Program Review Fillable Self-Study Master Template

OFFICE OF INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

PROGRAM REVIEW

Fillable Self-Study Template

College:  (Enter text)

Dean or A-Dean Responsible for Program Reviews in this College: (Enter text)

Department/School: (Enter text)

Primary Person Responsible for this Self-Study Template: (Enter text)

Last Program Review Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Date: (Enter text)

Upload a Copy of the MoU associated with this Self-Study: (Enter text)

Last Program Review Date: (Enter text)

For each section on this template, address the prompt questions provided in a narrative format. Please remember to include the following requirements in your narrative:

·       Goal/anticipated outcome from last program review

·       Actual results

§  Indicate the name, date, and source of data sets (see each section for required data pulls and inclusion)

§  Provide 5-year data, including yearly incremental disaggregation

·       Analysis of results

§  Provide previous data sets/results analysis

§  Discuss notable trends and patterns, historical fluctuations, unexpected findings, etc.

§  Indicate if previous target was met and how results relate to outcome statement

§  Conduct benchmarking of peer institutions and discuss how local findings compare to state or national trends

·       Improvements made since the last program review

§  List any improvements made in the last 5-year program review cycle (include and refer to annual program review action plan progress reports)

§  Evaluate why and how improvements were successful/not successful

§  Indicate budget and resources implications involved in these improvements

§  Discuss status of each goal included on the last program review’s action plan (i.e., met, not met, in progress)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

·       Required Data Points:

Visibility and Reputation (i.e., as evidenced in external rankings, etc.)

Program Meets Local/State Need 

Labor Market Projections (i.e., demand for the program/major, etc.) 

Program’s last 5-year Strategic Plan

Mission and Vision statements and Strategic Plan Goals/Objectives’ alignment with the College and BGSU’s Strategic Plan, Mission, and Vision (Use separate Multi-Levels Alignment Table in Appendix A)

Organizational Chart

Updated Program Catalog Listing

Updated Program Webpages

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section I: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space (Enter Text)

·       Prompt questions to address:

1.       Is the program’s mission clearly aligned with the University’s mission and strategic priorities? Does the program effectively educate graduates who will contribute to the common good? How does the program contribute to the vision, mission, and values of the University, specifically as outlined in BGSU’s strategic plan? Has the program’s mission and/or vision been modified in the last five years? Why?

2.       How are the program’s mission, goals, and student learning outcomes clearly articulated and communicated to faculty, students, and staff as well as other campus constituencies?

3.       What makes the program distinctive (in the field and/or on campus)? What is the program’s reputation in the field?

4.       What trends are emerging within the program’s discipline? Do these trends warrant the need for a change in the program?

5.       What leadership changes have recently occurred? How have these impacted the program’s effectiveness?

6.       How is the program organized in its operations and functions? How do faculty (tenure, non-tenured, adjunct, etc.), staff, and students participate in program administration/governance and decision-making? How does the program leadership work with campus leadership at other levels in visioning and organizational activities?

7.       Whom does the program see as current competitors? How does the program compare to other programs within the state of Ohio? Nationally?

o   Section # 1 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

APS and OIR data: Historical Enrollment Patterns:Headcount, Attrition, and Completion Rate (Fall-to-Fall Retention/Persistence Rate, Withdrawal Trends, Transfer Trends, In Progress Status, etc.); Time-to-Degree Data; Graduation Rates; Degrees Awarded Data; Specific Student Demographics, Headcount and Diversity (i.e., Full-time vs. part-time, Resident vs. non-resident, First time college, Underrepresented Minority, Undergraduate versus graduate, International Students, Gender, Ethnicity; Student Quality (i.e., Average GRE, ACT, SAT, GPA, etc.).

5-Year Recruitment/Enrollment Plan

Post-Graduation/Employment Status/ Job Placement Surveys Data (Career Services)

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 2: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      What have enrollment trends been in the last five years? If declining, discuss root causes. How do demographics support the diversity of our society and campus community? How do findings about diversity compare with other programs, departments and/or peer institutions?

2)       What retention, graduation, and progress toward degree benchmarks has the program set for itself? Have these been met? If not, discuss root causes.

3)      How has the program determined that its strategies and processes to ensure student recruitment and retention are adequate? Does the program have a realistic enrollment/retention/recruitment plan, inclusive of enrollment projections and recruitment and retention activities?

4)      What are the program’s efforts to ensure quality and viability?

5)      What efforts does the program make to recruit and retain underrepresented students? What success has there been in this effort? What diverse recruiting pools exist for the program? What data exist to prove it? What processes and/or procedures exist to ensure the “right fit” of students for this program?

6)      What are the program’s efforts to track student graduation and placement?

7)      How does the record of employment placement and/or admission to graduate programs correspond to program/institutional objectives and the type of program?  If not, what are the differences?

• Section # 2 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

SAAC Reports

NSSE Data/Student Satisfaction Surveys

Course Pass Rates

Student Engagement (including Curricular and Co-curricular) Data/Information

Additional evidence of Student Performance on Key Assessments not already addressed in the SAAC reports and/or additional Signature Projects or highlights of Student Performance

Evidence of Student Research

Additional evidence of program-based assessment of student learning methods and results as well as use of these results for improvement of student learning

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 3: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space

·       Please Note:

As part of your program review self-study, review and update your Student Achievement Assessment Committee (SAAC) Assessment Plan. Programs without an existing SAAC Assessment Plan should develop one using the template provided by the Office of Academic Assessment (OAA). When considering the prompt questions below, synthesize and integrate your SAAC Assessment Plan and Reportfindings to inform your narrative on student learning and success. Ensure that feedback from the program review process is incorporated into your plan before submitting the updated version during the next SAAC reporting period.

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      Does the program have appropriate and measurable learning outcomes? Are they obtainable within the scope of the program? Are they reflective of disciplinary standards? Are they published widely and publicly? Describe the process by which program learning outcomes are reviewed and updated based on data-informed needs (if applicable) and their alignment to the curriculum. Are there specialized curricular offerings in the program? Do the specialized curricular offerings have specific and level-appropriate learning outcomes?

2)      Using assessment evidence from the past five years (including SAAC reports, when applicable), provide an evidence-based analysis of major student learning successes, challenges, student satisfaction, and continuous improvement efforts. Consider the guiding questions below as appropriate to your program: What do the data indicate regarding student satisfaction with their learning? What do the data indicate regarding program graduates achieving the goals and intended learning outcomes of the program? Describe how assessment data are used to tell the story of student learning and program quality. Discuss how student learning has improved or decreased in the last five years. Discuss causes for any changes. How does the program effectively use student learning outcome data to improve program quality? Are there best assessment practices or methods that the program should consider using to measure its success in achieving its program outcomes? How are student learning data communicated to internal and external constituencies?

3)      What significant academic awards or scholarly publications have students received?

4)      How do students perform in program courses compared to other BGSU programs and/or similar programs from peer institutions? What program requirements (courses, pre-requisites, etc.) may need to be adjusted for the program to continue to maintain its high-quality?

5)      How does the program provide a stimulating and challenging learning environment for all students? What efforts have been made to create an intellectual climate that fosters student development, including awareness and sensitivity to multicultural, diverse, global, and technological issues? What do the data indicate regarding student engagement and performance in learning opportunities, including research and co-curricular activities?  

6)      How does student performance indicate satisfactory discipline-specific career preparation and related job market? Have students had any professional impact in the field in the last 5 years?

7)      How are student learning assessment data utilized to provide actionable feedback to students? How does the program effectively monitor student academic progress and assist underperforming students?

•  Section # 3 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

New Curriculum/Course Proposals (as applicable)

Syllabi (Pertinent Representative Samples only)

Updated Program Catalog Listing

As applicable: Curriculum meeting minutes; Evidence related to diversity, to technology integration in program courses, etc.; Student satisfaction with the curriculum survey data; etc.

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 4: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space (Enter Text)

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      How does the program define “learning experience”? Are students provided with adequate learning experiences (including co-curricular) that align with program, College/School, and institutional goals? Does the program’s curriculum provide breadth, depth, and challenge considering current scholarship and trends in the field? How does the program educate students in the values, knowledge, and skills appropriate to the discipline? Provide examples in support of your claims.

2)      Has the program curriculum been revised in the last five years? Why? Why not?  How has curricular rigor been established and maintained in the last five years?

3)      How does the primary instructional mode used in the program contribute to a meaningful learning experience? If varying instructional modes exist, how does the learning experience compare among them?

4)      How do courses effectively include instructional media, modern technologies, and innovative teaching strategies that promote student engagement with the learning process? Provide examples in support of your claims.

5)      How intentional are co-curricular experiences (i.e., internships, field experiences, co-ops, undergraduate research)?  How are they incorporated into the program curriculum?  How are they assessed?

6)      How does the program demonstrate a commitment to diversity in its curriculum?

7)      How does the curriculum compare with those of comparable (peer) institutions? What procedures exist to modernize curricular content?

•  Section # 4 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

Faculty Scholarship Data, including awards and recognition (i.e., Resume/CVs; Data from Faculty 180 or department/school database)

Revenue Generated by Faculty Grant Awards, Gifts, Contracts, etc.

Student Course Evaluations Data

Faculty and Staff Demographics Data (APS and OIR Data, Headcount, FTE, and composition, i.e., full-time, part-time, etc.)

Instructional Productivity (i.e., Student Credit Hour (SCH) Generation Data, Credit Hours Trends by Faculty Category, Delivery Format, etc.)

Instructional and Research Expenditures per SCH

Faculty Load Distribution and Analysis (APS Data; Courses Taught by Faculty/Instructors by Rank

Faculty Rank Promotion (as applicable)

Capacity Utilization/Sections Fill Rates (APS Data)

Faculty and Staff Salary Benchmarks

Samples of Faculty Engagement with (1) advising, (2) external recruitment efforts, and (3) research with students

Evidence of the program’s effort (1) to recruit from diverse faculty pools and (2) to offer professional development opportunities reflecting best practices in the discipline

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 5: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      What is the program’s philosophy and practice for who teaches which courses? How is faculty load determined? Is the faculty/student ratio appropriate to support student learning? Are all instructors properly credentialed? Offered training or professional development opportunities?

2)      What are the findings relative to faculty demographic data? What efforts has the program made to recruit and retain underrepresented/diverse faculty and staff? Have there been significant hires or losses within the five-year reporting cycle?

3)      What awards/grants have faculty and staff received? How have these supported the program’s mission, vision, and strategic plan?

4)      How does the faculty compare to faculty at other institutions in terms of their contributions to scholarship and creative work; teaching; and service to students, the profession, and community? What are students’ perceptions of faculty as teachers? As advisors? What data exist to substantiate quality advising? What is the caliber of instruction by program faculty? What data exist to prove it?

5)      How are the faculty sufficiently active in research or creative work to support superior academic programming?

6)      How do faculty stay current within their discipline? How do they stay current on best practices within the scholarship of teaching within their discipline?

7)      How do faculty engage students in their scholarly work? Provide examples in support of your claims.

•  Section # 5 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

Facilities Inventory (as applicable)

Technology Resources Inventory (as applicable)

Administrative Staff Data (Headcount, CVs/Resumes, Load, etc.)

Evidence in support of effective, transparent, and astute program resource management

Past five-year budgets and expenses

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 6: (Optional; As selected by program)

·       Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      Explain how the program’s human and fiscal resources (support staff, space, laboratories, computer technology, equipment, income, and expense budgets, etc.) are adequate to sustain a high-quality program in the long-term.

2)      How do the program resources for administrative and classified support staff compare with other programs at BGSU?

3)      How does the total amount of resources provided to the program compare with those allocated to similar programs at BGSU?

4)      What is the program’s assessment of its most pressing equipment and resource needs? Are the facilities and services able to meet the program’s mission and strategic goals and maintain its quality? Has the program accurately identified and prioritized its most important resource needs to improve overall quality? What kinds of space and/or facility issues does the program face? What are the projections for future needs?

5)      How well do the university’s computer hardware and software policies and campus support for technology meet the program’s current needs?

6)      How does the program assess how well it uses available fiscal and human resources and how often does it do so?

7)      Has the program had success in procuring external fundings? What programmatic activities does external fundings support? Are these external fundings sources viable long-term? What transition plan exist once they are exhausted?

•  Section # 6 narrative: (Enter Text)

Instructions:

-          The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) has pre-filled some of the data points required in this template. Use the drop-spaces below to provide any other required or additional evidence/information as instructed. Tables, charts, screenshots, hyperlinks, or embedded attachments such as PDFs, Excel, or Word documents are allowed.

-          The narrative must be between 1,500 words/3 pages (min.) and 3,000 words/6 pages (max.).

• Required Data Points:

Direct Costs and Trends in Direct Costs

Past five-year Budgets and Expenses

Non-Tuition Revenue and Expenses (i.e., Grant income, etc.)

Program Review Annual Action Plan Progress Report (since last 5-year cycle)

Any measure of institutional value (i.e., employer feedback, Labor Market Projections, Job Placement Satisfaction Data, etc.)

Evidence for Potential for Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Program Demand Data

Competition Benchmarks

·       Additional Data and/or Supporting Evidence for Section 7: (Optional; As selected by program)

o   Data/Supporting Evidence drop-space

·       Prompt questions to address:

1)      Is the overall evaluation plan for the program appropriate to demonstrate commitment to continuous improvement?

2)      Given current developments within the discipline, profession, society, and the institution, what are the anticipated needs for this program in the next five years?

3)      How does the academic and organizational structure as well as the culture of the program foster its mission and goals and continuous improvement? Please provide examples or data to support your claims.  

4)      How does the program’s historical data and plans reflect its vitality and growth? Describe what the program’s productivity looks like, including trends from the last five years (i.e., for example, consider SCH production, completion rates, migration in and out, direct costs, increasing vs. shrinking majors, etc.). Is there a need to realign the program? What have the Annual Action Plan Progress Reports and PVA Data revealed regarding the program’s long-term sustainability and ability to pivot to meet changing demands?

5)      How can the efficiency and effectiveness of the program be improved based on data?

6)      Given the evidence, how would the program compare with other programs within discipline, college, and institution?

7)      Is the program evaluation plan comprehensive enough? Are there key program goals or objectives that the department has not evaluated and should be evaluated in the next cycle?

•  Section # 7 narrative: (Enter Text)
• 5-Year Action Plan and Future Developments

Briefly respond to the following prompt questions (200 words max.) THEN complete the Action Plan table (Appendix B) for the next five-year cycle (Enter next cycle year)

1)      What are the program’s weaknesses, challenges, and threats?

2)      What are the program’s strengths?

3)      What are the program’s opportunities?

4)      What further challenges do you foresee the program facing in the next five years?

5)      What specific additional resources (i.e., programming, services, facilities, marketing, budget, staffing, etc.) would help strengthen the program?

6)       What existing national or local trends in the field may impact the future direction of the program?

7)      Based on the findings of this self-study, what should be the program goals and priorities for the next five years?