Revised Guidelines for MUS New Academic Program/Center/Institute Proposals
(2/10/15)
Rationale:
1. Need for earlier communication within the MUS in the proposal development process
a. Current 3 year program plans signal intent but how they are implemented can be
inflexible or incomplete.
b. The role of the MUS Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) and faculty in reviewing
proposals comes too late in the current process.
c. The MUS leadership needs earlier involvement in the planning and coordination of
new proposals.
2. Need to include the VP’s Research (VPRs) where appropriate (centers/institutes).
3. Need for clarification of role and timing of the Campus, CAOs, MUS leadership, and the Board
within the academic planning and approval process.
4. Need to strike a balance between ensuring appropriate levels of planning, input and approval
with an efficient process that strengthens internal campus approval processes and is
conducted in a timely manner.
Background
Board Policy 303.1 (Curriculum Proposals) outlines the authority of the Montana Board of Regents to
approve “All new postsecondary educational programs (i.e. degrees, majors, minors, options, and
certificates), substantive changes in those programs, delivery of programs in a distance format, changes
in organizational structure, and revision of institutional mission.” These proposals go before the ARSA
committee of the BOR in the form of a Level II academic item. Policy 303.1 also outlines the level of
board involvement through the Level I and Level II procedures.
Level II proposals require approval of the Board of Regents. These proposals entail more substantive
additions to, alterations in, or termination of programs, structures, or administrative or academic
entities typically characterized by the (a) addition, reassignment, or elimination or personnel, facilities,
or courses of instruction; (b) rearrangement of budgets, cost centers, funding sources; and (c) changes
which by implication could impact other campuses within the Montana University System and
Community Colleges. Level II academic proposals include the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Retitling a degree (ex. B.A. to B.F.A.);
Adding a new minor or certificate where there is no major or no option in a major
Establishing a new degree or adding a major or option to an existing degree
Forming, eliminating or consolidating a college, division, school department, institute,
bureau, center, station, laboratory or similar unity
5. Re-titling a college, division, school department, institute, bureau, center, station,
laboratory or similar unit
6. Retitling a degree (ex. B.A. to B.F.A.);
Each campus within the Montana University System (MUS) has its own internal process for developing,
reviewing, and approving new academic programs. The guidelines outlined in this document are
intended to guide degree program approval as determined by the MUS on behalf of the Montana Board
of Regents.
Approval Process
The new process for Academic Program/Center/Institute approval includes: 1) Campuses submit their
Three-year Program Plans to OCHE on an annual basis (Policy 303.10); 2) a notification phase in which
the institution submits a Notice of Intent; and 3) an approval phase in which the institution submits a full
proposal to OCHE.
Good practice dictates that institutional leaders update the other institutions in the MUS of emerging
ideas for new programs before planning is well advanced to allow for consultation and exchange of
information that may be relevant to the early planning process. Campus academic leaders have an
opportunity to provide this information in the annual Program Plans that are provided to OCHE and
through the Notice of Intent phase of the process.
The process for Board of Regents approval of Level II items involves three steps and is based on the
current two-meeting process but ensures much earlier and broader engagement of the campuses and
the academic officers. In the first two steps, campus intent is signaled in the Three-year Program Plan,
and then the one-to-two page Notice of Intent document is vetted by the campus and shared broadly
within the MUS and is approved by the CAO’s and the MUS leadership before substantial resources are
invested in the full proposal. This should ensure broader discussion and collaboration early in the
development of proposals and potentially result in more effective collaborative proposals and/or
reduction of duplicative programs.
Step 1. Program Plans
1. Each institution provides annual update to OCHE of their three-year Program Plans as
currently required by BOR Policy 303.10.
Step 2. Notice of Intent
1. The requesting institution’s Chief Academic Officer (CAO submits the Notice of Intent for a
New Program/Center/Institute Form to the Deputy Commissioner of Academics, Research,
and Student Affairs. This is a one to two page proposal form, signed by the campus leader,
and outlines key aspects of the program including the following:
i. Name of the proposed degree/program, mode of delivery and institutional
contact information.
ii. What is the general nature of the proposed program?
iii. Clear statement on how the program fits with institutional mission, strategic
plan, and existing institutional program array.
2. The Commissioner of Higher Education (or designee) grants approval for the Notice of Intent
(the Commissioner may approve, deny, or send the proposal back to the campus for
revisions or additional information).
3. The Notice of Intent is posted on the MUS website and shared with the system CAOs for
review and comment. CAS/AAS - the Notice of Intent is also provided to the Two-Year
Education CEO/Dean Leadership Council for comment.
4. Institutions will have 7 working days to review the Notice of Intent and respond to the
proposing institution’s CAO or specified designees with the following:
i. Opportunities for potential collaboration.
ii. Serious concerns, including questions of duplication.
iii. General comments regarding other aspects, such as the compatibility of the
proposed program with the institution’s mission.
5. The CAOs meet monthly and will provide an update to the comments received and
recommendation to move forward.
6. MUS Leadership meets and approves of the Notice of Intent on a monthly basis.
i. Approved by the Commissioner for the three Community Colleges.
7. The Notice of Intent is posted to the MUS website and the Board is notified.
Step 3. Submission of Level II
1. The requesting institution grants internal approval for the New Undergraduate Major or
Degree Program proposal and submits the request along with the Notice of Intent Form
(which includes the presidential signature) according to the schedule for the next regular
meeting of the BOR.
2. The Commissioner of Higher Education (or his/her designee) grants approval for the New
Undergraduate Major or Degree Program proposal (the Commissioner may approve, deny,
or send the proposal back to the campus for revisions or additional information).
3. The Level II proposals are posted for CAOs review and comment for next CAO meeting
scheduled to review BOR agenda items (once every two months).
4. The New Undergraduate Major or Degree Program proposal becomes an agenda item for
the ARSA committee of the Board.
5. The Board of Regents votes on approval of the New Program proposal.