UWM Academic Program and Curriculum Committee
Review Guidelines for Undergraduate Certificates
1. Undergraduate certificates fall into one of these classifications
a. tied to a major and offered as a certificate for non-majors.
b. stand-alone certificates that may be housed in a department or overseen by a
committee.
2. Review schedule:
a. Certificates tied to a major:
i. Existing certificates that are tied to a major will be reviewed on the same
schedule as the audit and review of the major starting with the next review
(2006-07).
ii. New certificates will be reviewed as follows:

If the major program review is scheduled within 5 years of the date on
which the certificate is approved, the certificate review will be
combined with the program audit and review schedule.

If the major program review is not scheduled within 5 years of the date
on which the certificate is approved, then the certificate will have a
five year initial review. Further reviews will be synchronized with the
general program review.
b. Stand-alone certificates will be reviewed as follows:
i. New certificates and those approved since 2002 will have a five year review.
ii. After the initial five year review, they will be on a 10 year review cycle.
3. Program chair or the faculty in charge of the certificate program shall be notified by the chair
of the APCC of the imminent review no later than January preceding the academic year of
the review. Program chairs shall oversee the information-gathering and program-assessment
in order to meet the October 1 deadline for the Self-Evaluation report. For certificates that
are not administered by a single academic department or unit, the department chair(s) and/or
the dean(s) will designate a lead faculty member as the program chair.
4. Self-Evaluation Report (same as program review)
a. The program chairs or the faculty in charge of the certificate programs under review
shall oversee the compilation of the Self-Evaluation Report (see Section II) and its
submission to the APCC by October 1 of the review year. The ultimate responsibility
for the report shall rest with the program chair or the faculty in charge of the
certificate as its executive officer. The report shall be sent to the dean or director of
the certificate under review, who may attach additional information or interpretative
comments prior to forwarding of the certificate’s report to the APCC. Even with the
addition of the dean or director to the routing process of the report the deadline
remains October 1.
b. For certificates that are reviewed together with the major, the self-evaluation report
for the certificate may be an addendum to the program self-study.
5. Formation of the Audit and Review Subcommittee
a. The audit and review subcommittee appointed for program review shall also review
the certificate that is tied to the major.
b. For stand-alone certificates, the Vice Chancellor shall appoint members of the audit
and review subcommittee upon recommendation from the chair of the APCC
following the same procedure used for appointing program review subcommittees
6. Functions of the Audit and Review Subcommittee (same as for program review)
a. The Audit and Review Subcommittee shall review the certificate’s Self-Evaluation
Report and the official data from the Office of Resource Analysis. The subcommittee
shall be expected to meet with the faculty, staff, and students, to assess student
evaluations, to consult with the dean or director of the unit under review, and to make
contact with alumnae/i. The subcommittee shall have the responsibility of preparing a
report to the APCC. The report shall be forwarded to the APCC, with copies directed
to the chair of the program being reviewed and to the appropriate dean or director.
b. For certificates that are part of a major, the report can be part of the program review
report.
7. Formation of the Final Report (same as program review)
a. In hearings before the APCC, the certificate under review and the appropriate dean or
director shall have an opportunity to respond, orally or in writing, to the report and
recommendations of the subcommittee and to propose amendments and
modifications. Drawing upon the work of the audit and review subcommittee and the
responses from the certificate and the dean or directors, the APCC shall prepare or
certify a final report with appropriate recommendations to be forwarded to the Vice
Chancellor, with a copy to the dean or director, and, if faculty action is required, to
the UWM Faculty Senate.
Area
Standards adopted
by APCC 9/02
Introduction
1) General data
A. Name and describe the certificate and its place within
the unit and the mission of the University. Include any
special contributions.
B. Describe the organization of the unit as it relates to the
certificate program. Note the relationship with related
units/programs
C. Describe the mechanisms for governance of the
certificate, and student involvement, including
committee membership and participation in curricular
policy making.
D. Address the currency and relevance of courses and
programs and the need for the certificate.
Faculty and
A. Identify requirements for and responsibilities of faculty
Instructional
and instructional academic staff.
Academic Staff are B. List current members of the faculty by name, rank,
qualified and in
teaching and research specialization.
sufficient numbers to C. List current members of the instructional academic staff
provide relevant
by name, rank, teaching specialization, and percentage.
quality learning
D. Clearly articulate role of part-time faculty
experiences
E. List the number of publications over the last 7 years by
monographs, chapters, articles, creative expressions and
presentations.
F. Describe contributions to professional and community
service activities.
Consult with dean or director of unit under review.
There are adequate A. Define qualified students, and identify cohorts of
numbers of qualified
certificate students.
students for
B. Trend number of students enrolled.
meaningful cohorts to C. Attend to minority, disadvantaged students.
meet learning
objectives
Review Instructional Capacity Analysis data or
comparable exhibits that include curricular area
code, course number and title, enrollments, semester
offered, frequency of course offerings, FTE students
conveyed by year compared to courses offered.
Faculty
Students
Evidence presented by the Unit in the self-evaluation
report. Narrative limited to 10 pages.
Focus of the audit team. Narrative of audit report
limited to four pages.
Meet with group responsible for program
governance. Include student representatives if at all
possible.
Review exhibits, documents, and materials that
support and augment the unit's report.
Meet with program faculty/staff.
Review curriculum vitae of faculty and instructional
academic staff, particularly of those involved with
the undergraduate program.
Review exhibits of faculty work.
Review Department Profile information including
faculty workload, and number and dollar amount of
research proposals submitted and awarded over the
past 7 years.
Curriculum
There is an
organized, coherent
sequence of course
work that prepares
students to meet the
educational goals of
the certificate
A. Identify the educational goals/outcomes of the
certificate.
B. Explain the organization of courses, credits and
sequencing within the certificate.
C. Describe how course content and activities help students
meet course objectives.
D. Describe the delivery options available.
E. Attach current undergraduate bulletin copy and copies
of printed information including catalogues, brochures,
etc.
GER assessment GER-designated
A. Attach a complete list of GER courses in the certificate
courses unique to the
and their designations with frequency of offerings.
certificate program B. Include syllabi for courses with GER designation. The
meet the general
syllabi should meet APCC requirements for GER
guidelines outlined in
course syllabi found at
the program review
http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/SecU/apcc/index.html.
document.
C. Describe outcomes to be achieved.
D. Describe the measures used to assess the outcomes.
E. Report the assessment data trended over the past 7
years.
F. State how the certificate builds on the GER.
G. GER plans for the next five years.
Resources
There are sufficient A. Describe and assess advising procedures
resources to meet
program needs:
1. For assisting
students
2. For facilities and
space within the
university
A. List space and facilities requirements for the certificate
and assess adequacy of current allocation.
B. Describe procedure for recommending additions to the
UWM Library holdings. Assess adequacy of library
resources for students and faculty.
3. For facilities and
space outside the
university.
A. List space and facilities being used for the certificate
program off-campus and assess adequacy.
Include related discussions as part of the faculty/staff
meeting, and the student meeting.
Review the Course Offering list of undergraduate
and U/G courses offered in the past three academic
years
Review GER course syllabi. A recommendation will
need to be made about retaining/removing GER for
each course. Assessment results are a factor in
recommendation for retaining/removing GER
designation.
Include related discussions as part of student
meeting, and faculty/staff meeting. Meet with
advisors and financial officers, as appropriate.
Review budget documents, including planning
documents and their updating and the Department
Profile. Observations, including a tour, may be
appropriate.
Evaluation
A. An evaluation
A. Describe evaluation process and identify the measures
process that involves
used to collect data.
students, faculty,
B. Display some of the data received and indicate use in
graduates, and
monitoring the program.
community members,
as appropriate, is in Data may include but are not limited to: course evaluations
place and the data
by students, evaluation of the program by graduates, the
gathered is used to
unit’s systematic program evaluation data, minutes of
monitor the program
curriculum meetings, community members’ assessment
and direct its
of graduates. Such information should be available for
changes.
review by the audit team.
Meeting with faculty/staff to discuss perceptions,
strengths, weaknesses, and future of the program.
Meeting with students to discuss their perceptions of
their program. Other mechanisms for securing
student input may be needed. An example might be
an e-mail survey.
Contact with alumnae/i presents same challenges as
do students. Again, an e-mail survey might be
appropriate.
Review evaluation data, committee minutes and
other exhibits.
B. 90% of students Report completion data trended over past 7 years
complete the program
within 5 years
Summary
A. Discuss the major strengths and particular
characteristics of the certificate. (Compare this program
with other institutions’ programs, if appropriate.)
B. Indicate any weaknesses or deficiencies.
C. Suggest resources that would be needed to eliminate the
deficiencies.
D. Comment on faculty workload relevant to program
objectives. What needs, if any, exist? What plans are
there to meet these needs?
E. Describe plans for the next 5 years.
The report must include specific recommendations to
strengthen, maintain, consolidate, reorganize or
phase out the academic program.
Evaluation of the standards and the unit’s summary
should provide the needed support for the
recommendation.