GUIDELINES FOR UNDERGRADUATE ACADEMIC PROGRAM
REVIEW AND IMPROVEMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
The University of Michigan-Flint is committed to offering academic programs of the highest
standards and to continually working to improve these programs. The Commission of Institutions
of Higher Education of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, in the most
recent Report of a Visit, called for review of academic programs. These guidelines provide a
framework in which to conduct undergraduate academic program reviews and utilize the findings
of such to enhance academic offerings at UM-Flint.
New undergraduate academic programs will complete a preliminary review process at the end of
the second year and a full self-study after the fourth year of the program. All academic programs
will participate in an ongoing review every five years.
The objectives of undergraduate academic program review are to:





Enhance the quality of academic programs,
Provide a basis for planning and assess progress on plans,
Improve programs by identifying strengths upon which to build,
Develop plans of action to address program weaknesses, and
Identify future resource needs to assist with budget planning for the program, unit, and
campus.
Academic programs that undergo reviews by external accrediting organizations should
incorporate the results of those external reviews into this program review process to minimize
the need for additional work. Much of the data requested in the program review is available from
other department or university sources. Please incorporate such data into the program review, to
avoid inefficiency and duplication of effort.
Program faculty members are encouraged to make appropriate modifications to this review
process, as necessary, in consultation with the unit Dean.
II. DEFINITION OF ACADEMIC PROGRAM
An undergraduate academic program is a coherent set of curricular offerings that produces a
measurable intellectual outcome, and generally takes the form of an academic major or minor.
Academic programs, as identified for learning outcomes assessment purposes, are generally
considered academic programs for review purposes. Many academic programs reside within a
single department, while some programs transcend departments, such as the Minor in
International and Global Studies and the Honors Program. Each academic department should
identify the programs residing within that department as well as interdepartmental programs in
which the department participates.
1
Some departments offer a number of general education courses to large numbers of students and
have few students in academic majors and minors offered in the departments, or may be
responsible for delivering more than one program. In this context, departmental faculty may
conclude that coordinating reviews of related programs is more effective than reviewing
academic programs individually, and should proceed accordingly.
Addressing recommendations for improvement is a key aspect of successful program review.
UM-Flint and Academic Affairs are committed assisting academic departments in implementing
recommendations for improvement by making the necessary resources available whenever
possible.
III. PARTICIPANTS IN PROGRAM REVIEW
Program reviews are conducted by the department Chair (or similar responsible party) and
faculty of the department in which the program principally resides. (If the responsible unit is not
obvious, the Provost will identify the appropriate dean.) The self-study is forwarded to the Dean
of the academic unit (school or college), who then evaluates the program with regard to quality,
value, viability, effectiveness and effective use of resources, and may provide recommendations
for follow-up. The self-study and Dean’s evaluation are forwarded to the Provost who may either
accept the evaluation or add an addendum. Both the Dean and Provost perform their evaluations
in consultation with appropriate faculty advisory groups. The Dean, department head and
program faculty receive the Provost’s final conclusions regarding program review.
IV. PRELIMINARY REVIEW PROCESS FOR NEW PROGRAMS
A preliminary review is conducted for new undergraduate academic programs at the end of the
second year of implementation. The purposes of the preliminary review are to:




Evaluate and monitor academic backgrounds and performance of students.
Evaluate and monitor enrollment patterns.
Determine if there has been sufficient qualified faculty available to support the program.
Determine if there have been sufficient financial and other resources to support the
program.
Self-Study for Preliminary Reviews
Please enter the requested information in the fields provided.
1. Comment on the first two years of the program regarding sufficiency of resources,
whether the program expectations have been met, and, specifically, the program’s
capacity to offer courses as planned and described in the program proposal. Describe any
changes being made next year.
2
2. Provide comments from students in the program.
3. Comment on the attached course schedule regarding the extent to which actual course
offerings have matched the original course schedule, reasons for any differences, and
plans for course offerings in the future.
4. Attach a copy of the program course schedule as included in the program proposal.
5. Please complete the attached Faculty Information form.
V. ONGOING PROGRAM REVIEW PROCESS
New academic programs complete the full program review at the completion of their fourth year,
and subsequently every five years. The purpose of program review is to enhance program quality
by identifying strengths upon which to build and developing plans of action to address program
weaknesses.
Self-Study for Ongoing Reviews
Please enter the requested information in the fields provided.
1. Introduction: Include a brief background description of the program, statement of
mission/purpose of the program and/or of the academic unit that the program
supports, and describe, in general terms, the student population in the program.
2. Goals and Objectives: Describe the program goals and objectives established during
and since the previous review. Indicate status of goals and describe factors that have
contributed to their attainment or have been barriers to their attainment. Please
summarize observations and recommendations from previous reviews and explain
how the recommendations have been addressed.
3. Previous Reviews: Please describe any actions taken in response to the previous
program review.
3
4. Diversity: Please describe actions taken to support UM-Flint’s mission to promote
diversity and create inclusive communities among faculty, staff and students in all
academic programs.
5. Curriculum: Describe any major curriculum changes since the most recent review (or
in the last five years. Describe the types of information (formative and summative)
that have been utilized in making curriculum changes and how outcome assessment
and other survey data have been used to improve curriculum.
6. Outreach: Describe outreach activities targeting the university and community
involving faculty, staff, administrators and students. Briefly assess the effectiveness
of these outreach activities.
7. Resources: Describe the ways in which utilizing available resources has impacted the
program and describe high priority items requiring additional funding.
8. Strengths: Summarize the strengths of the program as perceived by faculty and
students, including comments related to graduation and alumni survey data and
learning outcomes assessment results.
9. Weaknesses: Summarize the weaknesses of the program as perceived by faculty and
students, including comments related to graduation and alumni survey data and
learning outcomes assessment results.
10. Future Plans: Describe future plans for the program, including development,
improvement, enrollment targets, potential changes in student population,
opportunities to pursue, potential threats, and any other relevant issues.
11. Self-Study Participants: Please list the names of faculty, staff, and students who
participated in this self-study.
4
12. Faculty: Please provide a general assessment of faculty staffing patterns for the last
three to five years, comment on regularly appointed and adjunct faculty and the ways
in which each group contributes to the program as well as any activities relevant to
maintaining currency in their fields that may not appear on their CVs.
13. Enrollments/Degree Completion: Please comment on trends in course enrollments
and the number of graduates. Include written comments from current students and
graduates.
14. Complete the attached Student and Course Information, Faculty Information and
Trend Data Recap Forms.
VI. REVIEW OF SELF-STUDY REPORT
a. The Dean, in consultation with the appropriate department chair and faculty committee,
will review the Self-Study Report and prepare a report, highlighting the program
strengths and challenges, and if necessary, make recommendations regarding future
courses of action to be taken by the program faculty and administrator(s).
b. The Provost, in consultation with the appropriate faculty committee, reviews the SelfStudy Report and the Dean’s evaluation and either accepts or adds an addendum to the
report, evaluation, and recommendations. The Dean and Program Faculty are notified of
the Provost’s conclusions. Any remaining questions are addressed as appropriate among
the Provost, Dean, and Chair of the department in which the program resides.
VI.
REVIEW OF THESE GUIDELINES FOR PROGRAM REVIEW
The effectiveness of these Guidelines for Program Review will be reviewed within five years
of their initial adoption, and every five years thereafter. These guidelines will be used,
revised or discontinued based on this assessment.
Revised October 2011
5