Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Report
Guidelines for Program External Review
The schedule for the required external review is located at the following link:
http://www.sfasu.edu/acadaffairs/194.asp. The policy that requires this review is provided at the
following link: http://www.sfasu.edu/search.asp?q=external+review&site=policies.
At the beginning of each year academic year, Department Chairs and Program Directors shall view this
schedule to insure program’s timely preparation and to determine if the schedule coincides with a
previously scheduled accreditation site visit and, if not, to work with faculty in the identification of
potential external reviewers. Key required data are available from the Office of Institutional Research.
Although data may be automatically provided to the Department Chair, it is important to submit inquiries
if not received by the Summer I session that the review is required. Posted on the Department website
www.humanservices.sfasu.edu in Faculty Resources are files that provide critical information about the
process, a sample rubric for evaluation, and samples of Dean and Chair-approved reports and program
responses to the evaluation.
Step 1. Understand requirements and deadlines.
Look for your program of affiliation and begin to compile information in the correct format NOW. This
is a collective faculty program responsibility guided by the Program Director. Please support one another
in task completion.
Each program must submit a report that includes commentary from an external reviewer and a welldeveloped action plan for addressing deficits and limitations identified. This plan must highlight local
responsibility and should not be limited to points such as need for additional faculty or increase in
professional development funding. These are important; however, highlighting points over which faculty
have direct control in correction is most important.
Some program may experience an external accreditation review during the academic year in which the
THECB report is scheduled. In such cases, there is no need for an additional external review. Where
there is congruence between the accreditation report requirements and the THECB report requirements,
providing a Table of Contents that identifies the page location of each THECB criteria, within the preexisting report, will be sufficient. In cases in which the THECB report requirements exceed the
requirements of the accreditation report, a table of contents, which includes an addendum with
information not required in the site visit, will suffice. Remember that the THECB report includes a 7year review.
In cases wherein no accreditation site visit is scheduled during the academic year the THECB report is
due, program faculty must work together to identify three (3) external reviewers, collect their resumes,
and submit to the department chair. The schedule for the entire process is provided below.
February 1
April 1
April 15
April 15-May 15
May 15
Self-study document sent to external reviewer/s
Self-study committee, department chair and college dean make final
recommendations based on external review.
Approved program review document electronically submitted to Provost
(brewersj@sfasu.edu) and Dean of the Graduate School.
University program review committee reviews completed document and holds
possible consultation with department chair/representatives and dean
Draft of recommendation report from University Program Review Committee to
May 15 - June 15
July 1
September 1
Provost, Associate Provost, College of Education Dean and Department Chair
Provost meets with dean/department chair or representatives to discuss
implementation plan
Provost submits graduate program reviews electronically to THECB
Final Program Review and Final Recommendation document electronically
forwarded to the Office of Institutional Research (sfa_ir@sfasu.edu) with copy to
appropriate College.
Step 2. Identify external reviewers.
The following is an excerpt from the Academic Program Review policy that provides a guide for potential
external reviewers. http://www.sfasu.edu/search.asp?q=external+review&site=policies.
Reviewers must have subject-matter expertise, employment at an institution of higher education outside
Texas and faculty status in a program nationally recognized for excellence in the discipline. Additionally,
external reviewers cannot have a conflict of interest that could influence their judgment (e.g., SFA
alumni, former students or employees of the university, formal collaborators with faculty in the unit under
review, or employment at institutions within Texas). Faculty members of the academic unit nominate
three individuals from comparable institutions of higher education to serve as possible external
reviewers. The dean of the college selects at least one person from the three nominated. Preference is
given to nominees from colleges and universities accredited by SACSCOC. Doctoral programs must have
at least two external reviewers who conduct an on-site visit (see APR Handbook to obtain guidelines for
external reviewers). Upon completion of the external review, the faculty members of the academic unit
consider the recommendations. A final report is prepared that includes the self-study (Internal Program
Review), the External Program Review and the Program Improvement Plan that describes the actions
taken or to be taken to improve the performance of the academic unit. All documentation is sent to the
dean for comment. The dean forwards all materials to the provost and vice president for academic affairs
for review and feedback.
Step 3. Organize data.
The data points listed in the THECB Report Guideline, note the categories of information that must be
included in the report. This guide in posted in the departmental webpage in Faculty Resources.
An example of a report previously approved by the Department Chair and the College of Education Dean,
which was submitted to the THECB in Spring 2015, is provided as an example in the departmental
webpage under Faculty Resources.
Step 3. Identify or Development an External Review Rubric.
The program faculty body must work together to identify an appropriate rubric that an external review
might use in the evaluation. Use of accrediting bodies’ standards and/or domains as points for evaluation
might be considered an appropriate strategy to use in the development of a rubric. The selected external
reviewer(s) might supplement the use of the program-identified rubric with a preferred evaluation form.
Both forms of evaluation would be included in the final report. Posted on the departmental website is a
sample form used in a prior program review.
Step 4. Contact potential external reviewer(s).
After receipt of the names, contact information, and vitae for the program-faculty-identified list of
potential external reviewers, the department chair is assigned the responsibility of first contact to
determine the final appointee to serve in this role. It is important to note that doctoral programs must
have two external reviewers, whereas graduate program only require one. Below is a sample template for
the letter:
Dr. _______,
A ________ Professor in and Program Director of the Stephen F. Austin State University (SFASU) _______
program, has noted you as among those eligible to serve as an external reviewer for our __________
program, as required by the SFASU university policy and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The
following provides an overview of the required qualifications of those who assume the task as external reviewer:
“Reviewers must have subject-matter expertise, employment at an institution of higher
education outside Texas and faculty status in a program nationally recognized for excellence
in the discipline. Additionally, external reviewers cannot have a conflict of interest that could influence their
judgment (e.g., SFA alumni, former students or employees of the university,
formal collaborators with faculty in the unit under review, or employment at institutions within Texas).”
Our program report includes a comprehensive overview of the ________ program(s). The submission deadline
of the external reviewer’s report/evaluation is March 1st. There is a $300 honorarium.
Attached is a program-faculty developed rubric that shall serve as an evaluation guide for each program unit
reviewed. This will allow you to clarify the overarching mission of the assignment. Recommendation regarding
the use of another form that you have found to be more comprehensive is welcomed.
I hope that you might agree to assist us in this important effort. Please contact me with your final decision by
_______, ________(date). Your agreement to assist us in this endeavor will be much appreciated. Questions for
clarification are welcomed.
This inquiry should be sent to the prospective external reviewer(s) at the beginning of the report
development. The Program Director shall inform the Department Chair of the completion of each step in
the process so that s/he might be able to establish a best estimate date of when the report would be
submitted to the external reviewer. Timely completion of each step will allow the Department Chair time
to verify availability and inform the external reviewer of the anticipated completion of the report and the
deadline for submitting their evaluation. Attention to the schedule indicated above is key for completion
of the review and submission process. Early involvement and submission is strongly recommended. This
will allow time for feedback from the College of Education Dean and the Graduate School Dean prior to
the final submission.
Developed: 05/13/2016