Academic Program Review
Academic Program Review Processes and Calendars
Creighton University’s Academic Program Review Policy arises from the University’s mission and University Learning Outcomes. During the program review process, faculty members have an opportunity to reflect on their work as teachers and scholars and to engage in deliberations about strategic planning, improvement, accountability measures, and resources. Thus, program review offers academic program personnel an opportunity to review and evaluate its program(s), reflect on and refine its vision, and exchange ideas and best practices with others in order to strengthen and improve existing programs. Furthermore, ideas for new programs or innovative solutions to long-standing problems may also emerge.
Creighton exists for students and learning. Creighton University, as a Catholic, Jesuit University dedicated to excellence in undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs, is committed to an ongoing process of program evaluation that includes assessment of student learning, reflection, and action that is consistent with the model of Ignatian teaching and learning.
Systematic program review provides a vehicle for ensuring the following:
- Evidence of educational quality and consistency with national trends
- Documentation of student performance and achievement of stated program outcomes within the context of the University mission
- Evaluation of resources including student support, faculty, space
- Improvement of educational quality and strategies for improvement
- An evaluative process which identifies strengths and weaknesses with a forward-looking projection
- Actionable results
Academic Program Review consist of four phases:
- Planning and Preparation
- Self-Study
- External Review
- Recommendation and Action (see Process Flow Diagram).
Phase 1: Planning and Preparation
The Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs will, in consultation with school/college deans(s), notify the academic program that a review has been scheduled. Initial planning and preparation includes an orientation meeting as needed, appointment of self-study committee, and nomination/selection of reviewers. For a list of programs currently scheduled refer to the calendar:
Phase 2: The Self-Study Report
The Self-Study Report is an interpretive document that uses data to assess current program status and future direction. The university will provide to the unit this self-study document template and standard data set. Data should be analyzed and discussed in relation to the academic program/units mission and goals.
Phase 3: Program Review
The review team will analyze the program self-study document, and as necessary, collect additional relevant information, conduct telephone or video conferences with appropriate faculty, administrators, students and community groups. The external reviewers will prepare a Reviewers Report identifying program strengths, concerns, and recommendations. A recommendation will be made with a supporting rationale as to whether the program should be maintained (reviewed every 7 years) or reviewed again in 1 or 3 years.
Phase 4: The Recommendation and Action
The Academic Program/Unit head and supervising dean will review all reports and respond by completing the Response Memo and Action Plan and the Dean’s Response and Recommendations, respectively, to improve the academic program. The documents will be submitted to the Provost who will review, approve, and/or modify the action plan, as described in the Provost Memo.
The Self-Study Report, Reviewers Report, Response Memo and Action Plan, Dean’s Response and Recommendations and the Provost Memo will be considered as the permanent record of the review. These summary documents will be collected and archived by the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs.