California State University, Long Beach                                                         

Policy Statement

10-12

November 22, 2010

 

POLICY ON PROGRAM REVIEW

Supersedes Policy Statement 05-11

 

This policy was recommended by the Academic Senate on October 21, 2010
and approved by the President on October 27, 2010.

 

1.0 Introduction

 

Inquiry is a driving force in higher education.  It motivates the work of individual scholars as well as the endeavors of academic programs.  Applying inquiry at a program level is essential for the university to become a learning as well as a teaching organization.

This policy acknowledges that no process of program review that is merely a periodic, isolated response to external demands can be successful.  Program review will be useful only to the extent that it is a systematic, developmental, ongoing process of inquiry conducted by academic programs for their own improvement.  A continuous process that focuses on helping students to meet learning outcomes can also aid academic programs in planning for both the short and long range in developing curricular offerings, in documenting successes, and in substantiating resource needs.  It is in this context that the following policy on Program Review has been crafted.

 

2.0 Program Review Responsibility

 

2.1 Institutional Structure:  All degree programs and units in the Division of Academic Affairs must be reviewed.  Program review is a shared responsibility of the Division of Academic Affairs, the Academic Senate, and the Faculty.

2.2 Degree-granting Programs:  Review of degree-granting programs is conducted by the Program Assessment and Review Council of the Academic Senate, the College, and the Division of Academic Affairs.  A degree-granting program is defined as an academic program that leads to a baccalaureate, master's, or doctoral degree.

2.3 Academic Support Units:  Review of academic support units is conducted by the Program Assessment and Review Council of the Academic Senate and the Division of Academic Affairs.  An Academic Support Unit is defined as a non-degree unit within the Division of Academic Affairs that supports student learning.

3.0 Frequency of Program Review

3.1 Degree-granting Programs or Academic Support Units with Accreditation:  Normally, the cycle of program review for degree programs or academic support units with nationally recognized accreditation will coincide with the accreditation period but not to exceed ten (10) years.

3.2 Degree-granting Programs and Academic Support Units without Accreditation:  Normally, the cycle of program review for degree-granting programs and academic support units without nationally recognized accreditation will occur once every seven (7) years. 

3.3 When circumstances warrant, the frequency of review may be extended or reduced by the Division of Academic Affairs in consultation with the College Dean or appropriate administrator and the Chair of the Program Assessment and Review Council of the Academic Senate.

4.0 Components of Program Review

 

4.1 The degree-granting program or academic support unit shall address the components of program review according to the guidelines in the CSULB Curriculum Handbook.  These components include:  the proposal; the self-study; the review; the university program review committee report; the memorandum of understanding; and the annual report.

4.2 For programs or units with nationally recognized accreditation, documents prepared for accreditation, visits from the accreditation body, and reports from the accreditation body shall normally be accepted as satisfying these components in whole or in part, as stipulated in this policy.

5.0 Program Review Proposal

 

5.1 In consultation with the Division of Academic Affairs and the College Dean or appropriate administrator, the Department Chair or School Director of each degree-granting program or Director of each academic support unit undergoing a program review shall prepare a proposal that addresses program or unit performance, assessment of student learning outcomes, and additional relevant topics to be included in the self study.

 

5.2 The College Dean or appropriate administrator approves the proposal from the program or unit and forwards it to the Division of Academic Affairs.

6.0 Self-Study

 

6.1 A self-study shall be prepared in accordance with the agreed-upon program review proposal and the guidelines in the CSULB Curriculum Handbook.

6.2 For programs or units with nationally recognized accreditation, the self-study prepared for accreditation shall normally be accepted by the College Dean or appropriate administrator and the Division of Academic Affairs for satisfaction of this requirement in accordance with the approved program review proposal.

7.0 University Program Review Committee

 

7.1 The University Program Review Committee for degree-granting programs shall be comprised of three (3) members:  Two (2) members shall be selected by the Program Assessment and Review Council from its current members who are not from the College of the degree-granting program being reviewed, with one (1) serving as Chair of the Committee, and one (1) member shall be selected by the appropriate College Faculty Council.  Faculty from the degree-granting program being reviewed are not eligible to serve on the Committee.

7.2 The University Program Review Committee for academic support units shall be comprised of three (3) members:  Two (2) members shall be selected by the Program Assessment and Review Council from its current members, with one serving as Chair of the Committee. One (1) member shall be selected by the Program Assessment and Review Council from the academic support unit Faculty or professional staff at-large.  Faculty or professional staff from the academic support unit being reviewed are not eligible to serve on the Committee.

7.3 The University Program Review Committee for Programs or units with nationally recognized accreditation shall be comprised of two (2) members selected by the Program Assessment and Review Council from its current members who are not from the college of the degree-granting program or the unit being reviewed, with one (1) serving as Chair of the Committee.  Faculty from the degree-granting program being reviewed are not eligible to serve on the committee. Faculty or professional staff from the academic support unit being reviewed are not eligible to serve on the Committee.

8.0 External Reviewer(s)

 

8.1 External reviewer(s) will be selected by the Division of Academic Affairs in consultation with the College Dean or appropriate administrator and the Department Chair or School Director of the degree-granting program or Director of the academic support unit.

 

8.2 For programs or units with nationally recognized accreditation, the external review of the program or unit conducted by the accrediting body shall normally be accepted by the College Dean or appropriate administrator and the Division of Academic Affairs as satisfying this requirement.

8.3 Reports from any external reviewer(s) (including reports from accrediting bodies) will be considered by the University Program Review Committee in preparing its final report.

 

9.0 University Program Review Committee Report

 

9.1 The University Program Review Committee shall prepare a final report.

9.1.1 The Chair of the University Program Review Committee will send draft copies of the Committee’s report to the Department Chair or School Director for comments and to the College Dean or appropriate administrator for comments and/or recommendations; comments and/or recommendations must be returned to the Committee Chair within 15 working days.

9.1.2  After the comment period, the Chair and other members of the University Program Review Committee will present the report (and any comments) to the Program Assessment and Review Council in a regularly scheduled meeting.  The College Dean or appropriate administrator and the Department Chair or School Director will be invited to attend and to participate in the meeting. 

9.1.3  After the presentation, the Chair of the University Program Review Committee will finalize the report within five (5) working days and send the final report to the Department Chair or School Director, the College Dean or appropriate administrator, the Division of Academic Affairs, the Office of the Academic Senate, and the University Archives.

9.2  At the end of each academic year, the Chair of the Program Assessment and Review Council will prepare a summary of all program reviews completed during the year and forward it to the Division of Academic Affairs and the Office of the Academic Senate.

10.0 Memorandum of Understanding

10.1  Upon receipt of the final report of the University Program Review Committee, the Department Chair or School Director, the College Dean or appropriate administrator, and the Division of Academic Affairs will have twenty (20) working days to review all reports and recommendations.  The Division of Academic Affairs will then call a meeting with the College Dean or appropriate administrator and the program Chair or unit Director to discuss the recommendations and actions to be taken.  

 

10.2  The agreed upon recommendations and actions will be embodied in a memorandum of understanding (MOU).  The MOU will then be forwarded to the department, school, and/or academic support unit for approval before it is signed by the Department Chair or School Director, dean, and Academic Affairs designee.  The MOU shall be in effect for the duration of the review cycle.

 10.3  The MOU will be kept on file in the program or unit, the College, and the Division of Academic Affairs.

11.0 Annual Report

11.1  Each year, between June 1 and October 1, all degree-granting programs and all academic support units (with or without nationally recognized accreditation) will provide an annual report to the Division of Academic Affairs and the College Dean or appropriate administrator.  The annual report will provide a brief summary of the progress made toward accomplishing the actions stated in the MOU as well as relevant changes since the last program review and/or annual report.  Within eight (8) weeks of receiving the annual report, the Division of Academic Affairs will provide a response which contains at least the ways by which the Division has provided support for the program or unit to achieve progress toward the objectives of the MOU. The self-study may be substituted for the annual report during the self-study year.

 

 

EFFECTIVE: Immediately