Roles and Responsibilities

Various units and individuals from across the university play critical roles in the academic program review process.

In the Unit under review, the unit head selects faculty members for the unit’s APR committee, including a chair of the committee.  The committee then collects data, prepares the Self-Study Report, and brings it to the full faculty for deliberation, amendment, and final approval.  Then the unit head prepares a Chair’s Letter, which will be reviewed along with the Self-Study Report.  Once all the reviews are in, the unit head consults with the Dean to develop the unit’s APR Action Plan.

The Dean of the unit’s college reviews the Self-Study and Chair’s Letter and prepares a response.  The Dean’s Letter speaks to the suitability of the unit’s goals, any college-level re-allocations necessary to achieve the goals, and the fit between the unit’s goals and those of the college’s strategic plan (if present).  The Dean meets with the external review team.  After all the reviews are in, the Dean works with the unit head and the Provost to develop the unit’s APR Action Plan for the coming years.  Once the APR Action Plan is approved, the Dean is responsible for supervising its implementation, and issues an annual report speaking to the state of implementation.

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness (OIE) assists and coordinates the Academic Program Review process.  The Associate Provost for Institutional Effectiveness is responsible for overseeing academic program review, including preparing and gaining approval of the review schedule from the Committee on Academic Programs, providing orientation sessions for academic programs prior to review, securing and coordinating visits of outside evaluators to campus, assisting and supporting the Academic Program Review Committee (a sub-committee of the Committee on Academic Programs), and monitoring the status of action plans and their implementation.  Day to day management of the review process is undertaken by the Director of Academic Program Review, who helps units connect the content of the self-study report to the university strategic plan; provides the unit APR committee, external reviewers, and APRC members with institutional context; answers questions on the analysis of data and report creation, helps resolve data consistency issues; checks unit and external reviewer reports for compliance with reporting guidelines and deadlines; and aids in the development of action plans; and manages and catalogs all information related to the academic program review process.   OIE’s Office for Institutional Research and Office of Decision Support Services, collect data for units under review from a wide variety of sources, display the data on the unit’s Dashboard, prepare and administer surveys of the unit’s faculty, students, and alumni, and work with units to resolve data inconsistencies.

The External Reviewers are a team of two or three faculty members from other institutions in the unit’s discipline.  They review the Self-Study Report and Chair’s and Dean’s Letters; meet with the Dean and Provost; visit the unit and speak with faculty, students, and staff; and prepare a report, within 10 days of their visit, articulating the results of their review and their recommendations.

The Academic Program Review Committee (APRC) is a subcommittee of the University Senate’s Committee on Academic Programs (CAP).  APRC performs a review of the documents generated by the APR process, including the Self-Study Report, Chair’s and Dean’s Letters, and External Reviewer’s Report.  APRC prepares a brief report, which speaks to the quality, centrality, and viability of the unit’s programs, as well as the fit between the unit’s goals and those of the University Strategic Plan.

The Provost meets with the external review team, reviews all documents generated by the APR process, determines which of the unit’s goals can be approved, and approves the unit’s APR Action Plan.  The Provost monitors the annual reports by deans on the implementation of APR Action Plans as part of the deans’ annual evaluation process.