Guidelines for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review (formerly S89-161)

GUIDELINES FOR THE FIFTH CYCLE OF ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW

Academic Senate Policy #S99-161

(Formerly Academic Senate Policy #S89-161)

At its meeting of February 23, 1999, the Academic Senate approved the following

policy for guidelines for the fifth cycle of Academic Program Review:

The purpose of academic program review at San Francisco State University is

to assess the University's academic degree programs in order to assure that

they are of the highest possible quality. Its goals include identifying and

articulating the values, competencies, and learning outcomes expected for each

program, assessing the currency of learning objectives, and describing how those

learning objectives have been revised in response to changing needs and new

knowledge. Additionally, its purpose includes assessing how well the articulated

values, competencies, and learning outcomes have been achieved and describing

methods being employed to increase their achievement. The review

should provide information, analysis, and evaluation that will help all elements

of the University plan and make decisions about the maintenance, enhancement,

reduction, consolidation, or discontinuance of baccalaureate, master's, and

joint-doctoral degree programs.

Academic program review in the fifth cycle will include the following three

components:

1. Instructional Unit Self-Study and Recommendation

2. External Review and Recommendation

3. University Review and Decision-Making

1. Instructional Unit Self-Study and Recommendation

At the start of the process for a given College, representatives from the instructional

units, the College, the Office of Academic Affairs, and the Academic Program

Review Committee (APRC) will meet to discuss substantive and procedural questions.

Those attending should indicate any specific areas or issues needing to be addressed,

so that these may be given special attention in the review process.

Every instructional unit which offers academic programs leading to baccalaureate,

master's, or joint doctoral degrees (other than those subject to periodic accreditation

review) shall prepare a self-study that will serve as a basis for all subsequent

reviews and recommendations. In this self-study, the unit should describe and

assess each degree program it offers, following the guidelines that appear in

the Handbook for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review. Department

chairs and program heads should assure that there is widespread faculty participation

in the self-studies and that the faculty are made aware of all findings and

recommendations.

The unit shall forward its completed self-study to the Office of Academic Affairs

and to the College Dean for their respective review and signatures indicating

that the self study is complete and ready for external review.

2. External Review and Recommendation

The purpose of external review is to help each instructional unit improve the

quality of its degree programs and to add an additional perspective to the recommendations

made in the self-study. It is anticipated that the external reviewers will provide

evaluative assistance and support for program goals.

Typically, the review will be conducted by a team of two members, representing

both a CSU and a non-CSU perspective.

The unit faculty and the College Dean, working together, shall choose the potential

reviewers. The College Dean shall forward their names and addresses to the Vice

President for Academic Affairs for his/her concurrence. Reviewers will receive

a copy of the unit's self-study and supporting documents and are expected to

spend two days on the campus interviewing students, faculty, and administrators

and to prepare a report of findings and recommendations. Copies of this report

shall be sent to the program head and to the College Dean, both of whom will

be invited to respond in writing, commenting on recommendations made

and adding recommendations as needed. The report and responses will become

part of the unit's program review file evaluated by the Academic Program Review

Committee and the Office of Academic Affairs. Upon receipt of the report, the

University will pay the reviewers an honorarium (in addition to travel costs

and other expenses).

3. University Review and Decision-Making

In order to provide a University-wide faculty perspective and assist in University-wide

planning, the Academic Program Review Committee will carefully review each unit's

self-study, external review report, and responses to the external review. APRC

will meet with the College Dean and program faculty to ensure that APRC fully

understands all recommendations made. APRC will accept additional data and recommendations

from the units at this time. It will then proceed to evaluate all recommendations

and send its report to the Chair of the Academic Senate and the Vice President

for Academic Affairs for transmission to all interested parties. APRC should

review all recommendations in a timely fashion and submit its findings to

appropriate units as expeditiously as possible. APRC will also

send any policy recommendations and its annual report to the Academic Senate.

After the faculty of the instructional unit, the College Dean, and the Office

of Academic Affairs have had an opportunity to study all reports and recommendations,

representatives of these three areas will meet to discuss recommendations and

agree on actions to be taken. This agreement will be embodied in a memorandum

of understanding which will be in effect until the completion of the next review

cycle. This memorandum of understanding will be kept on file in the Offices

of Academic Affairs and the Academic Senate.

Accredited Programs

For programs that are nationally accredited and undergo periodic accreditation

review involving a campus visit by an accrediting team (see attachment), the

accreditation review will normally substitute for academic program review with

the following exceptions:

(a) Following receipt of notification from the accrediting body that a program

has been re-accredited, representatives of the instructional unit, College administration,

and Office of Academic Affairs will develop a memorandum of understanding embodying

agreements reached in the accreditation review. This memorandum of understanding

will be in effect until completion of the next accreditation review and will

be kept on file in the Offices of Academic Affairs and the Academic Senate.

(b) Upon special request of the instructional unit, College Dean, and/or Vice

President for Academic Affairs, an accredited program shall undergo academic

program review in addition to accreditation review. In this event, the self-study

prepared for accreditation may be adapted or substituted, as appropriate, for

the purpose of program review, and the campus visit by the accrediting team

may be substituted for the external review.

Program Review Schedule

As nearly as feasible, programs shall be reviewed on a six year cycle by College,

in alphabetical order of College, beginning in Fall, 1999. College Deans should

assure that their Colleges' programs are reviewed in a timely fashion and that

there is appropriate dissemination of information and recommendations.

The Liberal Studies and General Education programs shall also undergo review

during the fifth cycle.

Handbook for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review

A handbook will be prepared based on the Handbook for the Fourth

Cycle of Academic Program Review, with the following modifications:

1. In preparing the fifth cycle handbook, the content of the fourth cycle handbook

   will be reviewed and edited for accuracy and for inclusion of the principles

   delineated in the following documents (currently included as appendices to

   the fourth cycle handbook):

• The self-study guidelines which appear as Attachment A of Academic Senate

  Policy S89-161, "Guidelines for the Fourth Cycle of Academic Program Review."

• "The APRC Perspective in Academic Program Review."

(b) The fifth cycle handbook will include changes made to program review as

approved by the

Academic Senate in the "Guidelines for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program

Review."

(c) The fifth cycle handbook will incorporate the following additional self-study

guidelines:

• To help maintain the currency of academic programs, academic programs

  will be asked to describe the use of community advisory boards or appropriate

  alternatives where such bodies exist.

• Academic programs will be asked to describe the use of introductory

  courses/experiences which expose students to discipline-specific demands and

  ways of knowing, set standards of study in the discipline, provide feedback

  on the quality of student work, and identify opportunities to meet expected

  standards.

• Academic programs will be asked to describe how the curriculum integrates

  and enhances students’ basic skills, including critical thinking, written

  and oral communication, quantitative reasoning, and information access competence.

  Academic programs will also be asked to describe how this basic skill

  development is promoted and reviewed within the major program.

• Academic programs will be asked to identify to what extent their programs

  are interdisciplinary, to articulate the interdisciplinary philosophy of their

  programs and how the curriculum reflects it, and to describe any plans they

  may have for cross-department and/or cross-college collaborations.

• Graduate programs will be asked to address the level of preparation of admitted

  students, the investment of faculty and other resources in the graduate program

  compared with the undergraduate program(s), student research/scholarship (publications,

  exhibitions, public presentations, etc.), completion rates of the culminating

  experience, and average time to degree.

**APPROVED BY PRESIDENT CORRIGAN ON MARCH 2, 1999**

_______________________________________________________________________

SFSU PROGRAMS SUBJECT TO PERIODIC REVIEW FOR NATIONAL ACCREDITATION

Spring 1999