(A) Introduction
(1) An effective academic program review
process is essential for the health of Shawnee state university's academic
programs. The academic program review process strives to ensure the quality and
academic integrity of all programs through continuous program improvement. At
its most basic, the program review process is simply a review of the good
works, processes, procedures, and measured learning outcome results that
programs develop as they strive for continuous improvement.
(2) Program review is a best practice in
american higher education that involves stakeholders in the continuous
improvement process. Such a review includes an assessment of past and current
performance that is used to inform future directions and decision making. Those
charged with overseeing and coordinating program review activities should be
engaged in some aspect of assessment and program review year-round.
(3) The academic program review process
provides an opportunity for program faculty and administration to evaluate the
goals and effectiveness of a program and make appropriate changes that will
lead to improvement in the quality of instruction and curricular requirements,
improved career and life preparation for students, and effective and efficient
use of university resources.
(B) Purpose
(1) Assist programs in the identification,
evaluation
, and assessment of their mission and
goals and the development of short and long-term strategic plans.
(2) Assist programs in the determination of
their relationship to the mission of the university, college,
and department
, or
school.
(3) Assist programs
in assessing the quality of instruction, instructional methodology, student
learning, and the strengths and challenges in their curriculum.
(4) Provide programs the opportunity to
compare their curriculum, resources, and facilities with those at peer
institutions.
(5) Assist programs
in the identification of existing resources and determination of the resources
needed to carry out identified mission and goals.
(6) Assist the university in the evaluation
of the value, quality, effectiveness and efficient use of resources for the
academic programs at Shawnee state
university.
(7) Provide
direction and priorities for the university that can be used for needs
assessment, resource allocation, and planning.
(8) Provide structure, a plan of action, and
information for continuous program improvement.
(9)
Academic program
review is not intended to place a program under discontinuation or warehousing
(or a "watch list") as a result of the review. Rather, program review is
intended to provide a constructive and formative review to the program. In the
event discontinuation or warehousing of a program is needed, it is to occur via
a separate program closure process.
(C) Definitions
(1) Academic program - refers to any and all
coherent instructional activities of Shawnee state university and includes
degree and certificate programs,
concentrations, and other non-degree curricular entities, such as the
honors and general education programs.
(2) Degree program - refers to any prescribed
course of study which constitutes an area of specialization leading to a
recognized degree. This is the same as the term "discipline specialty" used in
reporting to the u.s. department of education's
integrated postsecondary education data system
(IPEDS)
higher education general information
survey (HEGIS). In baccalaureate degrees or higher, the term "degree
program" is the same as "major."
Degree programs must be significantly
distinct from one another. Where two proposed degree programs have sixty
percent or more of their program course requirements in common, they may be
classified as concentrations within a single degree program, rather than as
separate degree programs. When deemed appropriate by their college dean,
programs with curricular links (for example, associate and baccalaureate
programs in the same area or programs with concentrations, minors, or
associated certificates) will be combined into a single review.
(3) Preliminary self-study -
refers to a structured reflection of a program's faculty, staff, students, and
alumni concerning the educational effectiveness of its academic program. It is
not a description of the unit, but a data- and constituent-informed analysis
that leads to the identification of key issues and recommendations of potential
steps to address them.
(4) On-site
visits and external reviewer reports - on-site visits by external reviewers are
not mandatory, but generally recommended, and ought to be considered a
justifiable expense in conducting a proper program review.
(5) Final program review report - the end
product of a program review shall take the form of a final report, which
includes recommendations and a timeline for their implementation.
(6) Interim progress report - the provost,
upon consideration of the final program review report, can mandate a special
review and interim progress report. Such interim progress report shall be
conducted under the procedures approved for a regular program review.
(D) Academic program review
(1) Organization
(a) The cornerstone of a program review is
the development of the academic program's preliminary self-study. Following its
submission, a review to clarify, verify, and amplify the self-study will be
conducted by external reviewer(s) appointed by the respective dean or
the appropriate administrator within the office
of the provost in consultation with the unit under review.
(b) The preliminary self-study becomes the
core component of the final program review report, which will be submitted to
the respective college dean. In the case of non-degree curricular entities,
such as the honors or general education programs and similar non-departmental
academic programs, final reports will be submitted to
the appropriate administrator within the
office of the provost.
(2) Timeline
(a) Programs will be scheduled to undergo
review on a recurring five-year cycle. Program reviews shall be scheduled so
that no department shall have to conduct more than one program review per
academic year, except in cases when departments are home to more than five
programs or when a previous review requires a more frequent program review.
Reviews, when possible, should be spread out along the five-year cycle to
evenly distribute a department's program review efforts.
(b) Whenever possible, programs with outside
accreditation will be put on a program review schedule that will allow those
programs to complete review and analysis for the accreditation self-study with
a timeline for submission that corresponds with the university's program review
cycle.
(c) Programs that are
accredited by an outside body may submit their most recent self-study produced
to satisfy accreditation in place of the final program review report. The dean
of the program's college may require a supplemental report, providing data or
material required in the standard review (as outlined in
this guide
the
academic program review guide) if such information is not sufficiently
up-to-date or not found in
their
the program's accreditation study.
(3)
Annual
data
In addition to a periodic program
review, this policy also stipulates each academic program submit quantitative
data on degree programs to the office of the provost on an annual basis. These
annual data will serve to track the development of academic programs over time
and provide quantitative data for the program's next five-year review or
interim progress report. The office of the provost shall issue guidelines that
specify any supplemental data required in the annual report from each academic
program.
(E) Procedures
The president or his/her
their designee
will ensure the establishment of procedures necessary to effectively implement
this policy. These procedures will be revised and developed based upon the
recommendations of the university faculty senate.