Six Stages of Academic Program Review
Embedded Files
Stage 1. Program Self-Study
Stage 1. Program Self-Study
The Program Self-Study is a comprehensive report addressing every aspect of the academic program. The report should include a discussion of the findings and recommendations of recent Annual Departmental Reports. It should address the program’s vision, mission, and goals, and make recommendations for development based on an overall program analysis. The purpose of the self-study is to allow faculty, students, and administration to consider a department’s recent accomplishments and challenges and engage in a forward-looking planning process. Thus, the self-study enables the program to tell its own story to the external review team and the university administration.
A thorough and thoughtful self-study will be factual and explicit in assessing a program’s past efforts and status. It will also outline a realistic course of action for future development. The self-study provides the basis for the entire review process, and it is crucial that the report cover all aspects of the program. The most useful self-study is a thorough but succinct, honest assessment of the department/program. An incomplete self-study may confuse reviewers about the program or lead to an unproductive site visit.
The self-study must be a product of a designated committee of the program faculty. Program faculty are in the best position to raise and respond to any significant strategic and operational issues the program faces. Faculty are also in the best position to use the results of the review to improve the program. Department chairs and program directors should ensure that there is full faculty participation in the preparation of the self-study. All full-time faculty members in the program should participate in the composition of the self-study. At a minimum, all faculty must approve the self-study final draft at a faculty meeting prior to when the self-study is due.
In the Fall Quarter of the year the program writes the self-study, the Office of Institutional Research will provide a data report, aligned with the Academic Review Template in Appendix B, summarizing all available data since the previous Academic Program Review. The self-study report (excluding appendices) should not exceed 20 pages. The self-study report is to be approved by majority vote of the faculty, provided to the Provost and then sent to the Department of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness (DAIE) by the end of the Fall quarter.
Back to Top
Stage 2. External Review
Stage 2. External Review
The external review team provides an objective outsider’s perspective on the quality of the program. After reviewing the self-study and making a virtual campus visit, the external review team will compile a report that provides an evaluation of the program.
The role of the external reviewers is critical to the success of the program review process. Each program review includes a visit by at least two external reviewers. The external reviewers promote comparison with similar programs at other institutions, provide faculty and administrators a wider perspective, and ensure that the academic program under review is current and not isolated from the larger academic community. External review candidates are selected by the end of the Winter Quarter.
Each program under review will be asked to nominate at least six candidates (outside of PAU) for the external review team. The Provost will make the final selection of two candidates and will negotiate all arrangements for the candidates’ participation in the External Review. The nominees can have no conflicts of interest regarding the program under review (e.g., not a former employee, co-author, alumni, dissertation advisor, relative or close friend of current faculty member, etc.). In general, the external reviewers should:
hold the terminal degree appropriate to the department/program under review, or in the case of professional programs, have a record of accomplishment in the field.
have a record of distinguished scholarship and/or professional experience appropriate to the program under review.
be recognized as an active member of scholarly and/or professional societies appropriate to the program under review.
be employed at a recognized university or college at or above the rank of Associate Professor.
At least one reviewer should:
have current or prior experience at the level of department chair or higher.
have prior experience relevant to accreditation, assessment, and/or program review process.
hold an appointment in a prestigious and nationally recognized program or a program that the department/program wishes to emulate.
Virtual Review Period
Working with DAIE, the self-study director will make available all requested documentation and provide reviewers with full access to all courses within the program during the agreed-upon review period (usually 4 weeks). Access must continue until the external reviewers complete their report. Online access means that reviewers should be able to fully engage the online environment for evaluation (observer of faculty and students’ roles).
The DAIE constructs the itinerary for synchronous virtual meetings in consultation with the program.
The external reviewers should meet separately with the provost and program administrator at the first meeting. This meeting is used to welcome the external reviewers, provide an overview of the program, and answer questions. DAIE schedules this meeting.
They should then meet with students and alumni, program faculty (full-time and adjunct), program administrators, instructional designers, information technology services, the director of online programs, and other stakeholders to discuss all aspects of the program.
At the end of the virtual site visit, the external reviewers provide a preliminary report at an exit meeting with the program administrator and the provost. DAIE schedules this meeting.
DAIE will email the itinerary to the external reviewers and the PAU community participating in the external review.
Following the review week, the external reviewers will correspond solely with the DAIE if additional information is needed.
External Review Report and Responses
The external review report will follow the format of the External Review Report Guidelines provided in Appendix C.
One reviewer will focus on the online delivery system
One reviewer will focus on program content
However, the reviewers will work together to submit one cohesive report.
Once the external review report is submitted, DAIE will distribute the report to the program director/department chair to review the reviewers’ responses.
The program faculty will coordinate with the department chair to write their response to the external reviewer report and submit that to DAIE within 4 weeks after the external reviewer report is received.
Both responses should mirror the structure of the External Review Report Guidelines provided in Appendix C.
DAIE will then share the department program response of the external report with the PAU Assessment Committee.
Back to Top
Stage 3. Internal Review – The Assessment Committee Recommendations
Stage 3. Internal Review – The Assessment Committee Recommendations
Once the external review report is submitted and the program’s response is sent to DAIE, DAIE will share both pieces of information with the PAU Assessment Committee.
The PAU Assessment Committee has two weeks to review and comment on the external reviewers’ and program’s response to the report once they receive the external report and program’s response.
When making its recommendations, the Assessment Committee considers current structures in the program under review, program-specific goals and learning outcomes, the educational mission of the academic unit to which the program is assigned, and relevant resources to support the program. The Assessment Committee will prepare a written commentary informed by the materials reviewed for the review process. When appropriate, the Assessment Committee may note opportunities for further program development, including University-wide opportunities for program enhancement and interdisciplinary and collaborative educational efforts. No Assessment Committee member who is a member of the faculty of the program being evaluated will be present at the discussion of that program; however, the Assessment Committee may solicit information or advice from the Department Chair who oversees the program being evaluated or from anyone else the Assessment Committee believes can provide useful information.
Meeting with the Assessment Committee and Program:
At the next Assessment Committee Meeting, after the two-week material review:
The first 30 minutes of the meeting, PACmeets among themselves to share their final comments on the information received, to discuss the committee's findings and to list questions.
In the second 30 minutes of the meeting, the committee invites the APR program administrators to discuss any questions.
After the meeting:
The Assessment Committee will write out its final recommendations and executive summary in Appendix D to the Provost and get PAC signature approval of the recommendations after the meeting.
DAIE will share the executive summary, external report, and comments within a week of the Assessment Committee meeting, with copies to the program administrator(s). Any of those recipients may supplement Assessment Committee recommendations with their own recommendations to the Provost, with copies to all others.
Back to Top
Stage 4 & 5. Action Plan & MOU
Stage 4 & 5. Action Plan & MOU
The value of academic program review rests on its process, outcomes, and usefulness. Because the process and outcomes are developed to improve educational opportunities, curriculum quality, and program relevance, it is essential that universities make appropriate use of the results. The program creates a draft of the Action Plan for the Assessment Committee to review and approve so it can be sent to the Provost to help create the MOU.
Draft of Action Plan: The program takes the executive summary of the recommendations and drafts an action plan.
See Appendix E
Action Plan Review
The action plan draft is reviewed by the Assessment Committee & Department Chair, and feedback is sent back to the program to update the draft.
The initial Action Plan is approved by the Assessment Committee.
The Assessment Committee approves the initial Action Plan to be sent to the Provost.
Stage 5. MOU
The final stages of program review are the blueprint for evidence-based decision-making that affects academic planning at all levels of the institution. It culminates in an action plan and a memorandum of understanding (MOU).
MOU: The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in the program review process is an agreed-upon set of priorities and goals among the provost and program administrator(s) based on the program’s Action Plan. It should include a time frame and estimated costs for each plan, where applicable, as well as an indication of whether the plan requires new resources and, if so, the likely source of those resources. The MOU should be considered in the budget process. The parties to the MOU may modify it by mutual agreement.
Faculty Stipend: After the signing of the MOU, the program will receive a standard stipend for program review to be distributed to faculty as the program deems appropriate. The Provost's Office will contact the program administrator and request a list of program faculty members who are to receive stipends and the corresponding stipend amount for each person. The standard stipends for program reviews is to be distributed to faculty only (not staff or administrators) and the total is $4000 for the program under review.
Back to Top
Stage 6. Annual Report
Stage 6. Annual Report
DAIE will enter the contents of the MOU into PAU’s assessment management system for annual follow-up.
For the five-year action plan, the program administrator(s) and department chairs will report on the annual progress of implementing the MOUs in that program/department during that year by the end of June. The program will work with and get final approval of the MOU Annual Report from the department chair before it is sent to DAIE.
DAIE will share the MOU Annual Report with the Provost’s Office and the Assessment Committee.
Back to Top or APR Homepage
Page updated
Report abuse