Academic Program External Review Findings Response Template

Instructions:

This report should list the recommendations from the external reviewers and the department/cluster’s response to those recommendations. Further, the department should work with its respective Dean/Associate Dean’s office to indicate what actions will take place as a result of the review. Deadline: This report is due to the Office of Institutional Effectiveness by (Date: ………...). Questions: Any questions about the process can be directed to the Program Review Coordinator at institutionaleff@bgsu.edu

I. Response to the External Reviewers’ Recommendations

In this section of the report, please copy/paste the recommendations that the external reviewers provided in their report. Feel free to focus on the top 5 to 8 recommendations from the external reviewers’ report that are more salient or timely to the department/cluster’s needs. Then, provide a departmental/cluster response to each recommendation. This is an opportunity to agree with the recommendation or disagree with it (and in the latter case, to provide some context as to why). Copy/Paste from your existing Action Plan as needed for the third column (far right). Indicate which initiative(s) of the University’s strategic plan would be addressed (For the full strategic plan, click here). Add lines to the table as necessary.

Recommendations from External Reviewers

(copied from the external reviewers' report)

Response

(Agree/Disagree and Rationale)

Is this already addressed in the Department/Cluster Action Plan?

Yes/No and how? What metrics will be used for evaluation of this Action Plan item? What is the timeline for accomplishment of this Action Plan item? Who will be the person(s) responsible?

Initiative(s) from BGSU's Strategic Plan addressed by this specific Action Plan item
    
    
    
    
    

II. Self-Reflective Summary

In this section of the report, reflect on the entire process of undergoing the review.

Prompt questions for consideration: Were there discoveries made during the Program Review about the department/cluster that are worth noting? Did the external reviewers’ findings point to aspects of the department/cluster that were not originally mentioned in the self-study? Besides the listed actions, are there other aspects of the department/cluster that will change as a result of the study? Did the external reviewers confirm the activities that are well done in the department/cluster in ways that were expected? Unexpected? This section may be in narrative or bullet format.

Updated: 02/10/2026 03:40PM