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence? (Have there been any recent changes to your curriculum or program? Why were they made?)
— The department is currently implementing significant changes in the OM core, which we expect to improve our effectiveness in teaching OM as well as the appeal of the OM concentration. Our committee will evaluate the impact of these changes with respect to both objectives next year.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
— TBD
Date of the most recent program review
— Fall 2010
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
Students will demonstrate a mastery of core management theories and principles across business disciplines and will develop specialized skills necessary to add value and to be “profession ready.” They will build depth and expertise in functional and interdisciplinary business areas.
- Students will master critical thinking skills and learn strategic frameworks to solve business challenges.
- Students will develop practical technical skills that enable them to utilize and analyze data to solve business problems.
- Students will develop the skills necessary to be visionary leaders and to drive change.
- Consistent with the University’s Jesuit mission, students will understand their ethical responsibility as professionals to their community and society at large.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
- Students will participate in multi-disciplinary projects that enable them to put into practice the theories and concepts acquired in courses.
- Students will apply learned business theories and concepts through case study opportunities that demonstrate this integrated knowledge.
- Students will successfully complete the MBA program’s Data Analytics course sequence through which they will acquire the technical skills in demand by employers.
- Through group assignments, students will be evaluated both on their role as an individual contributor as well as their ability to collaborate effectively in teams.
- Students will participate in professional development programming that will enhance the standard functional coursework and to advance their career. Topics include, Management Decision Making, Pubic Speaking, and Business Writing.
- Students ae required to read, acknowledge and adhere to the Graduate Programs core values. These documents are kept as part of the student records.
- Students are required to complete and document a minimum of 20 hours of community service.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
The Associate Dean and Assistant Dean work together with MBA Core Faculty, Academic Department Chairs and the Dean of the Carroll School to review and analyze data and to recommend actions/changes where appropriate. This is done through semi-annual meetings with core faculty, individual course evaluations and ongoing planning sessions with academic departments.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence? (Have there been any recent changes to your curriculum or program? Why were they made?)
- The MBA curriculum has been refined to focus more on critical thinking, developing analytical frameworks and problem solving.
- We continue to offer co-curricular programming that focuses on critical skills and professional ability building and preparedness but are now utilizing experts outside of the MBA core faculty to deliver it. This allows us to tap into their cutting edge expertise and familiarity with the ever changing business world.
- Structure, Analysis and Integration - focuses on management thinking to breaking down problems, determining relevant data and analysis of that data and communicating integrated recommendations. We have worked with MBACase to develop programming tailored to our students and that is not solely focused on consulting skills but ones that are relevant across many business disciplines.
- Public Speaking – we have contracted with Dale Carnegie to provide a series of workshops that includes on-campus sessions and online.
- Business Writing - through a series of workshops and case assignments, students learn about the types of communication done on the job, especially in corporations. Business assignments are used to illustrate appropriate writing and communication strategies, protocols, styles, and formats.
- Having used an outside resource for a mandatory pre-matriculation online Statistics course, Carroll School faculty have created a customized online course that better ensures coverage of the critical skills needed to prepare students for the Data Analytics courses.
- We continue to enhance the Introduction to Strategic Management course, which is taken prior to beginning the core curriculum. This required course lays the groundwork for the rest of the curriculum and focuses on how firms formulate and implement strategies to create competitive advantage. Faculty continue to update case studies to include current and relevant issues.
- The Data Analytics courses continue to evolve to include current technologies, including SQL, R, and Tableau.
- A management simulation course has been integrated into the curriculum to close the knowing and doing gap. The course uses a simulation called Global DNA, in which teams compete in planning and executing a multi-year, multinational business strategy in a highly competitive global market. This course is mandatory for full-time MBAs and is offered as an elective for part-time MBAs.
- The Data Analytics course sequence, which was first rolled out in the full-time MBA program, will be integrated into the part-time curriculum. This will better align the curriculum delivery format across both programs.
- New market-driven electives continue to be added, allowing students to develop depth and expertise in a particular area.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
- Continued high internship placement rates – 95 – 100%
- Total compensation for full-time hires continues to grow
- Improved student profile – we continue to draw students who are more professionally focused, with strong pre-MBA professional experience
Date of the most recent program review. (Your latest comprehensive departmental selfstudy and external review.)
Feedback from students has indicated the relevancy of the program and the desire for continuing academic options in the way of classes and workshops, much of which is included for the class entering fall 2018.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
Formal learning outcomes have been established for the three Core courses:
— Students will understand the nature, types, and implementation issues related to assurance services.
— Students will understand the techniques that are central to multiple to applications in financial statement analysis in current practice.
— Students will understand how to identify and analyze tax planning across multiple settings.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website
Other than GPA, what data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree? (What evidence and analytical approaches do you use to assess which of the student learning outcomes are being achieved more or less well?)
While most of what students are asked to do in classes is reflected in their grades, emphasis is put on integrating knowledge. The Financial Statement Analysis and Taxes and Decision Making core courses draw heavily from micro-economics, finance, and, in the tax course, public finance. The Assurance course relies heavily on case work that addresses the multiple issues that confront auditors.
Aggregate data is collected on CPA pass-rates.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
Each professor in the required courses prepares an assessment of student learning in relation to the performance objectives of the course. This assessment is forwarded to Gil Manzon, one of two MSA co-directors. Student course evaluations are reviewed by Professor Ron Pawliczek and the Accounting Department Chair, Mark Bradshaw. Issues with courses and professors are discussed and resolved as they arise.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence? (Have there been any recent changes to your curriculum or program? Why were they made?)
The Strategic Cost and Management course is no longer a requirement for graduation. It was determined that, while the course was well received and reviewed useful knowledge, MSA students should be allowed to opt for electives they might find more useful in their career preparation.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
We have not gathered any data to assess the value of this change.
Date of the most recent program review. (Your latest comprehensive departmental self-study and external review.)
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
— Students will understand the principles of optimal capital budgeting decisions.
— Students will have proficiency with respect to the firm’s financing decisions.
— Students will be proficient with respect to methods used by analysts to value the firm.
— Students will be proficient with the use of derivative securities to manage risk and with fundamental models of derivative valuation models.
Where are these learning outcomes published? Be specific. (Where are the department’s learning expectations accessible to potential majors: on the web or in the catalog or in your department’s major handouts?)
— Accreditation website.
What data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree?
— Through exams in “Corporate Finance” students will demonstrate mastery of discounted cash flow techniques used to value a firm and its equity, and a mastery of advanced topics used in capital budgeting (e.g., real options or sensitivity analysis).
— Through exams in “Corporate Finance” students will demonstrate an understanding of the capital structure decision (debt/equity mix) payout policy (cash dividends and share repurchases).
— Through exams in “Investments” students will demonstrate an understanding of valuation models (e.g., dividend discount models or free cash flow models), and the relationship between risk and return.
— Through exams in “Investments” and “Derivative and Risk Management” students will demonstrate an understanding of valuation models (e.g., parity relationships and the Black-Scholes option pricing model), and how to use derivatives to manage portfolio risk.
Who interprets the evidence? What is the process? (Who in the department is responsible for interpreting the data and making recommendations for curriculum or assignment changes if appropriate? When does this occur?)
The MSF Faculty Director and the Finance Department Chairperson collect and review all of the data/evidence reported by faculty members teaching the relevant courses. The collected data/evidence are reported back to the faculty and the Associate Dean when appropriate. The collective group (Faculty and Dean’s office) interprets and discusses the evidence and recommends action where appropriate.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence? (Have there been any recent changes to your curriculum or program? Why were they made?)
Where learning goals are not met as evidenced by assessment outcomes, individual faculty will review the material in real time if possible (i.e., during the semester) to remediate deficiencies. If not possible (for example, if a deficiency is revealed on a final exam), faculty members address evident areas of weakness by revamping the syllabus (for example, allotting more time to a topic) or by modifying teaching approach (e.g., lectures or classroom assignments) to achieve greater student understanding.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
The collection of data on learning outcomes has attuned faculty members to student performance in these areas. As a result, the time and pace associate with key areas has been improved. We see this in the consistency with which our learning objectives have been achieved in recent years.
Date of the most recent program review. (Your latest comprehensive departmental selfstudy and external review.)
Fall 2015
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?)
- Students will understand the Firm’s investment decision.
- Students will have proficiency with respect to the firm’s financing decisions.
- Students will be proficient with respect to firm valuation.
- Students will be proficient with derivative securities.
Where are these learning outcomes published?
— Program website
What data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree?
- Through exams in “Corporate Finance” students will demonstrate the use of discounted cash flow techniques used to value a firm and its equity, and a mastery of advanced topics used in capital budgeting (e.g. real options or sensitivity analysis).
- Through exams in “Corporate Finance” students will demonstrate an understanding of the capital structure decision (debt/equity mix) payout policy (cash dividends and share repurchases).
- Through exams in “Investments” students will demonstrate an understanding of valuation models (e.g. dividend discount models or free cash flow models), and the relationship between risk and return.
- Through exams in “Investments” and “Derivative and Risk Management” students will demonstrate an understanding of valuation models (e.g. parity relationships and the BlackScholes option pricing model), and how to use derivatives to manage portfolio risk.
- Introduced a MSF Quantitative track option. Introduced a 5th year MSF option. Financial Policy was dropped from the required core course list and can now be taken as an elective. The MSF Curriculum is now seven Core Courses plus 3 Elective Courses (see attached).
Who interprets the data/evidence? What is the process?
The MSF Faculty Director and the Finance Department Chairperson collect all of the data/evidence. The data/evidence is reported by faculty members teaching the relevant courses and/or the Faculty Director. The collected data/evidence is reported back to the faculty and the Associate Dean in writing and by email when appropriate. The collective group interprets and discusses the evidence and recommends action where appropriate.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence?
Individual faculty members address emerging areas of weakness if and as needed, as evidenced by assessment outcomes.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
While direct evidence is limited, faculty members have become more attuned to student performance in these areas. As a result, the time and pace associated with key areas has been improved.
Have formal learning outcomes been developed? What are they? (What specific sets of skills and knowledge does the department expect its majors to have acquired before they graduate?
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the core areas of organizational behavior.
- Demonstrate knowledge of research methods.
- Demonstrate high-level research skills.
- Demonstrate high-quality teaching skills.
Where are these learning outcomes published?
— Program website
What data/evidence is used to determine whether graduates have achieved the stated outcomes for the degree?
- Students complete annual reports that document their accomplishments in the areas of research and teaching.
- Students’ completion of relevant course work is recorded and evaluated.
- Students’ course evaluations for those who teach MB021 are reviewed.
- Students’ performance on comprehensive examinations is assessed.
Who interprets the data/evidence? What is the process?
Each student’s advisor reviews data related to that individual student. The PhD Program Director reviews data related to all doctoral students. The Department Chairperson reviews all course evaluations. All faculty who work with doctoral students review the status of each PhD student yearly in June to assess the degree of accomplishment of these objectives. Each student receives a letter describing his or her status in the program and hence their accomplishment of these objectives.
What changes have been made as a result of using the data/evidence?
- A qualifying examination in the first year has been replaced by a comprehensive examination in the second year.
- Funding for students in their fifth year has been added to funding for students in years 1-4.
- A second-year research paper has been replaced by third-year research paper that is more closely aligned with a students’ dissertation research.
- An advisor has been assigned to each student whereas previously no formal advising program existed.
- The PhD Program Committee has replaced a committee of the faculty as a whole. The PhD Program Committee meets during the year to review these and other data, and the Committee has recently undertaken a more comprehensive review of the program.
- Students have been encouraged, and now are implementing, a new self-directed course in the Spring of their third year to help improve performance on comprehensive examinations.
What evidence do you have that the changes have resulted in improved learning outcomes?
- With only one exception in the past several years, the number of students accomplishing each of the four objectives in a timely fashion is now 100% for each cohort.
- Recent graduates have received excellent job placements, including the Harvard Business School, University of Oregon, IESE, and New York University among others.
- Students are increasingly receiving research awards, publishing articles in top journals, and publishing book chapters. Each year one or two students receive the Donald J. White Teaching Award, given to graduate students at Boston College to recognize outstanding teaching.