Effective: September 15, 1999

PURPOSE

To establish systematic procedures for carrying out graduate degree program reviews.

AUTHORITY/SOURCE

Provost
Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies
Dean of Graduate Studies
SACS: Section III - Program Effectiveness
BOR Memorandum

 POLICY

To address the issue of degree program quality control, the University must establish program review procedures to determine the nature and extent of progress. Decisions regarding program quality and the need to address critical issues related to resource utilization to enhance program quality should be important outcomes of the process. Allocation of resources should be matched with expected and desired program outcomes and enhancements. To this end, normally, each graduate program must be reviewed at least once every five years. To the extent possible, reviews should be synchronized so that they are carried out with accreditation reviews. Information compiled for the accreditation reviews, and the required common data fields listed in the procedures below, should be included as part of the overall review process. In cases where no accreditation review is required of the program, those programs must include the common data fields below and will have the option of providing any other additional information.

 PROCEDURE

The Office of the Provost establishes a five year program review cycle covering all academic programs. To the extent possible program reviews will be synchronized with accreditation reviews and reviews of covering all academic programs including reviews of undergraduate programs. The cycle begins in 1999-2000.

The Dean of Graduate Studies will work with the Provost’s Office and the academic deans or their designees in graduate program reviews.

One year in advance of review, the relevant academic unit shall establish a graduate program review committee. In addition to the committee and independent of it, there must be at least one reviewer external to the University. The committee shall submit to the Office of Graduate Studies at least three names of potential external reviewers. The Dean of Graduate Studies will select from this list at least one of the nominees to serve as an external reviewer.

In addition to any accreditation information, each program must present to the review committee and to the external reviewer (s) the following data covering the previous five years:

1.    Accountability and Planning Reports including among other data appropriate to the particular type of program being reviewed:

            a.      Expected program outcomes
            b.      Number of degrees awarded by level
            c.      Number of faculty teaching graduate courses
            d.      Number of students enrolled by level
            e.      Amount of external funding
            f.       Number of faculty citations; additional indices will be considered
            g.      Number of regular faculty publications in refereed journals
            h.      Number of scholarly books or other creative works
            i.       Number of minority students by level
            j.       Number of faculty with terminal degrees
            k.      Student course evaluations
            l.       Number of students on assistantships

2.    Department or individual research focus based on the University’s five themes.

3.    Other pertinent information related to the program’s national and international standing.

4.    Benchmarking data against   three similar programs at the University’s
       benchmark institutions, or at least three nationally recognized programs in the field.

5.    Evidence of student recruitment activities.

The review committee and the external reviewer (s) may gather and/or require that the unit submit other information it deems necessary to satisfy the review process. The Office of Graduate Studies will facilitate the gathering of benchmark data for the program being reviewed. The review committee and the external reviewer (s) must complete their respective reviews within six months, starting from the initial meeting of the committee and the engagement of the external reviewer (s) respectively.

The review committee and the external reviewer (s) will submit copies of their respective reports to the dean of the unit offering the program to the Provost, the Vice President for Research & Graduate Studies, and the Dean of Graduate Studies.

The dean and department chairperson will have six weeks to examine and respond to the report and shall by then present to the Provost, Vice President for Research & Graduate Studies, and Graduate Dean a plan for responding to the recommendations and suggestions contained therein.

The plan shall be incorporated into the annual departmental planning and accountability report.

The reviews and the response to it may be submitted to the BOR to satisfy the requirement that universities conduct their own program reviews.

Page last updated: November 19, 2002