Comprehensive Program Review Plan
for Columbus State University

The goal of comprehensive program review at Columbus State University and in the University System of Georgia is the improvement of instructional programs by periodically reviewing their strengths and weaknesses and establishing a set of priorities for their improvement based on information gathered during a seven-year cyclical review process. The process is recognized as one part of the overall institutional effectiveness plan that also includes strategic planning, assessment of student learning outcomes, and assessment of outcomes in administrative areas. The plan as follows will be reviewed periodically to determine its effectiveness in providing adequate program review information for the university and the University System.

Review Responsibility

The process of conducting program review rests with a Program Review Committee consisting of nine faculty members. The committee will oversee the program review process, receive the reports of departments examining individual programs, receive the reports of program reviewers, and make recommendations based on these reports.

Program Review Committee Membership

The membership of the committee will include nine faculty members appointed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will consult the deans of the colleges and the Faculty Senate for nominations. Each committee member will serve a three-year term. Of the nine committee members,

• Two will be from each college with degree granting programs at the baccalaureate level or above
• One will be from University College who will also serve as chair
• All will be tenured faculty

The Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs will serve as an ex officio member of the committee and will coordinate the dissemination of information to be used in the program review process.

Comprehensive Program Review Committee members will refrain from participating in the committee's review process that pertains to a program in which the committee member holds rank or is budgeted.

Programs Subject to Evaluation

All university degree-granting programs and general education will be reviewed at least once every seven years according to BOR policy. Exceptions to the seven-year review cycle may be made when a national accreditation review cycle is more than seven years, as may be the case with programs in education, nursing and music. However, no program review cycle may exceed ten years. Programs triggered for review by the University System Office based on enrollment and the number of degrees awarded may need to be reviewed the following academic year.

Program Review Report

In accord with BOR policies, the program review report will include responses to the items listed under the self-study procedures (Appendix I) that address quality, productivity, and viability. Overall, the focus of the report will be on academic programs; however, some items are best answered for the department in general than for each program offered by the department.

Program Review Schedule **

The following program review schedule indicates the academic year in which programs will be reviewed. For programs undergoing accreditation review by national boards, the process required by the national boards will substitute for the quality component of the program review process required by the Board of Regents. For these programs, however, performance indicators addressing productivity and viability must be assessed according to the self-study procedures listed in Appendix I.

* Programs triggered by the System Office

** A detailed schedule of program reviews including enrollment and degree completion data is available on the Web at: (PDF)http://aa.colstate.edu/assess/EnrDegData.htm

Program Review Timetable

January - Department submits names and supporting documentation of no more than three external reviewers to the appropriate dean for approval. Reviewers may be faculty assigned to other departments at CSU, Columbus-area professionals in the field or others from the state of Georgia. The dean will consider requests for reviewers from outside the state of Georgia. Travel expenses of the reviewers will be funded through the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, but will not include costs for accreditation reviews that are budgeted separately. A department may choose to provide reviewers with an honorarium; however, those costs are the responsibility of the department or college.

February - Dean responds to the department; department contacts reviewers.

August - Quantitative data (Appendix II) to be used in conducting self-studies sent to departments by VPAA Office.

September - October - Department conducts self-study based on the performance indicators addressing quality, productivity, and viability using the procedures in Appendix I.

November - Department completes its portion of the evaluation (Appendix III) and sends this form and the self-study report to the dean and to the review team. Department contacts reviewers to confirm date of visit.

November - December Review team visits department. At the end of the visit, the team completes the evaluation form (Appendix III) and submits its report to the department chair. The department chair revises the self-study in response to the team's report and sends the completed self-study and evaluation form to the Comprehensive Program Review Committee.

January - March - The CPR committee completes the evaluation form (Appendix III) and forwards its report to department chair with a copy to the dean.

April - After consultation with the department chair, the dean develops a program improvement plan as part of the self-study executive summary, and sends this report to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. If the dean recommends changes for the program, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will work with the department chair and the dean to determine the feasibility of the changes recommended and a timetable for implementation.

This page was last updated on 8/24/2006.