Santa Clara University. Guidelines for Academic Program Review

Save this PDF as:
Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Santa Clara University. Guidelines for Academic Program Review"

Transcription

1 Santa Clara University Guidelines for Academic Program Review April 7, 2014

2 SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW Table of Contents Sec. 1 Introduction 3 Sec. 2 Eight-Year Program Review Cycle 7 Sec. 3 Recommended Self Study Schedule 10 Sec. 4 Guidelines for Self Study Report 12 Sec. 5 Guidelines for Visiting Teams 16 Sec. 6 Guidelines for Revised Action Plan 19 Sec. 7 Guidelines for Integration of Program Review into Planning 20 Appendix A Data Provided by the Office of Institutional Research 22 Appendix B Strategies for Departments Undertaking Self Studies 24 Appendix C Broader Context of Assessment and Program Review 26 Appendix D Summary of 2011 Strategic Plan 31 2

3 SECTION I INTRODUCTION Overview of Process As part of its commitment to academic excellence as a Catholic and Jesuit university, Santa Clara University supports an ongoing process of program improvement. Every academic unit participates in an annual assessment of student learning and a comprehensive self-study or program review once every eight years, unless professional accreditation schedules require more frequent review. (See Section 2: Eight- Year Program Review Cycle.) The self-study typically begins at the start of a designated fall term and is completed by the end of the following academic year. An orientation is held during the spring quarter prior to the fall term. (See Section 3: Two-Year Program Review Schedule.) The comprehensive self-study conducted by each program culminates in a self-study report and an action plan focused on self-improvement. (See Section 4: Guidelines for Self Study Report.) A draft of the self-study report is reviewed with the Dean, who provides feedback to the program. The final report is sent to an external visiting team. After a campus visit, the external visiting team submits an independent report to the Dean's Office. (See Section 5: Guidelines for Visiting Teams.) The Dean s Office will forward the report to the Provost s Office and the program. The program discusses the visiting team report, revises its action plan as needed, and submits a Revised Action Plan to the Dean and the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. (See Section 6: Guidelines for Revised Action Plan.)The program meets with the Dean and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness to discuss the Revised Action Plan and the next steps to enhance academic quality. (See Section 7: Guidelines for the Integration of Program Review into Planning). Purpose of Program Review The purpose of program review at Santa Clara University is to provide a regular opportunity for programs to engage in systematic self-examination in order to improve their educational effectiveness. Several core principles guide Santa Clara s program review process: Program review is intended to foster academic excellence in the context of Santa Clara s mission as a Catholic and Jesuit university committed to education for competence, conscience, and compassion. In the words of the University s Mission, The University pursues its vision by creating an academic community that educates the whole person within the Jesuit, Catholic tradition, making student learning our central focus, continuously improving our curriculum and co-curriculum, strengthening our scholarship and creative work, and serving the communities of which we are a part in Silicon Valley and around the world. Program review is aimed at self-improvement. Its emphasis is on how individual programs can better realize their own aspirations for teaching, learning, and scholarship within a general framework of the University s vision, mission, values and strategic goals as outlined in the Strategic Plan. Careful analysis and reporting of both strengths and weaknesses are essential for self-improvement. Programs are not punished for identifying weaknesses; they are supported for addressing them seriously. 3

4 While calling for serious attention to all aspects of a program, including scholarship, program review places a special emphasis on student learning. The University s mission statement declares that Santa Clara makes student learning its central focus. If program review is to improve educational effectiveness, it must give particular attention to what students are actually learning. Therefore program review includes reflections on the program s annual assessments of student learning. Another important component of program review is the external perspective gained by learning about the best practices of similar or aspirational programs and inviting feedback from peers at other institutions of higher education. Program review is designed as a snapshot of an ongoing process of organizational learning, assessment, and improvement that begins before the program self-study is initiated and continues after it is completed. Exceptions to Guidelines Programs may request exceptions to the official guidelines or calendar if such changes would be conducive to a more effective program review. Such exceptions must be approved in writing by the Dean in consultation with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. Criteria for Effective Self Study Reports The following criteria will be used in determining whether or not a program self-study has been successful: The program follows the guidelines provided in this document unless alternatives have been approved in advance by the Dean in consultation with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The self-study process reflects broad participation by program faculty in defining issues, analyzing evidence, and formulating plans. The self-study is consciously designed to provide insights, encourage analysis, and solicit constructive feedback from external reviewers. The recommendations in the Self-Study Report are based on analysis of relevant quantitative and qualitative evidence, with special attention to the assessment of student learning.. The Self-Study Report exhibits rigor and candor in evaluating strengths and weaknesses of the program. The program responds to the self-study with actions designed to improve educational effectiveness. All participants in the process, including the Dean s Office and the Provost s Office, act with an understanding that the primary purpose of program review is to stimulate improvement by the program itself within the broad framework of goals set by the University and the relevant College or School. Retention of Program Review Materials Programs must retain documentation relating to program review in a systematic and retrievable fashion for at least eight years. Such documentation includes at minimum the annual reports of assessment of 4

5 student learning, materials related to their ongoing assessment of student learning outcomes, the Self Study Report, the Visiting Team Report, the Revised Action Plan, other reports generated or used in the self-study, and any pertinent correspondence. The Annual Assessment Report is described in the Guidelines for Assessment of Learning Outcomes, which specifies that programs must retain a representative sample of student work products assessed by the program and questionnaires, rubrics, and other instruments used to supplement the annual reports of individual assessments conducted. These materials are important for planning purposes, future self-studies, and accreditation processes. Accreditation visiting teams will expect these materials to be available for scrutiny. Responsibilities of Parties The program is responsible for following all guidelines presented in this document, unless exceptions have been approved in advance by the Dean; for acting upon the program review to make improvements in its educational effectiveness; and for retaining all relevant materials as described above. The Dean is responsible for offering timely feedback on documents submitted by the program, consulting with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness as indicated, and providing adequate support for the program to conduct its self-study. The Dean is also responsible for working with programs to ensure the integration of the program review into planning and budgeting during the years following the self-study. The Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness is responsible for working with the Dean to provide feedback and support to the program, as well as for overseeing the program review process in general at the University level. The Academic Affairs Committee is responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of the program review process in general and recommending changes to improve the process. Broader Context of Program Review Program review is required by the University s accrediting agencies and mandated by its Board of Trustees and Strategic Plan. The current process grew out of recommendations of the 1996 faculty Task Force on Academic Program Review. The guidelines are updated regularly. For additional information, see Appendix C: Broader Context of Assessment and Program Review and Appendix D: Strategic Plan Summary. Advice and Assistance For further information or advice about program review, programs should consult with their Dean or one of the following: Ed Ryan, Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness The Director of the Office of Assessment is available to provide advice and technical assistance on all aspects of the assessment of student learning outcomes, which is an integral part of the program review process. 5

6 Christine Bachen, Director, Office of Assessment St. Joseph's Hall, 1 st Floor, The Director of the Office of Institutional Research provides data to support the program review process. In some cases, IR is also able to assist programs with data analysis. Barbara Stewart, Director, Office of Institutional Research Walsh Administration Building, Lower Level

7 SECTION 2 Eight-Year Program Review Cycle Each academic program engages in a formal review every eight years unless professional accreditation cycles require more frequent reviews. Related disciplines usually undertake program review on the same cycle. The schedule is subject to change with approval from the Provost. Program reviews are scheduled as follows: YEAR Review Begins Participating Programs Reflections on program review process, updating of guidelines College of Arts and Sciences, Pastoral Ministries School of Engineering: Undergraduate Engineering Programs: Reflections on ABET review; updated action plan due Spring Fall 2011 College of Arts and Sciences, Humanities: Classics, English, History, Philosophy, Religious Studies Leavey School of Business: Aligned with Accounting and school-wide AACSB reports 2 Fall 2012 College of Arts and Sciences, Mathematics and Natural Sciences: Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics and Computer Science, Physics, Leavey School of Business: Marketing Department 3 Fall 2013 College of Arts and Sciences, Social Sciences: Anthropology, Communication, Political Science, Sociology, Psychology, Modern Languages and Literatures Leavey School of Business: Finance Department Jesuit School of Theology: Degrees in STL and STD Law School: Aligned with School-wide ABA accreditation 4 Fall 2014 College of Arts and Sciences, Creative and Performing Arts: Art and Art History, Music, Theater and Dance, Leavey School of Business: Preparation for AACSB accreditation 7

8 5 Fall 2015 College of Arts and Sciences, Non-Departmental Programs: Ethnic Studies, Environmental Science, Environmental Studies, Liberal Studies, Public Health Sciences, Women s and Gender Studies Leavey School of Business: AACSB accreditation 6 Fall 2016 Leavey School of Business: TBA School of Engineering: Undergraduate Programs in Civil Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Electrical Engineering. Mechanical Engineering: supplementary to ABET accreditation. Open University Certificate, Graduate Engineering, and Bio-Engineering. B.S. in Web Design, Computer Science in Engineering, Software Engineering. Non-Departmental Graduate and Undergraduate Programs in Engineering Undergraduate Core curriculum: Meta-review 7 Fall 2017 College of Arts and Sciences: college-wide reflection on program review process Leavey School of Business: non-departmental programs School of Engineering: Full program review for Graduate Programs in Applied Mathematics, Civil Engineering, Computer Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Engineering Management and Leadership, Mechanical Engineering School of Education and Counseling Psychology: Department of Counseling Psychology; Department of Education (or aligned with earlier CTC accreditation schedule). Jesuit School of Theology: Master of Divinity, Master of Theological Studies, and Master of Theology 8 Fall 2018 Reflections on program review process; revision of guidelines as needed 9 (1) Fall 2019 Cycle begins again Professional Accreditation Schedules Education: The Department of Education s program review will be aligned with the accreditation schedule of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC). School of Engineering: The undergraduate program reviews in the School of Engineering will be aligned with the ABET accreditation scheduled for

9 Jesuit School of Theology: The program reviews of the Master of Divinity, Master of Theological Studies, and Master of Theology in the Jesuit School of Theology will be aligned with the accreditation cycle of the Association of Theological Studies (ATS). Law: The program review for the Law School will be aligned with the ABA accreditation scheduled for Leavey School of Business: Program reviews for the Leavey School of Business will be aligned, when possible, with the AACSB accreditation cycle. 9

10 SECTION 3 Recommended Self-Study Schedule The comprehensive self-study process begins in fall term and typically ends no later than spring of the following academic year. Specific dates in the process are set by the appropriate Dean in consultation with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness and the programs involved. An orientation is held during the spring quarter prior to the fall term of Year 1. Unless there is a written agreement to the contrary, program self-studies include the steps listed below, which are completed sequentially. Spring Quarter Prior to Year One Orientation: An orientation is held during the spring quarter prior to the fall term when the program initiates the self-study. Deans, chairs of the programs scheduled for self-study, the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness, the Director of the Office of Assessment, and the Director of Institutional Research (IR) attend the meeting. Others may attend as well. The orientation provides an overview of the scope and content of the Program Review process, the recommended procedure for integrating reflections on Assessment Reports into Program Review, and the data supplied to the program by Institutional Research. See Appendix A, Data Provided by the Office of Institutional Research. Exemplary Self Study Reports from previous cycles will be available to programs initiating program review when appropriate. Year One: Fall The program resolves any questions about the scope and content of the process as early as possible with the Dean in consultation with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The program designs its self-study so as to be able to complete its Self-Study Report by winter quarter of year 2. (See Section 4: Guidelines for Self Study Report.) The program begins its self-study. A brief written or verbal update describing progress on the self-study is communicated to the Dean by December 15. The Dean provides timely advice and feedback. Year One: Winter The program continues its self-study. A brief written or verbal update describing progress on the selfstudy is communicated to the Dean by March 15. The Dean provides timely advice and feedback. Year One: Spring The program continues its self-study. A brief written or verbal update describing progress on the selfstudy is communicated to the Dean by June 15. The Dean provides timely advice and feedback. Year Two: Fall The program and the Dean identify suitable external reviewers who will review the Self Study Report, visit the campus, and make appropriate recommendations. (See Section 5: Guidelines for Visiting Teams, on recommendations for identifying external reviewers.) The program invites two external reviewers approved by the Dean to serve on the visiting team. (Please confirm the availability of the Dean, Provost, and Vice Provost to meet with the visiting team. See Section 5: Guidelines for Visiting Teams.) 10

11 Year Two: Winter The program submits its draft Self Study Report to the Dean and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness early in winter quarter. (See Section 4: Guidelines for Self Study Report.) The Dean provides feedback on the Self Study Report to the program. The program makes any necessary revisions of the Self Study Report and sends it, along with supporting materials, to the external reviewers, the Dean, and the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness, at least four weeks before the external reviewers visit the campus. At least four weeks prior to the visit, the program also submits to the dean a draft schedule for the external reviewers visit to the campus. (Programs may consult the dean for sample schedules.) The visiting team conducts a campus visit and submits a report with findings and recommendations to the Dean. The Dean forwards the report to the Provost s Office and to the program. (See Section 5: Guidelines for Visiting Teams.) Year Two: Spring The program discusses the Visiting Team Report and decides how to respond. The program consults with the Director of Assessment on the assessment component of the Revised Action Plan. Following the consultation with the Director of Assessment, completes the Revised Action Plan, and submits it to the Dean and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The Revised Action Plan is normally submitted by April 15. This document is a revision of the Action Plan section of the Self Study Report. (See Section 6: Guidelines for Revised Action Plan.) The Dean, in consultation with the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness, provides feedback on the Revised Action Plan and approves it after any necessary revisions. The program meets with the Dean and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness to discuss the Revised Action Plan. The program implements the next steps in program improvement with assistance, as appropriate, from the Dean. (See Section 7: Guidelines for the Integration of Program Review into Planning). Fall Quarter Following Year Two, and Each Subsequent Fall Quarter Follow-Up: The program continues implementing the recommendations in the Revised Action Plan, with assistance, as appropriate, from the Dean. (See Section 7, Guidelines for the Integration of Program Review into Planning). 11

12 SECTION 4 GUIDELINES FOR SELF STUDY REPORT The Self Study Report is the centerpiece of program review. This document should be no longer than 35 pages (plus required attachments and other materials as needed) and is to be submitted to the Dean with a copy to the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. To ensure broad participation and support, all full-time faculty on continuing appointment are expected to review and discuss this document. The Self Study Report includes the following sections: Introduction In no more than two paragraphs, present a succinct overview of your program and describe the self-study process the program has conducted in preparation of this report. Mission, Goals, and Objectives See the program s recent Annual Assessment Reports for A, B, and C below Mission Statement Include the program s current mission statement. Student Learning Goals and Objectives Include the program s current goals and objectives for student learning outcomes. Other Program Goals and Objectives Include current goals and objectives related to curriculum and pedagogy, scholarship and creative work, and service. Contribution to Mission and Goals of the University and College or School Discuss the contribution the program makes to the mission and goals of the University and the College or School, and, as appropriate, the ways in which the program contributes directly to the University Core Curriculum or advances Core learning goals; ways in which the program engages with the Residential Learning Communities, Centers of Distinction, or other centers or institutes; and ways in which the program responds to the priorities identified in the Strategic Plan, including diversity and inclusive excellence. Reflection on Previous Program Review Discuss progress made in areas identified in the Revised Action Plan submitted in the previous program review, or in other areas. Evaluation of Program Quality This two-part section focuses on the underlying capacity of the program to achieve and sustain educational effectiveness. Most of the data for the first section (Program Capacity) will be provided by the Office of Institutional Research during the Orientation; data for the second section (Educational Effectiveness) will usually be provided by the department. The analysis of data related to program capacity should inform the discussion of educational effectiveness. 12

13 Program Capacity Summary and analysis of data for each of the profiles listed below are fundamental to all academic planning. If possible, describe trend data. (See Appendix A, Data Provided by the Office of Institutional Research.) Faculty Profile Briefly summarize and analyze the demographics, credentials, areas of expertise, and teaching loads of full-time and part-time faculty. Include CV s of full-time faculty as an attachment. Student Profile Briefly summarize and analyze the demographics, preparation, and general performance of majors and other students served by the program. Describe any significant enrollment trends. Course Profile Briefly summarize and analyze the number of courses offered for the major, minor and Core, discussing, for instance, class sizes, the percentage of classes taught by full-time and part-time faculty, and other relevant course data for the past three years. Describe any significant trends. Resource Profile Briefly summarize and analyze the budget, facilities, equipment, and computing and library resources available to the program. Describe significant trends. Program Effectiveness This section is the core of the self-study and focuses on actual performance in achieving educational effectiveness. Student Learning and Student Success Describe your central goals and objectives for student learning in the program. How do you communicate program-level learning goals and objectives to students? Summarize what you have learned from your annual assessments of student learning. If the program contributes to the Core Curriculum, discuss the most recent Core Assessment Report with relevance to the program indicating whether/how the program could better support the Core. (See the Core Assessment Reports at Also draw upon data available to the program about alumni satisfaction, graduate program admission, employment after graduation, or other forms of student success. What are the particular strengths and weaknesses your assessments revealed? Summarize any changes or responses the department made in response to its assessment findings. Include as attachments the most recent Mission, Goals, and Learning Objective statement and the Assessment Plan (described in the separate document on Guidelines for Assessment of Learning Outcomes). Curriculum Summarize and discuss the breadth and depth of the curriculum; its coherence and sequencing; its reflection of major areas and issues in the discipline; its contribution to University and College or School goals; its alignment with the program s own goals and objectives for student learning; and its effectiveness in supporting the program s goals and objectives for student learning. What are the particular strengths and weaknesses revealed by your analysis of the curriculum? Summarize any 13

14 significant changes or responses the department made in the curriculum within this program review period. Include as attachments a list of all courses offered in each of the past three years; syllabi for required courses in the major; and syllabi for courses offered as part of the University Core Curriculum. Learning objectives should be included on all syllabi. Also include your most recent Curriculum Alignment Matrix. Pedagogy Summarize and analyze the kinds of pedagogy used within the program to foster expected learning outcomes; the teaching effectiveness of full-time and part-time faculty as reflected in student learning, course evaluations, annual performance reviews, and classroom observations; and grade distributions compared with those of similar programs. What are the particular strengths and weaknesses revealed by your analysis or assessments of pedagogy? Summarize any significant changes or responses the department has made in pedagogy within this program review period. Scholarship and Creative Work Summarize and analyze the scholarship or creative work of full-time faculty, noting areas of special research emphasis at the program level; the record of the program in obtaining external grants; the involvement of students in research or creative projects; the effectiveness of the program in fostering individual and collaborative scholarship; the extent to which the program reflects a community of scholars; and the extent to which scholarship in the program reflects the priorities in the University strategic plan. What are the particular strengths and weaknesses revealed by your analysis or assessment of scholarship? Professional Service Summarize and analyze any notable contributions the program makes to the discipline or profession. Also summarize any notable contributions it makes to the community or the University by virtue of its distinctive disciplinary expertise including contributions to the University s mission and strategic goals. What are the particular strengths and weaknesses revealed by your analysis or assessments of service? General Discussion Synthesize the analyses above, or provide additional information, as appropriate. Comparative Programs One of the most important steps to take toward program improvement is comparison with programs at other institutions. Program faculty should identify two or three issues or challenges faced by the SCU program, and two or three comparative programs, with the goal of determining how the comparative programs address the issues or challenges. Communication with faculty in comparative or aspirational programs, and examination of data related to their programs, should contribute to thinking about how your program can accomplish desired improvements. The Dean or the Office of Institutional Research, upon request, can, assist departments in selecting appropriate programs for comparison. Insights Based on Comparisons Describe salient features of the programs selected for comparison. Describe how the comparison programs responded to the issues, problems, or challenges selected for focus in your self-study. Describe ways your program can and should improve educational effectiveness and academic excellence based on your comparative analysis. 14

15 Unique Features of Santa Clara Program Describe any unique features of your program that make it a model for other programs in the discipline. Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses Provide an overall evaluation of the program s strengths and weaknesses and identify the three most critical issues facing the program. Preliminary Action Plan Based on your evaluation of the program s strengths and weaknesses, discuss where you want your program to go in the next several years. (Note: This section will be revised after the External Visitors Report has been received. See Section 6, Guidelines for Revised Action Plan.) This section should include: Vision Statement Articulate a vision for your program that is both aspirational and achievable. This vision should guide the program in its improvement efforts. It should be no more than three or four sentences. Improvements Using Current Resources Describe specific actions the program is taking or will take to improve quality by building on identified strengths and correcting identified weaknesses. These actions might entail the addition, elimination, or refocusing of program priorities or activities. All preliminary action plans should address improvements related to the assessment of student learning. (The Director of the Office of Assessment is available for consultation.) Explain how the program will deploy its existing resources to carry out these plans. Improvements Requiring New Resources Describe improvements important to the program that would require additional resources. Explain how the program would obtain these resources and what help, if any, it would need from the University. Discussion Questions Clearly articulate several questions or concerns on which you would like guidance from the external visiting team and others responding to your self-study. Required Attachments Entry for program in Undergraduate Bulletin or relevant graduate bulletin CV s of full-time faculty List of courses offered in each of the past three years Syllabi for required courses in major Syllabi for courses offered as part of University Core Curriculum Curriculum Alignment Matrix or Curriculum Map Assessment Plan Reports on assessment of student learning outcomes and feedback letters received from the Office of Assessment 15

16 SECTION 5 GUIDELINES FOR VISITING TEAMS Selection of Visiting Team The visiting team will consist of two external reviewers selected jointly by the program and the Dean. The program will submit to the Dean a list of approximately six possible external reviewers, along with a curriculum vitae (or biographical sketch) and rationale for each. Reviewers may be faculty at other institutions or practitioners in the field. Every visiting team should include at least one faculty member. In selecting members of visiting teams, programs and deans should look for persons of recognized accomplishment in the discipline or field who can provide honest, objective, and useful advice to the program. Reviewers should have experience with assessment of learning outcomes. Faculty members on visiting teams should ordinarily come from programs similar to SCU or programs of higher quality. External reviewers are not normally selected from among those who have participated in previous program reviews at Santa Clara University. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest in participating in the review. Individuals asked to participate are expected to decline to serve in the evaluation of the program if they have, or if it might reasonably appear that they have a conflict of interest. Responsibilities of the Program In cooperation with the Dean, the program engaging in the review is responsible for: Planning the schedule for the visiting team: At least four weeks prior to the visit the program submits to the dean a draft schedule for the external reviewers visit to the campus. (Contact the Dean for sample schedules.) Providing the visiting team with the following approximately three weeks prior to the visit: logistical arrangements; schedule of visit; Self Study Report; applicable Guidelines for Academic Program Review; and any other supporting material the dean and the program deem appropriate. Making arrangements for transportation, lodging, and meals as needed. Providing meeting space for the visiting team, including access to computers and, if needed, a printer. Making a representative sample of student work available for review by the visiting team. Expectations of Visiting Team The visiting team is expected to: Review the Self Study Report and all supporting materials carefully. Conduct a two-day site visit, which includes a tour of facilities and interviews with faculty, students, and administrators. Review examples of student work. 16

17 Provide honest and objective advice to the program, the Dean, and the Provost about the quality of the Self Study Report and self-study process, strengths and weaknesses of the program, and opportunities for program improvement. It is particularly important for the visiting team to address evidence of student learning and quality of assessment activities. The visiting team will also address the discussion questions posed by the program in the self-study. Submit a final written report to the Dean within three weeks of the campus visit. The Dean will forward the report to the program and the Provost s Office. Campus Visit Schedule The first meeting on Day One (normally at 9:00 am) should be with the Dean and the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The purpose of this 45-minute meeting is to orient the team, discuss the purpose and structure of the visit and the program review process in general, and respond to any needs the team has. If possible, the team should meet with tenured faculty individually. It may meet with other faculty either individually or in groups, as appropriate. A meeting with students should be scheduled at a time most convenient to students. Separate meetings should be scheduled for undergraduate and graduate students as appropriate to the program being reviewed. Meetings with faculty or administrators from other Santa Clara programs are strongly recommended. The Dean can recommend faculty or administrators from other programs with whom the visiting team should meet. Meetings with staff are appropriate but are ordinarily a lower priority than meetings with faculty and students as described above. Facilities tours should be kept sufficiently brief so as not to displace time for meetings with faculty and students. The visiting team should be provided with sufficient private time to discuss its observations and draft its report. It is generally best to let the team dine alone at dinner on Day One and at lunch on Day Two. The team should have three hours (including lunch) to begin drafting its findings and recommendations on the afternoon of Day Two before its last two scheduled meetings. The penultimate meeting on Day Two should be with the Chair and tenured faculty of the program. The purpose of this meeting is for the visiting team to discuss its findings and recommendations with the faculty. At their discretion, the tenured faculty may invite others to participate in this meeting. The final meeting on Day Two, normally at 4:00 pm, should be with the Provost, Dean, and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The purpose of this 60-minute meeting is for the visiting team to inform these administrators of its findings and recommendations. Only in very rare circumstances should the team raise issues that it has not already shared with the chair and tenured faculty of the program. 17

18 The visiting team ordinarily does not submit a written report during the campus visit. This report should be completed within three weeks of the visit. The report should be sent to the Dean. 18

19 SECTION 6 GUIDELINES FOR REVISED ACTION PLAN The Revised Action Plan is the program s response to the internal and external feedback it has received during the program review process. In this document, the program should comment on this feedback, update its Preliminary Action Plan (See Section 4, Guidelines for the Self Study Report) as appropriate, identify the next steps it will take to promote program improvement, provide a timetable for these steps, and identify issues that require further discussion within the program or between the program and the Dean s Office. The Revised Action Plan must address the assessment of student learning. This document should be no more than five pages long. To ensure broad participation and support, all full-time faculty on continuing appointment should review and discuss this document. 19

20 SECTION 7 GUIDELINES FOR INTEGRATION OF PROGRAM REVIEW INTO PLANNING To ensure that program reviews result in the enhancement of academic quality, the program learning and institutional learning resulting from program review should be integrated into future planning. Recommendations in Revised Action Plans may take more than one year to implement. Each year following the program review, the program chair will consult with the Dean on progress toward implementation of the recommendations in the Revised Action Plan. Deans will provide support as appropriate. To ensure that the insights in the self-study are integrated into future planning and that the insights are not forgotten, Deans will engage in discussions with new chairs focusing on the program s Revised Action Plan and progress made toward implementation of the Plan. Requests for new faculty positions, facilities, equipment, or resources should draw upon the data, recommendations, and evidence presented in the most recent Self Study Report. Plans for significant changes in curriculum or structure emerging from the self-study may require approval by the Academic Affairs Committee. (See Approval of Academic Program Changes, on the Provost s website.) Many departments revise their Mission, Goals, and Objectives or elements of their curriculum during the year following program review. In addition all departments will formulate a new assessment plan to guide their evaluation of student learning as they enter the new program review cycle. Consultation with the Director of Assessment and the University Assessment Committee is encouraged during this period. These new materials (revised Mission, Goals, Objectives, new assessment plan, etc.) will be submitted as the Annual Assessment Report for the department during Year 1 of the new cycle (see suggested timeline below. The following timeline offers a suggested approach to aligning the assessment of student learning and the Annual Assessment Report (AAR) with the 8 year Program Review Cycle: Year 1 First Year of Program Review: No Annual Assessment Report (AAR) is submitted unless it pertains to an assessment study completed and not yet submitted. Year 2 Complete Program Review; Submit new Assessment Plan and other assessment materials resulting from Program Review (e.g., revised MGO, revised Curriculum Matrix, reflections on student learning from Program Review) to Director of Assessment for feedback from University Assessment Committee. The material submitted constitutes the AAR for Year 2. Year 3 Finalize Assessment Plan, MGOs, Curriculum Matrix; begin implementation of Assessment Plan. Submit finalized assessment materials in the AAR, along with any assessments of student learning objectives conducted during this year. Year 4 Continue roll out of Assessment Plan, reflecting on results of previous year, implementing any changes that 20

21 result from that assessment, and assessing one or two student learning objectives (including reassessing previous year s learning objectives as desired). Year 5 Continue roll out of Assessment Plan, reflecting on results of previous year, implementing any changes that result from that assessment, and assessing one or two student learning objectives (including reassessing previous year s learning objectives as desired). Year 6 Continue roll out of Assessment Plan, reflecting on results of previous year, implementing any changes that result from that assessment, and assessing one or two student learning objectives (including reassessing previous year s learning objectives as desired). Year 7 Continue roll out of Assessment Plan, reflecting on results of previous year, implementing any changes that result from that assessment, and assessing one or two student learning objectives (including reassessing previous year s learning objectives as desired). Year 8 Begin new Cycle of Program Review Year: No Annual Assessment Report is submitted Reflections on the Program Review Process After completing a review, program leaders will provide feedback on the process to the Dean and Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. The Guidelines will be updated as needed. 21

22 APPENDIX A Data Provided by the Office of Institutional Research The following data are provided by the Office of Institutional Research to support the evaluation of program quality: Student Enrollment Undergraduate Count of Majors (First, Second) Count of Majors (First, Second) with Associated Majors and Minors Count of Minors Headcount by Primary Major Headcount by Primary Major, Ethnicity, Sex Graduate (excludes Jesuit School of Theology) Headcount by Primary Major Headcount by Primary Major, Ethnicity, Sex Undergraduate & Graduate (excludes Jesuit School of Theology) Total Student Headcount / FTE by Career, Major Completions (Degrees Conferred) Undergraduate Count of Majors (First, Second) Count of Majors (First, Second) with Associated Majors and Minors Count of Minors Freshmen: Average GPA, Degree Units Freshmen: Average High School GPA, SAT Freshmen: Graduated with Honors Degrees Completed by Primary Major, Ethnicity, Sex Time-To-Degree by Major Transfers: Average GPA, Degree Units Transfers: Graduated with Honors Graduate (excludes Jesuit School of Theology) Average GPA, Degree Units Degrees, Certificates and Credentials Completed by Ethnicity, Sex Graduated with Honors Alumni Undergraduate Survey of Recent Graduates Course Data Undergraduate & Graduate (excludes Jesuit School of Theology) Class Size Classes Taught by Faculty Type 22

23 Faculty (includes Jesuit School of Theology) Faculty Headcount and FTE by Program/ Department Excluding Full-Time Administrators Excluding Full-Time Administrators, by Instructor Type Including Full-Time Administrators Including Full-Time Administrators, by Instructor Type Jesuit School of Theology only: Student Enrollment (Graduate) Headcount by Primary Major Headcount by Primary Major, Ethnicity, Sex Headcount/FTE Completions (Degrees Conferred, Graduate) Conferrals by Primary Major, Ethnicity, Sex Suggestions for identifying comparative or aspirational programs Some academic departments undergoing program review are already familiar with departments or programs at other universities that have been identified as comparable or aspirational. To explore other options, Internet tools referenced below allow users to generate a list of comparable or aspirational institutions based upon institutional characteristics such as enrollment size, type of control (public/private), types of degrees offered, student/faculty ratio, etc. After a preliminary list is generated, further investigation of the institutions is advised to identify "stand out" specific-discipline programs. 1. College Board: Start by creating an account. Criteria can be set for institutions similar to SCU (or select other criteria) and search for institutions that offer your major program(s). 2. IPEDS Data Center: this tool is similar to College Board but with expanded selection of institutional data. Major programs are selected using the CIP (Classification of Instructional Programs) codes (see ). For the IPEDS data, CIP (i.e., major) data are available for the Completions (degrees conferred) surveys. 3. College Navigator: 4. UCAN (University and College Accountability Network For further assistance with these tools, please contact the Office of Institutional Research. 23

24 APPENDIX B Strategies for Departments Undertaking Self Studies This Appendix provides suggested strategies and recommended procedures that may be useful to departments undertaking self-studies. As noted in Section 1 of the Program Review Guidelines, academic program review at Santa Clara University provides regular opportunities for faculty to engage in structured dialogue and examination of academic programs with the goal of improving educational effectiveness and assuring academic excellence. Program self-studies serve multiple purposes. They support institutional improvement; they help the institution demonstrate program quality to accrediting agencies; and they clarify ways faculty can contribute to continuous enhancement of the program. Every academic program engages in annual assessment of student learning and conducts a formal selfstudy on a regular cycle. The cycle of program review provides systematic and continuous means for faculty to evaluate their programs by analyzing and evaluating various kinds of data that serve as measures of quality, and by engaging in on-going discussion of the findings. The self-study normally takes place over a period of two years. It culminates in a formal report, a visit by external reviewers, and an action plan based on the self-study and recommendations from external reviewers. Section 3 of the Program Review Guidelines provides the schedule for the program s self-study, which begins with an orientation the spring quarter prior to year 1. Prior to the orientation session, faculties who will provide leadership during the self-study are appointed. This group reviews findings and recommendations from the previous self-study report(s) and recent annual reports on assessment of student learning. All full-time faculties on continuing appointments are expected to participate in the selfstudy, discuss drafts of the report, and contribute to its revision. At the orientation session, the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness, the Deans, and Director of Institutional Research (IR) provide an overview of the scope and content of the process and review the data provided to the program by IR. Program leaders should begin to identify issues remaining from the previous action plan; questions the data from IR will help the program faculty answer; and additional questions relevant to program aspirations for improvement. The self-study should be meaningful to the program and manageable for participants. The following questions may help program faculty identify issues or questions to investigate during the self-study. These questions are intended to assist programs in developing the self-study. Programs are not required to answer all the questions below. Suggested Questions What would enhance student learning? Are students achieving the desired learning outcomes for the program? Are they achieving those outcomes at the expected level, and how is that expected level determined? Are they graduating in a timely fashion? Are they well prepared for advanced study, the world of work, and civic responsibility? What changes would enhance the curriculum? For example, how responsive is the program curriculum to changes in the discipline and needs of students? Does it offer sufficient breadth and depth of learning for the degree(s), minor(s), and concentrations offered by the program? Does the curriculum provide appropriate scaffolding and/or sequencing for required courses? Are the courses students need to 24

25 complete for the degree(s), minor(s), and concentration(s) reliably available when students need to take them? How well does the curriculum align with student learning objectives for the major and for the Core Curriculum. What effects, if any, do program commitments to teaching courses in the Core Curriculum have on the curriculum for the major and minor? How does the curriculum compare to those at other institutions? Does the curriculum reflect the value the University places on diversity and inclusive excellence? Does the curriculum address student need to increase information literacy? What changes would enhance pedagogy in the program? How effective are the pedagogies characteristic of the teaching in the program? Are appropriate technologies used to enhance teaching and support learning? Is there a need to enhance the student profile of the program? What is the profile of the students in the program and how does the profile relate to or enhance the mission and goals of the program? Do students in the program reflect the diversity and inclusive excellence valued by the University? Are there changes in student enrollment trends in the program over the last 6-8 years? Do enrollment changes suggest the need for adjustments in curriculum or pedagogy? Would benefits accrue from enhancing relationships with alumni of the program? What is the profile of alumni in the program? What could alumni contribute to student learning in the program? What would enhance the faculty profile of the program? What are the qualifications and achievements of the faculty in the program in relation to the program mission and goals? How do faculty members background, expertise, research, and other professional work contribute to the quality of the program? Do faculty in the program reflect the diversity and inclusive excellence valued by the University? What disciplinary issues, problems, or challenges should the program address in order to improve educational effectiveness and academic quality? What would enhance program viability and sustainability? Is the program viable and sustainable? Is the faculty sufficient to maintain and improve program quality? Is appropriate advising and tutoring support available for student success? Are information and technology resources adequate for teaching, learning, and scholarship in the program? Are classroom facilities appropriate for program instruction? Are offices appropriate for faculty and staff? Do students have access to appropriate study spaces? Is the staff sufficient to support teaching, learning, and scholarship? Is the operational budget appropriate for the program? Reminder: the questions above are not required. They are suggestions developed to assist programs undertaking self-studies. 25

Academic Program Review Handbook

Academic Program Review Handbook Handbook Continuously Improving Programs and Student Learning Revised July 2014 Original Issue: December 6, 2010 Approved: Derry Connolly, President Current Issue: July 3, 2014 Effective: July 3, 2014

More information

PROCEDURES Doctoral Academic Program Review California State University, Stanislaus

PROCEDURES Doctoral Academic Program Review California State University, Stanislaus PROCEDURES Doctoral Academic Program Review California State University, Stanislaus Self Study Elements for Academic Program Review for Doctoral Programs Program Improvement from Last Academic Program

More information

2011 Outcomes Assessment Accreditation Handbook

2011 Outcomes Assessment Accreditation Handbook 2011 Outcomes Assessment Accreditation Handbook Associate Degree Programs Baccalaureate Degree Programs Master Degree Programs Accreditation Policies can be found in a separate document on the ATMAE website

More information

GUIDELINES FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW For self-studies due to the Office of the Provost on October 1, 2015 GRADUATE PROGRAMS

GUIDELINES FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW For self-studies due to the Office of the Provost on October 1, 2015 GRADUATE PROGRAMS GUIDELINES FOR ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW For self-studies due to the Office of the Provost on October 1, 2015 GRADUATE PROGRAMS OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM REVIEW At Illinois State University, primary responsibility

More information

Evaluation of Undergraduate Academic Programs. Self-Study Guidelines

Evaluation of Undergraduate Academic Programs. Self-Study Guidelines Evaluation of Undergraduate Academic Programs Self-Study Guidelines Office of the Provost Fall 2009 Purpose This guide is designed to support academic unit efforts to evaluate undergraduate academic programs

More information

Appendix H External Program Review Guide

Appendix H External Program Review Guide Appendix H External Program Review Guide Program Review Overview Every department or academic program at Texas A&M University-Texarkana undergoes the academic program review process at least once every

More information

Previous Approvals: April 5, 2005; May 6, 2008; November 2, 2010; May 3, 2011, May 3, 2011, May 7, 2013

Previous Approvals: April 5, 2005; May 6, 2008; November 2, 2010; May 3, 2011, May 3, 2011, May 7, 2013 RYERSON UNIVERSITY POLICY OF SENATE PERIODIC PROGRAM REVIEW OF GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS Policy Number 126 Previous Approvals: April 5, 2005; May 6, 2008; November 2, 2010; May 3, 2011, May 3,

More information

Guidelines for Massachusetts Early Educator Preparation Programs Participating in the Early Childhood Educator Scholarships Program.

Guidelines for Massachusetts Early Educator Preparation Programs Participating in the Early Childhood Educator Scholarships Program. Guidelines for Massachusetts Early Educator Preparation Programs Participating in the Early Childhood Educator Scholarships Program Background The Departments of Higher Education and Early Education and

More information

SELF-STUDY FORMAT FOR REVIEW OF EXISTING DEGREE PROGRAMS

SELF-STUDY FORMAT FOR REVIEW OF EXISTING DEGREE PROGRAMS SELF-STUDY FORMAT FOR REVIEW OF EXISTING DEGREE PROGRAMS Although programs engage in continual self-assessment and review of their work, periodic program reviews are designed to provide a broader view

More information

GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW POLICY. Texas Southern University

GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW POLICY. Texas Southern University GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW POLICY Texas Southern University The Purposes of Graduate Program Review Graduate program review at Texas Southern University exists to ensure that programs are functioning at the

More information

Professional Education Unit

Professional Education Unit NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY Professional Education Unit ASSESSMENT SYSTEM HANDBOOK 2011/2012 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNIT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM HANDBOOK Table of Contents The Unit Assessment System Overview...

More information

Academic Program Review SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE

Academic Program Review SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE Academic Program Review SELF-STUDY TEMPLATE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Program Overview... 3 A. Introduction and Historical Context... 3 B. Relationship to Mission and Strategic Plan... 3 C. Program Description...

More information

DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINSTRATION POLICY ON REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, AND PROMOTION (RTP)

DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINSTRATION POLICY ON REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, AND PROMOTION (RTP) Approved by Academic Affairs May 2010 DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINSTRATION POLICY ON REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, AND PROMOTION (RTP) I. DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING RTP POLICY A. Preamble B.

More information

Sample Questions for External Reviewers

Sample Questions for External Reviewers Sample Questions for External Reviewers Introduction The purpose of the academic program review is to assess: 1. the program s contribution to the vision, mission and values of the University; 2. the quality

More information

MEMORANDUM. Accreditation Report for Baccalaureate Program in Social Work, University of Northern Iowa

MEMORANDUM. Accreditation Report for Baccalaureate Program in Social Work, University of Northern Iowa MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Board of Regents Board Office Accreditation Report for Baccalaureate Program in Social Work, University of Northern Iowa Date: March 6, 2000 Recommended Action: Receive the

More information

Policy Abstract. for the. Handbook for Program Review: Cleveland State University s Self-Study Process for Growth and Change Spring 2005

Policy Abstract. for the. Handbook for Program Review: Cleveland State University s Self-Study Process for Growth and Change Spring 2005 Policy Abstract for the Handbook for Program Review: Cleveland State University s Self-Study Process for Growth and Change Spring 2005 Significant institutional resources are devoted to academic program

More information

Academic Program Review

Academic Program Review Academic Program Review UCSF Graduate Council and Graduate Division May 2014 Table of Contents ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW: AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS... 2 ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW: PREPARING THE SELF- STUDY...

More information

Standard 2: The program shall have an explicit philosophical statement and clearly defined knowledge base.

Standard 2: The program shall have an explicit philosophical statement and clearly defined knowledge base. Council for Standards in Human Service Education National Standards MASTER S DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 2009) I. GENERALPROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS A. Institutional Requirements

More information

Board of Commissioners

Board of Commissioners Board of Commissioners SELF-STUDY HANDBOOK CHAPTER TWO Guidelines for Conducting an Institutional Self-Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Purpose of the Self-Study 1 Institutional Evaluation 1 Institutional

More information

Community-Based Program Review at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) Trudy W. Banta

Community-Based Program Review at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) Trudy W. Banta Community-Based Program Review at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) Trudy W. Banta Defining Approaches Program review is defined quite differently on different campuses. It may

More information

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Criminal Justice Sciences 43.0104

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Criminal Justice Sciences 43.0104 Review of the B.A., B.S. in Criminal Justice Sciences 43.0104 Context and overview. The B.A., B.S. in Criminal Justice Sciences program is housed in the Department of Criminal Justice Sciences within the

More information

USD Guidelines for Academic Program Review

USD Guidelines for Academic Program Review USD Guidelines for Academic Program Review Purpose The University of San Diego s academic program review provides a systematic and continuous means of assuring academic excellence in student learning.

More information

Academic Program Review. Guidelines and Procedures

Academic Program Review. Guidelines and Procedures Academic Program Review Guidelines and Procedures Office of the Provost June, 2012 Contents Introduction page 3 Overview of the Review Process page 5 Step One: Identification of Key Issues page 6 Step

More information

Draft Policy on Graduate Education

Draft Policy on Graduate Education Draft Policy on Graduate Education Preface/Introduction Over the past two decades, the number and types of graduate programs have increased dramatically. In particular, the development of clinical master

More information

Appendix A. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards

Appendix A. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards Appendix A Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards A new Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards has been approved by the CSWE Board of Directors in April 2008. Preamble Social work practice

More information

The University of North Texas at Dallas Policy Manual

The University of North Texas at Dallas Policy Manual The University of North Texas at Dallas Policy Manual Chapter 6.000 6.020 Academic Program Review Faculty Affairs Policy Statement. UNT Dallas offers high-quality academic programs that are achieved through

More information

National Standards. Council for Standards in Human Service Education. http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009)

National Standards. Council for Standards in Human Service Education. http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009) Council for Standards in Human Service Education National Standards ASSOCIATE DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009) I. GENERAL PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS A. Institutional

More information

Graduate Program Review Process Summary

Graduate Program Review Process Summary Graduate Program Review Process Summary Prepared By: Nathan Risling B.Comm, M.P.A. Coordinator, Graduate Program Review College of Graduate Studies & Research Ph: (306) 966-1606 nathan.risling@usask.ca

More information

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Political Science 45.1001

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Political Science 45.1001 Review of the B.A., B.S. in Political Science 45.1001 Context and overview. The B.A., B.S. in Political Science program is housed in the Department of Politics and Government within the College of Arts

More information

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW GUIDELINES

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW GUIDELINES Kean University ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW GUIDELINES Overview Program review is an ongoing process involving the faculty and others concerned with the particular academic program. The guidelines established

More information

2. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards

2. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards 2. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards Preamble Social work practice promotes human well-being by strengthening opportunities, resources, and capacities of people in their environments and by

More information

Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards

Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards Copyright 2001, Council on Social Work Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Sections renumbered December 2001, released April 2002, corrected May 2002, July

More information

PROGRAM PUBLIC INFORMATION

PROGRAM PUBLIC INFORMATION Department of Civil Engineering & Construction Management College Of Engineering and Computer Science California State University-Northridge Northridge, Ca Construction Management Program PROGRAM PUBLIC

More information

PLAN FOR INSTITUTIONAL SELF-STUDY NCA Accreditation A DECADE OF RENAISSANCE

PLAN FOR INSTITUTIONAL SELF-STUDY NCA Accreditation A DECADE OF RENAISSANCE PLAN FOR INSTITUTIONAL SELF-STUDY NCA Accreditation A DECADE OF RENAISSANCE Saint Louis University, a Jesuit, catholic university, founded in 1818 is undertaking the process of institutional self-examination

More information

Preparing the Self-Study Report for Engineering

Preparing the Self-Study Report for Engineering Preparing the Self-Study Report for Engineering Jeffrey W. Fergus Auburn University Member of ABET EAC Executive Committee 2015 ABET Symposium April 23-24, 2015 Disclaimer The information presented here

More information

WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM

WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM REVISED SPRING 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Development And Evaluation Process: Tenure Track Faculty... 4 Overview Of Mentoring And Evaluation Process

More information

THE SELF STUDY DOCUMENT For Undergraduate Only Departmental Reviews

THE SELF STUDY DOCUMENT For Undergraduate Only Departmental Reviews I. The Department/Unit (or Program) II. Resources University at Buffalo Comprehensive Program Reviews The Graduate School THE SELF STUDY DOCUMENT For Undergraduate Only Departmental Reviews A. Mission

More information

Template for Departmental Report for Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities Self Study (The most critical information is in Italic)

Template for Departmental Report for Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities Self Study (The most critical information is in Italic) Template for Departmental Report for Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities Self Study (The most critical information is in Italic) Standard One: Mission and Goals, Planning and Effectiveness

More information

SCHOOL OF NURSING FACULTY EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR RETENTION, PROMOTION, TENURE, AND PERIODIC REVIEW

SCHOOL OF NURSING FACULTY EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR RETENTION, PROMOTION, TENURE, AND PERIODIC REVIEW SCHOOL OF NURSING FACULTY EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR RETENTION, PROMOTION, TENURE, AND PERIODIC REVIEW This document is to be used in conjunction with the UA Board of Regents policies, University

More information

California State University, Stanislaus Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), Educational Leadership Assessment Plan

California State University, Stanislaus Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), Educational Leadership Assessment Plan California State University, Stanislaus Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), Educational Leadership Assessment Plan (excerpt of the WASC Substantive Change Proposal submitted to WASC August 25, 2007) A. Annual

More information

INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY GUIDE INTRODUCTION

INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY GUIDE INTRODUCTION INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY GUIDE INTRODUCTION Degree granting institutions in New York State may designate the New York State Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education as their nationally

More information

Program Review Guide Claflin University

Program Review Guide Claflin University Program Review Guide Guidelines and Procedures Office of the Provost /Academic Affairs May, 2013 Modified October, 2013 Table of Contents I. Overview of (Mission, Philosophy, Accreditation) II. Overview

More information

INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY

INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY Approval: Responsibility: Contact Office: University Senate; Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance (Quality Council) Provost and Vice President Academic

More information

AACSB Self Evaluation Report Documentation. Supporting Materials and Timeline

AACSB Self Evaluation Report Documentation. Supporting Materials and Timeline AACSB Self Evaluation Report Documentation Supporting Materials and Timeline The Self Evaluation Report is a critical document in achieving initial accreditation. Ours is due May 15, 2012. To reach this

More information

The Undergraduate Education Office and First-Year Offerings

The Undergraduate Education Office and First-Year Offerings UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL The Undergraduate Education Office and First-Year Offerings Custom Research Brief TABLE OF CONTENTS RESEARCH ASSOCIATE Joe LeMaster RESEARCH MANAGER Sarah Moore I. Research

More information

PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT A NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM (Major, Minor, Master s, Dual Degree, or Certificate)

PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT A NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM (Major, Minor, Master s, Dual Degree, or Certificate) PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT A NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAM (Major, Minor, Master s, Dual Degree, or Certificate) New academic programs must be approved by the AAC/Grad Council, Faculty Plenary, VPAA, Board of Trustees,

More information

GUIDELINES FOR GRADUATE COURSES OFFERED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL

GUIDELINES FOR GRADUATE COURSES OFFERED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL GUIDELINES FOR GRADUATE COURSES OFFERED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL Rationale: Professional development takes many forms, including such activities as workshops, courses, conferences,

More information

Master of Public Health Program Goals, and Objectives September 2006

Master of Public Health Program Goals, and Objectives September 2006 Goals for Teaching (), Learning (Students), Research, Service, and Operations Mission: The DMU-MPH program serves humanity through advancing and disseminating core public health knowledge through teaching,

More information

Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation

Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration ACCREDITATION STANDARDS For Master s degree programs Adopted October 16, 2009 at the NASPAA

More information

Department of History Policy 1.1. Faculty Evaluation. Evaluation Procedures

Department of History Policy 1.1. Faculty Evaluation. Evaluation Procedures Approved: 2/23/099 Department of History Policy 1.1 Faculty Evaluation Evaluation Procedures 1. The Department of History will evaluate all tenured and non-tenure faculty by March 1 of each academic year

More information

PROGRAM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS

PROGRAM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS PROGRAM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS Curriculum Renewal and Program Review Centre for Learning and Teaching November 23, 2007 (Revised October 31, 2013) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction... 3 2. Goal... 3

More information

GUIDELINES FOR CONDUCTING EVALUATIONS OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

GUIDELINES FOR CONDUCTING EVALUATIONS OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS GUIDELINES FOR CONDUCTING EVALUATIONS OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS OFFICE OF THE PROVOST UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA 15260 JULY, 2002 Guidelines for Conducting Evaluations of Academic Programs

More information

ABHE Commission on Accreditation Manual

ABHE Commission on Accreditation Manual 2012 ABHE Commission on Accreditation Manual 2012, Ed.1 EXCERPT All rights reserved, no part of the Manual may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information

More information

ABET SELF-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE: TEMPLATE FOR A SELF-STUDY REPORT 2011-2012 Review Cycle

ABET SELF-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE: TEMPLATE FOR A SELF-STUDY REPORT 2011-2012 Review Cycle ABET SELF-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE: TEMPLATE FOR A SELF-STUDY REPORT 2011-2012 Review Cycle ENGINEERING ACCREDITATION COMMISSION ABET, Inc. 111 Market Place, Suite 1050 Baltimore, MD 21202-4012 Phone: 410-347-7000

More information

2014-2015 Program and Admission Information

2014-2015 Program and Admission Information Ph.D. Program in Higher Education Administration Bowling Green State University 2014-2015 Program and Admission Information Review of applications begins December 15, 2014 On-campus interviews will be

More information

McNeese State University. Academic Program Review. Standards for Graduate and Undergraduate Programs

McNeese State University. Academic Program Review. Standards for Graduate and Undergraduate Programs McNeese State University Academic Program Review Standards for Graduate and Undergraduate Programs Rev. and updated 2012 Approved Academic Advisory Council, Dec 17, 2012 1 Contents Overview... 3 Candidates

More information

M. CRITERIA FOR FACULTY EVALUATION

M. CRITERIA FOR FACULTY EVALUATION faculty evaluation/1 M. CRITERIA FOR FACULTY EVALUATION 1. General Criteria: The professional lives of college faculty members traditionally have been characterized by expectations in the broad categories

More information

National Standards. Council for Standards in Human Service Education. http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009)

National Standards. Council for Standards in Human Service Education. http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009) Council for Standards in Human Service Education National Standards BACCALAUREATE DEGREE IN HUMAN SERVICES http://www.cshse.org 2013 (2010, 1980, 2005, 2009) I. GENERAL PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS A. Institutional

More information

Assessment of Student Learning

Assessment of Student Learning Page 1 of 12 UW-Madison Plan for the Assessment of Student Learning JANUARY 2015 Page 2 of 12 This document describes a strategic and systematic process of improving the quality of degree and co-curricular

More information

GRADUATE COUNCIL - COLLEGE OF GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW PROCEDURES

GRADUATE COUNCIL - COLLEGE OF GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW PROCEDURES GRADUATE COUNCIL - COLLEGE OF GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW PROCEDURES 1.0 Purpose & Intent The purpose of this review process is to ensure the overall quality and sustainability

More information

Dean of the College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences

Dean of the College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences 1 Dean of the College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences Texas Southern University invites nominations and applications for the position of Dean of the College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (COPHS). Reporting

More information

Council on Social Work Education. Curriculum Policy Statement for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Social Work Education

Council on Social Work Education. Curriculum Policy Statement for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Social Work Education Council on Social Work Education Curriculum Policy Statement for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Social Work Education B1.0 SCOPE AND INTENT OF THE CURRICULUM POLICY STATEMENT B1.1 This document sets

More information

SECONDARY EDUCATION. College of Education and Public Policy Bachelor of Science in Education (B.S. Ed.) with Initial Teacher Licensure.

SECONDARY EDUCATION. College of Education and Public Policy Bachelor of Science in Education (B.S. Ed.) with Initial Teacher Licensure. SECONDARY EDUCATION College of Education and Public Policy Bachelor of Science in Education (B.S. Ed.) with Initial Teacher Licensure and College of Arts and Sciences Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) / Bachelor

More information

APPLIED SOCIOLOGY, CLINICAL SOCIOLOGY, PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICE PROGRAMS AT THE DOCTORAL LEVEL STANDARDS

APPLIED SOCIOLOGY, CLINICAL SOCIOLOGY, PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICE PROGRAMS AT THE DOCTORAL LEVEL STANDARDS APPLIED SOCIOLOGY, CLINICAL SOCIOLOGY, PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICE PROGRAMS AT THE DOCTORAL LEVEL STANDARDS Box Q University of Tampa 401 West Kennedy Boulevard Tampa Florida 33606-1490

More information

Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies. Introduction

Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies. Introduction Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies Adopted by approval of the Council of the American Library Association, February 2, 2015 Purpose of Accreditation Introduction

More information

Doctoral Degree Programs in Special Education

Doctoral Degree Programs in Special Education Doctoral Degree Programs in Special Education University of Florida College of Education School of Special Education, School Psychology, & Early Childhood Studies P.O. Box 117050 / 1403 Norman Hall Gainesville,

More information

College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025

College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025 DRAFT College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025 Design. Technology. Engagement. School of Architecture School of Building Construction School of City and Regional Planning School of Industrial Design

More information

University Policy Statement UPS 210.001 RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF TENURE-TRACK FACULTY

University Policy Statement UPS 210.001 RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF TENURE-TRACK FACULTY University Policy Statement UPS 210.001 RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF TENURE-TRACK FACULTY I. INTRODUCTION The goal for recruitments is to appoint a high quality and diverse faculty utilizing an effective,

More information

RE: Revised Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies

RE: Revised Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies EBD #10.9 2013-2014 TO: ALA Executive Board RE: Revised Standards for Accreditation of Master s Programs in Library and Information Studies ACTION REQUESTED/INFORMATION/REPORT: For information purposes.

More information

University of Delaware College of Health Sciences Department of Behavioral Health and Nutrition

University of Delaware College of Health Sciences Department of Behavioral Health and Nutrition University of Delaware College of Health Sciences Department of Behavioral Health and Nutrition GUIDELINES FOR PROMOTION, TENURE AND REVIEW I. INTRODUCTION The mission of the Department of Behavioral Health

More information

University of Nebraska at Kearney. Academic Program Review Guidelines and Procedures

University of Nebraska at Kearney. Academic Program Review Guidelines and Procedures University of Nebraska at Kearney Academic Program Review Guidelines and Procedures Revised, approved August 2008; updated August 2009; updated July 2011 Table of Contents PURPOSE... 3 PROCEDURES... 3

More information

College of Health Sciences Department of Health Master of Public Health Program ***************** Council on Education for Public Health

College of Health Sciences Department of Health Master of Public Health Program ***************** Council on Education for Public Health College of Health Sciences Department of Health Master of Public Health Program ***************** Council on Education for Public Health Accreditation Self-Study Report September, 2013 1 WEST CHESTER UNIVERSITY

More information

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW HANDBOOK: EXPLAINING THE PROCESS

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW HANDBOOK: EXPLAINING THE PROCESS ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW HANDBOOK: EXPLAINING THE PROCESS Eighth Edition THIS DOCUMENT SUPERSEDES ALL PREVIOUS PROGRAM REVIEW HANDBOOKS AND IS ONE OF TWO DOCUMENTS RELATED TO PROGRAM REVIEW Please direct

More information

CTL 2009 ADVANCED PROGRAM REPORT

CTL 2009 ADVANCED PROGRAM REPORT CTL 2009 ADVANCED PROGRAM REPORT 1 Because the Office of Undergraduate Studies is now requiring program assessment reports that are similar to CTL program assessment reports; The Office of Research, Evaluation,

More information

COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES School of Nursing. Guidelines for Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment (Effective May, 2007)

COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES School of Nursing. Guidelines for Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment (Effective May, 2007) COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES School of Nursing Guidelines for Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment (Effective May, 2007) Attached are the documents related to the role and responsibilities of the

More information

ABHE Programmatic Accreditation Standards. Conditions of Eligibility

ABHE Programmatic Accreditation Standards. Conditions of Eligibility www.abhe.org ABHE Programmatic Accreditation Standards Adopted by the ABHE Delegate Assembly February 20, 2015 Conditions of Eligibility To be considered for programmatic accreditation, an institution

More information

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, BAKERSFIELD ACADEMIC SENATE NEW MINOR: HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT RES 1213021 AAC/BPC

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, BAKERSFIELD ACADEMIC SENATE NEW MINOR: HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT RES 1213021 AAC/BPC CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, BAKERSFIELD ACADEMIC SENATE NEW MINOR: HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT RES 1213021 AAC/BPC RESOLVED: that the Academic Senate recommends that the President approve the proposed Public

More information

Peralta Community College District

Peralta Community College District Peralta Community College District Berkeley City College College of Alameda Laney College Merritt College Counseling Program Review Handbook Fall 2015 Version 3. i ii Table of Contents Purpose and Goals

More information

GUIDELINES FOR PROGRAM REVIEW AND ACADEMIC PLANNING

GUIDELINES FOR PROGRAM REVIEW AND ACADEMIC PLANNING Page 1 of 8 LOYOLA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES` IN-DEPTH PROGRAM REVIEWS The process of evaluation is an important ingredient of any successful academic program. Periodic evaluations provide

More information

Curriculum Proposal Training Assessment Forms Center for Teaching and Learning

Curriculum Proposal Training Assessment Forms Center for Teaching and Learning Curriculum Proposal Training Assessment Forms Center for Teaching and Learning Monica Varner, Ph.D. Director of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness and Center for Teaching and Learning Associate

More information

Guidelines for External Reviews of Academic Departments and Programs

Guidelines for External Reviews of Academic Departments and Programs Guidelines for External Reviews of Academic Departments and Programs This document contains information for departments and programs conducting external reviews, including: 1. Guidelines for external reviews

More information

BARBARA R. ALLEN, Dean

BARBARA R. ALLEN, Dean 1 THE COLLEGE OF GENERAL STUDIES BARBARA R. ALLEN, Dean THE COLLEGE of GENERAL STUDIES offers a baccalaureate and associate degree in General Studies for students who desire a plan of study not found in

More information

Improving Board Engagement with Educational Quality. Institutional Case Report Templates

Improving Board Engagement with Educational Quality. Institutional Case Report Templates Improving Board Engagement with Educational Quality Institutional Case Report Templates As part of this AGB project, we will be compiling a set of case reports based on the experiences of the participants.

More information

College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025

College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025 College of Architecture Strategic Plan 2014-2025 From the Dean The College of Architecture at the Georgia Institute of Technology houses a rich mix of disciplines that are critical in shaping how people

More information

More information regarding Academics may be viewed at the following link:http://www.csufresno.edu/academics/index.shtml

More information regarding Academics may be viewed at the following link:http://www.csufresno.edu/academics/index.shtml Academics consists of the policies, procedures, and programs that fulfill the educational mission of the University, particularly those focusing on academic programs for both undergraduate and graduate

More information

Connecticut State Colleges and Universities. CCSU Department of Social Work

Connecticut State Colleges and Universities. CCSU Department of Social Work Connecticut State Colleges and Universities CCSU Department of Social Work Baccalaureate Social Work Program CSWE Self-Study for Reaffirmation Submitted July 2014 Volume 1: EPAS Narrative & Supporting

More information

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Psychology 42.0101

Review of the B.A., B.S. in Psychology 42.0101 Review of the B.A., B.S. in Psychology 42.0101 Overview of the program. The B.A., B.S. in Psychology program is housed in the Department of Psychology within the College of Arts and Sciences. Other programs

More information

College of Natural and Social Sciences Guidelines on Promotion and Tenure

College of Natural and Social Sciences Guidelines on Promotion and Tenure College of Natural and Social Sciences Guidelines on Promotion and Tenure I. Preamble The purpose of this document is to clarify the promotion and tenure process of the College of Natural and Social Sciences

More information

Guidelines For Graduate Studies In Biology The Master of Science in Biology

Guidelines For Graduate Studies In Biology The Master of Science in Biology Guidelines For Graduate Studies In Biology The Master of Science in Biology Department of Biology Virginia Commonwealth University 1000 W. Cary St. Richmond, VA 23284-2012 Telephone: (804) 828-1562 Fax:

More information

100 Graduate Faculty Handbook

100 Graduate Faculty Handbook 100 Graduate Faculty Handbook 101 Introduction Graduate education is an integral component of Armstrong Atlantic State University (herein Armstrong). Armstrong s graduate programs provide graduate education

More information

Delaware State University. Reflecting on our past while preparing for our future

Delaware State University. Reflecting on our past while preparing for our future Delaware State University Reflecting on our past while preparing for our future EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Delaware State University s foundation dates to May 15, 1891, when the 58 th General Assembly of the State

More information

Academic Audit Site Visit Report. Pellissippi State Community College University Parallel Program April 17, 2015

Academic Audit Site Visit Report. Pellissippi State Community College University Parallel Program April 17, 2015 Academic Audit Site Visit Report Pellissippi State Community College University Parallel Program April 17, 2015 Audit Team: Debra McCarter, Team Chair, Walters State Community College Jim Kelly, Northeast

More information

Dear Colleagues: A member of the University of Maine System

Dear Colleagues: A member of the University of Maine System Dear Colleagues: Over the last five weeks the deans and I have had long sessions discussing the difficult decisions necessary to close the budget deficit and put our academic programs on a sustainable

More information

Strategic Plan 2012-2014 2012-2014. San Luis Obispo County Community College District

Strategic Plan 2012-2014 2012-2014. San Luis Obispo County Community College District Strategic Plan 2012-2014 2012-2014 S Strategic Plan 2012-2014 San Luis Obispo County Community College District San Luis Obispo County Community College District STRATEGIC PLAN 2012-2014 San Luis Obispo

More information

Boston University School of Theology. Doctor of Ministry in Transformational Leadership Handbook

Boston University School of Theology. Doctor of Ministry in Transformational Leadership Handbook Boston University School of Theology Doctor of Ministry in Transformational Leadership Handbook Last revised June 2015 Boston University School of Theology Doctor of Ministry in Transformational Leadership

More information

Ch. 354 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS 22 CHAPTER 354. PREPARATION OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL CATEGORY PROGRAM DESIGN

Ch. 354 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS 22 CHAPTER 354. PREPARATION OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL CATEGORY PROGRAM DESIGN Ch. 354 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS 22 CHAPTER 354. PREPARATION OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS Sec. 354.1. Definitions. 354.2. Purpose. GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL 354.11. Minimum requirements for approval. 354.12.

More information

Faculty Evaluation and Performance Compensation System Version 3. Revised December 2004

Faculty Evaluation and Performance Compensation System Version 3. Revised December 2004 Faculty Evaluation and Performance Compensation System Version 3 Revised December 2004 2 SUMMARY OF MAJOR CHANGES FROM EVALUATION SYSTEM, VERSION 1, 2003-2004, TO EVALUATION SYSTEM, VERSION 2, 2004-2005

More information

Graduate Program Goals Statements School of Social Work College of Education and Human Development

Graduate Program Goals Statements School of Social Work College of Education and Human Development Graduate Program Goals Statements School of Social Work College of Education and Human Development December 12, 2014 Program Youth Development Leadership (MEd) Master of Social Work (MSW) Doctorate in

More information

Self-Study Town Hall Session. Working Group #1 Educational Innovation and Transformation

Self-Study Town Hall Session. Working Group #1 Educational Innovation and Transformation Self-Study Town Hall Session Working Group #1 Educational Innovation and Transformation Steering Committee Co-Chairs Dean Natalie Eddington Dr. Roger Ward September 2, 2015 Town hall objectives 1. Provide

More information

MSc Educational Leadership and Management

MSc Educational Leadership and Management MSc Educational Leadership and Management Programme Specification Primary Purpose: Course management, monitoring and quality assurance. Secondary Purpose: Detailed information for students, staff and employers.

More information