UK External Review Committee Institutional Recommendation
CPE Program Review Rubric
Institution:
Program Name:
Program Type:
Degree Designation as on Diploma:
CIP Code:
Program Implementation Date:
Submission Date:
External Review Committee Recommendation:
Maintain Without Modification
Level 1: Unacceptable
Maintain With Modification
Needs Further Review
Level 2: Acceptable
Comments (200 word limit):
Program Review
Note for unacceptable rating: Any
Committee
Numerical criterion that the committee
Rating
identifies as “unacceptable” must
Rating
have a recommended action for
(Unacceptable=
( 1, 2, or 3) improvement in the comments
1, Acceptable=2,
section and in the External Review
or Excellent=3)
Level 3: Excellent
Committee Recommendation Report.
A.
A.1.
A.2.
A.3.
B.
B.1.
Centrality to the Institution's Mission and Consistency with State's Goals
Consistency with Institutional
Mission/Strategic Agenda/
Strategic Implementation
Plan and Contribution to
institutional mission
Contribution to economic and
social welfare goals of HB1 as
delineated in the statewide
postsecondary education
strategic agenda*
Alignment with statewide
postsecondary education
strategic implementation
plan**
Program demonstrates
little or no relation/
contribution to
institutional mission.
Program somewhat
demonstrates relation/
contribution to
institutional mission.
Program demonstrates
strong, committed relation/
contribution to institutional
mission.
Select:
Select:
Program demonstrates
little or no contribution to
the state's economic and
social welfare goals.
Program somewhat
demonstrates
contribution to the state's
economic and social
welfare goals.
Program demonstrates
strong, committed
contribution to state's
economic and social welfare
goals.
Select:
Select:
Program proactively
advances the statewide
implementation plan.
Select:
Select:
Description of assessment
results is comprehensive,
including explanations of
how each SLO was
measured and how often,
what benchmarks or targets
were set, and how results
were used to make
improvements to the
program.
Select:
Select:
Program is not aligned with Program is somewhat
statewide implementation aligned with statewide
plan.
implementation plan.
Program Quality and Student Success
Program Quality and Student
Success
Use of assessment results
Description of assessment
results indicate an
assessment plan is in
Description of assessment place, and results have
results indicates that no
been used to improve the
assessment plan is in place program, but important
or that a plan was in place, elements (e.g., use of both
but assessment results
direct and indirect
have not been used to
measures, all SLOs
improve the program.
covered by some form of
assessment, use of
benchmarks or targets)
are missing.
1
Program has no or too few
awards or recognition; is
B.2.
not accredited
(if accreditor exists).
Program does not have
reasonable number of
Number of hours to complete
hours to complete
B.3.a.
program
program for its type and
level.
External awards or other
recognition of the students,
faculty and/or program
B.3.b.
Average actual time to
degree***
Average actual credit to
B.3.c.
degree****
Employer satisfaction with
B.4.a. graduates as measured by
surveys
Graduating students' and
B.4.b. alumni satisfaction with
program
B.5.a. Job placement
(AA/AS Programs Only)
B.5.b.
Transfer of Graduates
B.5.c. Graduate school admission
B.6.
Pass rates on licensure/
certification exams (if
applicable)
Program does not achieve
reasonable time to-degree
for its type and level.
Program's average is
below the institution's
target and trending
downward.
Program does not measure
employer satisfaction with
its graduates, or has poor
results.
Program does not measure
graduating students'
and/or alumni satisfaction,
or has poor results in this
area.
Program does not measure
job placement, or has poor
results in this area.
Program does not measure
number of graduating
students who transfer, has
poor results in this area, or
is trending negatively.
Program does not measure
graduate admission, has
poor results in this area, or
is trending negatively.
Pass rates are below the
state average.
Program has examples of
awards or recognition,
including accreditation
(if applicable).
Program has many examples
of awards/recognition,
including exemplary
accreditation results.
Select:
Select:
Program has reasonable
number of hours to
complete program for its
type and level.
Program has exemplary
number of hours to
complete program for its
type and level.
Select:
Select:
Program achieves exemplary
time-to- degree for its type
and level.
Select:
Select:
Program's average meets or
exceeds the institutional
target.
Select:
Select:
Program has exemplary
employer satisfaction
results.
Select:
Select:
Graduating student and/or Program has exemplary
alumni satisfaction results graduating student and/or
are generally positive.
alumni satisfaction results.
Select:
Select:
Program has good results
in job placement for its
graduates.
Program has exemplary job
placement for its graduates.
Select:
Select:
Program transfers
students or is student
transfer is trending
positively.
Program transfers large
number of students.
Select:
Select:
Some program graduates
are admitted to graduate
school or is trending
positively.
Large number of program
graduates are admitted to
graduate school.
Select:
Select:
Pass rates are at the state
average.
Pass rates are above the
state average.
Select:
Select:
Program achieves
reasonable time-todegree for its type and
level, and/or is trending
positively.
Program's average is
below the institution's
target, but trending
upward.
Employer satisfaction
results are generally
positive.
2
C.
C.1.a.
C.1.b.
C.2.a.
C.2.b.
Program Demand and Unnecessary Duplication
Program has average
Program has low
enrollment and credit
Number of students enrolled enrollment and credit hour
hour production, and is
and credit hour production
production, or is trending
trending positively in one
negatively in both.
or both.
Program is not producing a Program is producing a
sufficient number of
sufficient number of
Number of degrees conferred degrees to sustain itself
degrees to sustain itself,
long- term, or is trending
and/or trending
negatively.
positively.
Program shows some
Program is closely similar distinction from existing
to existing programs at
programs at other KY
Differentiated curriculum or
other KY institutions, nor
institutions, or can
access to existing programs is
does it provide access for demonstrate that it
limited
students beyond the reach provides access for
of other KY institutions.
students beyond the reach
of other KY institutions.
Explanation of pursuit of
Program is planning to
collaborative opportunities
Program does not seek any
seek collaborative
with similar programs at
collaborative opportunities
opportunities with similar
other institutions and how
with similar programs at
programs at other KY
collaboration will increase
other KY institutions.
institutions.
effectiveness and efficiency
D.
Cost and Funding
D.1.
Student credit hours per
instructional faculty FTE
Program has average
SCH/FTE productivity,
and/or is trending
positively.
Program has little to no
Program has some outside
outside funding, and is not funding, and is active in
pursuing funding
pursuing funding
opportunities.
opportunities.
Program has low SCH/FTE
productivity, and/or is
trending negatively.
Program has strong
enrollment and credit hour
production.
Select:
Select:
Program is producing a large
Select:
number of degrees.
Select:
Program is very distinctive,
or clearly demonstrates that
it provides access for
students beyond the reach
of other KY institutions.
Select:
Select:
Program proactively seeks or
engages in collaborative
opportunities with similar
Select:
programs at other KY
institutions.
Select:
Program has strong SCH/FTE
productivity.
Select:
Select:
Program has significant
outside funding, and is very
active in pursuing funding
opportunities.
Select:
Select:
D.2.
Extramural funding
E.
Additional Information and Comments/Brief rationale for ERC Recommendation
3
*Programs should contribute to one or more of these areas: College Readiness - Will your
program increase the number of college-ready Kentuckians entering postsecondary education?
What does your program do to recruit new students? Will it increase Kentucky's K-12
teacher/school leader effectiveness? Student Success - Does the program increase high-quality
degree production and completion rates and close achievement gaps, particularly for lowincome, underprepared, and URM students? Research Economic and Community Development
- Does your program increase educational attainment and quality of life in Kentucky
communities through regional stewardship, public service, and community outreach? Efficiency
and Innovation - Does this program increase academic productivity through program
innovations such as online learning or extended campuses? Does this program maximize the
use of postsecondary and adult education resources?
** College Readiness - What has the program done to increase educational
attainment/motivation at the P-12 level or new teacher excellence (Teacher Ed programs)?
Student Success - How many degrees have been conferred? How many KCTCS transfer students
have been recruited? What are your persistence and graduation rates? Research, Economic and
Community Development - How many externally funded R&D grants have been awarded?
What are the amounts of these grants? How many degrees and credentials in STEM+H fields have
been awarded? Efficiency & Innovation - How has your program worked to minimize credits
earned by degree graduates for on-time graduation? What are your program’s online offerings?
***Institutions may wish to compare program's average actual time to degree to the
institution's overall 3- or 6-year graduation rate
**** 2015 Institution Targets for Avg Credit-to-Degree: EKU = 136; KSU = 130; MoSU = 130;
MuSU = 138; NKU = 135; UK = 132; UofL = 136; WKU = 137;
EVALUATION CRITERIA: CPE's recommendation will be based on the above ratings. All areas of the review will be considered. However, special consideration will be given to the following
areas: Use of Assessment Results, AVG actual time to degree, Number of Students Enrolled and Credit Hour Production, and Number of Degrees Conferred.
ERC RECOMMENDATION RUBRIC KEY DEFINITIONS:


Maintain without Modification: Continuation of the program at the current level with recommendations for enhancement.
Maintain with Modification (Program Restructure): Continuation of the program; however, requiring substantive change in one or more of the following areas: current
practices/operations, utilization of faculty and department resources, and curriculum.
Overall ERC Committee Evaluation Rating: Rating reflects Committee consensus, and should be based on all areas with special attention to the criterion identified by the committee as
“unacceptable.” There is no magic number for determining the committee’s evaluation rating; it is the committee’s judgement call. Please Note: If the committee is not able to reach
consensus, we ask that the committee choose “Needs Further Review.”
Note for Unacceptable Rating: Any criterion that the committee identifies as “unacceptable” must have a recommended action for improvement in the Comments section and in the
External Review Committee Recommendation Report.
Last updated 04/28/2016
4