Revised July 2004

PURPOSE FOR PROGRAM REVIEW

Academic program review is a collaborative process designed to bring to bear the judgment of respected colleagues in assessing and improving the quality of academic units.  This process involves students, faculty, community members, school and campus administrators, and external specialists in the discipline in (1) gathering information about a program (i.e., a department, or a school if the school has no departments), (2) reviewing and analyzing this information during a site visit, (3) synthesizing all available information and making judgments about overall program quality and recommendations for improvement, and (4) following up to ensure that the unit is fully supported in its efforts to address the outcomes of the review.

While self-study and peer review are also fundamental components of the external process of accreditation, program review at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) serves important internal purposes.  In the campus statement of mission and goals faculty, staff, and students have committed themselves to providing for our constituents excellence in

• Teaching and Learning
• Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity
• Civic Engagement Locally, Nationally, and Globally with each of these core activities characterized by  
  • collaboration within and across disciplines and with the community,
  • a commitment to ensuring diversity, and
  • pursuit of best practices

Program review at IUPUI places emphasis on (1) involvement of campus administrators and faculty from IUPUI units other than the one undergoing review; (2) linkages between the program and the community it serves; and (3) connections between the review and planning, decision-making, and resource allocation at departmental, school, and campus levels.  These emphases ensure that the reviews contribute in a fundamentally important way to the attainment of the campus mission and that warranted recommendations for improvement stemming from them are carried out.  Programs that are strengthened through peer review will enhance the overall quality and reputation of IUPUI.

Program review at IUPUI increases the sense of shared purpose among its many diverse academic programs and reinforces the need for coordinated planning for the future by all campus units.  The involvement of campus administrators in the reviews ensures that meaningful and effective follow-up for each review will occur.  The involvement of IUPUI faculty from academic units outside the one being reviewed promotes campus-wide understanding of the contributions of each unit to the mission of the institution.  The involvement of community members who have an interest in the program emphasizes the importance of IUPUI's connections with the community it serves and, at the same time, furthers community understanding of the program and of IUPUI as well as civic engagement .  It should be noted that the term 'community' may be construed broadly in this context; some programs may perceive their community to be Indianapolis and central Indiana, others may wish to involve community members from throughout the State, while still others consider the region, the nation, or the world as their community.

Responsibility for Program Review

All academic units will be scheduled for review over a seven-year period.  If a school is a unit with no departments, the program review will focus at the school level. It may even be coordinated with the administrative review of the school dean.  If a unit also experiences periodic peer review for purposes of accreditation, the internal and external review processes will be carefully coordinated to minimize duplication of faculty time and effort.

The dean of each school will be responsible for carrying out the reviews of programs within his or her school.  The Vice Chancellor for Planning and Institutional Improvement (VCPAII) will develop and coordinate the overall review schedule and orient academic units using these Guidelines .  The Program Review and Assessment Committee, which includes two representatives appointed by the dean of each school, will serve in an advisory role to the VCPAII in order to ensure the continuity and integrity of the review process and follow-up activities.

The VCPAII will work with the dean of the school, and the program chair if the unit is a department, to plan the self-study and review.  The program chair and representative faculty and students will prepare a self-study in the year prior to the review using the "Criteria for Self-Study" outlined below. The self-study may be reviewed by a school or campus committee in advance of the visit by the review team.  When this is the case, the unit responsible for the self-study would be expected to make changes if a majority of the members of the review committee agrees that such modifications are needed.

Two or three external reviewers from the discipline will be chosen to take part in a site visit.  Two internal reviewers (IUPUI faculty or staff) and a community member will also be selected to join the review team.  The Chancellor and his/her staff, the dean of the school and her/his staff, chairs and interested faculty from related departments, program advisory groups, faculty, students, and graduates will take part in the review according to a pre-arranged schedule developed by the dean and/or department chair in cooperation with the Office of the VCPAII.  Participation by those who support the program as well as those who participate in it and benefit from its offerings serves to emphasize the openness of the review process.

CRITERIA FOR SELF-STUDY

Every effort will be made to standardize the formats of the various requests for information directed to campus units for purposes of planning, resource allocation, and program evaluation, including peer review.  Thus several campus offices, including the Office of Information Management and Institutional Research and the University Library, will be able to assist faculty, staff, and students in the program undergoing review in assembling information for the self-study.

The self-study outline that follows is meant to be suggestive rather than prescriptive.  Each department will have additional information to include and may choose a different order for parts of the narrative.  Graduate programs should be reviewed according to the questions suggested in the Appendix  (not included for programs offering only baccalaureate degrees).

Purposes, Reputation, Aspirations

Brief History of the Program - Origin and significant events in its development.

Mission and Goals

• Statement of mission, including relationship to school and campus missions.
• Specific goals in the areas of teaching and learning; research, scholarship, and creative activity; and civic engagement (attach planning documents and relevant policy statements).
• Evidence of external demand and internal (campus needs for the program.

Resources

Students   (Data for the past 5 years if available.)

• Characteristics of students majoring in the program (number, SAT scores, GPA, and other relevant characteristics).
• Description of recruitment practices and admissions criteria
• Activities and resources that serve University College students who declare a major in the department but have not yet met the department's entrance requirements.
• Number of students who have declared a major in the department but failed to meet the department's entrance guidelines.

• Types and levels of financial assistance available
• Numbers/percentages of women, minorities, international students in the population of majors
• Number of student in service courses
• Types and levels of financial assistance available

Faculty

• General description of faculty, including year hired, rank, teaching assignments
• Student-faculty rati os
• Faculty development opportunities available in past 5 years
• Evidence of faculty accomplishments, including participation in University College and   other campus-wide student initiatives , and teaching evaluations obtained from students, graduates, and peers
• Description of criteria for evaluation/reward/recognition of faculty
• Curriculum vitae for each faculty member, including list of courses taught, description of advising/mentoring responsibilities, record of service, research interests, publications, and sources of external support

Library - Description of library holdings and an assessment of their adequacy.

Physical Facilities - Overview of the physical environment for the program, including instructional technologies, other equipment, and supplies.

Program Process

Program Content

• Distinctive characteristics of the program
• Structure, breadth, and depth of curricular offerings, including interdisciplinary programs
• Desired learning outcomes for students

Student Support

• Description of student course placement procedures, orientation, advising, tutoring, mentoring, monitoring of progress, out-of-class contact with faculty, involvement in research and independent study, internships/field experiences, professional organizations and clubs, and other out-of-class learning opportunities.  Evidence that remedial requirements by the department in mathematics, reading, and English are appropriate and increase the likelihood of student success in departmental courses.
  
• Opportunities for student involvement in program planning and evaluation
  
• Description of efforts made to place graduates
  
• Description of efforts to support entering students, including first-year seminars and learning communities
  
• Description of research opportunities for beginning honor students

Outcomes

Indicators of Program Quality

• Evidence of student demand for entry/transfer into the program 
• Evidence of quality of applicant pool (GPA, SAT scores, other relevant characteristics) 
• Evidence of student retention in the program 
• Number of graduates 
• Evidence of student mastery of generic skills (general education)
• Evidence of student achievement of specified learning outcomes in the major
• Evidence of student learning in service courses offered by the department
• Evidence of placement of graduates in employment in the field or in further education 
• Evidence of program quality derived from surveys/interviews of current students, graduates, employers, community members or agencies
• External recognition of students, faculty, or graduates
• Evidence that honors students benefit from honors initiatives sponsored by the department

 Overall Assessment of Program Strengths and Concerns

Based upon all the foregoing information, what is the unit pleased about and what are its principal concerns?  What needs to be improved?  What areas of the discipline should the program emphasize?  How does the unit view its future?

THE FOLLOW-UP PROCESS

Within a month of the date of the site visit, external and internal reviewers will collaborate to produce a single written report summarizing the strengths of the program and recommending changes if these seem to be warranted.  Within six months following receipt of the reviewers' report, the program faculty will draft a written response to the reviewers' report, indicating the actions to be taken to address each recommendation.

The dean of the school will call a follow-up meeting within six months to a year of the date of the site visit for the purpose of discussing the program faculty's response to the reviewers' report.  All appropriate representatives of the campus administration will be invited to this meeting in order to bring to bear all the university resources that are needed to assist the unit in making essential improvements.  In subsequent years, the program's progress in each targeted improvement area should be addressed in its annual planning/budgeting review.  During the third or fourth year following the review, the Program Review and Assessment Committee will schedule a meeting with the department chair for discussion of the longer-term outcomes of the review.