Program Prioritization

Transcription

1 University of Alberta, Department of and Film Studies 1 October 2015 Program Prioritization Department of Jonathan Warren York University

2 Contexts for prioritization Department of 1. Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Differentiation protocols to ensure a system that supports improved quality as well as social and economic development to contend with growing enrolment in a financially constrained environment to build on and distinguish among kinds of existing excellence found within post-secondary educational institutions, Strategic Mandate Agreements (SMAs)

3 Contexts for prioritization Department of 1. Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Differentiation protocols to ensure a system that supports improved quality as well as social and economic development to contend with growing enrolment in a financially constrained environment to build on and distinguish among kinds of existing excellence found within post-secondary educational institutions, Strategic Mandate Agreements (SMAs) 2. Institutional budget and planning pressures

4

5

6 Contexts for prioritization Department of 1. Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities Differentiation protocols to ensure a system that supports improved quality as well as social and economic development to contend with growing enrolment in a financially constrained environment to build on and distinguish among kinds of existing excellence found within post-secondary educational institutions, Strategic Mandate Agreements (SMAs) 2. Institutional budget and planning pressures 3. US experiences and Robert Dickeson 4. University of Guelph report

7 Department of

8 A three-phase AAPR process Department of 1. Data collection and assessment a. June to December 2013: Community consultation and communication strategy plan; Finalize academic and administrative program lists; Develop criteria and templates for program information; Gather data for templates; and Nomination process for task forces. b. January to May 2014: Distribute templates; Programs templates completed and submitted; Task forces established and trained. c. June to November 2014: Task forces to review submissions, complete program assessments and prepare reports. 2. Response 3. Evaluation

9 Department of Program Information Form (PIF) Nine impossibly data-dense, timesensitive, all-important mini-essays 1. Advancing York University 2. External demand 3. Internal demand 4. Quality of inputs 5. Quality of outcomes 6. Program effectiveness 7. Financial sustainability 8. Opportunity analysis 9. Final comments

10 Department of Program Information Form (PIF) Simultaneous collection of data from all Academic and Administrative units 1. Advancing York University 2. External demand 3. Internal demand 4. Quality of inputs 5. Quality of outcomes 6. Program effectiveness 7. Financial sustainability 8. Opportunity analysis 9. Final comments

11 Each with a set length and weight 1. Advancing York University 500 words (15 points) 2. External demand Department of 500 words (15 points) 3. Internal demand 400 words (15 points) 4. Quality of inputs 500 words (10 points) 5. Quality of outcomes 500 words (15 points) 6. Program effectiveness 400 words (10 points) 7. Financial sustainability 400 words (15 points) 8. Opportunity analysis 300 words (10 points) 9. Final comments 200 words (0 points)

12 Criterion 1 Advancing York University Department of Describe the central contributions of this program to the advancement of York s mission, vision and priorities. Programs should consider key documents such as the University Academic Plan priorities, the White Paper and the Strategic Research Plan as well as Faculty-specific Academic and Research Plans. Describe any significant contextual changes that have had an impact on your program in the period between and , and how your program has evolved in response to these changes (programs that commenced after will necessarily have to adjust their response to this question including, for example, in the case of quite recent programs that might focus on the contextual factors that influenced the development of the program). What factors affect the program s future plans, and what might be done to address limitations and/or reduce their impact given current resource constraints?

13 Program Information Form (PIF) Department of presuming a ready access to, familiarity with, facility in accounting for departmental, faculty, institutional, sectoral, provincial, and national data.

14 Department of

15 Available data and statistics were most often descriptive of departmental attributes, while PIFs required assessments of individual programs within departments. Department of Obliging unit chairs to account for apportionments of resources, costs, demands, etc. by program. Anxiety Confusion Resentment Denial Resignation Suspicion Resilience Creativity

16 Department of Scoring Rubrics

17

18 During Summer 2014, a 16-member Task Force reviewed and scored PIFs from 267 academic programs. 14 faculty members, 1 undergraduate, and 1 graduate student Department of 33 high-level recommendations

19 Recommendations Arising from Overall Scoring Results 1. Analyze on a priority basis whether programs located in the lower left quadrant of Figure 1 (especially those falling outside the mid-range square) can be delivered more effectively or should be discontinued. Department of

20 Department of

21 Department of Why is the central square not perfectly balanced among the four quadrants, but instead closer to the upper half of the scatterplot? The square represents the mid-range of the absolute scores that could be assigned under the rubric, whereas the quadrants are based on the average scores that were actually assigned to programs. The placement of the square shows that on average, the Task Force assigned lower-end scores for sustainability criteria. By contrast, average scores for quality criteria were in the midrange.

22 Recommendations Arising from Overall Scoring Results 1. Analyze on a priority basis whether programs located in the lower left quadrant of Figure 1 (especially those falling outside the mid-range square) can be delivered more effectively or should be discontinued. Department of

23 Recommendations Specific to Graduate Programs 2. Provide all graduate programs with clear information about their revenue and cost structures and encourage them to explore less resource-intensive operating models that do not significantly impair quality. 3. Articulate an explicit sustainability strategy for every graduate program based on linkages to undergraduate programs or other sources of support. 4. Provide graduate programs with the flexibility and autonomy to respond more nimbly to changes in the graduate education landscape. Department of 5. Define a clear identity and target audience for all Masters degree programs in light of changing graduate student pathways and increased external competition. 6. Require Masters programs to be well established and sustainable, with demonstrated quality outcomes, before launching a PhD in the area. 7. Implement proactive steps to promote timely completion in every PhD program.

24 Recommendations on Leveraging Academic Strengths to Grow Student Demand 12. Develop a coordinated, externally focused strategy for recruiting students that includes a more active role for faculty in partnership with administrative units. 13. Strike a task force to forge new strategies to cultivate external demand through distinctive new combinations of existing programs. Department of 14. Reduce duplication of similar skills or methodology courses wherever possible and optimize the service teaching role of programs or units with leading expertise in these areas, especially those that are experiencing low or declining external demand. 15. Address unmet need for writing and math skills support among York students, address the state of undergraduate research skills training, and increase and promote the University s commitment to critical skills education more generally.

25 Recommendations on Knowing and Looking After Our Students 16. Solicit and integrate student feedback on program satisfaction more frequently in between full cyclical reviews, and at different stages of program completion. 17. Further improve and monitor effectiveness of student advising across the University. 18. Track career and other pathways of York graduates more systematically across all programs and use this information to strengthen curricular and extra-curricular programming and student recruitment. Department of Recommendations to Promote Internal Collaboration (and Reduce Internal Competition) 19. Create or re-activate pan-university mechanisms to more clearly differentiate areas of study in which York offers multiple programs. 20. Prioritize co-planning, resource sharing, and collaboration among interdependent or similar programs.

26 Recommendations on Rethinking Academic Planning from the Bottom Up 21. Provide programs or units with meaningful and timely information for improving quality and sustainability of existing programs. Identify early warning signals that will trigger automatic analysis of program changes and potential support needs. 22. Encourage faculty experimentation with new academic content as well as digital, technology enhanced and blended learning methodologies, in appropriate contexts where they can improve academic quality or resource efficiency. Department of 23. Create mechanisms to pilot, develop and test curricular or pedagogical innovations before they are proposed as new programs. 24.Make processes and criteria for approving new curricular programs more rigorous and realistic with respect to evidence of sustainability.

27 25. Require cyclical program reviews to define more clearly the level of demand and other conditions which must be met in order to recommend that a program continue, as well as roles and responsibilities to take necessary actions to address quality or sustainability challenges in programs recommended to continue. Recommendation on New Revenue Generating Activities 26. Ensure colleagues at the program and unit level have access to market research services and other supports to develop new revenue generating activities. Department of Recommendations on Moving Quality from Good to Exceptional 27. For high-demand curricular programs with clear plans to innovate and improve quality, address the need for additional faculty resources whether through appointments or reorganization of existing resources.

28 28. Examine the potential benefits and risks of diversifying teaching capacity with alternate stream appointments and practitioner instructors, especially where programs express an interest. 29. Strengthen coordinating infrastructure to support programs interested in creating more experiential learning opportunities, especially those which are work- or community-focused. 30. Address high priority physical infrastructure deficits such as those identified in s of the Academic Task Force Report. Department of Recommendations on Optimizing Data for Academic Planning 31. Further improve the quality and transparency of institutional data to facilitate effective planning at the program and unit levels.

29 32. Clarify the budget attribution principles that are used to generate program and unit-level financial data in the Faculties and foster constructive dialogue on resource and cost allocation. 33. Track research, scholarly, and creative activity over time to better understand patterns and changes in activity levels and research impact, and to benefit University reputation. Department of

30 Department of

31

32 Department of The situation for

33 30 Years of Data AAPR

34 Numerous best pratices and effectiveness strategies identified in the Task Force Report are in place in Department of Define program identity compared to similar programs elsewhere Launch new curricula on emerging issues in field Connect with alumni Pursue external recognition (publications, awards, rankings) Offer summer courses to increase access Create distinctive online courses Design interdisciplinary electives for professions Incorporate mandatory Dissertation Proposal Workshop Track program progress of PhD candidates rigorously Publish in leading venues Establish credit-transfer agreements with colleges

35 Department of

36 Department of

37 Department of

38 Ongoing planning aims to enhance our ability to Department of Maintain meaningful grasp of program data Track student pathways after graduation Involve external community in experiential learning Partner with local school boards to network with prospective students Provide community partners with learning programs Understand and respond to student satisfaction indicators

39 Department of

40 Department of BA

41 Department of MA PhD

42 Department of Creative Writing BA

43 Department of

44 Department of Our challenges: Maintain and build quality Improve sustainability

45 Department of Our challenges: Maintain and build quality Improve sustainability Appointments Curriculum Pedagogy Experiential Education Internationalization Retention

46 Appointments Curriculum Pedagogy Experiential Education Internationalization Retention Moving towards realizing these priorities Department of What are the unit-level lessons of the AAPR?

47 The unit-level lessons of the AAPR Prioritization is always already ongoing. It is better, therefore, to be actively engaged in it rather than in denial about it. All programs believe in their own intrinsic value. Protestations of the value of do not distinguish us effectively. Department of Coordinated planning even when initiated centrally need not be an omen of annihilation. Programs that were mindful of their location within an institutional mission were often already excelling. Those that were defiantly oblivious to such contextualization were often at risk. Evidence is powerful. Even when data are dismal, a unit s awareness of its predicament and clear planning to contend with it realistically are compelling to decision-makers.