Guidance for Deans, Department Heads/Chairs, and Faculty

Revised February 2008

Purpose

"First and foremost, the purpose of the academic program review (APR) process at Cal Poly is to acknowledge the strengths of our academic programs and, at the same time, to seek ways of further enhancing their quality."

The APR process provides an opportunity for everyone in the department, in the college, and at the institutional level, to make better, more informed decisions that lead to program improvement for the benefit of students and their learning. Due to the role that program review plays in enhancing educational effectiveness, the review of academic programs is mandated by the CSU and is expected by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), our regional accrediting agency. See WASC rubric on program review.

Features

• APR is intended to be a collaborative process involving the department, the college, qualified reviewers (external to the university as well as internal), and the provost, through the involvement of the Office of Academic Programs. It is intended to be formative and to lead to program improvement. It is not intended to be punitive in its consequences.
• The APR is a cyclic 5-6 year process. Embedded in this process is a self study process that takes place over a two year period. Action plans, based on the self study are then implemented in the remainder of the cycle. Annual progress reports are compiled, including a progress report on assessment efforts. See schedule of reviews.
• APR is timed to coincide with an external accreditation review whenever applicable. The self-study and everything else that is part of the accreditation review are automatically included in the dossier for APR. The program is generally asked to address additional items that are of interest within the university but not necessarily to the accrediting team. See guidelines for self-studies.
• In the absence of a concurrent accreditation review, APR normally involves at least two external reviewers and one internal reviewer. When there is an external accreditation team, one internal reviewer is appointed. See guidelines for appointment of reviewers.
• The opportunity exists in this self study period for accredited programs to elect to go through a pilot process for an integrated program review. This pilot has as its goal the opportunity to look at student learning in terms of university learning outcomes, and as such requires collaboration between the academic program and the general education program.
• Program review provides a process for improvement. As such, programs are asked to involve their faculty in all stages of APR, including design of the self-study. The Program Head/Chair, the Dean, and the Vice Provost all sign off on the self-study proposal and the time-line for its preparation. See guidelines for self-studies.
• Following a 1-2 day site visit, the review team submits a written report (which may be the report submitted by an accreditation team along with supplementary material addressing issues/concerns of institutional interest).
• After the visit, the Program Head/Chair reviews the report for factual accuracy and informs the Academic Programs Office if there are errors. This provides a mechanism to ensure that the reviewers' report, which will receive strong consideration in developing a plan of action for program improvement is accurate.
• A working meeting is held to assist in the development of an action plan for the program, typically involving the Department Head/Chair, departmental faculty, the Dean (and/or designee), the Vice Provost (or designee), and others who may contribute expertise to the planning, such as assessment. The plan is based on the self study and the review or the accreditation report. This meeting is the “action plan preparation meeting.” See action plan template.
• The action plan is completed and submitted via the Dean to the Vice Provost prior to a final meeting, involving the entire program faculty, for adoption of the action plan. This is the “action plan adoption meeting.”
• One important element of the action plan provides for assessment of student learning at the program level. The action plan specifies the cycle of data collection, data analysis and interpretation, leading to possible changes in the curricula or programmatic offerings for the purpose of improving student learning. This plan may be an ongoing one that has already been established or a revised one.
• Up until the next self study year, the Department Head/Chair reports annually on implementation of the action plan and resulting outcomes via the Dean to the Vice Provost. See action plan progress report template.

For more information, contact Delores Lencioni in the Office of Academic Programs (756-7299).