Guidelines for External Reviews of Academic Departments and Programs
|
|
|
- Jason Freeman
- 10 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 2. Communication template from the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office to reviewers 3. Sample schedule for the site visit Guidelines Purpose The primary purpose of regularly scheduled external reviews is to understand, evaluate, and improve the educational quality of the College s academic departments and programs. At the department and program level, the goals of periodic external reviews are to provide regular opportunities for information gathering, reflection, and evaluation of the educational effectiveness, thoroughness, and currency of the College s educational programs. Selection of External Reviewers and Dates After being notified of an upcoming review, the Department or Program will submit a set of potential dates available for the review and an initial list of names and contact information of at least eight potential reviewers to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office for consideration as External Reviewers. The Provost and Dean of the Faculty, or his or her designee, will select three Reviewers using the list as guidance, and likely in consultation with the department chair or program director, but may select Reviewers of his or her own choosing. One of the External Reviewers will be invited to serve as the Chair of the External Review Committee. Two of the three External Reviewers should come from liberal arts institutions similar to Whitman, and where appropriate, one from a research university to which Whitman students are likely to apply for graduate study. In their submission of a list of potential reviewers to the Provost s Office, departments and programs may find it helpful to include specialty areas of potential reviewers, as well as a list of any substantive areas that would be important to include among the areas represented by the reviewers. External Reviewers will be contacted well in advance of their visit to campus. They will be compensated for their work after their report is received by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office, and will be reimbursed for travel, lodging, and food expenses. Role of the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office The Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office will invite and make the initial contacts with the External Reviewers. The Office is also available to assist the Department Review Chair in coordinating logistical arrangements for the External Reviewers including travel, accommodations, and site visit logistics. 1
2 The Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office will add a narrative about Whitman College to the department or program self-study, and will duplicate and mail/ the completed departmental and program self-study materials. During the year before an external review, department chairs and program directors of programs undergoing review in the next academic year will be contacted and asked to submit potential dates and reviewer names to the Provost s Office. Invitation letters are then sent via to prospective reviewers. After the reviewers have committed, subsequent correspondence will include the charge to the reviewers (including instructions for their report), a list and contact information of the other reviewers on the team, logistical instructions, requests for accessibility or dietary needs, paperwork for the reviewers stipend, travel and lodging arrangement information, review materials, and the site-visit schedule. Departmental/Program Review Chair When a Department or Program is selected to undergo an external review, its members will select a tenured (when possible) member of the Department or Program faculty to serve as the Department/Program Review Chair. The Review Chair is most often the Department Chair or Program Director. The Departmental/Program Review Chair will be responsible for overseeing and coordinating the review process. The Review Chair will supervise the preparation of materials for the review process and his or her responsibilities will include: Ensuring that all materials for the Departmental Self-Study are properly assembled and submitted by the due dates specified by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office. Ensuring that all department members are involved in the conceptualization and preparation of the Department Self-Study. Consulting with the Director of Institutional Research to arrange for the administration of an Alumni Survey. Coordinating and hosting the External Reviewers site visit, including securing a working room for the external review team in the academic building where the bulk of the participating faculty and staff are located, picking up reviewers at the airport and arranging for transportation between the hotel and campus. Ensuring that the Departmental Response to the Review Report is submitted the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office on time (see below). 2
3 Timeline The following approximate timeline may help chairs and directors plan for how the external review fits into other work during the year: Academic Year before visit: Departments and programs undergoing review in the next academic year are notified by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office Six months before visit: Dates are chosen, names/contact information of potential reviewers are submitted to the Provost s Office Three - Five months before visit: Reviewers are confirmed and travel logistics are handled by the Provost s Office Four months before visit: Alumni Survey questions are drafted in consultation with the Director of Institutional Research Two months before visit: Department completes and submits Self-Study, including response to Alumni Survey results, to the Provost s Office Six weeks before visit: Provost s Office formats and sends materials Two weeks before visit: Review Chair makes appropriate campus room reservations and submits visit schedule to Provost s Office; Provost s Office sends schedule to reviewers Site Visit: Review Chair or designee arranges reviewers transportation between hotel and campus, and works with the Provost s office to ensure all arrangements are satisfactory and accessible One month after site visit: Reviewers report is due to Provost and Dean of the Faculty Two months after report receipt: Review Chair submits department/program response (2-5 pages) Departmental Self-Study and Supporting Materials Each program undergoing review completes a self-study that provides the Reviewers information about the program being reviewed. The primary focus of the self-study should be less about description and more about analysis, appraisal, and assessment. The Review Chair is responsible for coordinating the Departmental Self-Study and for gathering the supporting materials. These completed and compiled items should be submitted to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office approximately two months before the site visit. The Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office will add general information about Whitman College to the self-study, and will duplicate and mail/ the finished reports to the External Reviewers. The Self-Study materials include the following sections, and can be arranged in any order: 3
4 Goals What are the learning goals of the Department or Program (e.g., Students will be able to demonstrate proficiency in scientific written communication )? (These can be pasted from the department or program s annual assessment report. Whenever possible, state goals in terms of what students will be able to do as a result of their participation in the department or program.) How do those goals contribute to the mission of Whitman College? Are there other goals of the program that are not direct student learning goals (e.g., Faculty members aim to increase external grant applications )? Assessment and Planning What evidence does the Department or Program have that it is meeting its learning (or other) goals? If applicable, what benchmarks are used to assess whether goals are being met? Where in the curriculum are the goals incorporated? What improvements, if any, would the Department or Program like to see in terms of meeting its goals? How well prepared are majors for graduate study? What do alumni report about their success or difficulty in their graduate studies? What are some common career paths taken by recent graduates? (the responses to these questions may be included here or in the Alumni Survey section of the Self-Study) How do the Department or Program s assessment activities inform subsequent curricular and budgetary considerations? What changes have been made to the Department or Program over the past several years based on these assessments? What evidence is there that these changes have improved the educational program? These items may be based on recent annual assessment reports. Governance Describe how the Department or Program is governed. How are administrative, advising, and other responsibilities allocated among individual faculty members? How are department or program decisions made? How often do the Department or Program faculty members meet, and what is the purpose and tenor of these meetings? Curriculum Describe the requirements and organization of the Department or Program s major and minor requirements. This can be pasted from the most recent Course Catalog. What is the rationale for this organization? List the ways in which students are evaluated throughout their major or minor course of study. Describe the format, timeline, and procedures relating to the Senior Assessment in Major. How does the senior assessment help students integrate the information, concepts, and skills that they have learned? How does it allow students to demonstrate the depth and breadth of their knowledge of the field? 4
5 Are any courses in the curriculum team-taught and/or cross-listed with other departments or programs? Assess those relationships. Staffing Describe the staffing of courses in the Department or Program. To what extent are the teaching faculty (including any non-tenure track faculty) free to teach the courses they wish? Are they able to teach them in the ways they wish? How are course schedules determined within the Department or Program? What substantive areas are covered within the teaching and research expertise of the faculty? Include a rationale for the inclusion of these substantive areas as a means to providing appropriate courses for students. To what extent does the Department or Program make use of non-tenure track faculty? What is the primary role of these faculty members in the Department or Program? How are untenured faculty, in particular, mentored with respect to their teaching, scholarship/art /performance, and service? Are adjunct and/or visiting faculty generally satisfied with this role? Teaching In what ways does the Department or Program promote excellence in teaching? Describe what the Department or Program does in regards to the development of its faculty members teaching effectiveness. Professional Activity Describe faculty scholarly/artistic interests and aims. How does the faculty s professional activity advance the Department or Program s learning goals? What are the Department or Program s expectations for faculty research/artistic creation/performance in terms of quality and quantity? How are these expectations communicated to Department or Program faculty? Here you may paste or include a link to the department or program s Guidelines for Professional Activity. Students What opportunities exist for faculty/student collaboration in research, scholarship, and/or performance? What are the expected and desired outcomes for students and faculty from such collaboration? Does the Department or Program encourage activities such as internships, off-campus study, or community-based learning? If so, how are these integrated into the curriculum? Do the students in the major or minor programs in the Department or Program reflect the diversity of the College as a whole? Are there ways to attract and retain a more diverse student population in the department or program? 5
6 Support Are there adequate support staff and physical facilities (e.g., technology, library resources, laboratory equipment) for the department or program to realize its teaching goals? How have new technologies affected the curriculum or the ways in which courses are taught? Are there new technologies or other innovations that the Department or Program would like to incorporate into existing or future courses? Connections on Campus Compile a list of other departments in which the Department majors must take courses, or departments for which the Department provides prerequisites, and a description of the interrelationships. Discuss the Department/Program s contributions to Interdisciplinary Studies and Individually Planned majors. Discuss the Department/Program s contribution to General Studies, including Encounters. Enrollment Include enrollment information for all courses taught in the past four years including details about the teaching loads for each member of the Department/Program with courses listed for each department member for the past four years. Also include number of graduating seniors in the major for the last four years. Questions for the Reviewers The Department or Program may, if they wish, include questions or specific issues they would like the reviewers to address. Alumni Survey Include a summary statement describing and commenting on the results of the Department or Program s Alumni Survey, including the types or topics of questions asked of alums. Departments may wish to include the raw data, but should remove identifying or contact information for respondents. Curriculum Vitae Include curriculum vitae of each member of the department including all temporary or part-time faculty members, as well as staff, if relevant. Course Syllabi Include course syllabi for all courses taught within the past four years. If a course is repeated multiple times with little change by the same faculty member, include only the most recent version of the syllabus. 6
7 Department/Program Budget Include department/program budgets for the past four years, including any endowments or other relevant funds. These can be requested from the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office. Format for Submission of the Self-Study to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office Because the Self-Study is compiled by the Provost and Dean of Faculty Office after electronic submission by the Review Chair, whenever possible, documents should be submitted as Word files without page numbers. Exceptions to this can include the last four items listed above: a copy of survey results, CVs, syllabi, and scanned images of budgets, which are usually pdf files, and which can be sent as separate files. External Review Visit The site visit will provide the External Reviewers the opportunity to meet with all department faculty, individually and as a group; tour facilities; meet with the Provost and Dean of the Faculty, Division Chair, any faculty members who the program deems relevant, the Review Chair, and students; and examine the Department or Program s self-study materials. Time will be built into the schedule for other interviews they may request and for their own discussion and writing. When creating a site visit schedule, it is important to allow breaks for the reviewers in between back-to-back meetings. It is also important to give colleagues enough lead time to confirm their availability for meeting with the reviewers. Because the purpose of the review is to evaluate and comment upon curricular and programmatic elements, External Reviewers will not visit individual classes. External Reviewers Report Within four weeks of the campus visit, the Chair of the External Review team will submit a written evaluative report to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty. The report should clearly and forthrightly comment on the quality of undergraduate education and provide an evaluative perspective of the program. The report should focus on the program as a whole and refrain from making judgments about individual faculty members. The report should address, but not be limited to, the following items: The range, depth, balance, and currency of the Department/Program's curricular offerings compared to departments in similar colleges and to the current state of the discipline. The adequacy of instructional resources for teaching and research in the Department/Program. 7
8 The interdependency of the department or program with other departments in which majors must take courses, or departments for which the department or program provides prerequisites. Ways in which the department can continue to serve the College as a whole, including interdisciplinary studies and General Education, including Encounters. Changes the Department/Program could make in order to improve the quality of its program on a short (1-2 year) time-line. Changes that the Department/Program could make in order to improve the quality of its program on a long (8 year) time-line. Effectiveness of the Department/Program s Assessment and Planning activities. Responses to the questions posed by the Department/Program being reviewed. The report should reflect the collective judgment of the External Reviewers. However, if a consensus opinion is not possible, the report should present the individual members' judgments with justifications. Post Review Procedure: Following the External Review, several procedures will be followed to ensure that information from the review is used effectively by both the Department or Program and the College: 1. After the External Reviewers Report is received by the Provost and Dean of the Faculty s Office, honoraria are sent to the Reviewers. 2. The Provost and Dean of the Faculty, along with the Committee of Division Chairs, reviews the Reviewers Report and sends it to the Department/Program for consideration and response. 3. The Department/Program will have eight weeks to send to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty a 2-5 page written response to the External Reviews Report that provides the Department or Program s reaction to the report and describes short term and long-term goals and a time-line for the changes it plans to implement. This response will be shared with the Committee of Division Chairs. 4. Departments/Programs will be expected to discuss the progress they have made dealing with the External Review Report in their annual assessment reports. 8
9 Templates of External Communications Sent by Provost s Office Letter to potential External Review Chair: Dear Dr. [last name], On behalf of Whitman College and Provost and Dean of the Faculty Timothy Kaufman-Osborn, I am writing to invite you to serve as chairperson of a three-person evaluation team who will conduct an external review of Whitman College s xxx program, on [dates]. The College has embarked on a program of external reviews of all its academic and administrative departments, and welcomes your contribution to that process. I would appreciate it if you would respond to this invitation as soon as possible (preferably before [date]) to indicate whether you will participate in the review. If you accept the invitation, Susan Bennett, Senior Academic Assistant in the Office of the Provost and Dean of the Faculty, will help make your travel arrangements to and from Walla Walla. You may contact Susan at [email protected] or The team will arrive in Walla Walla on Wednesday, [date]; they will spend Thursday and Friday ([dates]) on campus; they will have dinner with members of the xxx department during the visit; they will have an introductory meeting and final debriefing with the Provost and Dean of the Faculty; they will have time to work alone as a team; and finally, they will depart Walla Walla on Saturday, [date]. Specifics of the visit beyond this, including the schedule to meet with department members and other interested parties, will be set up before the visit. Additionally, about one month before the visit, the College will send you materials from the xxx program, including, among other things, items such as a departmental self-study, the results of an alumni survey of the program, curricular information, and guiding questions for the review. Other materials will be available upon request. The College will reimburse you for all visit-related expenses and will pay you a stipend of $1,500 after receipt of the evaluation team s report. Thank you for your assistance in helping Whitman College maintain the excellence of its academic program. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Susan Bennett. I have attached a version of this invitation on letterhead for your records. 9
10 Letter to potential External Review Team Members: Dear Dr. [name], On behalf of Whitman College and Provost and Dean of the Faculty Timothy Kaufman-Osborn, I am writing to invite you to serve on a three-person evaluation team to conduct an external review of Whitman College s xxx program, on [dates]. The College has embarked on a program of external reviews of all its academic and administrative departments, and welcomes your contribution to that process. I would appreciate it if you would respond to this invitation as soon as possible (preferably before [date]) to indicate whether you will participate in the review. If you accept the invitation, Susan Bennett, Senior Academic Assistant in the Office of the Provost and Dean of the Faculty, will help make your travel arrangements to and from Walla Walla. You may contact Susan at [email protected] or The team will arrive in Walla Walla on Wednesday, [date]; they will spend Thursday and Friday ([dates]) on campus; they will have dinner with members of the xxx department during the visit; they will have an introductory meeting and final debriefing with the Provost and Dean of the Faculty; they will have time to work alone as a team; and finally, they will depart Walla Walla on Saturday, [date]. Specifics of the visit beyond this, including the schedule to meet with department members and other interested parties, will be set up before the visit. Additionally, about one month before the visit, the College will send you materials from the xxx program, including, among other things, items such as a departmental self-study, the results of an alumni survey of the program, curricular information, and guiding questions for the review. Other materials will be available upon request. The College will reimburse you for all visit-related expenses and will pay you a stipend of $1,000 after receipt of the evaluation team s report. Thank you for your assistance in helping Whitman College maintain the excellence of its academic program. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Susan Bennett. I have attached a copy of this invitation on letterhead for your records. 10
11 Letter sent to Review Team Members after acceptance (with Department Chair/Program Director cc d): Dear Drs. [names], On behalf of the Whitman College Provost and Dean of the Faculty office, and the Department of xxx (Chair [name] cc'd here), I want to thank you again for your willingness to participate in the upcoming xxx external review, scheduled for [dates]. If you have not already done so, please contact Susan Bennett, Senior Academic Assistant in the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office ([email protected] or ), regarding your travel arrangements. The members of the Provost and Dean of the Faculty Office facilitate the external review process to ensure that the department's and reviewers' work is based on information that is wellorganized, high quality, and useful to reviewers and to us. I would like to take this opportunity to introduce you to the other reviewers serving on your team: [delete name of addressee] Reviewer #1 Name (Review Chair), College/University Reviewer #2 Name, College/University Reviewer #3 Name, College/University I have one request for you: could each of you please send an updated copy of, or online link to, your CV, which will be made available to the Provost and to the faculty members in our xxx Department? You may wish to "reply all" so that each of you can be introduced professionally, too. Of course, you now have each others' addresses, so please feel free to communicate amongst yourselves. Attached please find documents that we hope you will find easy to understand, helpful, and informative: a booklet with information about the review process and the department's selfstudy, a set of faculty CVs, a set of course syllabi, budgets, and results from a recent xxx alumni survey. If you would like us to mail you a hard copy of any of these, just ask. In addition, you may find it helpful to access the link to our College Catalog and other relevant course of study documents here: This link is also referenced in the self-study document on page [#]. Details for the written evaluative report for this review are found on page [#] of the self-study. You will be sent a detailed schedule for your visit closer to your arrival, but tentatively you can count on a flexible Wednesday evening (where perhaps you three may want to have dinner together to introduce yourselves), complimentary breakfast at the Marcus Whitman Hotel on Thursday, an introductory meeting with Provost and Dean of the Faculty Tim Kaufman- Osborn at 9 a.m. on Thursday, an introduction to the workroom that will be available for your visit (with keys), several meetings and tours throughout the day on Thursday with faculty, staff, and students, a dinner with faculty Thursday evening, more meetings and tours on Friday, and 11
12 an exit conversation with the Provost at 3 p.m. on Friday. Friday evening is your time to work with each other on the review document itself. You may want to mark your calendars for the due date for the review document: [date]. Instructions for this are also included in the attached self-study document on pages [#s]. If you need any further information in the next few weeks that we have not provided, or if you have any special dietary, travel, mobility, or other needs, do not hesitate to ask. We know you will be working hard during your visit, but we would like to make it as easy as possible. To that end, if there are other documents or pieces of information that you may want before or during your visit, please let us know. We participate in external reviews in order to seek ways to maintain our high quality programs, and to improve upon them. Thank you for your willingness to help us in this process. Let us know if you have questions. Soon your visit schedule will be finalized and sent, and contact phone numbers are included below if you need anything during your stay. We look forward to your visit to Walla Walla. 12
13 Sample Schedule for External Reviewers Visit to Campus Wednesday Afternoon Early Evening Arrival of external reviewer team Dinner for external reviewers to get acquainted Thursday 9:00 a.m. Meeting with Provost and Dean of the Faculty to receive charge and discuss institutional context. 10:00-11:00 Meeting with Review Chair 11:00-11:45 Meeting with Division Chair, perhaps with tour of Division/Department facilities. 11:45-1:00 Lunch with students. Afternoon Evening Tour of campus and/or meetings with faculty and staff members. Dinner with faculty members of program being reviewed Friday 8:00 a.m. Reviewers have breakfast as a group. 9:30-12:00 Follow-up meetings with faculty members, staff, or administrators as necessary. 12:00 Lunch with faculty or just Committee 1:00-3:00 Additional meetings or work time (allow plenty of breaks) 3:00-4:00 Debriefing session with Provost and Dean of the Faculty Evening Saturday Morning Committee meets to work on report Reviewers depart (Written report due within one month.) 13
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
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
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
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
Nomination and Selection of External Consultants for Graduate Program Reviews
Nomination and Selection of External Consultants for Graduate Program Reviews Graduate Programs External Consultants are required for the review of all new programs (with the exception of new collaborative
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...
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...
QUALITY ASSURANCE HANDBOOK. Policies, procedures and resources to guide undergraduate and graduate program development and improvement at UOIT
QUALITY ASSURANCE HANDBOOK Policies, procedures and resources to guide undergraduate and graduate program development and improvement at UOIT UOIT Academic Council June 15, 2010, revised June 9, 2011 QUALITY
CAMPUS GUIDE TO THE NEW GRADUATE PROGRAM APPROVAL PROCESS
CAMPUS GUIDE TO THE NEW GRADUATE PROGRAM APPROVAL PROCESS As of February 2015 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS New Graduate Program Approval Process Steps (Overview).... 2 1. Introduction.... 3 2. Initial Discussion
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
Institutional Quality Assurance Process. University of Ottawa
Institutional Quality Assurance Process University of Ottawa June 27, 2011 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION...1 1.1 Authorities...1 1.2 Contact person...1 1.3 Definitions...1 1.4 Evaluation of programs...2
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
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
University Of Alaska Anchorage College Of Health Department Of Human Services. Criteria and Guidelines For Faculty Evaluation
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
Adjunct Faculty Orientation and Professional Development Custom Research Brief
UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL Adjunct Faculty Orientation and Professional Development Custom Research Brief RESEARCH ASSOCIATE Laura Nickelhoff TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Research Methodology II. Executive
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
Graduate Policies and Procedures for New Programs. Table of Contents
Graduate Policies and Procedures for New Programs Table of Contents Page I. Overview...2 II. Five-Year Master Plan...2 III. New degree proposals: white papers...2 IV. Consultation among units...4 Prior
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,
CANDIDACY FOR ACCREDITATION
CANDIDACY FOR ACCREDITATION The Meaning of Candidacy The Candidate for Accreditation program offers certain postsecondary institutions the opportunity to establish a formal, publicly recognized relationship
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
Laney Graduate School Curricular Revision Guidelines. Updated September 2012
Laney Graduate School Curricular Revision Guidelines Updated September 2012 Contents 1. Courses... 3 1.1. Credit Hour Determination... 3 1.2. Revisions to Existing Courses... 3 1.3. New Course Proposals...
TUFTS UNIVERSITY APRIL 27, 2011 GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSING NEW DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS
OFFICE OF PROVOST S THE AND OFFICE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT TUFTS UNIVERSITY APRIL 27, 2011 GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSING NEW DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS These guidelines outline the steps necessary to develop
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY. The Graduate School. Graduate Degree Program Review. Revised Format for the Self-Study Report
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,
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
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
Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Geography Bylaws. Article I. The Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Geography
Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Geography Bylaws Passed: 1 December 2006 Revised: February, 2007; February, 2008; April, 2008; August, 2008; October 8th, 2009; The Department of Environmental
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
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
Interdisciplinary Studies Doctorate. Graduate Student Handbook
Interdisciplinary Studies Doctorate Graduate Student Handbook Graduate College April 2015 Introduction The Interdisciplinary Studies Doctorate at Western Michigan University is a unique degree that offers
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS PROCEDURES FOR UNIVERSITY APPROVAL OF NEW ACADEMIC DEGREE PROGRAMS, PROGRAM CHANGES, AND PROGRAM TERMINATION
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
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
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
9. The ad hoc joint committee drafts a formal program implementation proposal. (See Attachment B for a description of the contents of this document.
GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING JOINT DOCTORAL PROGRAMS WITH INDEPENDENT INSTITUTIONS These procedures are based on documents developed by the CSU and California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. List all of the program s learning outcomes: (regardless of whether or not they are being assessed this year)
STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: C.KOPAC AND M. VENZKE DATE: JUNE 26, 2014 REVISED JANUARY 2015 TO MEET UAC RECOMMENDATIONS SEE BELOW- HEADING HIGHLIGHTED IN GREY BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE
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
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 [email protected]
Procedures for Implementing New Graduate Programs 1
Procedures for Implementing New Graduate Programs 1 MASTER'S DEGREE PROGRAMS 2 Introduction There are three possible ways to propose new master's degree programs: the standard process (involves two steps),
III. Standards for Accreditation of Graduate Education Programs in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology
III. Standards for Accreditation of Graduate Education Programs in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology Effective January 1, 2008 Introduction The Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and
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
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
3.2.1 Evaluation and approval process for new fields and new programs created from existing and approved University of Ottawa programs
3.2 Protocol for the Expedited Approval of Graduate Programs The Expedited Approval Process requires the submission to the Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance of a Proposal Brief. No external
THE PROCESS OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
THE PROCESS OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT INTRODUCTION The Cal Poly Pomona Curriculum Development Guide has been compiled to assist you with the task of preparing curriculum proposals to be considered for
GRADUATE SCHOOL AND CONTINUING EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE DEAN
GRADUATE SCHOOL AND CONTINUING EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE DEAN SUMMER SESSION 2015 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Summer I: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - Friday, June 26, 2015 Summer II: Monday, June 29, 2015 - Friday,
Review of the B.S. in Computer Science 11.0701
Review of the B.S. in Computer Science 11.0701 Context and overview. The B.S. in Computer Science program is housed in the School of Information Technology within the College of Applied Science and Technology.
UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL OFFICE OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL OFFICE OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 4 Program-Related Actions New and Spin-off Degree Program
INTERIM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ON TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED COURSES AND PROGRAMS
INTERIM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ON TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED COURSES AND PROGRAMS I. Rationale The primary purposes of instructional technology are to facilitate effective instruction and enhance student learning,
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
Texas Southern University
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
COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY ANTHROPOLOGY GRADUATE PROGRAM PROCEDURES
1 COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY ANTHROPOLOGY GRADUATE PROGRAM PROCEDURES TABLE OF CONTENTS PROGRAM OVERVIEW 2 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE. 2 ADMISSION TO THE PROGRAM 3 Page MASTER OF ARTS 1. Introduction. 4
WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF AVIATION POLICY STATEMENT
WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF AVIATION POLICY STATEMENT It is the right, the responsibility, and the privilege of University faculties to participate in the governance of their departments. Fundamentally,
(most recent revision November 8, 2013) Humboldt State University 1 Harpst Street Arcata, CA 95521-8299. 707-826-3653 envcomm1@humboldt.
A two-year interdisciplinary Master of Arts in Social Science Program in: PROGRAM HANDBOOK (most recent revision November 8, 2013) Humboldt State University 1 Harpst Street Arcata, CA 95521-8299 707-826-3653
Donna Woolcott, PhD Executive Director, Quality Assurance
Donna Woolcott, PhD Executive Director, Quality on Quality MAY 7, 2012 UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR Overview of quality assurance R International context R Ontario context Quality Council mandate Key elements
By the end of this session, you should be able to:
SESSION OBJECTIVES By the end of this session, you should be able to: 0 Describe basic elements of the job interview 0 Appreciate the importance of preparation and mentoring in the interview process BASIC
VI. SAMPLE CAMPUS VISIT SCHEDULES
VI. SAMPLE CAMPUS VISIT SCHEDULES Department of Physics and Astronomy (College of Arts & Sciences) Department of Health Policy and Administration (School of Public Health) School of Social Work Times and
Part III. Self-Study Report Template
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
Institutional Quality Assurance Process
Institutional Quality Assurance Process (Covering also the academic, non vocational degree programs of Dominican University College) February 17, 2012 Senate Approved May 30, 2012 Quality Council Ratification
Consortium for Faculty Diversity at Liberal Arts Colleges. Fellowship Program G U I D E L I N E S O N M E N T O R I N G
Consortium for Faculty Diversity at Liberal Arts Colleges Fellowship Program G U I D E L I N E S O N M E N T O R I N G The Consortium for Faculty Diversity at Liberal Arts Colleges (CFD) Program The Consortium
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR FACULTY AND DEPARTMENTS The Graduate School of NMSU 575 646-5745 Revised on March 19, 2013
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR FACULTY AND DEPARTMENTS The Graduate School of NMSU 575 646-5745 Revised on March 19, 2013 Guidelines are provided on developing proposals for the following: Guidelines on
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
Program Review. Social Work: BSW Follow-Up Report. College of Health Professions. October 2010 MARSHALL UNIVERSITY
Program Review Social Work: BSW Follow-Up Report College of Health Professions October 2010 MARSHALL UNIVERSITY Program Review Marshall University _10/15/2010 Program: _Social Work: BSW Degree and Title
FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Institutional Quality Assurance Program (IQAP) Review. Classics
FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Institutional Quality Assurance Program (IQAP) Review Classics Date of Review: March 4-5, 2014 In accordance with the University Institutional Quality Assurance Process (IQAP),
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
GRADUATE GROUP REVIEW PROTOCOL FOR SCHOOLS
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.
Institutional Quality Assurance Process Joint Graduate Programs Carleton University and University of Ottawa
Institutional Quality Assurance Process Joint Graduate Programs Carleton University and University of Ottawa April 19, 2012 Table of Contents Introduction. 2 1 Authorities. 4 2 Scope... 5 3 Definitions.
Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance
Council on Quality Donna Woolcott, PhD Executive Director, Quality Cindy Robinson Manager, Quality F EBRUARY 14, 2012 Q UEEN S U NIVERSITY 2 Outline of Presentation Overview of quality assurance International
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND FOUNDATIONS 2013 APPOINTMENT, SALARY, PROMOTION, AND TENURE POLICIES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND FOUNDATIONS 2013 APPOINTMENT, SALARY, PROMOTION, AND TENURE POLICIES The following document outlines the Educational Administration and Foundations Department
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
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
Humber College Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning. Program Advisory Committee. Procedure Manual
Humber College Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning Program Advisory Committee Procedure Manual Message from the President On behalf of Humber College Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning,
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE COLLEGE OF NURSING AND HEALTH PROFESSIONS PEER REVIEW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE COLLEGE OF NURSING AND HEALTH PROFESSIONS PEER REVIEW The College of Nursing and Health Professions Peer Review Process follows requirements stipulated in the AFUM contract
Faculty Workload Policies at Public Universities
ACADEMIC AFFAIRS FORUM Faculty Workload Policies at Public Universities Custom Research Brief Research Associate Ashley Greenberg Associate Research Director Sarah Moore February 2013 2 of 12 3 of 12 Table
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
