Texas A&M University-Commerce
Procedure: INDEPTH ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW FOR SELF-IMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
Purpose: The purpose of academic program review is to provide a systematic evaluation of the quality of each academic program and its effectiveness in supporting the mission of the University. Regular review is required to ensure the continuing viability and appropriateness of the University’s programs and to meet the requirements of external accrediting agencies. Such reviews are formative in nature, use disciplinary criteria, include peer review, and are conducted by representatives of the academic unit, college, and/or administration.
Academic Program Defined: An academic program is defined as all of the following:
· a department or any academically coherent, distinctively functioning subdivision thereof;
· an academic unit whose tenured, tenure-track or non-tenure track full-time faculty are organized to deliver instruction in a single academic area (usually an approved major); and
· an academic unit that offers instruction leading to the awarding of degree.
Process: A five-year review cycle will be established for each of the academic programs. However, the Provost or Dean may request reviews of specific programs or departments outside the five year cycle. The Office of Institutional Research is available for consultation and for data collection and analysis.
Responsible Persons: Program self-evaluation is the responsibility of the entire program. Program members will be expected to provide individual responses to several items in the document to enable the individual compiling the self-evaluation report to prepare a comprehensive response to those items.
Format: The report format for program evaluation should serve as an outline for the departmental report.
Timeline: Program review reports will be initiated at the beginning of a semester and completed by the end of the semester. Upon receipt of the report, the dean of the college will evaluate the findings of the program review and the recommendations for program improvement/development. When necessary the department will be asked for additional information. After the dean has evaluated the report and approved the plan for program improvement/development, it will then be forwarded with the dean’s written recommendations to the Provost. The approved program recommendations will be shared with the Deans Council and representatives from the Faculty Senate. The program’s action plan will be finalized through negotiations between the Dean and the Provost. Approved plans will be included in the strategic planning and budgeting processes of the department, college and university.
The schedule is outlined as follows:
1. Dean notifies department to initiate indepth review prior to the beginning of the semester.
2. Program report is due to the dean at the end of the semester.
3. Dean evaluates report and approves the program plan within 30 days.
4. Approved plan is forwarded to the Provost Office and shared with the Deans Council and representatives of the Faculty Senate.
5. Approved plan becomes part of the next annual planning cycle.
Coordination with Other Reviews: Academic program reviews will be coordinated with external reviews (i.e., Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board) including accreditation self-study and visiting committee reports (i.e., AACSB, CACREP, NASM, CSWE) as well as any specifically required internal reviews. Programs scheduled for review that have undergone an externally mandated accreditation review during the previous five (5) years or in the same academic year may submit their accreditation self-study and visiting committee report in lieu of the academic program review self-evaluation report, with the understanding that items in the academic program review instrument not addressed in the accreditation self-study must be completed by the programs and submitted during their scheduled year of review. In particular, items in the academic program review self-evaluation instrument requiring a quantitative analysis must be submitted for the complete five-year period preceding the scheduled program review.
Dimensions: Program review covers many dimensions of the way a unit is functioning. A great deal of descriptive information is typically reported, including average class size, number of majors, and faculty resources.
Information about student learning and development is one of many aspects of the unit that is examined. (Assessment of academic programs determine whether students have learned what an academic program is designed to teach them and to give information faculty and administrators can use to improve the curriculum, pedagogy, and/or instructional support infrastructure, leading to improved student learning. The emphasis is on the overall academic program and the overall learning of a group of students as a result of the intended experiences in a particular program of study.) Assessment data should be collected regularly to provide a basis from which an evaluation may be made during the in-depth academic program review. Data collection will be facilitated in a collaborative manner between the Office of Institutional Research and the academic department.
The Report: The report will include assessment and evaluation of the following based on quantitative and qualitative data:
· Overview (optional)
· Curriculum
· Program Profile
· Student Profile
· Student Learning
· Student Achievements
· Faculty Profile
· Work Environment for the Faculty
· Fiscal Resources
· Planning and Evaluation Processes
· Summary of Self-Evaluation and Action Plan
· Feedback (optional)
Procedure Review: This procedure shall be reviewed by the Provost in consultation with the Deans Council on a regular basis.
References:
INDEPTH ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW FOR IMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - COMMERCE
REPORT GUIDELINES
I. OVERVIEW (OPTIONAL)
Present the mission statement (purpose) of the department along with the number and types of degree programs offered. Briefly summarize the major developments of the program during the preceding five (5) years.
II. CURRICULUM
1. Describe and evaluate the curriculum in relation to:
a. current disciplinary standards
b. present and future societal need of the program (based on research),
c. costs as indicated by average costs per credit hour based upon faculty salaries (Date supplied by Office of Institutional Research)
2. List the approved degrees, majors, minors and certifications offered by the program. Describe the current accreditation status of the program with any specialized external accrediting agency (if applicable). Do not include SACS.
3. Review the most recent Undergraduate and Graduate Catalog entries that describe the program. State whether or not the entries are current and complete.
Are the entries appropriate to the needs of today’s students?
Do they reflect the most contemporary thought?
Are they written to appeal to today’s students?
Provide corrected information if the following entries are not current or complete:
courses offered;
course requirements for all degrees, majors, minors and certifications;
admission requirements (criteria) that are different from university requirements; and,
completion requirements specific to each program being reviewed.
4. Provide a list of courses and the number of sections of each course (TABLE A) offered by the program to support
§ the curricular needs of other A&M-Commerce programs (e.g., Core Curriculum, and/or
§ the curricular or developmental needs of other institutions and/or agencies in the community (e.g., public schools).
How does the provision of such courses impact your program?
Present this list as TABLE A. (List of courses and number of sections for the past 5 years to be supplied by Office of Institutional Research.)
5. Provide a list of the courses offered by other A&M-Commerce departments or programs to meet the needs of your program. (Do not include Core requirements.)
Indicate beside each course whether the course is required or recommended. Present this list as TABLE B.
To what extent do these external courses impact the quality of your program?
6. Compare the courses and requirements of the program with equivalent programs in at least two peer institutions. (Attach relevant documentation.) If the requirements of your program are substantially different from those of the comparable programs, what is the rationale for the differences?
7. Describe any formal or informal process for curriculum development in the program, including the measures used for establishing and evaluating the curriculum. Describe the extent to which members of the program provide input into the formal or informal process.
1. Using the data provided by the Office of Institutional Research (TABLE I) on total semester credit hour production, discuss the impact on the program of total student demand for courses over the past five (5) years.
How has the program addressed, or made plans to address, any significant changes in overall SCH production and/or in SCH production by student classification?
2. Using the data provided by the Office of Institutional Research (TABLE II) on majors and minors, discuss the trend in the number of majors/minors in the program over the past five (5) years.
How has the program addressed, or made plans to address, any significant changes in the demand for the program’s courses or degree(s) by majors/minors?
Describe any efforts by the program to increase enrollment if student demand has remained static or decreased.
3. Using the data provided by the Office of Institutional Research on total degrees granted by majors and minors (TABLE III), evaluate the effectiveness of the program in graduating majors/minors during the past five (5) years.
Describe any efforts by the program directed toward retaining students during the same period of time
4. Has the program been flagged in the past five (5) years for any of the following reasons? What does this indicate about the program?
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) Flags:
Course that has not been taught in 3 years
Low degree program productivity for the past 5 years based on 1993 Coordinating Board standards—
-Undergraduate programs:
fewer than 15 graduates during five-year period = LOW productivity program
fewer than 40 graduates during five-year period = MODEST productivity program
-Graduate programs:
fewer than 10 graduates during five-year period = LOW productivity program
fewer than 30 graduates during five-year period = MODEST productivity program
Excessive number of courses approved for a discipline that does not offer an approved program (offerings exceed 21 hours.)
In addition to THECB flags named above, if the program has offered small classes (fewer than 10 students in an undergraduate course or 5 students in a graduate course) for three or more of the past five (5) years, discuss the implications of such a trend relative to the scheduling of courses. Refer to the Small Class Reports submitted to the A&M-System and available from the Provost’s Office.
5. Describe departmental orientation efforts for students in the program. To what extent do faculty members address career opportunities during orientation activities? Explain how the program evaluates departmental orientation efforts and how often the evaluation is conducted.
6. Describe the advisement process in the program, including the training and assignment of faculty advisers. Explain how the program evaluates the process and how often the evaluation is conducted.
IV. STUDENT PROFILE
1. Using data supplied by the Office of Institutional Research on student demographic characteristics (age, part or full-time, race, etc.), and average admission scores (ACT/SAT/GRE etc. and high school rankings, where appropriate) for majors and minors (TABLES IV & V), discuss the significant features of the majors/minors served by the program. Consider any trends noted over the past five (5) years and their impact on the program.
2. Using the data supplied by the Office of Institutional Research (TABLE III) on the
§ average number of years to graduation,
§ total hours of course work attempted,
§ course completion rates (required by SACS 1998 Criteria),
§ total hours of course work earned, and
§ average GPA for undergraduate students,
discuss whether the students in the program are graduating in a reasonable amount of time without taking an excessive number of hours.
If the program serves a significant number of part-time students, including students who are employed full-time, is class scheduling such that those can graduate in a reasonable amount of time?
V. STUDENT LEARNING
1. List the critical components, i.e., knowledge, abilities and skills, that students in the program are expected to learn. On what basis or authority were the components selected?
2. Provide a comprehensive matrix of the methods (e.g., lecture, small-group discussion, hands-on experience, use of multimedia) used by the faculty in the program to teach the critical components listed above.
Provide a comprehensive list of the methods (e.g., comprehensive exam, major field test, licensing exam, senior performance, peer review, portfolios) used to assess the level of student mastery of the critical components by graduation.
Describe how the results of the assessment have been used in the past five (5) years to upgrade the curriculum and enhance student learning.
3. How do members of the program foster an environment conducive to student learning (e.g., faculty accessibility; commitment to teaching; independent studies; field trips; student organizations; mentoring; opportunities for student research, presentations at conferences, or publications; guest speakers)?
What is the level of participation by students and faculty members in these activities? How are these student activities funded?
4. Discuss the effectiveness of student development services (e.g., recruitment, orientation, academic advising, tutoring, financial aid, counseling, student activities, student health services, student publications, career and placement services, assessment), library services, and instructional technology and distance learning in support of students in the program.
What efforts are made by the department to ensure that the faculty members in the program are aware of the full extent of such services?
VI. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENTS
1. Describe students’ academic achievements in the program over the past five (5) years in such categories as:
· attendance and presentations at professional meetings;
· writing of scholarly papers and publications;
· planning and involvement in research project;,
· recognition through prizes, awards, fellowships, training grants, or scholarships;
· participation in program planning; and
· membership on program, college, or university committees.
2. Estimate the value added to student skills and knowledge using measures such as:
§ employer surveys,
§ professional certification,
§
state
licensing examinations (required by SACS 1998 criteria).
§ admission to graduate school.
§ test results,
§ graduate surveys,
§
job
placement rates (required by SACS 1998 Criteria) and
§
other measures of accomplishments of
students who graduated within the past five (5) years.
VII. FACULTY PROFILE
1. Provide the following information on all full-time and part-time instructional personnel in the program. Include the data in TABLE C (available from Office of Institutional Research faculty database):
o name
o rank and year last promoted
o tenure status and year achieving tenure, if appropriate
o graduate faculty status
o degrees, years awarded, majors, institution awarding degrees
o meets SACS criteria , Section 4.8.2.2 & 3 (justify, if necessary for an exceptional case)
Each full-time and part-time faculty member teaching credit courses
leading toward the baccalaureate degree, other than physical education activity
courses, must have completed at least 18 graduate semester hours in the
teaching discipline and hold at least a master’s degree, or hold the minimum of
a master’s degree with a major in the teaching discipline (SACS Criteria,
Section 4.8.2.2).
Each full-time and part-time faculty member teaching credit courses
leading toward the master’s and specialist degree level must hold the terminal
degree, usually the earned doctorate, in the teaching discipline or a related
discipline (SACS Criteria Section 4.8.2.3).
Each full-time and part-time faculty member teaching credit courses
leading toward the doctoral degree must hold the earned doctorate in the
teaching discipline or a related discipline (SACS Criteria Section 4.8.2.3).
2. For the past five (5) years, show the instructional loads of each faculty. Include in table format (TABLE D) the FTEF for undergraduate instruction and FTEF for graduate instruction; FTEF for workload equivalency; and any compensated overload FTEF.
3. Using the data compiled by the program on full-time equivalent (FTEF) instruction, equivalencies and compensated overload (TABLE D) and the data on total semester credit hour production, discuss changes in the faculty workload over the past five (5) years. What is the impact of overloads, equivalencies and the use of part-time faculty and teaching assistants on the quality of instruction in the program?
4. In light of the goals of the program, current and projected SCH enrollment, and the size of the faculty, discuss the needs of the program with regard to instructional personnel. If additional positions for instructional personnel are needed to improve the program, what efforts have the program made to secure the additional positions?
5. If the program employs teaching assistants or assistant instructors, what are their responsibilities, how do they received orientation, what in-service training do they receive, how are they supervised, how are they evaluated, and how are the results of evaluations used to improve their teaching effectiveness?
6. Complete TABLE E (workload equivalencies or released time) TABLE F (compensated overloads) TABLE G (teaching activities), TABLE H (professional achievement/scholarly accomplishments) and TABLE G (professional service activities) for the full-time faculty members teaching in the undergraduate and graduate programs.
7. Briefly discuss the strengths of the faculty in the program with respect to teaching effectiveness (student ratings, peer review other indices), professional achievement/scholarship (program related) and professional service (program related. Discuss the impact of these strengths on the quality of the program.
VIII. WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR THE FACULTY
1. Has the program added faculty during the past five (5) years? If so, describe how the addition of these faculty enhance the program. Has the program lost faculty members in the past five (5) years? If so, discuss the reasons for leaving and the impact of this turnover on the program.
2. Describe opportunities provided by the university (e.g., teleconferences, computer training), the college or the department (e.g., mentoring of faculty members) that were utilized by faculty members in the program for professional growth and development over the past five (5) years.
Discuss ways in which the program was enriched through faculty growth and development during the same time.
Discuss ways in which additional resources or opportunities for faculty growth and development could be used to improve the program in the next five (5) years.
3. Describe any circumstances that curtail the professional growth and development of the faculty, e.g., overloads, lack of released time, large number of preparations, thesis supervision, specific budgetary constraints, lack ov availability of technology.
What strategies has the program developed to mitigate those circumstances?
4. Describe any changes in the availability and utility of space (classroom, laboratory, research, office, administrative, conference, storage, etc.) provided to the program over the past five (5) years.
How have these changes, or lack of changes, affected the quality of the program?
If additional space is needed to improve the program what efforts has the program made to secure the additional space?
5. Discuss the adequacy of equipment (classroom, laboratory, research, office, administrative, etc.) available to the program. If additional or more up-to-date equipment is needed to support the operation of the program, what efforts has the program made to secure the additional equipment?
6. Discuss the effectiveness of services provided by Business Affairs units (e.g. Grants and Contracts, Mail Services, Personnel, Physical Plant, Purchasing, University Police) in supporting the operation of the program.
IX. FISCAL RESOURCES
1. Using data supplied by Business Administration, include a spreadsheet or table (similar to sample below) of the department’s fiscal resources for the categories listed below that are applicable to the department for each year of the past five (5) years.
Include in the spreadsheet a line for the annual budget allocations and expenditures under each of the categories, followed by lines for other sources of state funds that have provided budgetary support for the department.
Fiscal Resources – Five Years
State Funds:
Faculty Salaries
Non-Faculty Salaries
Adjuncts
Graduate Assistants Not Teaching (GANTS)
Graduate Teaching Assistants (GATS)
Wages
Travel
Supplies
Contracted Services
Operation and Maintenance
HEAF
Non-State Funds
Totals
2. Include a spreadsheet or table of the department’s weighted semester hour productivity due to formula funding and tuition and fees. (Supplied by Office of Institutional Resesarch)
3. Discuss the impact of any significant changes, or lack of changes, in the fiscal resources available to the undergraduate program for the five year period.
Discuss the capability of the department to accomplish the short-term and long-term goals of the program with existing or projected resources.
If the department has both undergraduate and graduate components, discuss whether the department’s fiscal resources and productivity are adequate to support both components.
4. Describe the extent to which members of the program provide input into the internal (departmental) allocation of funds available to the program.
X. PLANNING AND EVALUATION PROCESSES
1. Provide a copy (or draft) of the program’s mission statement and the goals established for achieving its mission. (Each undergraduate and graduate program in the department should have a separate mission statement and goals.)
Describe how the program’s mission supports the university’s mission.
How are the students, faculty, and staff in the program made aware of the mission statement and goals of the program?
2. Describe the program’s planning process. If the program has not developed a formal planning process, provide a timeline for the development and implementation of such a process.
3. Discuss
how the program evaluates progress toward achieving its goals. Describe who is involved, how often progress
is evaluated, and how the results of evaluations are used to improve the
program.
4. What developments with respect to such
aspects of the program as curriculum, students, student learning, instruction,
faculty, fiscal resources, mission and goals, planning and evaluation are
envisioned during the next five (5) years?
How are these developments reflected in the goals of the program?
5. How is instruction by full-time and part-time faculty members in the program evaluated? How are the results of evaluations used to improve teaching effectiveness?
6. Identify measures in place in the program to identify and assess the perceptions of program quality by students currently in the program. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the program revealed by these assessments.
7. Identify any measures in place in the program to assess the performance of graduating or former students, e.g., program-wide comprehensive examinations, certification/licensing, examinations, graduate school acceptance, evaluations by employers.
If measures are in place, provide the numbers and percentages of graduates entering graduate school or entering employment related to their degrees and/or any informal data available that measure this aspect of student achievement over the past five (5) years.
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the program based on the results of these measures as applied to its graduates.
XI. SUMMARY OF SELF-EVALUATION
1. Describe 3-5 internal strengths of the program that demonstrate its effectiveness.
2. Describe 3-5 opportunities in the external environment (e.g., better prepared entering freshmen, career opportunities for graduates) that may have a positive impact on the program in the next five (5) years.
3. Describe 3-5 internal weaknesses of the program that diminish its effectiveness.
4. Describe 3-5 threats in the external environment (e.g., state funding, demographics) that may have a negative impact on the program in the next five (5) years.
5. Provide recommendations for improvements in the program. Include the rationale for each recommendation or refer to the item number above that provides the rationale.
Develop an action plan (that may extend over several years) to address areas of concern and/or emerging new directions for the program identified through this program review. This plan should be written in the form of objectives to be achieved with timelines for their achievement. It should include the components (e.g., curriculum, student recruitment/retention and learning, faculty recruitment and retention) above as appropriate.
XII. FEEDBACK
Please specify any changes to this document that would improve the program’s ability to report its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities or threats.
General Directions
FORMATTING
Normally, each program review report will include the following components:
·
Title
Page
Indepth Academic Program Review for Improvement and Development (IAPRID)
Program Name
Date (semester, year)
Department Chair/Program Coordinator
Compiler of Report
· Signature Page
Signature Page (the title)
The Following Statement: The findings and conclusions presented in this report have been reviewed by all full-time faculty in the program and approved by a majority of the full-time faculty.” (If the members of the program prefer that all faculty members should sign the page the page, remove the word “full-time.”)
Signature Line for each Faculty Member, with the name typed below the line
Date Signed (optional)
·
Responses (may substitute external accreditation
review, etc. as appropriate)
· Tables
· Appendices