Five-Year Periodic Program Review

Periodic academic program reviews provide a systematic approach for documenting the quality of academic programs. Through this process, faculty and administrators work collaboratively to identify programs and areas that may need additional attention. The ultimate goal is to ensure program excellence and develop strategies for continuous improvement. Targets of the review are curriculum integrity, coherence of course offerings, quality of teaching, expertise of the faculty, and student learning outcomes. To be optimally meaningful, the program review is informed by data collected since the last program review. Thus, a program review is an assessment of the past, a statement of the present, and a plan for the future.

Goals of Program Review

• Improve the quality of the program
• Ensure the quality of instruction
• Document student learning outcomes
• Maintain currency in the discipline
• Assess the resource needs of the program to support academic planning
• Demonstrate accountability to specialized accreditation/approval bodies

Frequency of Reviews

• Programs that do not have professional accreditation – every 5 years
• Programs with professional accreditation - follow the accreditation cycle
• Programs with concerns may be required to have more frequent reviews or follow-ups

Steps in the Process

1. Dean notifies Chair in Fall-A that review will commence in subsequent Fall-B Semester
2. Chair identifies faculty to compile Self-Study by end of Spring-B Semester
3. External Reviewer(s) selected and notified by end of Spring-A Semester
4. External reviewer(s) conduct on-site visit in Fall-C Semester
5. External reviewer(s) submit Final Review by early Spring-C Semester
6. Dean and Chair meet with Provost to discuss findings and implications of Review
7. Provost, Dean, and Chair produce a memorandum of understanding that contains:
   1. Statement of overall academic health of the program
   2. Agreed upon changes to curriculum or other issues that need to be addressed
   3. Identification of resource needs
   4. Time table to address identified issues

Required Sections of the Self-Study

(see Key Areas for Program Review for sample guiding questions)

• Mission and history
• Program policies and processes
• Program content, learning outcomes and assessment
• Program relationship to other programs and/or degree levels
• Student demographics, retention and completion; alumni and employer satisfaction
• Program resources (faculty, technology, library, facilities, etc.)
• Future directions/strategic plans (internal and external environment)

Specific Data to be included in Self-Study (Provided by Institutional Research)

• Student information: demographics, enrollment, retention and completion data
• Alumni information: career and further education
• Instructional delivery information: course enrollments and credits delivered by modality, core faculty workload, adjunct utilization
• Assessment information: APAR reports, use of data from the assessment of student learning outcomes

Potential Outcomes of Periodic Program Review

• Accommodations as an excellent program with no issues to address
• Accommodations as a quality program, with minor or few issues to address
• Program needing significant improvement within a specified time frame
• Program identified for phase-out

Within 90 days of the report of the external reviewer, the program shall develop an action plan detailing how the program plans to build on the strengths and address any weaknesses identified.