Academic Program Review
Academic Program Review at a Glance
Academic Program Review consists of on-going, high quality peer reviews of all the NSU’s academic units and programs on an approximately 5-7 year cycle. Such reviews provide a sharpened focus on academic program areas in which excellence can be achieved in order to enhance national stature and assure the most efficient use of available resources. Thus, academic program review is more of an opportunity for self-examination and self-challenge.
Resources
- Guidelines for Academic Program Review
- Academic Program Review PowerPoint
- Academic Program Review Long Range Schedule
NSU encourages the development of new and innovative academic programs which advance its mission. The development of new programs is facilitated by the New Program Review Committee (NPRC) whose members provide support and counsel for academic units seeking approval of proposals. Part of this university-wide committee’s goal is to ensure that future growth and development of the university occurs in an orderly manner. Additionally, the review process contributes to the quality of the proposed programs and increases their probability of success. It is the only process permitted by the Board of Trustees for the approval of substantially new academic programs.
Resources
- Committee Members
- Guidelines for Proposed Degree Programs
- Guidelines for Ph.D. Programs
- Proposal Review Form
- New Certificate Program Request Guidelines
- Gainful Employment Form
- Budget for Graduate Proposed Programs
- Budget for Undergraduate Proposed Programs (Draft)
- NSU Theses Dissertations Agreement
- NSU Credit Hour Policy
- New Program Review Signature Contacts
Initial Program Review
Initial Program Review occurs after New Program Approval and before Academic Review. The IPR process takes usually takes place 1 to 2 years after the new program officially starts. The purpose is to review the program proposal that was approved by the New Program Approval Committee and determine whether or not the proposal was implemented as planned.
Resources
Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes (ASLO)
The ASLO process engages the academic departments in an assessment of student learning outcomes for majors offered by the departments. The purpose of the process is to demonstrate the extent to which particular student learning outcomes have been achieved, to improve the quality of teaching in the major, and to discover methods to enhance student learning. All academic units participate in the assessment process, which is coordinated through the Office of Academic Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation as part of the Office of Academic Affairs. The ASLO process applies to all degree programs. The process is designed to ensure that outcomes for educational programs are being assessed, that assessment results inform decisions regarding the programs, and that improvement in student achievement results from this assessment. Programs are required to compare the performance of students studying on and off campus and/or online as part of their assessment of student learning outcomes by analyzing the direct assessment data overall and by location.
Resources
- ASLO Template
- Sample ASLO Report - M.S. Developmental Disabilities
- ASLO Rating Sheet
- Assessment Plan Template
- Sample Assessment Plan - B.S. Computer Science
- Sample Assessment Plan - M.S. Speech Language Pathology
- NSU Program Assessment Model
Internal Review Committee (IRC)
The Internal Review Committee generates a report for each respective program under review. This report will be evaluative and prescriptive in nature and will provide specific recommendations for program improvement.
Resources
External Consultants (EC)
External Consultants will be experts in the field to be reviewed and accepted as leaders in their area of expertise. For each program to be reviewed, designated External Consultants (EC) will provide to the President and the Academic Review Committee a written evaluation of the program and the IRC report.
Resources
Academic Review Committee (ARC)
The Academic Review Committee (ARC) is a permanent, standing university committee comprised of University faculty members appointed by and reporting to the President. Recommendations for membership will be solicited from a variety of sources, including academic deans, faculty, and University administrators and officially appointed by the President
and Provost.
Resources
- Academic Review Committee Members
- ARC Summary of Recommendations Rubric
- ARC Subcommittee Guidelines
- ARC Summary of Recommendations Template
Executive Review
During the Executive Review, the President, Provost, Associate Provost, and Dean/Program Director/Chair will discuss the program review results. The meeting is concluded with a request for a 5 year Action Plan.
Action Plan
Following the Executive Review meeting, the leadership will request the creation of an Action Plan that will serve to implement the recommendations that were identified in the ARC Summary. This Action Plan should provide specific activities, along with timelines and resource reallocations that will serve to illustrate how these recommendations will be actualized.
Resource
Action Plan Updates
Program provides Annual Progress Report on the initial Action Plan.
Resources