THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA
ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW
Form 1: Procedures
Background | Procedures | Timetable |  Forms | Master Schedule | Accreditation Summary

Procedures for Program Reviews

The Office for Academic Affairs (OAA) coordinates program reviews in cooperation with the academic unit under review, the respective college or school, and the Graduate School whenever graduate programs are involved.  Reviews are scheduled at a time convenient for the academic unit under review.

There are two program review procedures. “Full” review is for programs not subject to external accreditation.  “Modified” review is for programs subject to accreditation.

1. Full Review:

When none of the degree programs in a department is accredited by an external agency or professional organization, there will be a full review every 8 years. At the beginning of the review, OAA provides data forms and objective data from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment to assist in completing the forms. There will be an internal review committee and an external consultant.

2.  Modified Review:

a) When all degree programs in a department are accredited (e.g., departments in the Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration and the College of Education), OAA provides the department forms that are modified versions of the full review forms. OAA provides the department with objective data from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment to assist in completing the forms. The forms and OIRA data are provided during the early stages of the department’s self-study for external accreditation. When the self-study is completed, the department sends OAA the completed forms and a copy of the self-study. The department sends OAA the site-visit report within one week of receiving it from the site-visit team or accrediting agency.

b) When a department has both accredited and unaccredited degree programs (e.g., departments in the College of Engineering), OAA will consult with the dean and department chair to determine whether all should have full review or all should have modified review. Rather than following the 8-year cycle used when no programs in a department are accredited, the review of departments with a mix of accredited and unaccredited programs normally will occur in the year when the self-study begins for accreditation. If the accrediting agency has a short review cycle, full reviews may occur every other cycle.

Detailed Steps in the Review of Programs Not Subject to External Accreditation (“Full” Review)

Spring prior to review:
  • Deans contacted to fine-tune review schedule for next academic year
  • On-line Student Satisfaction Surveys completed (optional)
  • Consultants nominated and contacted
  • Program review committees nominated

Summer prior to review:
  • Consultants’ visits finalized
  • Data to complete review forms obtained from Institutional Research and Assessment
  • Two-day visits scheduled with external consultants(typically for Sept.-Oct.)

Fall:
  • Review forms completed & submitted to OAA
  • Review committees established and oriented
  • Committees analyze data and conduct interviews of dean, department chair, faculty, students, and others as appropriate
  • Committees begin to draft report
  • Consultant’s report sent to OAA review coordinator, who forwards it to department chair, dean and review committee

 Spring:
  • Committee sends draft report to OAA review coordinator, dean, and department chair; draft report ends with these 3 sections: 
         (1) strengths;
         (2) areas of opportunity; and
         (3) recommendations—grouped into low-cost and higher
              cost
  • Chair consults with dean’s office and sends OAA review coordinator and each committee member an Action Plan (described below) addressing each recommendation in the committee’s report and demonstrating consistency with the department’s Strategic Plan
  • Committee prepares final report
  • Final meeting:  provost and other OAA representatives, graduate dean when graduate programs involved, academic dean and assistant/associate dean(s), department chair, and review committee; discussion focuses on committee recommendations and department’s Action Plan
  • Provost’s letter to dean, with copies to all who were involved in review
  • Executive Summary sent to Chancellor’s Office

1-2 years after review is completed:
  • Dean reports to provost when each item in the Action Plan is completed
  • Follow-up report on Action Plan progress (only if stipulated in provost’s letter) 

3 years after review:
  • Mid-cycle report (“Form 5”) on Action Plan progress (all full reviews)

Guidelines for Program Review Action Plan by Department Chair and Dean at the Conclusion of a Full Review

Action Plan:  Background, Format, and Components

An important outcome of academic program review is the development of a comprehensive Action Plan that begins with the department’s Strategic Plan and then addresses each action item (recommendation) in the report by the review committee.  In the months and years following completion of the review, the department chair and dean work to complete each action item.  In the dean’s regular meetings with, and reports to, the provost, the dean will inform the provost as action items are completed.

The department chair drafts the Action Plan and discusses each action with the dean. The chair makes every effort to tell how current resources can be used to address each low-cost recommendation and each higher-cost recommendation.  The plan includes the action(s) to be taken, the responsible person(s), and a timeline for completion of each.   

In May of the third year following completion of the review, the department submits to the OAA program review coordinator a report (Program Review Form 5) addressing the status of each component of the Action Plan.

Detailed Steps in the Review of Programs Subject to External Accreditation (“Modified” Review)
 
NOTES:
(1) A modified review does not include an external consultant and usually does not include a review committee.
(2) The review cycle is not fixed. It varies to coincide with the review cycle of each unit’s accrediting agency.
 
  1. During self-study period, OAA provides program review forms to unit director; OAA asks OIRA to provide unit director all available data to assist in completing the forms
  2. Unit director completes forms and forwards 3 copies of each completed form to OAA program review coordinator, along with self-study report, by the date on which the self-study is to be completed
  3. OAA and Graduate School (if graduate programs involved) review the forms and self-study report; additional information may be requested as needed
  4. Unit director sends copy of site-visit report to OAA program review coordinator within one week of receiving it
  5. If necessary, unit representatives meet with representatives of OAA and Graduate School to discuss site-visit report and information on review forms, and to decide whether to establish a review committee; this meeting generally has the same participants as the current “final meeting” for internal program reviews (except for the absence of a review committee when one has not been used)
  6. After the meeting, provost sends letter to dean to whom the unit reports; copy of letter is sent to all who attended the meeting; letter summarizes major strengths of the unit and issues to be addressed; provost and/or graduate dean may call for a “mid-cycle follow-up” meeting within a specified time to address any pressing issues
For more information please contact Dr. John Schmitt: jschmitt@ua.edu