4. Process & Procedures for Tier 3 Program Review: a) Schedule of reviews: Academic Affairs will schedule Tier 3 program reviews on a five year recurring interval. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will develop a 5-year review schedule that projects a review for all academic programs. That schedule will be updated annually and distributed to all academic departments and the Faculty Senate. The following is a suggested academic year timetable: April of year preceding review - notify departments of the forthcoming Tier 3 review November - arrange for external consultant visit December - first draft of program self-study report due January - review self-study draft comments and edits February - final self-study report completed March - preparation of program performance portfolio in support of self-study report April - external consultant site visit May - external consultant final report due October following review year - program improvement plan due to dean b) The Program Self-Study Report: The self-study report should be brief and concise and no more than 20 single-spaced pages in length. It should use the following outline as a guide. A. Introduction brief program history; relationship with other academic units; a clear statement of changes that have occurred in response to recommendations from the last review, and, where appropriate, recommendations independent of the review; B. Curriculum program objectives; curricular requirements; provide evidence that the curricular quality is as strong or stronger than similar programs in the state and nation; summary table listing the courses and the terms/sessions in which they have been offered since the last review; provide evidence correlating the assessment of student learning outcomes to program objectives and indicate changes made as a result of strategies employed by faculty; indicate complementary nature of the program with other essential programs or functions at WSU; identify duplication of work done in the program with work done in other programs or departments and suggest modifications to reduce duplication; describe how teaching effectiveness is assessed; describe cooperative efforts to ensure quality for program course requirements outside the department; C. Students verify current student demand and projected enrollment for the program; verify student satisfaction with the program learning experience; enrollment objectives; verify satisfactory placement of graduates (graduate school, jobs); D. Faculty verify that the faculty are qualified to teach the curriculum; verify that the faculty have maintained an active professional development process; provide evidence that the faculty are actively engaged in their discipline; provide evidence that the faculty have been scholarly, including the scholarship of teaching; verify that the program has an adequate number of qualified faculty to meet student demand; verify that teaching loads are not excessive; E. Service provide evidence that the program contributes to the mission and planning priorities of WSU; provide evidence that the program provides important service to the community; F. Resources describe the adequacy of physical facilities and space assigned to the program; verify that the program is provided adequate operating budgets for supplies, equipment and library resources; describe resource limitations to program growth; G. Other Information other information not mentioned above; c) Selecting and Scheduling an External Consultant: The academic department will be responsible for identifying and forwarding a list of 2-3 potential external program review consultants to the dean. The dean in consultation with the department will recommend a consultant to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for approval. Once approved, the consultant visit will be coordinated by the dean in cooperation with the department. Every effort should be made to schedule a site visit over a period of two days. d) Preparing for the Consultant Site Visit: The department is responsible for assembling documentation in support of its self-study report. Materials such as course syllabi, texts, laboratory manuals, and other course-related items should be available in a central location for review. In addition, examples of student work such as tests, projects, assignments and research should be available to the consultant. This is similar to "patterns of evidence" required by NCA. Every effort should be made to demonstrate student success. Examples of faculty scholarly work should also be available. e) Site Visit Interview: The consultant should conduct interviews with the following individuals or groups: department chair, faculty members of the department, undergraduate and graduate (if appropriate) students of the program, dean of the college, members of the program advisory board (if applicable), staff in the unit or department others from the University community who have some association with the program. f) Issues to be Addressed by the Consultant: The external consultant should be viewed as an outside quality auditor whose main responsibility is to assess the quality of the program. The consultant review should provide written recommendations that should be implemented to improve the quality of the program. Issues to be addressed will include but not be limited to the following: changes since the last 5-year review, proposed plans for the future, the relation of the department with other units, strengths and weaknesses of the program, opportunities for improving the program within existing resources, strengths and weaknesses of the program faculty, strengths and weaknesses of the department’s research and scholarly activity, student satisfaction with the program, staff and workload issues, adequacy of supporting services, student success, adequacy of the program assessment plan, effectiveness of the program in meeting University mission and goals. Further issues for consideration specific to the program may be identified by the department and dean. g) Distribution of the Consultant Report: Copies of the external consultant’s report shall be sent to the following offices: (1) department chair, (2) department faculty, (3) dean, (4) VPAA, and (5) President. h) The Quality Improvement Plan: Once the department has received the external consultant’s final report, it should begin to develop a quality improvement plan. The purpose of the plan is to ensure that the feedback obtained from the consultant is incorporated into program planning. The department may wish to include a detailed response to the consultant report in the plan. The Quality Improvement Plan should propose anticipated changes to the program that faculty and students can incorporate to benefit both the program and institution. The plan should be forwarded to the dean for comment by October 1 of the year following the consultant visit. The dean shall comment on the report directly to the department chair. The department shall have 30 calendar days to make any revisions and forward the final plan to the dean with a copy to the VPAA.
Pages to are hidden for
"Process Procedures for Tier Program Review a Schedule of"Please download to view full document