Academic Program Review Workshop 2017 D. Kent Johnson, PhD

Overview New Program Review OAA 16-2 and 16-3 outlined a new program review process. The purpose of the review is to: Enhance academic program quality Assure institutional accountability Serve as the basis for planned change

Program Review Framework Annual Program Assessment Reports Department Annual Reports (formerly USAP) Program Review 7 year Cycle Department Profiles

Process New Program Review Seven Year Cycle OAA Support (workshop, cost support for external reviewers, in house consultants, draft review, etc.) Program Review based on self-study prepared by departmental faculty and staff Based on three documents – Departmental Profiles, Annual Assessment Report and Feedback, and USAP Reports (to be replaced with Annual Report beginning with 2018 cycle) Dean review and comment External peer review (comprised of at least two faculty external to the university and appointed by dean) and report Final Self Study reviewed by Dean and VCAA to discuss findings and plan of action

Program Review Report Outline (not to exceed 25 pages) Program Context Departmental Profile (IR) Strategic Direction (Source Document USAP Reports) Student Learning (Annual Assessment Reports) Faculty Students and Alumni Other Comments 5 year improvement plan

Program Review Timeline Self Study Development (Jan 2017-Dec 2017) January: Program Review Initiated Feb-March: Planning Workshop April – December: Collect and organize documents for self-study November: Peer review members identified and contacted December: Department submits draft self-study draft to College Dean

Program Review Timeline Self Study Review and Revision (Jan 2018 – May 2018) January: Dean/designee reads self-study and forwards comments to department Feb: Department revises draft and sends final self study report to dean Early March: External peer review team on-campus review of report* Early April: External peer review team submits report to the department* May: Department submits draft self-study draft to College Dean * For Accredited Programs completing Program Review and their Professional Accreditation in the same cycle, the External Peer Review for the Accreditation Visit replaces the Program Review Peer Review. Be sure to include their comments and your responses in the Program Review Report.

Program Review Elements Source Documents Primary Supporting Documents: Annual Assessment Reports USAP (to be replaced by Program Annual Report) Departmental Profile

Source Documents Annual Assessment Report Outline http://www.ipfw.edu/offices/assessment/reports/annual-assessment-report-template.html

Source Documents Unit Annual Report USAP goals/accomplishment/progress (will be replaced with new report in Fall 18) Faculty, student, and staff significant accomplishments in the areas of scholarship and creative endeavor, teaching and learning, service (only items not included in USAP goals) Alumni information such as survey information, career accomplishments, employment, professional and graduate school enrollment Resource allocation recommendations

Source Documents Departmental Profile Number of degrees awarded Credit Hours generated Number of majors and faculty Resources/budget Recruitment and retention rates Graduation rates

Program Review Elements I. Program Context Provide information that will help in understanding the program. Potential topics include: Program history Program demand/niches Accreditations & licensures Curriculum Major program changes since last review

Program Review Elements II. Departmental Profile Review and discuss trends and information derived from the Departmental Profile. Discuss progress on program viability metrics based on this information.

Program Review Elements III. Strategic Direction Using USAP report(s), reflect on and answer the following questions: How have your goals aligned and supported the mission of the department? How have they aligned with the strategic direction of the department? What goals have been achieved? (evidence (e.g., metrics used) to support conclusions) Additional resources to assist in accomplishing goals – how were resources used, what impact did they have on reaching goals. Identified needs that have not been met – how have unmet needs influenced your program.

Program Review Elements IV: Student Learning Using Annual Assessment report(s), reflect on and answer the following questions: What are your student learning outcomes (SLO’s)? Are Program’s SLO’s aligned with discipline practices and the Baccalaureate Framework? Are program learning outcomes current, relevant, and measurable? Are the assessment data adequate? Are they aligned with the learning outcomes? Provide specific examples from the Annual Assessment reports. What have you learned from an examination of assessment data (specific examples)? Describe how assessment data are used to improve student learning and achievement. Based on your assessment findings, what additional resources/facilities (departmental or campus) are needed to improve learning.

Program Review Elements V. Faculty Using appropriate departmental reports, address the following: Assess all faculty (all ranks and Limited Term Lecturers) in terms of qualifications: teaching, research, scholarship and creative endeavor, and service/engagement. How does this staffing impact the delivery of the program? Assess department, college/school, and campus-level support for all faculty development (e.g. mentoring, promotion and tenure criteria and processes, governance issues).

Program Review Elements VI. Students and Alumni Highlight significant student and alumni accomplishments.

Program Review Elements VII: Other comments Discuss any other topics not adequately covered in the sections listed above (e.g. support to other academic units, staffing, diversity initiatives, outreach activities).

Program Review Elements VIII: 5-Year Improvement Plan Based on this review, please provide a 5-year improvement/maintenance plan. Plan should include: Strengths Areas needing improvement Challenges/concerns Recommendations/plans of action (including resources needed)

Program Review Elements Appendices Annual assessment reports IR data (most recent profile) Unit annual reports from last program review to present)