Each program will analyze a variety of data during the program review process (see chart). The data will originate from a variety of sources. Data provided by the institution will be data that is reported as official information for the institution. Institutional data may be accessed from the program review page. Once the data is gathered, the program analyzes the data to determine strengths and areas needing improvement regarding the program’s quality, productivity, and viability. Once the major findings have been identified, the program outlines a plan for improving the program across these three areas. The program then discusses planned allocations and resources to be dedicated to the program’s improvement. If a program has been identified as a triggered review, the program must include a plan for increasing productivity above the threshold program. The analysis will be submitted via a program review narrative utilizing data to support major findings. The narrative should be a maximum of 2 pages in length.
Once the comprehensive program review is completed at the departmental level, the program review narrative is submitted to the respective dean for review by March 1. The dean will review the material and sign-off on the document with an option to add comments. The narrative along with the dean’s signature sheet is forwarded to the Provost’s Office by April 1.
**The Board of Regents requires the completion of a CPR form preview and the attachment of the attachment of the completed program review document (will download in MSWord format).
Viability |
Productivity |
Quality |
Relevancy of Curriculum: To prepare students to demonstrate mastery of the program outcomes; To prepare students for professional world (Program) Available Budget Resources: To support teaching, research, and service efforts as appropriate to program and institutional mission (College/Department/Program) Teaching, Scholarship, and Service Contributions: To support the goals and mission of the institution, University System, and state (Program) |
Faculty Scholarly Productivity: Number of Publications, Presentations, and Grants (number submitted, number funded, amount of funding) (Program) Faculty Professional Development: Number of Professional Development Activities (Program) Course Offerings: Student Credit Hour Production; Number of Service Courses Offered (if applicable) (Institution/Program) Student Retention: Attrition/Retention Rates of Majors (Institution) Student Contributions: Number of Graduates; Number of Graduates Passing Professional or Qualifying Exams (Institution/Program) |
Faculty: Number of Faculty; Diversity of Faculty (race, gender, rank, tenure); Qualifications/Expertise (Institution/Program) Faculty Service Projects: Types of Projects (Program) Faculty Scholarly Productivity: Types of publications, presentations, and grants (internal, external)(Program) Faculty Professional Development: Types of Professional Development Activities (Program) Students: Qualifications (Selectivity/Admission Standards) (Program) Curriculum: Coherency (logical sequence; appropriate for major; appropriate for program outcomes); Currency (up-to-date; based on latest research of discipline); Learning Experiences (design; appropriateness for program outcomes) (Program) Learning Space/Work Space: Adequacy; Condition (Program) Library Offerings: Currency; Adequacy (Library) Technology: Software; Hardware; Computing Labs (Institution/Program) Accreditation: Findings of accrediting body (College/Program) |