Program Review at UNC-Chapel Hill

Instructions for Implementing the Self-Study

Program Overview
Curriculum
Faculty
Students
Leadership, Administrative Support, Facilities and Equipment, Institutional Relationships
The Future

A NOTE ON COMBINED GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEWS

A combined review of both graduate and undergraduate programs of a school, department, or curriculum offers the opportunity to evaluate each degree level within the context of its own needs, goals, and objectives, as well as within the context of the unit’s overall mission and strengths. When preparing the self-study in such a case, it is important to provide assessment and commentary on each degree level separately, wherever possible. This is done in order to conduct a meaningful evaluation of the teaching, research and training activities of each degree level on its own merits. Afterward, an assessment of the programs together should focus on the dynamic relationship between the undergraduate and graduate degree levels. The combined review should also address the program’s effectiveness in representing the discipline on campus.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The program overview presents a comprehensive assessment of the program’s degree offerings, within the parameters of its stated mission, goals, and objectives, and its position within the history of the discipline (past, present, projected), as well as within the family of its peer institutions and research centers. This is an opportunity for the program to reassess itself, restating or modifying its mission and the consequent goals and objectives. This statement serves as the framework for the evaluation process. Specifically, the reviewers will be charged to assess whether the stated mission is realistic and feasible, and whether it meets the needs of the profession for both scholarship and research.

The following suggestions may help in developing this section:

MISSION, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES

State the unit’s overall mission and goals – as well as the distinct mission and goals of the graduate and undergraduate programs, if appropriate – and the objectives to achieve those goals. There should be reference to the program’s position within the university’s mission (e.g., the Academic Plan), including the role of the undergraduate major and minor in relation to the program’s other functions (graduate program, research mission, service courses and activities). A description of the program’s organization, and policies which guide its operations, is essential.

Units with both graduate and undergraduate programs should organize subsequent materials into separate sections for each level, and then proceed to develop mission/goal/objective statements for each level, as well as for different degree programs within each.

NEED/DEMAND

For each degree or area of concentration within a degree program, including the undergraduate major (if any), please provide evidence concerning the need and/or demand for the program.

INTERDISCIPLINARY ACTIVITIES

Comment on the degree of rapport and exchange that exists with related programs, and on any means for encouraging students to take courses in other programs. Note joint faculty appointments, joint or dual degree programs, and participation by program faculty in curricula outside the program. Comment on the program’s involvement in research centers and institutes.

INTERINSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Summarize evidence that compares the quality of your program with those on other campuses within the state, the region, and the nation.

PREVIOUS EVALUATIONS

Include a synopsis of any previous evaluations or accreditation reviews of the program.

CURRICULUM

The section on curriculum is to describe the design and requirements of all degree programs, and to correlate these with the educational goals and learning outcomes they are intended to achieve for the students – content knowledge, thinking and expression skills, and professional skills. If programs sponsor certificate programs, either for matriculated or off-campus/professional students, they should be discussed as a separate program.

Specifically, the reviewers will be charged to assess the curriculum in terms of the stated mission of the program and their understanding of the needs of the profession. They will look at the breadth and depth of content, integration, opportunities for practice and research, and preparation for professional life in the 21st century. Among other things, they will look for balance between coursework and research for each concentration area, as well as balance between required and elective courses; the progression of courses, seminars, research opportunities, and integrative projects; the length and size of the program relative to its stated goals; the balance between graduate and undergraduate programs; and the timeliness of course offerings. Figure 1, “Curricular Matrix,” may help in developing this section.

For programs offering courses for General College students: Explain the program’s role in the university’s undergraduate general education program for non-majors. How do undergraduate courses that enroll general education students differ from those aimed predominately at majors or minors? How are faculty made aware of these differences? How does the program ensure that is offers general education courses in sufficient numbers to satisfy demand and to attract majors?

FACULTY

This section is to frame the discussion by the faculty and the program’s administration of the faculty’s strengths and areas of concern in research, teaching, mentoring/advising, and participating in professional, program/department, and university committees and activities. This should be accomplished by:

The Program Review Team will be asked to look at faculty size, quality and distribution by field of expertise, in relation to your program’s stated mission, and to identify priority areas of scholarship and research. We will ask them to look at how the faculty portrait relates to the university’s commitment to maintain a diverse population (e.g., women, underrepresented populations). They will consider both students and faculty evaluations of teaching, as well as whether there are sufficient opportunities for faculty to improve their teaching skills. They will look at research strength as compared to that of faculties at peer institutions, and will assess whether faculty research is effectively integrated into their teaching. We will ask them whether faculty compensation and rewards are appropriate in comparison to peer institutions. Finally, they will take into account the morale of the faculty and collegiality within the program.

It may be useful to organize the information into sections addressing overall assessment, research activities, and teaching responsibilities:

Overall Assessment of the Faculty

The overall assessment should include descriptive statements, supported by both aggregate data and individual data:

Faculty Research

State the research goals of the faculty in each program area, including standards of quality and quantity. What are the rewards and results of meeting or exceeding these goals? How do these goals compare to those of similar programs at peer institutions?

Teaching

Describe and discuss the program’s policies on teaching, (supplementing with data, as shown in Figure 2, “Teaching Activities,” and Figure 3, “Teaching Activities/Faculty Member”):

For each faculty member individually, indicate:

STUDENTS

This section is to summarize data about and by the students in the program, for the most part separating the presentation for graduate and undergraduate students. The Program Review Team will be asked to assess the standards of the program’s student scholarship and research, as well as the placements of graduates, as compared to peer institutions. They will consider the adequacy of student funding, the quality of advising and mentoring of students, student morale, student learning outcomes assessment results, average time to degree trends, and the distribution of students in relation to the university’s commitment to maintain diversity (e.g., women, underrepresented populations). They will talk with students and they will assess whether students feel that they can participate effectively to improve or revise the program.

To assist in preparing this section, there are several types of data the program can obtain, described in detail later in this manual. The program being reviewed should comment on the trends revealed by those data. Information should be obtained for the past five years and includes various configurations of data on enrollment; graduate applications and acceptances; credit hours generated; and degrees conferred.

You may want to present quantitative data in the format of Figure 4, “Demographic Profile of Graduate Students” and Figure 5, “Demographic Profile of Undergraduate Majors”. Please note significant trends. In addition, the following descriptive information should be included:

In preparing this section, please obtain student input and evaluations of all phases of the program; this is typically accomplished through the use of program-generated assessment tools and surveys. Comment on the results of any such assessments. Include a discussion of the impact of teaching by graduate student teaching assistants (GTAs) on the effectiveness of the undergraduate curriculum. Summaries and representative samples of student comments are encouraged. Comment on the legitimacy of student criticisms.

LEADERSHIP, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT, FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT, INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

The goal of this section is to assess the effectiveness of the program’s governance and administration, and the adequacy, currency, and distribution of space, equipment, and support services, especially as related to achieving the program’s stated mission.

LEADERSHIP

Describe the program’s internal organization for governance and administration. Include an organization chart, if available.

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

Comment on the adequacy of staff support, or support of others that may be appropriate, indicating the financial base of this support and clearly delineating state versus nonstate support levels. This should include technical, clerical, secretarial, and administrative support.

FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

Comment on the status and adequacy of physical facilities, including:

INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

Delineate relationships with other academic and research units.

THE FUTURE

The program is asked to engage in an intellectual five-to ten-year planning process, taking into account the self-study data generated. This section should also share with the review team the vision that the program faculty and administration hold for the discipline. Where is the program going? Stimulate faculty dialogue and report both majority and minority views.

Discuss how the program integrates an ongoing assessment of its progress toward its stated goals into planning for the future. How does the program recognize its strengths and concerns, and how is this recognition translated into planning? Where applicable, delineate between undergraduate and graduate aspects of program planning.

The Program Review Team will be asked whether the program’s plans for the future, and its new initiatives, are realistic, and reflect the needs of the discipline. They will be asked to provide insights as to significant new developments in education and/or research that they see as likely to occur in the next five years, and to assess whether the program is positioned to capitalize on these developments. They will be asked for recommendations for program growth, retraction, and/or other changes.

In preparing this section, the program may wish to address the following questions (among others):

Next: Suggestions for the Self-Study Outline

(A printable version of Program Review at UNC-Chapel Hill is also available.)