General Information

 

APR Schedule

APR operates on a seven-year schedule.  Each academic unit is reviewed one time each cycle.  Below are links to the schedules for the current cycle (2013-2020) and the next planned cycle (2020-2027).

2013-2020 Cycle

2020-2027 Cycle

Process and Timeline

The APR process lasts approximately two years.  During the first year, the unit collects data and prepares a detailed self-study report, which follows a template developed by the University Senate Committee on Academic Programs (CAP).  During the second year, the report is reviewed by the unit’s dean, a team of external reviewers who conduct a site visit, and the Academic Program Review Committee, a subcommittee of CAP.  Following the completion of the review process, the unit develops an Action Plan in consultation with the Dean, which is then reviewed by the Provost.  Once the Provost has approved the Action Plan, the unit begins implementation, with the Dean providing annual progress reports.

The timeline for Academic Program Review process is available here: APR Timeline.

Roles and Responsibilities

A variety of units and individuals participate in the APR process.  The key actors are:

  • The unit under review and its chair
  • The Dean of the unit under review
  • The external reviewers
  • The Academic Program Review Committee (APRC)
  • The Provost

Detailed descriptions of the role each actor plays and the resources each will need can be found in the section Information for Participants.

APR Funding Domain

APR is expected, wherever possible, to be a budget-neutral process, with its major focus on non-resource-dependent program quality improvements.  The cost of quality improvements—whether for faculty lines, staff, infrastructure, operating budgets, or graduate funding—will need to be met, for the most part, by reallocations elsewhere within the relevant college or unit.

It is also expected that Action Plan commitments as well as the corresponding college level resource allocations for APR will be two-directional in nature. Units that have been evaluated positively in terms of their quality, productivity, and viability, and relevance to the University and College Strategic Plans will gain resources while units that have been negatively evaluated on these criteria will experience redirection of existing funds.

Accreditation and Academic Program Review

Units with programs that are separately accredited are still required to undergo APR.  Nevertheless, every effort is made to exploit the overlap between the two processes so that units are not unduly burdened.  For details, see the statement approved by the Committee on Academic Programs and Continuing Education (APACE, the precursor to CAP) in 2002.