|
For departments preparing for, or currently undergoing Program
Review
See
data from a past Program Review
View
a Program Review report
The first reviews were conducted
in the 1996-97 academic year and the first cycle of reviews
continued
for another four years, ending in 2000-2001. In all, 75 academic
programs in the College of Arts and Sciences, the McIntire School
of Commerce, the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, the
Nursing School, the Curry School of Education, and the School
of
Architecture were reviewed. Learn more about
the first cycle of Program Review
At the end of the
2000-2001 cycle, a review of Program Review was conducted to
determine the
strengths and weaknesses of the process and to make suggestions
for improvement. The results of this review were carefully considered
in drafting a plan to begin a second cycle of Program Review, to
begin in 2004 and to include all academic programs
(the first cycle did not include Law, Darden or the Medical School).
The second cycle of Program Review began in 2004 and emphasizes
program improvement, with special attention to graduate studies,
and comprehensive
planning. In 2005 additional components
were
added to
ensure
that
programs
used
the results of assessments for program improvement, especially
student learning.
Academic program review
consists of on-going, high quality peer reviews of all the University’s
academic units and programs on a five-year cycle. The purpose
of program review is to foster academic excellence, to determine
how to raise the quality of every department, and to provide
guidance for faculty and administrative decisions in support
of continual future improvement.
Reviews are intended
to provide a sharpened focus on program areas in which excellence
can be achieved that will enhance national stature and assure
the most efficient use of available resources. Final plans that
are the outcome of program review will guide decisions to develop
and allocate new resources.
Every department will
prepare a self-study containing a comprehensive plan for improvement
over the next six years, with special attention to graduate programs.
The process is intended to assist an academic unit in understanding
its current status so that it can establish clear priorities
for achieving excellence or becoming eminent in its field.
A critique of each
unit’s (the Provost will determine whether department or
school level review is appropriate at time of initiating review,
considering, among other factors, unit size) plans for achieving
excellence and recommendations for constructive change will be
provided by faculty peers from the best programs in the field
at other leading universities.
Program reviews should
have the following characteristics:
- Reviews incorporate
expert assessment provided by reviewers from other leading
institutions.
- Reviews are forward looking. While assessment of a program’s
current status is important, priorities for continual future
improvement are of greatest concern.
- Reviews are evaluative, not just descriptive. Plans for improvement
require academic judgments about the quality of the program,
students, curriculum, learning outcomes, resources and future
directions.
- Review provides a concise, honest appraisal of an academic
unit’s strengths and weaknesses in order to judge plans
to improve.
- Academic program reviews should incorporate recent results
from an accreditation review and not duplicate those efforts.
- Reviews will result in an action plan with an overarching strategic
agenda, which will enable the program to increase its stature
or achieve eminence.
- Action plans emphasize improvements that are possible through
reallocation of the program’s existing resources. These
plans should include a timeline, milestones and measurable outcomes
to determine success.
|
