Program-Review Process Ohio University Link to Program Review Web Site.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Planning for Academic Program Review Site Visits
Advertisements

A Model of Quality Assurance A Case Study: UCC Dr. Norma Ryan Director of Quality Promotion UCC.
Academic Program and Unit Review at UIS Office of the Provost Fall 2014.
The Board’s Role in Accreditation Michael F. Middaugh Associate Provost for Institutional Effectiveness University of Delaware Celine R. Paquette Trustee,
Orientation for Academic Program Reviews
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Preparation for Developmental Reviews.
Promotion and Tenure at Ohio University Martin Tuck PhD Associate Provost for Academic Affairs.
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
Planning for Academic Program Review Site Visits
Orientation for Academic Program Reviews
Orientation for Academic Program Reviews
 The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is a voluntary, non-governmental, membership association that is dedicated to quality assurance and.
Strategic Planning Summit GAP/Committee Chairs/IE December 5,
A member of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, Bemidji State University is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer and educator.
Accreditation and Self Study Process A presentation by: Joseph Saimon Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) (Director for Development and Community Relations)
The Report of the Provost’s Advisory Group on the SUNY Assessment Initiative September 2009 Tina Good, Ph.D. President Faculty Council of Community Colleges.
PERIODIC ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS AT UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL Office of the Provost Hélène David, associate vice-rector academic affairs Claude Mailhot, Professor.
Introduction to The Grant Center Grant Center, Fitchburg State College.
STUDENT SERVICES REVIEW January 8, Context – Administrative Unit Reviews Objectives Roles Unit Self-Study Internal Review Committee External Reviewers.
University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director.
Introduction to The Grant Center Fitchburg State University.
On-line briefing for Program Directors and Staff 1.
Primary Functions of Program Directors Leadership Curriculum Management and Coordination Coordinate Program Assessment Marketing, Recruitment and Admissions.
Promotion Process A how-to for DEOs. How is a promotion review initiated? Required in the final probationary year of a tenure track appointment (year.
Florida Tech’s University Assessment Committee For A Continuing Culture of Assessment.
Los Angeles Southwest College LACCD Trustee Accreditation Subcommittee Self-Study Overview December 14, 2005.
Proposal Development by Faculty in an Academic Unit College, School, Department, or Program Proposal Preparation Office of Academic Programs, Assessment,
Performance Management A briefing for new managers.
2012 Middle States Accreditation Report Review Chapter 1: Institutional Excellence Standards 1 and 6.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
External Review Team: Roles and Responsibilities A Very Brief Training! conducted by JoLynn Noe Office of Assessment.
Planning for Academic Program Review Site Visits
Accreditation Overview Winter 2016 Mallory Newell, Accreditation Liaison Office.
Accreditation 101 Julie Bruno, Sierra College Glenn Yoshida, Los Angeles Southwest College Roberta Eisel, Citrus College, facilitator Susan Clifford, ACCJC,
1 Michigan State University Preparation for EC 2000 Thomas F. Wolff, Ph.D., P.E. Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies College of Engineering Michigan.
ABET 101 What has happened so far? When is the ABET visit? Faculty Responsibilities Assessment Process.
A Commitment to Continuous Improvement in Teaching and Learning Michaela Rome, Ph.D. NYU Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment.
Proposal Development by Faculty in an Academic Unit College, School, Department, or Program Proposal Preparation Office of Academic Programs, Assessment,
What’s Going on at SCC Presented by: Corinna Evett.
The Committee will: Assess and report on technology resources, status and needs. Create concept papers in support of strategic directions approved by.
Presented by Rob Till, Chair UAC Craig Bain, Chair UCC Bruce Fox, Chair LSC & member of UAC Niranjan Venkatraman, member UGC & UAC 1 3/10/14.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
New Program Proposal Workflow Chart
How an Assessment Framework helped revitalize Program Review at JCCC
Expectations for Degree Programs: Curriculum & Assessment
New Program Director Workshop:
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
Best Practices Managing Agendas and the Electronic Curriculum System
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
2016 Tenure and Promotion Workshop Policy and Procedures Overview
OUHSC Graduate College Program Review Overview and Timeline
Substantive Change Full Category I Proposal Workflow
Extend an Existing Degree Program to a New Location
New Certificate Program
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
Terminate an Academic Unit
Reorganize (Merge, Split, Move) an Academic Program or Academic Unit
New Degree (Undergraduate, First Professional, Graduate) Program
Conducting Needs Assessments for UF/IFAS Extension
Establish a New Academic Unit
Suspend a Degree or Certificate Program
Rename an Academic Program (Degree or Certificate) or Academic Unit
Program Review Guidelines & Processes at SUNY New Paltz
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
Fort Valley State University
Extension Title Series
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Best Practices Managing Agendas and the Electronic Curriculum System
Presentation transcript:

Program-Review Process Ohio University Link to Program Review Web Site

Purpose Academic program reviews, which include the preparation of program self studies and the completion of site visits by review committees, are qualitative and quantitative assessments that play vital roles in the university’s mission of delivering excellent undergraduate and graduate instruction and furthering Ohio University’s research and service profiles. Initiated and conducted by the Program Review Committee of the University Curriculum Council (a committee of the OU Faculty Senate), program reviews are important sources of information for faculty, administrators, trustees and other stakeholders regarding the size and reach of academic programs, programmatic strengths and weaknesses, the status of faculty and staff resources, student profiles, curricular outcomes, and equipment and space needs. These are important considerations in light of Responsibility Centered Management (RCM) and are areas of significant interest to the Higher Leaning Commission, the university’s accreditor. All academic programs on the OU Athens and regional campuses are reviewed periodically— every seven (7) years, normally—to help identify program, college, and university priorities, goals, and accomplishments, and help measure the progress of ongoing initiatives.

Guiding Principles ✓ Program review is part of an overall assessment plan that provides a portrait of program strengths and limitations and should result in program improvement. ✓ The process should be broadly participatory. ✓ The process should facilitate assessment planning, curricular development, faculty workload and scholarship responsibilities, and resource allocation. ✓ The program-review process allows OU to account for its use of resources, develop support among its various constituencies, and provide collegial and objective review to ensure academic-program quality.

Schedule / Phase I March Chair of the Program Review Committee Notifies Programs Up for Review During the Subsequent Academic Year No Later than July 30 Programs Submit Lists of Potential External Reviewers to the Chair of the Program Review Committee Sept. 15 Program Self Studies Due. Submitted to Chair of Program Review Committee and External Reviewer(s). All UCC Business Tabled if Deadline Not Met. Oct./Nov. Site Visits of Review Committees (External and Internal Reviewers)

The site-visit report must be submitted to the chair of the Program Review Committee no more than two (2) weeks after the visit. The chair of the Program Review Committee then distributes copies of the report to the program chair/director and to the program’s dean. Program chairs/directors and the program’s dean each have no more than two (2) weeks to comment on the report; such responses, which are submitted to the chair of the Program Review Committee, will be attached to the report and proceed with it throughout the remainder of the process. The correction of factual errors is of particular concern and the site-visit committee is under no obligation to change any recommendations, criticisms, conclusions, etc. If a program’s chair/director and/or dean do not provide comments to the Program Review Committee during the two-week window, the committee will interpret their absence as the tacit approval of a site-visit report by the chair/director and/or dean. If the report includes the evaluation a graduate component, the report and any comments from the chair/director and dean goes to the Graduate Council, which has the span of two (2) meetings to review it. If there is no graduate component, the report, once reviewed by the program and dean, goes to the University Curriculum Council for approval (upon the endorsement of the Program Review Committee). After consideration and a vote by the University Curriculum Council, a program’s review is then placed on the agenda of the Ohio University Board of Trustees by the Provost as an informational item. The entire process (from notification the previous March to the documentation’s appearance on the Trustees’ agenda at the end of the Spring Semester) should take no more than 15 months. Schedule / Phase II

Programs Submit Self-Studies to the Chair of the Program Review Committee (Sept. 15) Site Visits Conducted (October-November) Self-Studies and Site-Visit Reports Submitted to Program Review Committee and Provided for Comment to Program Chairs/Directors and Appropriate Dean. Program Review Committee Forwards Documents to Graduate Council for Review. University Curriculum Council Vote to Accept; Documentation then Forwarded to OU Trustees as an Informational Item on Meeting Agenda (Late Spring) Process Overview : Programs With Graduate Components

Programs Submit Self-Studies to the Chair of the Program Review Committee (Sept. 15) Site Visits Conducted (October-November) Self-Studies and Site-Visit Reports Submitted to Program Review Committee and Provided for Comment to Program Chair/Directors and Appropriate Dean. Program Review Committee Forwards Documents to the University Curriculum Council Vote to Accept; Documentation then Forwarded to OU Trustees as an Informational Item on Meeting Agenda (Late Spring) Process Overview : Programs Without Graduate Components

Resources Program Review Committee (Chair):Dr. David Ingram, Provost Faculty Fellow for Program Review:Dr. Patrick Barr-Melej, Assoc. Provost for Faculty and Academic Planning:Dr. Howard Dewald, Exec. Assistant for Faculty and Academic PlanningAnita Leach,