Program Revision Guidelines
EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
DIVISION OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
OUTLINE FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS TO REVISE PROGRAMS
Use this outline to prepare proposals to revise existing programs, including undergraduate majors and minors
and graduate degree programs and certificates. Proposals for revising programs should be submitted in
narrative form, using the following outline. Guidelines are on the following page.
PROGRAM NAME AND SUBJECT CODE:
Master of Music in Composition (MCOM)
REVISED PROGRAM NAME AND SUBJECT CODE (IF APPLICABLE):
DEGREE:
Master of Music in Composition
DEPARTMENT(S)/SCHOOL(S):
CONTACT PERSON:
_________
Music and Dance
Marilyn Saker
COLLEGE(S):
CAS
CONTACT PHONE:
487–1284
CONTACT EMAIL:
msaker@emich.edu
REQUESTED START DATE: TERM Winter YEAR 2012
I. Rationale
Students in the Master of Music in Composition program currently lack necessary opportunities to
have their compositions performed and recorded. This instructional issue becomes particularly
serious when considering the accreditation standards mandated by the National Association of
Schools of Music (NASM). This lack of performance and recording opportunities also severely
impacts a student’s ability to adequately complete degree-program thesis requirements.
II. Description of Current Program
The 2011–2012 Graduate Catalog currently specifies the following exit requirement:
Exit Requirements
2. Thesis (original composition for large ensemble with the intent of performance).
III. Proposed Revision
The following revision to the above policy is proposed:
Exit Requirements
2. Thesis (original composition for orchestra with the intent of performance). The
composition will be rehearsed (20 minutes) and recorded (10 minutes) by the EMU
Symphony Orchestra. The student composer will pay for recording and editing costs.
IV. Impact
This program revision (along with the course revisions for MUSC 518, MUSC 617, and MUSC 618)
establishes performance and recording guidelines that address NASM’s specification that “students
must be afforded regular opportunities to hear their works performed.” Furthermore, this revision
will enable students to complete thesis requirements in a manner consistent with similar degree
programs at other institutions.
Miller, Program Revision Guidelines
Sept. 09
Program Revision Guidelines
V. Budget
No impact.
VI. Action of the Department/College
1. Department/School:
For
19
Against
0
(Enter the number of votes cast in each category.)
Vote of faculty:
I support this proposal. The proposed revision can
ü
cannot
Department(s)/School(s) without additional College or University resources.
David O. Woike (signature on hard copy)
Department Head/School Director Signature
Abstentions
0
be implemented within the affected
5 December 2011
Date
2. College/Graduate School:
A. College
I support this proposal. The proposed program can
College without additional University resources.
cannot
be implemented within the affected
College Dean Signature
Date
B. Graduate School (Graduate Program Revisions ONLY)
Graduate Dean Signature
Date
VII. Approval
Associate Vice-President for Academic Programming Signature
Date
VIII. Appendices
A. Market Analysis/Needs Assessment
B. Mandates
C. Request for New/Revised Course Forms
D. Letters of Support from Impacted Departments
E. Cost Analysis (Complete only if the revision cannot be implemented without additional University resources. Fill in
Estimated Resources for the sponsoring department(s). Attach separate estimates for other affected departments.)
Estimated Resources:
Miller, Program Revision Guidelines
Sept. 09
Year One
Year Two
Year Three
Program Revision Guidelines
Faculty / Staff
$_________
$_________
$_________
SS&M
$_________
$_________
$_________
Equipment
$_________
$_________
$_________
Total
Miller, Program Revision Guidelines
Sept. 09
$_________
$_________
$_________
Program Revision Guidelines
EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
DIVISION OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
DIRECTIONS FOR PREPARING PROPOSALS TO REVISE DEGREE PROGRAMS
Departments/Schools intending to submit proposals for revising programs are encouraged to consult with the
Course and Program Development Office and, if appropriate, the Graduate School prior to submitting such
proposals. Proposals for program revisions should be submitted in narrative form, according to the following
guidelines:
I. Rationale: Explain completely the rationale for the proposed revision. If it is the result of a market analysis or needs
assessment, include documentation as Appendix A. If the revision is the result of state of Michigan, federal or accrediting
agency mandate, attach documentation, including required implementation date, as Appendix B.
II. Description of Current Program: Describe the current program as it appears in the most recent University catalog.
Include information about major/minor requirements, restricted and general electives, and the minimum number of total credit
hours students completing the program will have taken by the time they graduate.
III. Proposed Revision: Provide a complete description of the revised program, organized so that the current and revised
programs can easily be compared. Include a list of any new or revised courses. Indicate whether the proposed revision will
increase the number of credit hours in the program, and provide a rationale for any increase.. Attach completed Request for New
Course and/or Request for Course Revision form for each proposed new or revised course as Appendix C.
IV. Impact: Indicate whether and how the proposed revision will impact other University programs. Attach letters of support
from affected departments as Appendix D.
V. Budget: Describe the budgetary impact of the proposed revision. If new resources will be needed, indicate their source.
If the revision will require resources beyond those the department/school or college can provide, attach a cost analysis as
Appendix E. (Note: If a significant portion of the cost of the revised program will be borne by Continuing Education, include
evidence of Continuing Education’s willingness to bear those costs.)
Miller, Program Revision Guidelines
Sept. 09