1 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 of a program s academic structure and performance. Some presumed outcomes of the reviews are clearer understanding of the program s: mission, goals and objectives; quality and breadth of instruction, research, and public service; preparation of students in the discipline role within the University and effectiveness in fulfilling that role; and utilization of resources and resource requirements Instructions: Departments or other degree-granting units should follow this format in preparing self-study documents for periodic reviews of their degree programs. The information submitted should be complete in narrative or table form as applicable. However, the total length of the narrative document, excluding appendices and faculty curriculum vitae, should not exceed (30) pages and may be less. Twelve copies should be sent to the Associate Dean of the Graduate School. These will be distributed to each member of the review committees and each Dean involved in the Review. In preparing the self-study report units are asked both to reflect upon objective data and to engage in thoughtful reflection and analysis on their past performance, goals, and future plans. The self-study report should include each of the following elements 1. I. DESCRIPTION AND ORGANIZATION A. Degree Offerings and Accreditation What degrees are granted by the unit? Give the exact title of these degrees (e.g. Bachelor of Arts, Master of Science, Doctor of Musical Arts, etc.). List any separate curricular programs and/or specialties within the unit, as well as any official certificate programs. If any of the unit s programs are accredited, provide the name of the accrediting agency, the date granted, and the frequency of the accreditation review. If accreditation has been denied or has not yet been attained, describe the current status of the program in this regard. B. Administrative Structure Locate the unit within the structures of the University (e.g., English, Humanities, College of Arts and Sciences). Describe any important formal and informal relationships the unit has with other departments, institutes, centers, or other units within the university. Briefly describe the administrative structure(s) of the unit. Summarize the structure and function of major committees. Describe and explain any significant changes in these structures or relationships which have occurred over the last five years. Describe any planned or desired changes in these structures or relationships. C. Comparator Programs 1 Units that do not have every level of program (e.g., no doctoral program) will note that in the first section of the self-study and ignore any subsequent sections related to that element.
2 For the undergraduate program, identify similar programs that are offered at other colleges and universities in the state or region. For the graduate program and faculty identify those programs, nationally or internationally, that are perceived to be the units peers. In each case, describe how the unit is similar to and/or different from these programs? Describe what specifically makes any of these elements (undergraduate, graduate, faculty) distinctive or unique relative to these comparators. D. Role within the University Units have a variety of roles and responsibilities within the university, and may contribute to the mission and strategic priorities of the university more directly in some areas than in others (e.g., undergraduate education or graduate education; basic or applied research; enriching the lives of Oregonians; international awareness, etc.). What are the unit s perceptions of the University s strategic priorities; and how does the unit contribute to fulfilling those priorities? Identify specific ways in which the unit contributes to the mission of the UO. In both cases, focus on those things the unit does particularly well, or that you believe are relatively unique or distinctive. E. Funding and Budget Using the data provided, briefly summarize the unit s budget including sources of funds, expenditures relative to student credit hours and faculty FTE, and grant and contract funding. Comment on recent trends in these figures. F. Infrastructure Describe and comment on the facilities dedicated to the unit, the types and amounts of technical support, and the types and amount of administrative support. Describe any significant changes in these over the last five years. Describe any planned or desired changes in these elements. What are the most pressing needs? G. Special Concerns (Optional) Describe any particular issues or concerns that the unit wishes the review committees to address or give special attention. II. CURRICULAR PROGRAMS This section should describe in detail the curricular programs within the unit. If a unit offers multiple degree programs at either the undergraduate or graduate level, the description of these programs may be presented separately or together. However, units should note and justify their method of presentation. A. Undergraduate Programs 1.0 Description and Rationale for the Curriculum 1.1 Degree Programs and Options for Majors: Describe the bachelor s degree program options including the total number of required credits and credit distribution among various units. If more than one option or specialization track is available, list each option or track and their curricula separately (use attached Appendix format). Briefly explain the rationale for the structure of the major requirements, including any prerequisites or proficiency
3 requirements. Indicate the scheduled frequency at which courses within the curriculum are offered. What is the typical size of classes within each segment of the curriculum? Describe any opportunities for independent study, research, honors programs, international experiences, and/or participatory learning experiences that exist within the major curriculum. 1.2 General and Service Education: What roles, if any, do general education offerings and service courses to other disciplines play in the curriculum? Describe the general education and/or service course offerings and briefly explain the rationale for these courses. Describe any recent trends in these types of offerings, including enrollment trends. 1.3 Interdisciplinary & International Components: Describe the extent of the unit s participation in interdisciplinary courses or curricula and the rationale for the development of and participation in these courses or curricula. Describe any components that provide international experiences for majors. 1.4 Use of Technology: Describe the extent to which technology is being used to deliver the undergraduate curriculum. Comment on the use of class management technology (i.e., Blackboard) in the undergraduate curriculum. Identify all courses that are delivered predominantly or exclusively via distance learning. Discuss any plans to increase or decrease the use of technology and/or distance learning. 2.0 Student Characteristics 2.1 Number of Students and Enrollment Patterns: Discuss trends over the past 10 years (or since the time of the last review) in the numbers of students within the program and degree options. Discuss enrollment patterns such as enrollment at different levels of the curriculum, enrollment in individualized study and other specialized courses, and the extent to which students are customarily enrolled for summer as well as other quarters. 2.2 Demographic Data: Describe the demographic characteristics (including gender, age, race/ethnicity) of undergraduate majors. Highlight any characteristics on which majors in the area may differ from the University as whole (e.g., higher percentage of non-traditional students) 2.3 Diversity Initiatives: Describe and comment on the extent and quality of the unit s efforts to attract, retain, and graduate members of traditionally underrepresented groups. 2.4 Academic Quality: Discuss data available on the academic characteristics of majors within the program including entry test scores (e.g., SAT), average entering GPA, GPA at graduation, and if applicable, placement test scores (or comparable metrics for performance-based disciplines). Compare these characteristics to those of closely related departments, the university as a whole, and other comparator universities (when available). Also include a discussion of trends over time and any other indicators collected by the unit.
4 2.5 Graduation Patterns: Describe trends in the number of degrees and the length of time required for degree completion since the time of the last review or within the last 10 years. What are the approximate attrition rates from the major? Compare these indicators to those in closely related departments, the University as a whole, and other comparator universities. 3.0 Academic and Support Staffing 3.1 Teaching: What proportion of courses at each level (e.g. lower division, upper division) are taught by tenure track faculty, adjuncts, instructors, and/or graduate teaching assistants? If non-instructional staff has responsibility for delivering some elements of the curriculum, describe the nature of their involvement and the rationale for this practice. How are decisions regarding course assignments made? 3.2 Advising and Other Services: Who provides academic advising to undergraduates? Does the faculty or other staff serve in additional roles, such as mentor, internship supervisor, other? How are decisions made regarding the assignment of academic advisors and service in other roles? 4.0 Assessment and Reflection 4.1 Quality of the Undergraduate Curriculum: What procedures does the unit use to evaluate a) the quality of undergraduate courses and degree programs; b) the progress of individual students toward a degree; and c) the long-term effectiveness of the program? Describe the results of these assessments. How satisfied is the unit with the breadth and quality of the various parts of the curriculum? Describe the ways in which issues such as the development of critical thinking, communications skills (written and spoken), cross-cultural awareness, and/or individual-based research and learning have been addressed. Discuss how grade inflation has been dealt with in the unit s undergraduate courses. Highlight any areas of specialization and/or features of the unit s undergraduate programs that make them distinctive or unique. 4.2 Curriculum Changes: What significant changes have taken place in course offerings and degree programs over the past five years? Explain the rationale for these changes and their relation, if any, to recent trends and developments in the field, to ongoing assessments of student learning and the curriculum, and/or to trends in the placement of graduates. Are there desirable changes in the undergraduate curriculum that have not been accomplished? What has prevented the implementation of these changes? What changes, if any, are being considered or planned for the next 3-5 years. 4.3 Quality of Instruction and Advising: What procedures are used to judge the quality of instruction and academic advising within the undergraduate curriculum (e.g. course evaluations, classroom visitations, post-graduation surveys of students, etc.)? Discuss the results of these assessments. Comment on how this unit compares to similar departments and the University as a whole.
5 4.4 Student Learning: Describe what the graduates of your programs should know and be able to do when they leave the university. How does the unit assess the extent to which students have met these expectations? Include a discussion of any department-specific indicators that have been developed (e.g. exit exams or blind reading of senior essays) as well as universityprovided indicators of the quality of the graduates, such as average scores on GRE exams. When possible compare these outcome measures to those of the university as a whole and for comparator schools. 4.5 Student Satisfaction: What steps does the unit take to assess graduating students perceptions of the quality of their experiences? What are the results of these assessments? Have any changes been made in the undergraduate program based on these measures? 4.6 Postgraduate Placements: Describe any data available on the postgraduate academic and career placement of students. Are there specific trends in these placements? Does the unit assist in the placement of graduates? To what extent are alumni, visiting committees, or advisory boards involved in evaluating the quality of the unit s graduates in the work place? B. Graduate Programs 1.0 Description and Rationale for the Curriculum 1.1 Masters: Describe the master s degree curriculum including the total number of required credits and credit distribution among various fields or subfields. If more than one option or specialization track is available, list the options or tracks and their curricula separately (use attached Appendix C format for this purpose). Note any required research experience (or performance or creative activity) such as a thesis, terminal project, internship, or other experiences outside the classroom. Indicate any associated professional certification or licensure requirements. Include any additional information concerning curricula emphasis which would aid in characterizing this program as practice or research oriented. If there is substantial dependence on some other unit or program, comment on this relationship. Finally, explain the rationale for the structure and sequence of the curriculum for the master s degree, including any prerequisites or proficiency requirements. 1.2 Doctoral: Describe the doctoral curriculum, including the total number of required credits and credit distribution among various fields or subfields. If more than one option or specialization is available, list the options or tracks and their curricula separately (use attached Appendix C). Indicate whether the master s degree is usually completed before proceeding to the doctoral degree program and explain any differences in requirements between students entering with or without a master s degree. Explain the rationale for the structure and sequence of the doctoral curriculum, including any prerequisites or proficiency requirements. Describe all requirements for advancement to candidacy (e.g., written examinations, oral examinations, required papers, proposals), including recommended or required deadlines for completing each component.
6 1.3 Instructional Relationships to Other Programs: Describe how graduate instruction and research, performance, and/or creative activity in this unit relate to other programs (undergraduate, graduate, professional, postdoctoral) within the unit, in other University units, or with other OUS institutions. What is the rationale for these relationships? Identify other programs where students frequently take minor fields of study or other program options in the unit. Describe the extent of the unit s participation in interdisciplinary programs at the graduate level. List any courses in the program that are requirements, prerequisites, or frequently recommended for students in graduate degree programs outside this unit. 1.4 Research Participation: What types of formalized research training do graduate students receive before they begin work on their theses or dissertations? Describe the nature and extent of this training, how it differs for masters and doctoral students, and the rationale for the specific nature of this training. If any of these training experiences are not a part of the regular curriculum, how are these experiences supported and how are students selected for them? 1.5 Teaching Preparation: How is the development of graduate students teaching abilities addressed by the program? What types of teaching experiences do graduate students have during their program, and what percentages of the students get those experiences? Describe any awards or other types of support for graduate students teaching. 1.6 Funding: Describe the stipend support packages available for graduate students and the number of each type of appointment (teaching and research assistantships, fellowships, traineeships) available annually. Describe the procedures used to allocate the support and any information as to how the level and type of student support compares to that offered by closely related units, the university as a whole, and comparator universities. 2.0 Student characteristics 2.1 Number of students and Enrollment Patterns: Discuss trends over the past 10 years (or since the time of the last review) in the numbers of students within each segment of the graduate programs. Discuss enrollment patterns such as enrollment at different levels of the curriculum, full-time and part-time ratios, and the extent to which students are customarily enrolled for summer as well as other quarters. What is the optimal size of the graduate program at each level (Masters, Doctoral)? If the current program differs from the optimal size, how does the unit plan to move toward that goal? 2.2 Demographic Data: Describe the demographic characteristics (including age, gender, race/ethnicity) of graduate students. Highlight any characteristics on which graduate students in this unit may differ from graduate students in other units within University. 2.3 Diversity Initiatives: Describe and comment on the extent and quality of the unit s efforts to attract, retain, and graduate members of traditionally
7 underrepresented groups. Discuss any initiatives that focus on international students, or providing international experiences for enrolled students. 2.4 Academic Quality: Discuss data available on the academic characteristics of graduate students applying to, and accepted by, graduate programs in this unit (separate these data by Masters vs. Doctoral if appropriate). Include information on criteria used to make admissions decisions (e.g., entry test scores, average entering G.P.A., placement test scores, portfolio, audition). Include data on applicants, students offered admission, and those who accept, including measures of selectivity and yield. Compare these characteristics to those of similar departments, the university as a whole, and comparator universities. Also include a discussion of trends over time and any additional indicators collected by the unit. 2.5 Graduation Patterns: Describe trends in the number of degrees and the length of time required for degree completion at each level of the graduate program since the time of the last review or within the last 10 years. What are the approximate attrition rates from each portion of the graduate program? For the doctoral program, what percentages of students successfully reached advancement within four years, and what percentages completed the degree within seven years. Compare these indicators to those for closely related departments, the University as a whole and for similar units in comparator institutions. 3.0 Academic and Support Staffing 3.1 Teaching: What proportions of courses in each segment of the graduate program are taught by each of the following: tenure track faculty, adjuncts, and instructors? How do these proportions compare to those for other similar units within the university? If non-instructional staff shares responsibility for delivering the curriculum, describe the nature their role and the rationale for this practice. If graduate teaching assistants are involved in teaching any graduate courses, describe the nature of that involvement and the rationale for this practice. How are decisions regarding course assignments made? 3.2 Advising and Mentoring: How are advisors assigned to graduate students and what is the advisor/advisee ratio at the graduate level? What is the role of the advisor in the unit? Describe the nature of any workload adjustments that the unit makes for faculty service on dissertation or thesis committees? 4.0 Assessment and Reflection Quality of the Graduate Curriculum: What procedures are used to evaluate a) the quality of graduate courses, mentorship, and advising; b) the progress of individual students toward a degree; and c) the long-term effectiveness of the program? Describe the results of these assessments. How satisfied is the unit with the breadth and quality of the various parts of the graduate curriculum? What proportion of the graduate curriculum consists of courses 2 Units should note at the beginning of this section whether they will be presenting their assessments of Masters and Doctoral programs together or separately.
8 III. FACULTY that contain only graduate students (i.e., 600 level)? If a significant proportion of courses are not graduate-only (i.e., 400/500 courses), describe what requirements are added to these courses to assure that graduate level training is taking place. Describe the ways in which issues such as time toward degree, attrition, involvement in research, and job placement have been addressed. Identify any areas of specialization and/or features of the unit s graduate programs that make them distinctive or unique. 4.2 Curriculum changes: What significant changes have taken place in the graduate program(s) over the past five years? Explain the rationale for these changes and their relation, if any, to recent trends and developments in the field, to ongoing assessments of student learning and the curriculum, and/or to trends in the placement of graduates. Are there desirable changes in the graduate curriculum that have not been accomplished? What has prevented the implementation of these changes? What changes, if any, are being considered or planned for the next 3-5 years. 4.3 Quality of Instruction and Advising: What procedures are used to judge the quality of instruction and academic advising within the graduate curriculum? Discuss the results of these assessments. 4.4 Student Learning: What outcomes are expected for students at each stage of the graduate program and how does the unit assess the extent to which students have met these expectations? Include a discussion of any departmental specific indicators that have been developed (e.g. exit exams or blind reading of comprehensives). To what degree have graduate students published research (or presented creative work) before graduation? 4.5 Student Satisfaction: How satisfied are graduating students with the quality of their experiences? How do these measures compare with data from similar units and from the university as a whole? 4.6 Postgraduate placements: Provide data on the placement of graduate students over the last 5 years. How does the unit assist in the placement of its graduates? To what extent are alumni, visiting committees, or advisory boards involved in evaluating the quality of graduates in the work place? This section should describe and reflect on the quality and adequacy of academic staffing within the unit. As an attachment to the self-study narrative, units must provide an alphabetic list of faculty members, their ranks, and the number of masters and doctoral committees they have headed (served on?) during the past five years. Current curriculum vitae (CV) for each tenure-track faculty member should follow the text and all appendices. Also include CV for instructors, adjunct faculty, and any others (e.g. emeriti, participating or courtesy faculty) who regularly teach for the unit. A. Numbers and Status
9 1.0 Size and Composition: Describe the size and composition of the unit s faculty in terms of ranks and areas of specialization within the discipline. To what extent are non-tenure track (e.g. visiting, part-time, adjunct) faculty a part of the unit s programs? Do faculty members from other university units serve important roles within the unit? What is the typical duration of involvement for non-tenure track faculty in their roles? Describe the rationale for the unit s staffing plan. 2.0 Recruitment, Retention, Tenure and Promotion: Describe the rates at which the unit has successfully recruited its top choices for new faculty over the last 10 years (or since the last review). Where have new faculty received their training and/or been employed prior to coming to the UO? Describe the unit s record of retaining faculty, and discuss any plans or strategies for continuing or improving on this record. Provide data on the success rates (successful vs. tried, and time to promotion) for junior faculty receiving tenure and/or tenure and promotion, as well as the rates for faculty being promoted to full professor. 3.0 Diversity: How do the proportions of women and minority groups on the unit s faculty compare to the University as a whole, comparator institutions, and the field nationwide. What specific plans and programs does the unit have in place to increase the proportions of traditionally underrepresented groups in the faculty and to support their professional development? B. Research and Scholarly Work 1.0 Current Research: Provide a brief description of notable and/or unique ongoing research, performance, or creative activity in the unit. Describe three to five major accomplishments in this area over the past five years by faculty and/or graduate students. 2.0 Interdisciplinary Projects or Programs: Describe interdisciplinary research projects or programs with other units on campus or with other universities or agencies. How successful is the unit in developing and supporting these types of activities? How important are these kinds of interdisciplinary relationships to faculty and graduate students in the unit? What changes in this area, if any, are being considered or planned for the next 3-5 years. 3.0 Funding: Describe and evaluate the level of internal and external funding for research or performance/creative activity for faculty in the unit. Are the faculty and unit competing effectively for external support? What are the unit s goals, if any, for internal and external research funding? How does the unit s performance in this area compare to other similar units within the University (comparator schools?)? 4.0 Transfer of Knowledge: Describe any significant recent research or other scholarly/creative interactions with the private sector which have been developed by the unit or individual faculty members (other than consulting). To what extent are faculty engaged in the knowledge or technology transfer process (e.g. invention disclosures, patents, license agreements, spin-off companies)? Does the unit actively encourage such activities or consider
10 C. Teaching them in evaluations such as tenure and promotion decisions? What are the policy and/or regulatory concerns that influence your unit's ability to form research or creative partnerships with the private sector (e.g. conflict of interest policy, Oregon Administrative Rules, intellectual property rights)? 1.0 Teaching Load and Distribution: Describe how the teaching loads of faculty within the unit are determined, including the number and level of courses. Does the pattern of teaching assignments differ among members of the unit and if so, what are those differences and what is the rationale for this distribution? 2.0 Teaching Support: How does the unit support and reward the development of quality teaching? To what extent have faculty, GTFs, and other instructional staff used these mechanisms and what have been the results? D. Service 1.0 Community Service: Describe the extent to which the unit s professional expertise is made available to the community, state, and nation through lectures, concerts, service to governmental boards, scientific/professional associations, or any other means. Evaluate the quality of this service and indicate how it contributes to the unit s instructional and/or research programs? 2.0 Continuing or Executive/Professional Education: To what extent is the unit involved in offering continuing education and professional development courses or programs? List any courses offered through continuing education. Describe any courses or programs designed for professional or executive education. Identify any of these courses or programs that are offered in locations other than the Eugene campus, or via distance technology. Describe any changes that are being considered or planned for the next 3-5 years. 3.0 Consulting: To what extent is the faculty involved in outside consulting work? Provide a quantitative and qualitative assessment of this type of work and explain in what ways it contributes to the unit s instructional and/or research programs. E. Assessment and Evaluation 1.0 Evaluation Criteria: Describe how (and how often) the unit evaluates the quality of its faculty in teaching; research, performance, and/or creative activity; and service. How are the results of these evaluations used by the unit? Attach a copy of the standards for promotion and tenure that have been developed with the approval of the appropriate Dean and the Provost. Attach a copy of the standards used for post-tenure review. Provide a copy of any other standards or forms used to evaluate teaching, research/performance or service.
11 2.0 Assessment: Provide a brief overview of the quality of the research, teaching, and service of faculty in the unit. How do assessments of faculty teaching compare to similar departments and to the University as a whole? Highlight any areas in which faculty have provided exemplary service to the university, the discipline, the public. How does the research, performance or creative activity in the unit compare nationally or internationally to research in the discipline? Describe any external rankings of the unit. What are the unit s goals for faculty in the research/creative activity area. 3.0 Faculty Development: What does the unit do to encourage and develop research, performance or creative activity? How well are these incentives working? Describe any deficiencies in facilities and resources that negatively affect the unit s attempts to reach its research objectives. 4.0 Adequacy of Staffing and Resources: Is the unit staffed adequately to meet the needs of various fields of specialization in the discipline? How will the unit maintain an appropriate distribution of specializations if available resources remain essentially constant? IV. SUMMARY Reflect upon and summarize the major strengths and weaknesses of the degree programs and the unit as whole, and the issues that the unit is likely to face in the next five years. Review briefly the unit s objectives for the next 5 to 10 years. What changes might help the unit attain these objectives. If changes require resources, identify possible sources for any additional resources. If changes will free-up resources, discuss how those resources would be reallocated.
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Graduate Degree Program Review Revised Format for the Self-Study Report Instructions: Designed for the eight-year review of graduate degree programs,
SELF-STUDY GUIDELINES Part I: Program History, Mission, and Administrative Structure I.1 Program History Briefly describe the historical development of the program and associated components. I.2 Mission
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
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
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
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
Board of Governors, State University System of Florida Request to Offer a New Degree Program (Please do not revise this proposal format without prior approval from Board staff) University Submitting Proposal
Staff Analysis Checklist Request to Offer a New Degree Program Board of Governors, State University System of Florida University Submitting Proposal Initial Review Date Proposed Implementation Term Last
Guidelines for Preparing New Graduate Program Proposals The New Programs and Program Review Committee of the Graduate Council recommends that the originators of proposals for new graduate programs follow
0. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION DATA SUPPLIED BY PROGRAM Official U of S Program URL: Provide the URL for the graduate program, or department website that introduces the graduate degree, and provides information
NOTE: This meeting was canceled due to inclement weather. GRADUATE COUNCIL AGENDA for Thursday, December 14, 2000 at 2:00 p.m. Old Main 523 1. Minutes for the November 16, 2000, Graduate Council meeting
Accelerated Graduate Degree Programs Proposal Template Overview. This template was created to: 1) provide a general overview of the basic elements of accelerated graduate degree programs at the University
Page 1 of 32 STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION OF POSTSECONDARY CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION DEGREE PROGRAMS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 3. CURRICULUM 4. FACULTY
Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of Graduate Studies Graduate Council Doctoral Program External Review Self-Study Instrument AY 2008 (revised fall 2007) Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of
Texas Woman s University College of Arts and Sciences Bachelor of General Studies Program Undergraduate Program Review May 2012 I. PROGRAM REVIEW AND MISSION A. History Texas Woman s University has a proud
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
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
School of Accounting Florida International University Strategic Plan 2012-2017 As Florida International University implements its Worlds Ahead strategic plan, the School of Accounting (SOA) will pursue
The National Communication Association s Standards for Undergraduate Communication Programs Updated April, 2011 A variety of disciplinary organizations have developed specialized accreditation standards
Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of Graduate Studies Graduate Council Doctoral Program Review Instrument Texas A&M University-Kingsville College of Graduate Studies Doctoral Program Review Instrument
GRADUATE GROUP REVIEW PROTOCOL FOR SCHOOLS (Adopted 1.10.10) Overview of the Graduate Council of the Faculties The Graduate Council of the Faculties is advisory to the Provost and Vice Provost for Education.
DOCTORAL PROGRAMS It is the policy of the university to allow development of new doctoral programs (either independent or programs developed in conjunction with other institutions). Joint doctoral programs
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
Academic Program Reviews Guidelines for Conducting a Self-Study [Revised January 2014; available at http://academicplanning.gwu.edu/academic-program-reviews] The self-study is the vital initial element
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
Part 3 Ministry Of Education And Higher Education Directorate General of Higher Education Part III Self-Study Report Template LABE SELF-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE http://www.labe.org.lb General Instructions Introduction
MARSHALL UNIVERSITY HONORS COLLEGE POLICY HANDBOOK PURPOSE This handbook offers basic information about the procedures and practices of the Honors College at Marshall University. The information presented
Template for Academic Committee Review The numbered titles in this document that appear in boldface print represent the standards being evaluated as met, not met, or partially met on the Program Report
University Of Alaska Anchorage College Of Health Department Of Human Services Criteria and Guidelines For Faculty Evaluation This document is to be used in conjunction with the UNAC and UAFT Collective
MPH Program Policies and Procedures Manual Curriculum and Advising Academic Advising Academic advisors are appointed by the chairs, in consultation with the MPH Director Curriculum Decisions All changes
NOVA SCOTIA COLLEGE OF ART AND DESIGN (NSCAD UNIVERSITY) QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURES ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW PROCESS SELF-STUDY REPORT GUIDE EXTERNAL REVIEW GUIDE ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW TIMELINE
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,
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.
Department of Economics College of Arts and Sciences Texas Tech University Strategic Plan 2012 2020 Mission The Department of Economics is dedicated to excellence in teaching, research, and service. The
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
Instructions for Preparing the Self-Study Report, Doctoral Programs The minimum required elements of the self-study report are listed below. The overall purpose of the report is to allow the program to
2010-2015 Strategic Plan Template Department of Special Education and Child Development 2010-2015 Strategic Plan I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-2 pages A. Mission and goals: The mission of the Department Special
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,
Deploying Professionally Qualified Faculty: An Interpretation of AACSB Standards An AACSB White Paper issued by: AACSB Accreditation Coordinating Committee AACSB Accreditation Quality Committee January
UMD Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Indices and Standards for Tenure and Promotion to Professor as Required by Section 7.12 of the Board of Regents Policy on Faculty Tenure (June 10,
Ph.D. Completion Project: Policies and Practices to Promote Student Success Executive Summary The Ph.D. Completion Project is a seven-year, two-phase project that addresses the issues surrounding Ph.D.
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...
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
UCC Program Review Committee summary of review Program Department of Mechanical Engineering This program includes the following degrees and certificates: B.S. in Mechanical Engineering M.S. in Mechanical
This policy applies to Faculty only. Appointment Types APPOINTMENT TO AND PROMOTION OF ACADEMIC STAFF In policies, practices, and procedures related to faculty appointments, the University shall not engage
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
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...
Doc. T92-012, as amended Passed by the BoT 4/8/92 Revised 8/6/97 UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS PROCEDURES FOR UNIVERSITY APPROVAL OF NEW ACADEMIC DEGREE PROGRAMS, PROGRAM CHANGES, AND PROGRAM TERMINATION
Action Plan for the Graduate College Feb. 2012 Western Michigan University Introduction The working premises of this plan are that graduate education at WMU is integral to the identity and mission of the
Basic Programs Oriented Toward Ministerial Leadership A MASTER OF DIVINITY (MDiv) A.I Purpose of the Degree A.1.0 The Master of Divinity degree is the normative degree to prepare persons for ordained ministry
Texas Southern University College of Education Bylaws 2012 [Type text] 2 College of Education Bylaws Preamble Texas Southern University was founded in 1927 and became a state institution in 1947. Texas
Graduate Group in Biochemistry, Molecular, Cellular & Developmental Biology Ph.D. and M.S. DEGREE REQUIREMENTS Graduate Council Approval: April 15, 2009 MASTER'S PROGRAM 1) Admissions Requirements Applicants
PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT TEMPLATE Seventh Edition Note: The following pages constitute the template for all Program Review Reports. Do not change the order or the wording of any items and respond where indicated.
SCHOOL OF NURSING - GRADUATE NURSING - Dept. Code: NUR The School of Nursing offers two degrees: the Master of Science in Nursing and the Doctor of Philosophy with a major in Nursing. Admission to graduate
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
MSU Departmental Assessment Plan 2009 2010 Department: Education Department Head: Dr. Joanne Erickson Assessment Coordinator: Bill Freese 214 Reid Hall 994 3072 Degrees/Majors/Options Offered by Department
NARRATIVE REPORT Master of Science in Engineering Management University of Tennessee Chattanooga Part 1 - Student Experience External Reviewer Report by Dr. Resit Unal, Old Dominion University Are admissions
Graduate Catalog 2010-2011 Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work 545 Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work Picture Page 546 Robert Stempel College of Public Health and
RACKHAM GRADUATE SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Guidelines for Developing and Revising Graduate Degree and Certificate Programs 2015 Contents Introduction 3 Stages of Proposal Development and Activation
Introduction: The Clinical Faculty College of Education Clinical Faculty Appointment and Promotion Criteria Provost Approved 11/11/11 In accordance with University guidelines most professional programs
REQUEST FOR NEW PROGRAM APPROVAL Catalog Copy for New Program Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) The doctor of nursing practice (DNP) degree prepares nurses with a blend of clinical, organizational, economic,
A. Contributions to Teaching Department of Child & Family Development Promotion and Tenure Guidelines November 2004 The Standard Teaching communicates knowledge to students and develops in them the desire
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
University of Georgia College of Public Health Strategic Plan 2010 2015 Vision The College of Public Health at the University of Georgia serves the needs of local, state, national, and international populations
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,
Fogelman College of Business and Economics Ph.D. Program Policies and Procedures Ph.D. Sub-Council Daniel Sherrell, MSCM, Chair Charles Bailey, ACCT William Smith, ECON David Allen, MGMT Brian Janz, MIS
1 Mission/Vision/Strategic Plan Audiology and Speech-Language Sciences 2011-2016 UNC Mission Statement The University of Northern Colorado shall be a comprehensive baccalaureate and specialized graduate
School of Music College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY REVIEW AND PROMOTION GUIDELINES Policy Title: School of Music Non-Tenure Track Faculty Review and Promotion
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
HIM 2008 Master s Degree Standards and Interpretations for Accreditation of Master s Degree Programs in Health Information Management Who We Are The Commission on Accreditation for Health Informatics and
1 University of Missouri-Columbia MU Sinclair School of Nursing GUIDELINES for APPOINTMENT, REAPPOINTMENT, and PROMOTION of NON-REGULAR FACULTY The MU Sinclair School of Nursing (SSON) faculty established
Our Vision To serve as a model unit of support, service, and stewardship of excellence in graduate education to meet the intellectual, academic, and vocational needs of students in the region and beyond.
PH.D. IN COMPUTER SCIENCE PROGRAM ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PH.D. IN COMPUTER SCIENCE A student can be admitted into one of the following graduate degree
Homeland Security and Defense Education Consortium Association General Overview for academic programs (associate s, undergraduate and graduate) seeking program accreditation. SPECIAL NOTE HSDECA has designed
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY SUPPLEMENTARY RULES FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING OR COMPUTER ENGINEERING (In addition to the rules of the Graduate College) This document together with the Graduate
PhD in Nursing Science Plan Graduate Program Review, 2011-2012 Program Overview and Mission The PhD program is an integral part of the CON programs. The overview section provides a good description, showing
CGS Assessment Report: MBA Program 2013-2014 Table of Contents Assessment Process Overview... 2 Assessment Report... 4 Assessment Process... 4 Results: Direct Measures of Student learning... 5 Results:
Purdue University Department of Computer Science West Lafayette, IN Strategic Plan 2010-2015 Final Version 5.0: May 3, 2010 Computer science is a discipline that involves the understanding and design of
Review of the M.A., M.S. in Psychology 42.0101 Overview of the program. The M.A., M.S. in Psychology program is housed in the Department of Psychology within the College of Arts and Sciences. Other programs
College of Medicine Promotion and Tenure Procedure FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY Approved by majority vote of College Faculty March 25, 2014 Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Governance... 1 a. Membership...
A Guide to Assessment of Student Learning in Journalism and Mass Communications 2001, Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications Assessment of student learning The Council seeks
Department of Marketing / College of Business Florida State University BYLAWS Approved by a majority of faculty Initially adopted December 4, 2006 Amended February 17, 2009 Amended November 23, 2010 Amended
Graduate Certificate in University Teaching Handbook Contents Overview of Graduate Certificate in University Teaching... 2 Program Overview... 2 Why a Graduate Certificate in University Teaching at Concordia?...
Higher Education Dickinson Hall, Room 419 (501) 569-3267 Master of Arts and Doctor of Education The Master of Arts in Higher Education is designed for those individuals who are interested in entering or
Guidelines for the Annual Assessment and Fifth Year Review of Centers and Institutes Clemson University has a systematic approach to annual assessment of all academic and nonacademic programs, services,
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
German Graduate Program Ph.D. and MA Degree Requirements Revised: Sept 2008; Jan 2009; March 2014 Graduate Council Approved: Feb 18, 2009; Aug 14, 2014 Master s Degree Requirements 1) Admissions requirements
Terry College of Business Strategic Plan The mission of the University of Georgia s Terry College of Business is the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge for the effective and ethical practice of business.
Standards of Accreditation Theological schools accredited by the Commission on Accrediting of the Association of Theological Schools (the Commission ) are special-purpose institutions of postbaccalaureate,
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