2. Program Review: Beyond Compliance to Program Improvement Kathleen Gorski, Ed.D

3. National Louis University

4. Founded in 1886 College of Professional Studies and Advancement Allied health Applied behavioral sciences Human services Business and Management National College of Education School of Teacher Preparation School of Advanced Professional Programs Campus Locations: Illinois: Chicago, Elgin, Lisle, Skokie, and Wheeling Wisconsin: Milwaukee and Beloit Florida: Tampa Enrollment: 7000 Gender: F=80% M=20% Diversity: 44% Minority Age: 35

5. NLU Mission & Values Mission Statement: National Louis University provides access to quality higher education that nurtures opportunity for students through innovative teaching, scholarship, community engagement, and service excellence. Values: Excellence, Respect, Access, Collaboration, Passion, Inquiry, Innovation, Engagement

6. NLU Serves Working adults that have attended multiple institutions Historically underserved populations Immigrants and first generation English speakers.

7. PROGRAM REVIEW HISTORY National Louis University

9. The 30 Page Report Culture of Quality Financial Viability Innovative Teaching and Scholarship Community Engagement Service and Operational Excellence

10. What happened to the report? It was “Put on a Shelf”

11. Does this sound familiar? What are your Institutions doing for Program Review?

12. We thought we were doing the right thing, but it wasn’t working

13. How did we know it wasn’t working? Prior to 2012 There were a few or no students enrolled in several programs. There were programs that were not aligned with the University mission and vision. The University did not have the resources to invest in the programs to gain an appropriate and sustainable market share. Overall Debt Concerns

14. A REMARKABLE AND COURAGEOUS DEPARTURE IN THE WAY THAT NLU HAS DONE BUSINESS Program Prioritization

15. Academic Portfolio Prioritization Eliminated 12 programs Reengineered 37 Maintained 12 The University used an engaging transparent process that involved stakeholders from throughout the institution with the end result of reducing overall budgets by 15% and re- positioning the institution to support strategic priorities that would advance growth and improve customer service in the process.

17. High level academic vision We will position NLU for a vibrant sustainable future where……. Excellence permeates our work and we have the evidence to prove it. Students are engaged in learning that connects conceptual learning and practice. They are exposed to real life situations. Programs are relevant and market driven. The NLU experience advances student professional identity, enhances career goal achievement and instills a commitment to lead and to serve

18. We needed a new Process

19. What We Knew

20. We didn’t want to reinvent the wheel Culture of Quality Financial Viability Innovative Teaching and Scholarship Community Engagement Service and Operational Excellence

21. We wanted to: Use data to help programs understand their programs. Use data across programs to understand how their program fit within the University portfolio of programs. Use data for improvement, not elimination. Incorporate University assessment

22. And we wanted to:

23. 2013-2014 Created a new process We Defined Program Review Criteria Worked with Colleges to select preferred metrics We Created a Rubric for review We decided to use existing reports as evidence instead of completing ANOTHER report. (Reports completed for the state, for external accreditors etc.) New process = Four annual updates. Fifth year = Review = Trend analysis over time. Approvals at and by University Curriculum Council, Provost and College Dean.

24. 2014-2015 Implement the process Bad Timing… Senate had their 3 - year committee commitment end. New term began and we had almost all new faculty members.

26. Criteria and Ratings

27. Why Are We Being Rated? What does Needs Improvement mean? What is Acceptable? What is Effective? What is Distinctive?

29. Please Define The Following Words:

30. Quality and Effectiveness became Health HEALTH Quality Effectiveness

32. The Data

33. The Web Form

34. The Results

35. From: Faculty Prepare Program Review College Committees Review Programs Reviewed by the Dean Review by the UCC Accepted by Faculty Senate Reviewed by the Provost

36. To:

37. “Health” refocused the purpose from elimination to support Areas Of: Concern Competence Excellence % in each category all programs to compare years with the goal of continuous improvement.

38. How did we SIMPLIFY? All data provided to programs through a Share Point site. A Web form was created to enter data Annual update report was designed to be completed at program faculty meetings. Programs can use their existing college reports. We reduced the approval process

39. How did we improve? Programs receive data on an annual basis Programs review university assessment data Programs can set goals as they relate to their place within the university portfolio Results of the Areas inform the budget cycle, programs most in need can receive funds. All goals linked to the Mission Accountability on goals and the opportunity to share best practices