UH - Hilo Academic Affairs
Guidelines for Academic Program Seven-Year Review
Academic Policy _______ (previous was 2-2005)
Approved by Congress on ___________, 2008
Effective : ___________________, 2008
Supersedes: September 13, 2005
DRAFT April 13, 2008
Keywords: program review, external review, self study, seven year review, assessment
Academic Program Seven-Year Review
Table of Contents
Purposes and Principles ............................................................... 3
Program Review Timeline ............................................................. 5
Self-Study Preparation Guidelines ................................................ 6
1) Executive Summary ..................................................... 6
2) Background................................................................... 6
3) Program Organization and Performance ....................... 7
4) Student Learning .......................................................... x
5) Current Resources ........................................................ x
6) Chair’s Evaluation ......................................................... x
7) Broad Statement of Future Goals.................................. x
8) Appendices .................................................................. x
Letter of Invitation to External Reviewer (sample) ......................... x
Academic Program Review
Purposes and Principles
“To provide for a periodic examination by faculty and administration of the extent to which
established academic programs are meeting their stated objectives and the extent to which their
program objectives are still appropriate to the campus, unit, and University missions.”
University of Hawai`i Executive Policy E5.202. Review of Established Programs
A Program review:






Is consistent with UH system policies, WASC standards, and the standards of external
accrediting bodies.
Fosters a strong and positive sense of program identity and program contributions to the
UH Hilo mission and to General Education.
Promote the practices of ongoing self-assessment and improvement of student learning
consistent with national practices in the field.
Encourages programs to manage faculty, fiscal and physical resources for maximum
student benefit and faculty development.
Draws on many kinds of evidence gathered by the department and by the institution
Involves active and productive communication, planning, and mutual commitment to
program improvement among department faculty; and between the department and the
dean, faculty governance, Office of Institutional Research, and Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs (VCAA).
Schedule: Set by vice chancellor for academic affairs (VCAA), overseen by dean’s offices,
posted on UH Hilo calendar and website.
Costs: Early in the process, departments should request support for resources related to
planned program review activities from the VCAA. Fees and travel expenses for external
reviewers are paid by the VCAA’s office.
Assessment Support Committee (ASC): Campus assessment committee comprised of
representatives of faculty and staff as defined in the UH Hilo Academic Assessment Plan. The
committee works with the Office of Institutional Research and the UH Hilo Faculty Congress,
oversees the annual assessment budget, coordinates assessment training for faculty,
summarizes assessment activities, and tracks program review outcomes.
Program Self Study Report and Plan: (approx. 8 pages, with attached tables and charts as
appropriate). Sources: UH Exec. Policies E5.202 Review of Established Programs (June 1987),
App. B and C; E5.210 Institutional Accountability and Performance (June 1999); UH BOR Policy
Sec. 4.5 Institutional Accountability and Performance (Jan. 1999); WASC 2001 Standards.
Programs undergoing external accreditation may submit their accreditation self study reports in
lieu of the report.
MOU (Memorandum of Understanding): Program review will result in a memorandum of
understanding between the administration and the department regarding the department's
strengths, weaknesses, and future course of action and interaction with the administration. The
MOU will be posted on the VCAA website and forwarded to the Faculty Congress.
Recommended actions are to be integrated into UH Hilo planning and resource allocations.
Storage and Modifications


All program review documents shall be housed in the Office of the Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs. Online access for authorized users (the department, accreditation
members, and administrators involved with that review) will be provided in a password
protected website.
Departments are to be notified of any modifications in recommendations and of progress
in implementation. by ? ? ___________________
External Reviewer/Consultant

External Reviewer/Consultant: A recognized expert in the field whose primary
responsibilities are to identify strengths and weaknesses and show program faculty how
they might develop the former and address the latter. The objective is primarily
constructive guidance.

One consultant may work with several departments within the division. The consultant is
appointed by the VCAA from a list of qualified persons recommended by department(s),
or selected by a professional organization approved by the VCAA. Consultant fees and
travel expenses are paid by the VCAA’s office.

The consultant will study the department self study report in advance of the visit. During
the visit, he/she will consult with the faculty on curriculum and instructional resources,
talk with students and the dean, and visit classes, physical facilities, the library, and
other support units.

She/he will help the department to clarify its goals, as needed, and suggest more
efficient or more effective ways of achieving departmental goals and mission, including
more efficient management of department resources; and suggest future initiatives.

She/he will submit a written report to the department before leaving the campus, and the
department will respond to the consultant’s findings and recommendations in its final
self-study report. The consultant’s report will be appended to the program review report.
Program Review Timeline
1. Spring/Summer Semesters Preceding Fall Review: The department and chair begin to conceptualize
objectives for the program self study. Recommendations for an External Reviewer are submitted to
the VCAA. The recommendation can be to have an external reviewer selected by an external body
such as professional organization, or a list of three potential reviewers with CVs. Early in the
process, departments should request support for resources related to planned program review
activities from the VCAA (i.e. cost of alumni surveys, other assessment activities, commitment on
teaching release(s), etc.)
2. August 15 1: By this date, VCAA Office has decided on and responded to departmental Resource
Request Form and external reviewer proposal. Arrangements are actively being made for external
reviewer’s stipend and travel compensation.
3. September 15: By this date, Office of Institutional Research has scheduled orientation workshop
about the data and report production process.
4. November 1: By this date, Program Self Study Report is drafted, and forwarded to Office of
Institutional Research for standard checks on content & data integrity.
5. November 15: By this date, Institutional Research has reviewed draft report and noted for
departments any issues that may need addressed before final report submission.
6. December 1: By this date, issues noted by IR review have been addressed in the report document.
The finalized report is forwarded to the external reviewer
7. March 1: By this date, external reviewer will have completed a site visit and submitted findings and
recommendations to the department and chair.
8. March 15: By this date, a copy of external review recommendations is appended to the final report,
and Department and chair will have reviewed and incorporated viable recommendations of the
external review into the program self study report.
Finalized report is forwarded to Office of
Institutional Research for final data integrity check.
9. April 1: By this date, IR office has completed final data integrity check and program review final
report is submitted to College Dean. Acceptance of final report triggers immediate scheduling of MOU
meetings during the remainder of the current Spring term, the Summer, or the Fall term that follows.
10. May 1: By this date, the College Dean’s written comments & response to department program review
and external reviewer’s recommendations have been forwarded to the VCAA, the Faculty Congress,
and the department itself.
11. Prior to MOU Meeting (anytime May through December 1, following year): College Dean consults
with department chair about the report, with particular attention to whether the program is “meeting its
stated objectives and the extent to which [its] program objectives are still appropriate to the campus
and unit missions” (UH E5.202). Dean and VCAA consult on departmental program review reports &
recommendations; and Department faculty may also consult with the VCAA in regard to the College
Dean’s recommendations.
12. December 1 of the following year: By this date, the VCAA will have met with the department faculty,
college dean, and Office of Institutional Research to resolve any outstanding issues of concern and to
formulate an action plan. Action plans are to be detailed in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
that is signed by the VCAA and tenured/tenure track faculty in the department.
Self Study Preparation Guidelines
Table of Contents for Self Study
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Executive Summary (1-2 paragraphs)
Background (1 page)
Program Organization and Performance
Narrative (2+ pages)
Tables (1 required, 5 recommended)
Student Learning
Narrative (2 pages)
Tables (2 recommended)
Current Resources (1 page)
Chair’s Evaluation (1 page)
Broad Statement of Future Goals (1 page)
Appendices
Part #1)
Executive Summary (1-2 paragraphs)
What To Include
Part 1-#1)
Part #2)
abstract of important points from the program review self study.
Background (1 page):
What To Include
Part 2-#1)
Department mission and curricular goals, its role in UH system and in UH Hilo mission
and strategic plans.
Other Ideas for Inclusion
History and Mission
2-a) Department mission statement, and how, when and by whom was the current mission
statement developed?
2-b)
Brief history of department and its programs.
2-c)
How does the department mission statement support and how does it differ from the College
and University mission statements?
2-d)
Brief discussion of the results of the prior program review.
Part #3)
Program Organization and Performance
Narrative (2+ pages)
6 Tables (1 required, 5 recommended)
What To Include: [See UH Executive Policy E5.202 Review of Established Programs, Appendix B
and C at http://www.hawaii.edu/ovcaa/academics/pdf/prog_rev_e5202.pdf]
Part 3-#1)
Part 3-#2)
Part 3-#3)
Part 3-#4)
Part 3-#5)
Part 3-#6)
Part 3-#7)
How the department organizes the curriculum to meet Major program requirements,
provide service/General Education courses; achieve program efficiency.
Description of seven-year trends in numbers of majors, enrollment patterns,
student/faculty ratios, retention data.
Faculty productivity in instruction, creativity/scholarship, and research.
Special accreditation or other external evaluation.
Curricular changes over the last 7 years or, if changes have not and do not need to be
made, describe how the curriculum is relevant to current and emerging developments
and careers within your field. If changes should be made to accomplish this goal, please
describe what the changes should be.
Department's service to community.
Lacunae in departmental expertise, if any. Are you currently pursuing new faculty lines.
If so, what are they?
Other Ideas for Inclusion
Departmental Program Structures and Performance
3-a) Are the department's programs fulfilling state, regional, and national needs and expectations?
3-b) Is the curriculum adequate to meet the needs of the diversity and number of student majors
and students in service courses?
3-c) How up-to-date is the curriculum for current and future students seeking careers inside and
outside of academia?
3-d) How does the quality of the curriculum (e.g. comprehensive and integrated among courses
from 100-level through 400-level, within its stated goals) compare to those recognized as
highly effective curricula by regional and national scientific and educational societies?
3-e) How does the curriculum compare with similar departments at 4-year liberal arts colleges,
comprehensive regional universities, and major, tier 1 universities with Ph.D. programs?
3-f)
Is the department serving non-majors to the satisfaction of the students and faculty across the
campus?
Department and Faculty Roles in the College and University
3-g) Describe how curriculum development and long-range planning are done.
3-h) List, describe, and discuss the joint cooperative and combined interdisciplinary efforts with
other academic units, departments, and programs.
3-i)
Discuss the department’s contribution to the college-wide goals and objectives.
3-j)
Describe departmental faculty involvement in college curriculum planning and governance.
3-k) Discuss the commitment among faculty to diversity issues.
3-l)
What levels of effort, commitment, and accomplishment do faculty show for teaching, research
mentorship, scholarly activities, and professional service activities?
3-m) How many and what proportion of the faculty are tenure-track versus non-tenure-track full-time
instructors versus. part-time lecturers?
3-n) Are there effective methods of evaluating and helping faculty improve their academic
endeavors, thereby enabling them to succeed in tenure, promotion, and merit reviews?
Relevant Data Tables Provided by Institutional Researcher


Required data table 1
(Awaiting input from Brendan about available data)
Table 1 – Required Data
20xxxx
20xxxx
1. Number of Majors
2. SSH Taught, Fall Semester
3. FTE course enrollment
(SSH divided by 15)
4. Crossover data
4a. % own majors
4b. % within college
4c. % all others
5. Number classes/sections offered,
Fall Semester
6. Avg. class size (Total student
registrations divided by no. classes
offered)
7. FTE faculty
8. Student-faculty ratio (FTE course
enrollment divided by FTE faculty)
9. Number degrees earned by major
or number of graduates (annual)
10. Budget allocation
11. Cost per student hour
Comparable
Data
Not Available
Data from
these years
is in preBanner
system
20xx-xx
20xx-xx
20xx-xx
20xx-xx
20xx-xx
Recommended Additional Data Tables for Part #3
A. List degrees (include tracks, options, and areas of specialization), minors, certificates, etc. offered by
your program on Table 4A. (Please asterisk core courses that every major must take in order to meet
major requirements in the program.)
Table 3A – Degrees, Tracks, Options, Specializations, Certificates, Minor
Specific Courses
Track Options / Areas Certificate Courses
Minor Course
Required in the Major
of Specialization
Requirements
B. List GE courses provided by your program.
(See http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/genedfac/courseproposalreview.php for information about the
UH Hilo GE program.)
Table 3B – GE Courses
Course
*Frequency
(Alpha #)
Yearly
Sections
**Yearly Enrollment
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
*Frequency: sem - every semester, yr – once a year, infreq – infrequently
** Yearly Enrollment: Total yearly enrollment for the GE course for the past 7 years.
C. List service courses your program provides for other programs. For example, the English program
provides Eng 225 Writing for Science and Technology for science majors. Include cross-listed
courses where your program provides the course for the cross-listed program.
Table 3C – Service Courses
Service Course
Program
Alpha #
Frequency
Yearly
Sections
1
2
Yearly Enrollment
3
4
5
6
7
D. Show a sequence of courses that would enable a freshman to graduate with your major in four years.
See http://cs.uhh.hawaii.edu for samples.
Table 3D – Four-Year Course Sequence for Majors
Year 1
Year 2
Fall
Spring
Fall
Spring
Fall
Year 3
Spring
Fall
Year 4
Spring
E. Faculty Productivity
Table 3E – Faculty Productivity
Instructional Productivity
Faculty
Rank
#
SSH
Yearly
Total #
Courses
Taught
Yearly
#Courses
Per
Faculty
Comments
(e.g. Upper Division, Lower Division,
Graduate Level)
Full
Assoc
Assist
Inst
Creative/Scholarly Activities
Faculty
Rank
#
For a seven years since your last program review, include the number of
refereed publications (RP), book chapters (Ch), books (B), other publications
(OP), grants received (G – number/total dollar amount) for the past seven
years.
RP
Ch
B
OP
G (#/$)
Full
Per Fac.
Assoc
Per Fac.
Assist
Per Fac.
Inst
Per Fac.
Service Activities
Faculty
Rank
Full
Assoc
Assist
Inst
#
Committees /
Year
Community
Projects / Year
Events/Year
Comments
Part #4)
Student Learning (2 pages)
Narrative (2 pages)
2 Tables (recommended)
What To Include
Part 4-#1)
Part 4-#2)
How effectively do students learn in this program, in terms of learning objectives and
criteria established by the program; also in terms of stakeholder expectations?
What distinctive and effective teaching approaches are used (e.g. distance ed)?
Other Ideas for Inclusion
Goals and Assessment
4-a) Major goals of the departmental programs, in particular, what the program expects students to
have learned in terms of skills, knowledge, and attitudes.
4-b) Specific student learning objectives for the program.
4-c) Measures of student learning outcomes at program level: tracking learning over time, valueadded measures (e.g. pre-testing, capstone courses, internships, standardized tests,
performances, portfolios, graduate placement, etc.).
4-d) Identify what data will be used to measure (assess) whether objectives are achieved.
4-e) Department’s use of assessment results to review and revise curriculum and teaching
strategies.
4-f)
State how the major goals and objectives were developed and how they and their outcomes
are communicated to faculty, administrators, alumni, and students.
4-g) Feedback from alumni.
4-h) Feedback from stakeholders (employers, practitioners, community) and how program will use
feedback to improve. (May include data from UH Hilo surveys of alumni and graduating
seniors.)
4-i)
What are the student perceptions of their learning and how well do their evaluations assess
teaching effectiveness?
4-j)
Identify and describe major program activities that will enable goals and objectives to be
reached.
4-k) Service learning activity reports.
4-l)
What are the structures, policies and procedures for academic advising and pre-career
advising and what are the student perceptions of advising and of course scheduling?
4-m) What are the grade distributions at the A, B, C, D, F levels? Are they consistent with program
assessment findings?
4-n) What proportion of the students are at each academic achievement level in the non-majors
courses and in the majors courses?
Methods of Instruction
4-o) How are the programmatic objectives implemented by faculty; in which ways, by which kinds
of courses (e.g. state which courses are methods-oriented, inquiry-based research oriented,
factual knowledge content-focused, theory content-focused) with what kinds of pedagogy?
4-p) Which courses are lecture, lecture-and-inquiry-based guided discussions, online (in part or
whole), and labs which involve guided demonstration (gaining technical expertise)?
4-q) Does the department support collaborative research between student and faculty?
a. Directed Studies
b. Student-faculty research projects
c. Student theses/ senior projects
4-r)
What are the prevalent student products in courses that are graded, and which courses are
writing intensive? What do they do in writing intensive classes, and do science courses
require full scientific format papers?
Relevant Data Tables Provided by Institutional Researcher

Awaiting relevant data suggestions from Brendan
Matrix of Program Outcomes and Courses
Table 4A – Student Learning Outcomes
Outcome 1: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 2: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 3: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 4: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 5: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 6: ________________________________________________________________________
Outcome 7: ________________________________________________________________________
Courses for Majors
Outcome
1
Outcome
2
Outcome
3
Outcome
4
Outcome
5
Outcome
6
Outcome
7
I = Introduced, D = Developed & Practiced with Feedback, M = Demonstrated at the Mastery
Table 4B - Assessment Plan for Program Outcomes
Program Outcome (same
Assessment Plan
outcomes in Matrix above)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
How have assessment results been used to improve the program?
Status / Progress
/ Results
Part #5) Current Resources (1 page)
What To Include
Descriptions of current status and current as well as expected needs in:
Part 5-#1)
lecturer/instructional support
Part 5-#2)
space and facilities (offices, laboratories, classrooms)
Part 5-#3)
equipment
Part 5-#4)
library acquisitions
Part 5-#5)
technological support
Other Ideas
Academic Support for Faculty
5-a)
5-b)
5-c)
5-d)
5-e)
5-f)
Are library resources adequate for research and instruction? Describe specific lacks and
specific strengths.
What is the departmental operating budget, and what constraints does it put on the
department’s operations and service to students?
What level (how frequent and in what amounts?) of departmental funding for
instrumentation comes from alumni giving, research overhead, and other resources?
What support for student technicians, faculty teaching-release time, professional leaves,
and other research and teaching development exists?
Describe the extent of teaching and research support from campus personnel as
equipment fabrication and maintenance, and instrumentation maintenance.
How adequate are the facilities available to the department for instruction and research
use?
o
Lecture halls, discussion and seminar rooms, teaching laboratories, other
instructional facilities; administrative offices and staff offices?
o
Faculty office space, research space, and other research facilities?
o
Campus computing hardware and software?
Part #6) Chair’s Evaluation (1 page)
What to Include
Part 6-#1)
Part 6-#2)
Part 6-#3)
Part 6-#4)
Part 6-#5)
Department chair’s assessment of how well the department is meeting its own mission
and goals and a summary of the evidence used to reach this conclusion
What present and identifiable problems in the foreseeable future it needs to overcome,
and ongoing or planned program changes to address these problems and rationale.
Unusual features or trends in the quantitative program profile, if any.
Respond to external reviewer’s report and recommendations. The department may
respond briefly to the external reviewer’s comments in this section, or may address
them in the meetings with the Dean and VCAA.
Summary of additional resources (faculty, support personnel, funding) needed to
improve student learning.
Other Ideas for Inclusion
Strategic Planning
6-a)
6-b)
6-c)
What are the departmental goals and major priorities, and what is the rationale for each
specific goal and priority?
What are the recommendations to achieve these goals, and when and how will these
achievements be assessed?
What plans are to be implemented for:
o Faculty replacements, new faculty lines, changes in the form of faculty responsibilities
and effort.
o Increases in curriculum efficiency (e.g., reduce duplication of material in courses within
and among departments, reducing content and integrating content among courses, not
teaching a course every semester of every year).
o Priority use of any newly available funds for what new courses and course development,
and which instrumentation for research and teaching.
Part #7) Broad Statement of Future Goals (1 page)
What to Include
Part 7-#1)
Five to seven-year program development plan for student learning assessment,
curriculum, and faculty. Please include realistic annual budget estimates.
Part #8) Appendices
What to Include
Part 8-#1)
Part 8-#2)
Part 8-#3)
Part 8-#4)
Part 8-#5)
Required Data Table 1
Photocopy of the program’s catalog copy
CVs of all tenured and tenure track faculty
Report of the external reviewer
Other attachments that support the assertions of the report.
Letter of Invitation to External Reviewer
(Date)
Dear :
The University of Hawai‘i at Hilo invites you to conduct an external review of our @@@ Program. You
will be compensated $500 for providing this service, upon receipt of the evaluation report, which is due 30
days after the visit.
In addition to the monetary compensation, the @@@ Department will coordinate and process documents
through the UH System for your travel arrangements, including air fare, miscellaneous and incidental
expenses (M&IE), hotel accommodations and ground transportation. You will be provided with the
following:




the most economical roundtrip, coach class airfare between your home and Hilo, Hawai‘i;
applicable miscellaneous and incidental expenses (M&IE) for the duration of your visit;
hotel accommodations for the duration of your visit;
ground transportation for the duration of your visit. You will be met at the Hilo International
Airport upon your arrival.
Enclosed is a tentative site visit schedule for your review. We will be forwarding a copy of our internal self
study electronically no later than December 1, 20xx.
We look forward to your visit.
Sincerely,
(VCAA)
Enclosure
C:
Department Chair
Chancellor
Dean
Division Chair (for CAS only)
Congress Chair
Program Review 7-Year Schedule
(Proposed 4/xx/08)
2008-2009
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
(Scheduled)
2009-2010
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
(Scheduled)
2010-2011
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
2011-2012
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
2012-2013
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
2013-2014
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
2014-2015
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev
2015-2016
Department
Majors, Minors, Certificates
Yr of Prev Pg Rev