Program Review Procedures and Timeline
Program Review Five-Year Cycle
Every certificate and degree program is scheduled for review once every five years:
Program Review Annual Timeline
- April: Notification of programs under review to Dean's Offices and program points of contact by Director of Academic Excellence and Assessment. Programs will also receive links to Qualtrics self-study form.
- May/June: Programs receive standard data-sets from Director of Academic Excellence and Assessment.
- Summer: Programs may request individual consultation with Director of Academic Excellence and Assessment.
- September: Program review workshop held.
- December: Programs must submit completed self-studies by December 15th.
- January - March: Graduate and Undergraduate Councils perform self-study reviews and make recommendations to the Office of the Provost.
- April-June: Associate Provosts provide draft reports to college deans for review
and potential appeal.
- April or June: Associate Provosts make final recommendations to Board of Governors for review and approval.
- July: Programs receive program review summary, institutional recommendation, follow-up
actions, and suggestions.
Program Review Graduate and Undergraduate Council Procedure
- Every certificate and degree program scheduled for review in a particular year must complete a Qualtrics-based self-study form by December 15th of the review year.
- Program self-studies are reviewed by the Graduate or Undergraduate Council over the period of January through March.
- One member of the reviewing council is assigned to each program as a primary reviewer with at least an additional second reviewer assigned to every program as well; reviewers may not serve on reviews for programs within their own departments.
- Both reviewers are responsible for reviewing and evaluating the self-study documents. Reviewers may contact the program for additional information or clarification as needed.
- The primary reviewer completes a Qualtrics-based review summary. The secondary reviewer makes any necessary edits to the review summary and the two reviewers propose an initial recommendation concerning the program.
- The primary reviewer presents the review summary to the relevant Council and makes the initial recommendation.
- The relevant Council discusses the summary and initial recommendation. The reviewers answer questions about the program based upon their review self-study report. If Council members are present from the program, they may provide factual information about the program but are expected to refrain from comments that are intended to influence the Council's decision.
- The relevant Council votes on its recommendation to the Office of the Provost concerning the program. If the program has requested designation as a Program of Excellence, a separate vote is held on this request. Council members who are associated with a program under review are expected to abstain from the vote.
- The relevant Council also discusses and comes to agreement on any specific actions required of the program, including the due date and content of any required interim reports, and any general recommendations or suggestions to be conveyed to the program.
- The primary reviewer edits and finalizes the review summary, including the final recommendation of the Council and its follow-up actions and suggestions.
- The relevant Associate Provost edits and collates the final review summaries and submits them for action by the Board of Governors at their April or June meeting.
- Programs receive the summary review with requested follow-up actions and suggestions
upon approval by the Board of Governors.