Program Review Policy and Procedures

Revisions approved by EPC and GSC
Spring, 2002

Introduction

Program review in the California State University originates from Trustee policy as found in the Chancellor's Memorandum AP 71-32, "Performance Review of Existing Degree Major Programs." Campuses are asked to "establish a formal performance review procedure for all existing degree programs on campus in order to assess periodically both the quantitative and qualitative viability of each undergraduate and graduate program in the total context of offerings." An annual resolution by the Board of Trustees states "that a formal review of existing degree curricula continue to be conducted annually by the campuses as a part of the overall academic planning process."

At California State University Northridge, the major purpose of program review is to ensure the highest quality educational programs. In order to accomplish this purpose, the program review process should foster departmental self reflection and creative thinking about curriculum, faculty, students, and resources. This process should promote positive and forward-looking change in academic programs. The process should utilize internal and external resources effectively and should be integrated into academic planning and assessment.

The Program Review Process
1. Calendar

The Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies, in consultation with the Associate Vice President of Graduate Studies, Research and International Programs, Deans, Associate Deans and the Department Chairs/Program Coordinators (hereafter "Chairs") will establish a program review calendar. The calendar will ensure that reviews, beginning with the creation of a self-study document, will occur at least every five years and that they can be completed in a timely manner. The calendar will be reviewed every November/December as part of the annual request from the Chancellor's Office for an update of the Academic Plan (under the heading "Review of Existing Programs.")

2. Alumni Survey

Program Review requires that all departments complete an alumni survey. At the beginning of the Spring semester departments scheduled on the program review calendar for review in the next academic year will conduct an alumni survey. Institutional Research together with the Office of Undergraduate Studies will contact the department to request materials needed to initiate the survey. Institutional Research will mail the alumni surveys and process the survey data and give the results of the survey to the department.

3. Data from Institutional Research

Prior to initiating the self-study, the departments/program (hereafter "department") will receive data from Institutional Research, including the data from the alumni survey, which will be incorporated into the self-study.

4. Self Study

Each department will prepare a self-study according to guidelines approved by the Educational Policies Committee and the Graduate Studies Committee.

Faculty Participation

The department chair shall provide for the participation of the tenured and tenure-track faculty of the department in the preparation of the self-study. Each faculty member will receive a copy of the self-study guidelines. A draft of the self-study will be distributed to all tenured and tenure-track faculty and made available to part-time faculty for review prior to formal approval. The tenured and tenure-track faculty will approve the department's self-study before it is forwarded to the college.

(Note: In recognition of the fact that the proper preparation of the self-study requires extensive use of faculty and/or department Chair time it is recommended that the college consider the allocation of reassigned time to the department for this purpose.)

Where there are no tenured or tenure-track faculty in a department, the functions assigned to such faculty by these procedures will be assumed by the governing or advisory body that normally assists the Coordinator or performs the personnel and/or curricular functions for the program.

5. Participation of EPC and GSC Representatives

EPC and GSC (if the department being reviewed includes a graduate program) will each appoint from present or former membership a representative to participate in the program review process. Normally these representatives will be selected from departments outside of the college of the department being reviewed. These representatives will be provided with a copy of the department's self-study and will participate in the college level review meeting. They will also be invited to the exit meeting with the external reviewers and possibly other meetings with the external reviewers, preferably when the reviewers are meeting with the department curriculum and/or graduate committees. EPC and GSC representatives will receive copies of the reviewers' final report and will be invited to attend the final meeting convened by the Vice President to discuss this final report. When the review process is completed with the circulation of the Final Memorandum of Understanding the EPC and GSC representatives will share the relevant curriculum recommendations with their respective committees.
6. College Level Review

Each college will review the self-study within its curriculum review and/or planning structure, for example, its Academic Council, Academic Planning Committee, etc. Educational Policies Committee and Graduate Studies Committee representatives will participate in the college review process and will be present during all discussion of the review. In some colleges, program review may be a function of the college rather than the department, e.g., the College of Business and Economics.

It is the function of the college review committee to evaluate the departmental self-study in accordance with the established guidelines and to determine whether the department has adequately and realistically conducted its self-study. The college committee may require clarification from the department on any aspect of the self-study or may require additional information. The college review committee and Dean should ensure that the department self-study is comprehensive and accurate before submission to Undergraduate Studies. If in their opinion the self-study is deficient, the Dean will require the self-study to be revised or rewritten. The representatives of EPC and GSC will report to their respective committees on the progress of the self study at this point.

7. External Review Team

The Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies, in consultation with the Associate Vice President of Graduate Studies, Research and International Programs, the Dean, Associate Dean, and the Chair, will invite a team of reviewers, preferably consisting of two off-campus reviewers. It is recommended that the reviewers as a group represent a variety of academic experiences, e.g., in graduate studies, or in general education, and/or in specialties within the discipline.

The department tenured and tenure-track faculty will provide a list of suitable candidates from off-campus to the Dean. This list will also include a business address, telephone number, description of current position and specialty within the discipline and a brief rationale for the recommendation. The Dean may rank, comment upon the list or request additional names, then forward it to the Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies. The department chair will have an opportunity to review and comment on the ranking. The Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies will invite the reviewers based upon ranking.

In conducting the review process the review team will respond to the self-study, consult with the department, college, and others in the university, evaluate the department, and submit recommendations.

8. Coordination of Review Team's Visit

The Office of Undergraduate Studies, in consultation with the Associate Vice President, Graduate Programs, Research and International Programs, the Dean, the Associate Dean and the Chair, will coordinate the on-campus visit of the review team.

9. Initial Response to Review Team's Report

The report received by the Office of Undergraduate Studies from the review team will be forwarded to the department Chair. The Chair circulates the report to the faculty and arranges time for discussion and evaluation by the department faculty. If deemed necessary by the department faculty, a written response and preliminary plan of action reflecting any diversity of opinion that may exist within the department will then be formally approved by the faculty and forwarded to Undergraduate Studies. Copies of the review team's report and any department response will be distributed by the Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies to the Vice President of Academic Affairs, the Dean, and all other individuals who will be invited to participate in the Final Meeting.

10. Final Meeting ("Wrap-up Meeting")

The self-study, the review team's report, and the department's response will be thoroughly discussed at a meeting convened by the Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies in order to achieve consensus on a final plan of action. The following people are invited: the Associate Vice President of Graduate Studies, Research and International Programs; the Chair; the Dean; the Associate Dean; Manager of Academic Resources from the college; all members of the department faculty; and the EPC and GSC representatives.

A document summarizing the meeting (the Memorandum of Understanding) will be issued by the Office of the Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies with copies to the Provost, Provost's staff and each of the participants in the meeting and the representatives of EPC and GSC. A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding will also be sent to the President.

11. Report to Chancellor's Office

The Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies, in consultation with the Deans and Associate Deans will prepare a synopsis of the program review of each department based on the self-study, the review team's report, the departmental response to it, and the Memorandum of Understanding developed from the final program review meeting. It shall be submitted to the Chancellor's Office with copies to the Deans.

12. Follow-up

Progress on the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding and related departmental activity will be an agenda item for at least one department faculty meeting each academic year between reviews.

During the academic year following completion of the program review, the Dean will meet with the Chair to review recommendations contained in the final program review document to ascertain the status of any action recommended. Thereafter, the Dean will meet annually with the Chair with the purpose of reviewing implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding. Three years after the completion of the program review, the Dean will submit a report to the Vice President describing the progress the department is making toward fulfilling the recommendations contained in the program review report.

13. Accreditation

Two years before the accreditation visit, the department Chair will discuss with the Dean how the standards for accreditation address the program review guidelines. When there is not a match between accreditation and self-study guidelines, the Dean will direct the Chair to develop an addendum to include guidelines that are missing. This addendum will be used for internal review processes, not external review. The Dean will inform the Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies what has been decided. The accreditation report prepared by the department or college should be submitted to Undergraduate Studies.

14. Calendar

The program review process requires two academic years for completion as follows:

First Academic Year (Preparation)

February Department conducts alumni survey to initiate program review process.

August

August through March I.R. forwards data to department.

Department conducts self-study.

March Self-study submitted for college approvals.
List of recommendations for external reviewers submitted to the Dean's office.
May Copies of self-study (approved by the Dean) and a list of recommendations for external reviewers (approved by the Dean) submitted to Undergraduate Studies.

Second Academic Year (Year Identified on CSU Academic Plan for "Review of Existing Programs")

Fall Semester External Reviewers Visit

Spring Semester Wrap-up meeting to develop MOU.
Final MOU received by dept. and distributed to Provost, Provost's Council and President

December Summary report to Chancellor's Office

Upon completion of the process departments will have five years to implement recommendations contained in the MOU before beginning the self-study process once again.

Sample Schedule - Program Review for Department X

Academic Year 2001-2002 - Department/Program X "scheduled for review" in CSU Academic Plan.

February 2000 - Department/Program X notified by Undergraduate Studies that it is scheduled to begin a self-study in the coming academic year. Department/Program prepares materials for Institutional Research to conduct an alumni survey.

August 2000 - Institution Research forwards data (including alumni survey data) to the Department/Program.

August, 2000 through
March, 2001 - Self-study conducted. Self-study reviewed by college curriculum review and/or planning structure (ex. Academic Council or Academic Planning Committee)

March, 2001 - Names of potential external reviewers forwarded to the Dean's office.

May, 2001 - Self-study (approved by the Dean) submitted to Undergraduate Studies. List of recommendations for external reviewers (approved by the Dean) submitted to Undergraduates Studies.

Fall, 2001 - External Review takes place.

Spring, 2002 - Wrap-up meeting scheduled, MOU developed.

Academic Year 2007-2008 - Department/Program X "scheduled for review".

August, 2006 - Department/Program X begins self-study.

12/7/90
1990 Program Review Revision Committee
G. Larson
D. Philibosian
E. Price
G. Rossy
D. Schwartz
R. Swade

4/30/92
EPC/GSC Joint Subcommittee on Program Review
R. Camp
J. Goss
R. Madison
C. Navarro
J. Reagan
K. Schminke
C. Spector
B. Swerkes

Fall, 1992 - Spring, 1993
Groups Reviewing Proposed Revisions of Program Review:
Campus Assessment Group
Deans' Council
Executive Committee of the Council of Chairs
Associate Deans

Fall 2001-Spring 2002
EPC/GSC/IR Joint Subcommittee on Program Review
M. Filbeck
R. Gunther
J. Hidalgo
F. Horvath
R. Madison
J. Reagan

Groups Reviewing Proposed Revisions of Program Review
Educational Policies Committee
Graduate Studies Committee
Executive Committee of the Council of Chairs
Executive Committee of the Academic Senate
Associate Deans