APR Committee Report
Academic Program Review SUMMARY*
Department under review: Medical Dosimetry
Date self-study received in Dean’s office: 6/1/2015
Date of external consultant’s review: 6/1/2011
Date APR received report: 7/1/2015
APR’s Recommendations (must be completed)
Recommendations:
1. Work closely with the department chair and dean to take all possible measures (staffing or tuition fees) to bring the
program faculty workload in line with the expected “normal” workload for full time graduate faculty. Faculty Senate
Policies stipulate 9 contact hours of group instruction per week and a total workload of 15/16 contact hours for fulltime graduate faculty.
2. Give serious consideration to modifying the curriculum structure to reduce the number of 1-credit classes.
☒ No serious areas to address – review in next regularly scheduled cycle
☐ Some areas to address – review in next regularly scheduled cycle
☐ Some areas to address – department should submit short report on progress to Faculty Senate/Provost’s Office
in 3 years
APR’S summary of self-study (first two boxes must be completed)
APR’s summary of how the academic program attempts to reach its goals and objectives and the extent to which
those goals and objectives have been achieved.
The current medical dosimetry Master of Science degree program emerged out the expertise of the Radiation
Therapy program and is housed in the Health Professions Department. The field of Medical Dosimetry involves the
measurement and calculation of dose for the treatment of cancer patients. Dosimetrists use their knowledge of
physics, anatomy, and radiobiology to develop an optimal arrangement of radiation portals to spare normal and
radiosensitive tissues while applying a prescribed dose to the targeted disease volume. The program began as a
certificate program and became a graduate degree program in 2011. The M.S. program has two major tracks: full
degree for those new to the discipline and degree completion for those already certified. The 4-semester “full
degree” track requires 46 credits of both online classes and clinical internships in the field. For students who are
already certified dosimetry professionals, the 3-semester “degree completion” track requires 31 credits. Students
must take all classes in sequence. The program follows the curriculum mandated by the American Association of
Medical Dosimetrists and is accredited by the Joint Review Committee on Education and Radiation Technology
(JRCERT). The program admits students in cohorts and uses a variety of multimedia tools in order to foster social
interactions in the online environment.
APR’s comments including:
1
Notable Strengths
1. UWL is one of only 17 programs nationwide. All 17 programs are post-baccalaureate (hospital based) or graduate
programs. UWL is one of only 4 graduate programs.
2. The didactic portion of the program is presented 100 percent online, which is more accessible and flexible
compared to traditional education.
3. The program has a 78 percent pass rate on the board exam, which is above both the national average and the
requirements of accreditation standards.
4. Students have a 100 percent employment rate.
5. There has been a notable increase in minority students (from 6 to 14) between 2008 to the present.
Notable Weaknesses/Challenges
1. The program has reached the capacity of students (31) it can accept because of limited clinical internship sites and
the administrative and teaching load of its current 2 faculty.
2. Half of the courses (12 of 23) in the program are worth 1 credit. Faculty struggle with the curriculum content and
course credit assignment due to many 1-credit courses and the effects on faculty teaching load.
3. In order to remain current with lifesaving technological improvements, faculty must update and revise course
content each time the course is taught.
APR evaluation/comments on any/all of the six specific components of the self-study (if applicable)
Self Study: Purposes
Evaluation
Criterion
Mission Statement or overall goals/objectives provided
Description of academic programs housed in department and interdisciplinary programs
to which department/program is major contributor
Clearly
expressed
☐
☒
Insufficient
or missing
☐
☒
☐
Sufficient
☐
Comments: The mission statement says, “The Medical Dosimetry Program at the University of Wisconsin – La Crosse is
committed to the education of medical dosimetrists who are knowledgeable, competent, and dedicated to their
profession and their patients.” The program goals include demonstration of competence, use of critical thinking,
communication and research skills, and development of professional practices. The APR committee would appreciate
a more specific statement.
Self Study: Curriculum
Criterion
Summary of curriculum, including course delivery mode, and how it reflects
current disciplinary trends and emphases
Statement of minimum total credits to degree (justify if exceeds 120 cr)
and explain any significant difference between this and credits at time of
graduate reported in Table 1 of Unit Data Sheet
Evaluation
Well
supported
Sufficient
evidence
Some/partial
evidence
Insufficient
or missing
☒
☐
☐
☐
☒
☐
☐
☐
Comments: The medical dosimetry program provides students with an educational foundation in medical dosimetry
as well as clinical experience in a radiation oncology department. All academic classes are online and clinical
practicums take place at hospitals or cancer centers around the country. The full degree program of 46 credits has a
total of 23 classes, 12 of which are 1-credit. The online courses consist of various instructional approaches such as
2
lectures, practice problems, quizzes/tests, papers, projects, group discussion forums, and interactive online tools.
There is a high degree of interaction with the instructor and peers in this cohort-based program. Some content areas
include radiation safety, dose calculations, and treatment planning.
In a follow-up conversation, the program director explained that the many 1-credit courses are a legacy of the original
certificate program and have never been changed because of the direct ties to tuition. The 46 credit program costs
students $18,400. In the follow-up conversation between APR committee and the program director, the program
director noted that 3 credits would more accurately reflect the amount of content delivered and true workload of
faculty. In essence students get 3 credits of material but only pay for 1 credit. To increase the credits would make the
program prohibitively expensive and daunting. This discrepancy makes judging faculty workload difficult. Tuition and
credit hours play outsized roles in the program’s decision-making.
Self Study: Assessment of Student Learning & Degree of Program Success
Criterion
Evaluation
Well
supported
Sufficient
evidence
Some/partial
evidence
Insufficient
or missing
N/A
Has appropriate assessment plan for measuring the stated student
learning outcomes for department (may be separate for each
program in department, including graduate)
☒
☐
☐
☐
☐
Provided assessment data collected during review period, and
discussed important changes made as a result of this data (linked
changes to data) plus potential future curriculum revisions due to
assessment results
☒
☐
☐
☐
☐
Provided Writing in the Major Program (WIMP) assessment results,
changes
☐
☐
☐
☐
☒
Well-defined process of advising students and description of any
changes made since last APR review
☒
☐
☐
☐
☐
Identified and described single most significant strength
☒
☐
☐
☐
☐
Identified and described single area most in need of improvement
and discuss plans for accomplishing this
☒
☐
☐
☐
☐
Comments: The program has a robust assessment process measuring students’ ability to design treatment plans which
include knowledge of anatomy and dose volume as well as the ability to communicate the plan to patients and other
medical professionals. They have 5 SLOs which each have a rubric. These rubrics have been revised after student
feedback. For direct measures, the program uses oral presentations, case study and dose calculation papers, research
methods course grades, and clinical affective evaluations. For indirect measures, the program uses graduate and
employer surveys; retention, graduation, and job placement rates; and the National Certification exam pass rate and
scores. The program responded to assessment results by implementing a new rating scale and scoring range for
clinical evaluations.
Self Study: Previous Academic Program Review and New Program Initiatives
Evaluation
Criterion
Well
Sufficient
Some/partial
Insufficient
N/A
3
supported
evidence
evidence
or missing
Actions taken in response to recommendations of most recent
previous APR and results of those actions
☐
☐
☐
☐
☒
Continuing or new concerns related to your program/department’s
ability to achieve its goals were elucidated
☐
☐
☐
☐
☒
Plans for new program initiatives were provided
☐
☐
☐
☐
☒
Comments on any trends in the Unit Data Sheets noteworthy to
changes in the program/department
☐
☐
☐
☐
☒
Comments: This APR report is the first one completed for the medical dosimetry degree but the accreditation review
from 2011 had no citations.
Self Study: Personnel
Criterion
Evaluation
Well
supported
Sufficient
evidence
Some/partial
evidence
Insufficient
or missing
Professional development opportunities and expectations are clearly
described
☒
☐
☐
☐
Relative emphases placed on teaching, scholarly achievements and service
when making recommendations regarding retention and promotion are
clearly described
☒
☐
☐
☐
Clear description of staffing plan, with estimate for next 5 years
☒
☐
☐
☐
Comments: (include APR comments concerning Unit Data Sheet data on faculty, IAS and workload)
The program has two full-time faculty -- one is the program director and the other is the education coordinator who
manages internships. Both do advising, publish, and engage in department-required professional development
activities. Both are IAS positions. The course credit issues in the curriculum make faculty workload calculations
difficult. The program director explained that, in addition to their own courses and administrative work, the two full
time faculty create the D2L course shells, develop the courses, and enter grades in WINGS so the part-time faculty
only have to deliver the content. The program director teaches 9 credit hours with another 6 contact hours for
reassigned time as director. However 6 different classes make up those 9 credit hours.
Self Study: Support for Achieving Academic Program Goals (Resources)
Criterion
Clear description of impact that physical facilities, supplies and equipment,
personnel and external funding have had on the ability to achieve goals
Evaluation
Well
supported
Sufficient
evidence
Some/partial
evidence
Insufficient
or missing
☒
☐
☐
☐
Comments: Since the program is online and at clinical sites, it has less need for facilities, supplies or equipment. The
program is entirely (salary, benefits, expenses, computers) supported by its student tuition and receives no state or
other external funding.
External Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on report from External Reviewer or Accreditation Agency (if applicable)
Evaluation
4
Criterion
Agree
with all
comments
Agree
with most
comments
Disagree
with most
comments
Disagree
with all
comments
☒
☐
☐
☐
Areas addressed and comments made by external reviewer or accreditation
agency
Comments: The evaluation from JRCERT did not identify any areas of concern.
Department’s response to the Reviewer Recommendations
APR’s Comments on the Department’s Response (if applicable)
Criterion
Department’s response addressed all areas raised by external reviewer
Evaluation
Well
supported
Sufficient
evidence
Some/partial
evidence
Insufficient
or missing
☒
☐
☐
☐
Comments: The program merely acknowledged receiving the external reviewer’s report since the reviewers had no
citations and the program met all the necessary standards.
Dean’s Letter
APR’s Comments on Dean’s Letter (if applicable)
Criterion
Evaluation
Agree
with all
comments
Agree
with most
comments
Disagree
with most
comments
Disagree
with all
comments
☒
☐
☐
☐
Areas addressed and comments made by Dean
Comments: The Dean did not have any specific strength or weaknesses of the program to comment on, based on the
JRCERT evaluation. The APR committee would appreciate more detail and commentary from the Dean’s perspective.
* APR’s report to faculty senate will consist of this completed form in electronic form.
5