Technical Review Checklist
Pedagogical review:
1. Does the course meet the System Office’s five criteria for establishing curriculum: (1)
appropriateness to mission, (2) need, (3) curriculum standards, (4) adequate resources, and (5)
compliance?
2. Is the course written in accordance with state and federal laws, including any licensing body,
accrediting agency, or special funding agency?
3. Is the course title a clear indication to the student of the content of the course?
4. Is the course number appropriate for the level of study required in the course?
5. Are the semester hours accurate appropriate?
6. Does the catalog description clearly state the goals and outcomes a successful learner will
demonstrate at the end of the course?
7. Are the prerequisites/corequisites/advisories appropriate and validated?
8. Are prerequisites/corequisites/advisories that will ensure student success provided?
9. Do the course objectives describe outcomes in terms of what a successful learner can demonstrate at
the end of the course?
10. Do the majority of the course objectives reflect higher order thinking skills?
11. Is the course content in outline form and utilize subtopics to show the emphasis each topic generally
receives?
12. Does the required-texts-and-supplies section list examples of specific texts with copyright dates or
other college-level materials appropriate for the course and representative of current or emerging
knowledge and practice?
13. Does the methods-of-instruction section specify what is appropriate for the specific course and align
with course objectives?
14. Does the methods-of-evaluation section specify procedures which are consistent with the objectives,
the course content, and the scope of the course and based on demonstrated proficiency, at least in
part, by means of essay, problem-solving exercises, or skill demonstrations?
15. Does the methods-of-evaluation section explain how the methods will be evaluated (not simply what
will be evaluated)?
16. Do the examples of reading, writing, and outside assignments reference both the course content and
at least one objective?
17. Do the assignments listed provide examples that require students to think critically and apply the
concepts from the course objectives?
18. Is the course outline accurate, complete and integrated according to Title 5 regulations?
19. Does the course have appropriate AA/AS General Education Breadth Area placement? This should
be reviewed by the Curriculum Committee Counselor(s) member using the questions on the Title V
GE breadth Area Guidelines (listed under the Distance Ed Checklist under Questions for Review of
Proposed Curriculum).
Curriculum Specialist:
1. Are the required district forms accurate, complete, and attached?
2. Are the semester hours accurate?
3. Are the catalog and brief descriptions appropriate in length (75 words and 120 characters
respectively)?
4. Does the required-texts-and-supplies section list examples of specific texts with copyright dates?
5. For New Courses, is the new course number one that is not already in use or has been used in the
past?
6. For Course Revisions, compare course title, unit value and breakdown, TOP code, repeatability,
class maximum, pass/no pass only, pass/no pass allow, prerequisite, corequisite, advisory and other
enrollment criteria to advise to add changes and rationale to the rationale on form A or to change the
information back to the original.
7. Review honors and distance ed addenda lists to advise course author that submission is incomplete
without revision to addenda/addendum.
8. Review program revisions to add/update AA/AS degree, state certificate or ECC.
Class Scheduling and Information Specialist:
1. Does the catalog description contain complete sentences written in the present tense? Be sure there is
no mention of need of course – GE area, Certificate, Degree, ECC reference
2. Are the prerequisites/corequisites/advisories/other enrollment criteria enforceable in Datatael or will
they require Instructor Consent? Are they written in the approved language format (with a grade of
C or better)?
3. Is the course a stand alone course? Has that been appropriately documented on the A and B forms?
4. Is the course Program Applicable? If, yes, has the Dept started their program review, completed their
program review, if no – send to Kristi and appropriate dean(s). If yes, is the curriculum submission
an outcome of program review? If yes, incorporate into the rationale on form A.
5. Review current catalog for course listing in AA/AS, state certificate and ECC and advise course
author if revision is required (change to course status, title and unit value requires program revision
in all approved AA/AS, state certificates and ECCs).
6. Volunteer to review program revisions before deadline.
2009-10
Administrative Co-Chair: Richard Rowley (rrowley@msjc.edu)
Faculty Co-Chair: Michelle Stewart (mstewart@msjc.edu)
Class Scheduling and Information Specialist: Angela Seavey (aseavey@msjc.edu)
Curriculum Specialist: Kass Munoz (kmunoz@msjc.edu)
Articulation Coordinator: J. Mc Curdy (jmccurdy@msjc.edu)
Counselor: Debbi May (dmay@msjc.edu)