Orientation for Academic Program Reviews

Introduction o Purpose of this meeting: Orient academic units to the review process o Outline for today: Overview of the review process Selecting the review committee Content of the self-study Site visit Resources available to you

Purpose of Program Reviews o Primary purpose: evaluate academic excellence o Emphasis on future-oriented strategic planning rather than retrospective accounting o Includes all undergraduate and graduate degree programs, Graduate Certificates o Allows units to plan for the future o Compliance with University mandate o UW institutional accreditation

How to Prepare for Program Reviews o Make process transparent Identify faculty and staff who will be involved in the review Inform faculty, staff and students about the pending review and what it entails; seek their input Make self-study available to constituents o The more informed constituents are, the better prepared they will be in giving their input to the review team

How to Prepare for Program Reviews o Communicate early on with the Dean or Chancellor/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs about what the institution and unit would like to accomplish in the review. o How can the review team’s perspective be valuable to the unit—how can they help?

Program Review Timeline o Autumn Quarter – year before review Unit submits documentation: suggested site visit dates proposed review committee members (UW and external) unit-defined questions for self-study

Program Review Timeline o Winter and Spring Quarters – year before review 1)Confirm site visit dates 2)Establish review committee 3)Hold charge meeting

1) Site Visit Dates o 2 days for colleges, schools, departments o 1 -1 ½ days for smaller programs, individual degree programs, or graduate certificates o Unit suggests dates when faculty, students and staff are available o Monday/Tuesday or Thursday/Friday

2) Review Committee o Completed Review Committee Recommendation Form contains: Requested site visit dates Ranked list of potential reviewers 8 UW reviewer suggestions 8 external reviewer suggestions Indicate potential committee chairs (UW faculty) Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest List has been reviewed by Dean’s Office / Chancellor’s Office before submission

Forming a Review Committee o Reach for the top in considering external faculty for the review committee, not only individuals who may be close professional colleagues, but those who can give balanced yet critical perspectives on the unit in relation to peers and future direction of the field o Propose faculty with diverse backgrounds and perspectives; assure gender and other diversity

Review Committee Member Conflicts of Interest o Possible conflicts of interest include faculty who: have a joint, adjunct, or affiliate position in your unit have been a mentor for or mentee of a faculty member in your unit are unit alumni were considered for a position in your unit within the last five years are currently on a visiting or advisory committee have previously chaired a review committee or served on a visiting committee in your unit have engaged, or are currently engaged, in collaborative research or published with a member of your unit have a significant personal or professional relationship with a unit member

3) Charge Meeting o Attendees: review committee unit leadership school/college/campus leadership Graduate School Undergraduate Academic Affairs Graduate School Council o Results in formal charge to the review committee as well formal charge to the unit to write the self-study, taking into account the Part B: Unit-Defined Questions o Documents available on Program Review Catalyst website (password protected, available only to review committee and staff involved with program review planning)

Prior to Site Visit o Unit collaborates with Academic Affairs and Planning to plan site visit and respond to needs of review committee o Unit proposes site visit agenda o Academic Affairs and Planning makes self-study and site visit agenda available to all review participants via Catalyst website (website created prior to charge meeting) o Review committee may request additional information from unit and may suggest revisions to site visit agenda

The Site Visit o Meetings with unit constituents and key stakeholders, including faculty, students, staff, and others o Graduate & Professional Student Senate (GPSS) survey and participation in student meeting Independent of Graduate School process Exclusively for Seattle campus graduate programs o Exit discussion between those present at the charge meeting plus a Provost’s Office representative General session Executive session (without unit’s leadership)

Final Events o GPSS Report* o Review Committee Report (within 4 weeks) Submitted to Office of Academic Affairs & Planning o Academic Unit’s Response (within 4 weeks) Response letter to review committee report o Graduate School Council consideration of report and recommendations o Graduate School Recommendations to Dean / Chancellor / Vice Chancellor o All underlined documents available on Catalyst site and, after review is formally concluded, on the University’s decennial accreditation website (password protected) *GPSS participation is exclusive to Seattle campus and is independent of the University’s review process.

Self-Study Structure o Part A Unit’s responses to pre-defined questions o Part B Unit’s responses to questions it has defined o Part C Required appendices

Self-Study Limit of 25 pages Units with national accreditation reviews Submit one hard copy and one digital copy Submission deadlines: September 1 for Autumn Quarter site visits November 1 for Winter Quarter site visits February 1 for Spring Quarter site visits

Example of Review Process Timeline o Site Visit Autumn Quarter, 2014 o GPSS Report (2-3 weeks) Winter Quarter, 2015 o Review Committee Report (4 weeks): Winter Quarter, 2015 o Academic Unit’s Response (4 weeks) Winter Quarter, 2015 o Graduate School Council Review Spring Quarter, 2015

Another example of Timeline o Site Visit Winter Quarter, 2015 o GPSS Report (2-3 weeks) Spring Quarter, 2015 o Review Committee Report (4 weeks) Spring Quarter, 2015 o Academic Unit’s Response (4 weeks) Spring Quarter, 2015 o Graduate School Council Review Autumn Quarter, 2015(next academic year)

Review Process Documents o Review committee charge letter o Site visit agenda o Self-study* o GPSS report* o Review committee report* o Unit’s response to report* o Letter to Dean / Chancellor / Vice Chancellor* *Published on password protected UW Accreditation website upon completion of the review

If you need help… o Contacts in the Office of Academic Affairs & Planning: Rebecca Aanerud, Associate Dean Augustine McCaffery, Senior Academic Program Specialist David Canfield-Budde, Academic Program Specialist Lillian Gaya, Assistant to the Deans

Next Steps Due by end of Autumn Quarter )Suggested site visit dates 2)Proposed review committee members (UW and external) 3)Part B: Unit-Defined Questions for self-study