CURRY SCHOOL PROGRAM AREA PEER REVIEWS
AND SCHEDULE (rev. 9-15-09)
The Curry School of Education values continuous improvement of the quality and impacts of our
academic programs and provides a number of opportunities to support program faculty in these
aims. Most of our Program Areas engage in self-analysis and many are also reviewed by
accrediting agencies and organizations. These activities support program refinements and
strategic enhancements that can be complemented by regular peer review and formative planning
efforts. Building from the recent Provost’s Review of Curry, in which all program areas engaged
in taking stock of their current status and considered strategic for future efforts, this year the
school will start a cycle of periodic formative reviews seeking program-specific feedback from
peers. Peer reviews are intended to provide program faculty members and administrators with
information useful for program improvement, strategic directions and opportunities, and
planning. A critical element of peer review is the continuation of the process of planning and
program improvement that began in 2008-2009 with the Provost’s review, in particular the
specification of program outcomes (e.g. student outcomes) and assessments of those outcomes
that can be used in program planning. Peer reviews should also help program areas prepare for
accreditation and professional organization reviews.
Program Review Features
Goals:
Peer reviews are formative. They are aimed to provide program faculty with the opportunity to
engage external experts in their own discipline in a discussion of program vision, aims, quality,
and outcomes in an effort to strengthen programs. Program areas undergoing review should use
the review an as opportunity for: (1) refining and articulating its goals, priorities, special
features, and vision, (2) refine degree programs, (3) think about future opportunities in terms of
curriculum development and faculty development and (4) identifying information on its
graduates’ growth, achievements, and job placement. As noted above, peer reviews are intended
to provide program faculty members and administrators with information useful for program
improvement, strategic directions and opportunities, and planning. A critical element of peer
review is the continuation of the process of planning and program improvement that began in
2008-2009 with the Provost’s review, in particular the specification of program outcomes (e.g.
student outcomes) and assessments of those outcomes that can be used in program planning.
The goal is for these recommendations to help Program Areas develop in ways consistent with
the Commission on the Future of the University, the goals of Curry for program, faculty, and
student excellence, and goals of the professions we prepare students to enter.
Process:
Each Program Area will provide the reviewers with a) background material and b) a cover letter.
The background material will consist of: A report describing mission and degree programs,
building on the documentation already developed for the Provost’s Review and other
organizational reviews. Thus programs should examine the report they prepared in 2008-2009
and make any additional updates. This report should be supplemented with faculty vitae,
program handbooks, course syllabi, admission and course enrollment data, information on
placement of graduates, and any additional materials as needed to give reviewers a useful
understanding of the program. Programs should coordinate the preparation of this background
information with the Associate Dean for Academic Programs, their Department Chair, and the
information management database specialist.
In their cover letter to the review team, program areas should feel free to pose to the review team
any specific questions or topics around which they would like the reviewers to focus the review.
Again, the intent of these reviews is to gain the added information and perspectives that can be
available from external peer review.
Program Areas will nominate several faculty members, from peer institutions, who are
recognized as experts in their discipline and can provide the Program Area with substantive
feedback and recommendations.
The Program background materials and cover will be sent to two or three of these outside experts
for analysis. These reviewers will then visit Curry to meet with Program Area faculty and
students, and Curry administrators, to ask questions, gather more information, and provide initial
feedback. Shorty after their site visit, the reviewers will submit a follow-up report on their
analysis and recommendations pertinent to the questions posed by the program in their cover
letter.
Outcomes of review:
It is expected that both program faculty members and outside reviewers will provide an analysis
of the Program Area tailored to questions posed by program faculty, and provide
recommendations for enhancing the experiences offered to students and facilitating the work of
faculty members. In particular, these recommendations should help the Program Area build on
its strengths and address any weaknesses. Helpful reviews provide programs with new ideas and
opportunities for strengthening and focusing program resources and quality.
Program Area Review Schedule
The review schedule below was developed by the Department Chairs in early 2009 and was
endorsed by the Leadership Team.
Accrediting
Organization
EDHS
Adapted Physical Education
Clinical Psychology
Communication Disorders
Counselor Education
Exercise Physiology
Health and Physical Education
School Psychology
Athletic Training (M.Ed.)
Sports Medicine (Ph.D.)
EDIS
Elementary Education TED
Mathematics Specialist (Lic.)
Secondary Education TED
Special Education TED
Reading Education (Lic.)
Grad Special Education
Grad Math/Science Education
Grad C&I
Grad Language/Literature
EDLF
Administration and Supervision
Education Policy
Educational Psychology
Gifted Education (Lic.)
Gifted Education
Higher Education
Instructional Technology
Research, Statistics, Evaluation
Foundations of Education
NCPERID
APA
ASHA
CACREP
Last Org
Review
2006
2006
Next Org
Review
2013
2010
Provost
Review
Curry
Review
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2010-11
2011-12
2009-10
2009-10
2010-11
2010-11
2011-12
2011-12
2011-12
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2011-12
2011-12
2011-12
2011-12
TEAC
NASP
NATA
2006
2013
2008
2008
TEAC
TEAC
TEAC
TEAC
TEAC
2006
2008
2006
2006
2006
2013
2013
2013
2013
2013
TEAC
2006
2009
2008
TEAC
2006
2013
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2011-12
2011-12
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
2010-11
Program Reviews for 2009-2010
Program Areas:
1. Communication Disorders: Fall 2009/Spring 2010.
2. Counselor Education: Fall 2009/Spring 2010.
Schedule for 2009-2010 Curry Reviews:
May 15: Notify program areas of their upcoming program-specific review
June 30: Meet with programs area faculty to discuss review.
July 15: Programs submit list of recommended reviewers, with description of qualifications.
August 15: Finalize list of solicit outside reviewers
November 1: Programs submit review materials (background materials and cover letter) to
Associate Dean for Academic Programs and to Dept Chair for internal review and comments.
November 15: After internal Curry review and possible revisions, review materials then sent to
members of the review team.
February 1: Visit by external team
March 15: Report of team due
April 1: Program faculty and administrators review report and meet to discuss next steps and
recommendations