Academic Program and Unit Review at UIS

Office of the ProvostFall 2014

Why UIS Conducts Program and Unit Reviews To identify and analyze program strengths

and areas of concern To identify ways to improve the quality and

productivity of programs To comply with Illinois Board of Higher

Education (IBHE) requirements

IBHE Requirements for Program Review

Program goals and learning outcomes Program and course-by-course assessment Multiple performance measures (retention, graduation,

institutional metrics, learning measures, etc.) Feedback from key stakeholders Formal feedback/improvement mechanism for improving

curriculum, instruction and learning Demonstrated capacity to efficiently and effectively deliver

programs using technology and data systems Findings and recommendations

Best Practices in Program and Unit Review

More than 80% of American colleges & universities surveyed have some form of program/unit review

UIS process is consistent with best practices in program/unit evaluation– Comprehensive coverage of program components– Grounded in faculty ownership– Review process is broadly participatory– Enhanced feedback

Resources on Box Data, prepared by the Office of Institutional Research Previous self-study, college memo, dean’s memo, Council

memo(s), IBHE Reports and MOUs (if available). PowerPoint and materials from Program Review Workshop. Program and Unit Review Guidelines, also available on Institutional

Effectiveness web page: http://www.uis.edu/academicaffairs/planning/institutionaleffectiveness/.

Alumni Survey data, prepared by Office of Survey Research, available in November.

Tips, Rubrics, and Process Documents, prepared by Grad Council.

Routing Sheet

Routing Sheet– Documents each level of approval, with dates and

signatures– Must accompany Program/Unit Review at each level

of approval (can be electronically conveyed) Instructions for Routing and Approval Process Routing Sheet and Instructions are posted on

Box.

What To Expect

Overview of Process– Year One– Year Two

Timeline– Year One: Academic Year 2014-15– Year Two: Fall 2015– Year Two: Spring 2016

Year One Overview1. Program or unit identifies self-study committee, lead writer, and

departmental or unit coordinator. This person oversees the process and is chief contact for the Provost’s Office. Coordinator should be identified immediately following the Program Review Workshop.

2. Program or unit completes self-study by gathering and analyzing data. Consult with Office of Institutional Research and Provost Office staff as needed.

3. Program faculty or unit staff draft report sections. Program or unit’s lead writer edits and compiles sections into Program Review report.

4. Program or unit approves report.5. Copies of report are submitted to College Curriculum Committee

AND Dean (OR to Unit Director’s Supervisor).

Year One Overview continued . . .

6. College Curriculum Committee asks questions, provides feedback to Program.

7. Program or Unit revises report based on college or administrator feedback and submits revised report to College Committee and Dean (note that Dean should not wait for College Committee memo to review the report).

8. College Curriculum Committee prepares brief approval memo and forwards it with the report to the Dean (a copy of the approval memo should be sent to the Program).

9. Dean or Unit Director’s Supervisor prepares a memo outlining recommendations and forwards all materials to the Provost’s Office (a copy of the administrative memo should be sent to the Program).

10.The Provost’s Office distributes copies of the Program Review report and memos to the Councils.

Year Two Overview Councils review materials and usually invite program or unit

representatives and dean to a meeting to answer questions and clarify areas of the report.

Councils prepare written comments/recommendations in memos and forward the memos to Campus Senate & Provost.

Senate hears reports from the Council and votes to approve the report.

Provost’s Office develops a Memorandum of Understanding based on recommendations from Program, Dean, Councils and makes an official report to the Illinois Board of Higher Education (IBHE).

Program Review Timelines

Some target dates for the next 24 months . . .

Timeline: Academic Year 2014-15

Program or Unit attends Workshop,

appoints Coordinator,

Committee, and Lead Writer, and

receives materials (Oct-Nov 2014)

Program or Unit drafts self-study and

approves it at program level (by

March 2015 if possible)

Program or Unit forwards self-study

to College Curriculum & Dean

(by May 2015)

Timeline: Fall 2015

Review by College Curriculum

Committee or Unit Director’s

Supervisor; revisions made if

necessary (early fall 2015)

College Committee issues memo and forwards to Dean

and Program (mid fall 2015)

Dean or Administrator

issues memo and forwards all materials to

Provost’s Office, with copy of memo to Program or Unit (by late fall 2015)

Timeline: Spring 2016

Council receives materials from

Provost’s Office and reviews; program or unit representative answers questions (early Spring 2016)

Council prepares memo and forwards

all materials to Campus Senate (by

March 1, 2016)

Campus Senate hears Council

Report and votes to approve; Provost’s

Office prepares MOU and IBHE Report (Summer 2016)

Academic Program Review Guidelines Program Objectives &

Structure Assessment of Learning

Outcomes & Curricular Revisions

Student Characteristics & Academic Support

Faculty Learning Environment &

Support Services

Student Demand & Program Productivity

Centrality to Campus Mission

Costs Summary &

Recommendations

Reviews of Minors & Certificates

Program Description & Objectives Curriculum Students Faculty Student Demand Costs Quality & Productivity Recommendations

Unit Review Guidelines Background Potential Faculty/Staff

Quality Centrality Facilities and Equipment Locational Advantages Comparative

Advantages

Cost/Revenue Relationship

Quality of Service or Research

Additional Productivity Considerations

Recommendations Statistical Data

Three-Year Review (New Programs) Brief general description of program, including learning

outcomes and any developments in curriculum. Discussion of positive developments and challenges in

implementation (may involve student demand, changes in faculty, etc.).

Plans for or developments in assessment of student learning. Analysis of performance measures including, if available: student

enrollment in the program, enrollment in the courses associated with the program, pattern of course availability, number of credit hours generated by the program, and number of students completed.

CASL Mid-Cycle Assessment Reports A new process, approved by Campus

Senate Departments now submit an Assessment

Progress Report to CASL in Year Three of the regular program review cycle.

The Report will be due no later than May 15th of that academic year.

CASL Mid-Cycle Assessment Reports Cont.

In Year Four of the academic program review cycle, CASL will review the report and provide formative written feedback and assistance to the program.

Departments will be required to include CASL's feedback in their academic program review documentation.

For More Information on Assessment See the CASL website:

http://www.uis.edu/assessment/ The CASL website can help you– Understand the assessment process– Prepare for the mid-cycle assessment reports– Find resources on best practices in assessment

Suggestions Get started as soon as possible and anticipate target

dates over the next 18 months

Use the self-study process and external feedback to reflect and think about how the program could be improved

Involve all program faculty in the evaluation & writing process

Respond to the issues raised in the program’s last review cycle

Suggestions continued…

Demonstrate how evidence of student learning has been used to make curricular change

Analyze the data, including enrollments, and think about the possible implications of trends

Address problems directly in the report

Integrate the review with other planning or accreditation processes