1. Report from the Ad Hoc Institute Review Committee (IRC)
Ronald Arkin
Kent Barefield
Brent Carter
Russell Gentry
Mark Guzdial
Joseph Hoey
Jeff Jagoda
Jim McClellan
John McIntyre
Farrokh Mistree
Gary Parker
Steve Usselman
Paul Wine
Brian Woodall
Computing
Chemistry
Mechanical Engineering
Architecture
Computing (IUCC Liaison)
Office of Assessment
Aerospace (GCC Liaison)
ECE
Management
ISYE
HTS
International Affairs
J. Jospeh Hoey, Ed.D.
Director of Assessment
Office of Assessment
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia
fax
T. Russell Gentry, Ph.D., PE
Associate Professor
College of Architecture
Architecture Program / AWPL
Atlanta, Georgia
fax
Presented 8 April 2003
Georgia Tech Executive Board Meeting
Russell Gentry, Architecture
Joseph Hoey, Office of Assessment

2. Outline Background Institute Review Committee
IRC Recommendations for the Future
Hughes/Green Proposal
IRC and CIAPRA
IRC Operations going forward

3. Background: GT Experience with Program Review
SACS visit problems in 1994 and 1998 – certain programs on campus are not being assessed
IUCC and GCC not reviewing curriculum per statutory requirements in 1980’s and 1990’s – no process in place to enable this review
Board of Regents Mandate in 2000 – periodic program review required
Dean Rosser report recommends formation of IRC
IRC formed as an ad-hoc appointed committee with two year life

4. IRC Operations: Fall 2001 to Spring 2003
8 members on the IRC with the Director of Assessment acting as Chair
ROLE
Develop infrastructure: schedules, templates, procedures
Police/enable the process
Liaison with colleges and schools
Assess the process: How is it working and how can it be improved?
April 15 summary presentations

5. IRC Requests to EB
Late Fall 2002: If IRC operations are to go forward, then the EB will need to appoint additional members to the IRC (operational)
Spring 2003: Disband IRC – its mission is complete (strategic)
IRC members feel that the committee need not continue if its role is solely to administer the program review process – this is an administrative function that is well-handled by the Office of Assessment.

6. Hughes/Green Proposal
Expand IRC role to assist with the curriculum review
Charge IRC with condensing and commenting on review materials and providing a summary for the Provost’s use
IRC to become a faculty committee or standing sub-committee of the curriculum committee(s)
IRC Reaction:
Generally positive. Role of curriculum review piece and IUCC/GCC interaction needs clarification.

7. Future Operations: IRC and CIAPRA
CIAPRA: Council on Institutional Accreditation, Program Review, and Assessment
High level committee – administrators, organized to address SACS and other Institute-wide issues
Policy-level advice to the Provost
Ability to look across the program review process to identify problems and opportunities
IRC: Institute Review Committee
Support policy-making functions of CIAPRA within the context of periodic program review and the scope of the IRC charter.

8. IRC Role going Forward
Infrastructure: provide templates, instructions, flowcharts, and schedules for program review
Liaison: act as a bridge between the program review process and the individual units undergoing review
Policing: Set dates for key milestones in the program review process and ensure that elements of the program review are routed to and received from appropriate members of the GT community (Deans, IUCC, GCC, Office of Assessment, CIAPRA, Provost)
Curriculum Review: Provide or enable curriculum review of undergraduate and graduate components as appropriate.
Synthesis: Provide a final synthesis of each program review that reflects key findings and recommendations from the elements of program review: (1) self-study, (2) external visitors’ report, (3) Dean’s letter, and (4) curriculum review report.

9. IRC Makeup
Minimum of 8 members, one from each college with one additional from Engineering
Ability to add additional members during years when a large number of programs are undergoing review (minimum 2 members for each program review)
Liaison members from IUCC, GCC, and CIAPRA
Membership for 3 years with 1/3 rotating off each year
Director of Assessment to chair committee with a faculty co-chair

10. EB Decision-Making Elected or appointed committee?
Position within faculty governance structure?
Relationship with IUCC and GCC?
Two roles of collaboration at expressed preference of IUCC and IGC: (1) IRC forwards curriculum-related information to curriculum committees who review the curriculum component and report back to the IRC or (2) the curriculum committees appoint liaison members who sit on the IRC and complete the curriculum review component “in house”.