Committee on Undergraduate Academic Program
Development and Review Process Improvement
CHARGE
January 6, 1997
The myriad of activities and processes related to undergraduate academic
program development, review, evaluation, and improvement, is such that
it seems prudent to consider whether these processes are currently serving
existing faculty and institutional needs in efficient and effective ways.
These activities and processes include course and curriculum review done
currently through our system of courses and curricula committees, reviews
associated with accreditations in disciplines, and institutional assessment
activities which focus on the outcomes of the delivery of our undergraduate
academic programs. This committee is asked to consider current undergraduate
academic program development and review processes and to make recommendations
for improving processes that will promote, support, and facilitate our
undergraduate academic programs, by providing an improved basis for effective
program evaluation and improvement which is crucial to:
-
enable effective response to institutional information needs,
-
provide assessment information useful to departments and the institution,
-
satisfy accreditation requirements, and
-
control unnecessary duplication among processes.
Central to this task is the recognition that academic program development
and review must always originate with and have the endorsement of faculty
in the respective programs and departments where the courses are taught
and where students are advised. While the Office of the Provost has the
final official responsibility for approval and documentation of the academic
programs offered, the degree to which all kinds of review activities must
traverse the same path can certainly be questioned. Therefore, the committee
is respectfully requested to:
-
Propose any needed improvements in the existing processes, or better alternative
processes, for undergraduate academic program review that:
-
acknowledge the principle of faculty responsibility for academic programs
-
clearly indicate the necessary levels and types of review at the program/department,
college, and university levels, paying particular attention to the functions
of courses in the curriculum in considering at what levels reviews are
appropriate
-
wherever possible and appropriate, integrate processes related to program
review and focus the resulting process on improving programs continuously
-
promote sound educational planning by:
-
addressing the issue of relevance to institutional mission
-
facilitating communication between departments and colleges on relevant,
mutual academic program matters (requiring courses in curriculums, curriculum
development, content analysis, delivery considerations, pedagogy, resource
planning)
-
addressing issues of appropriate resources
-
identifying core indicators to be included in program reviews
-
minimize the information processing requirements at every level (department,
college, university), making use of existing information technology as
appropriate
-
Propose a time line and process for implementing any revised or new processes
|
