Program Review Self-Study Format
Academic Unit
Department (if applicable)
Program(s) in Review
Academic Year Scheduled for Review
Notes: Additional information may be found on the PEC blog: http://info.umkc.edu/pec/programreview
The self-study should be submitted to Amy Watson (watsonar@umkc.edu) by December 1st.
Domains of Review
A. Unit Description
 Organizational Structure
 Degrees and Programs
 Budget Information (General fund allocation, tuition, and grant income)
 Describe how the program(s) serve constituent groups.
 Describe how the unit and program(s) support the overall mission of UMKC and UM System.
B. Programs or Support Functions
 For each degree program, provide assessment plan annual reports across five years and a five year summary
(https://app.weaveonline.com/umkc/login.aspx)
 Representative syllabi, internships and supporting documents demonstrating where objectives/student competencies
are taught/addressed within the curriculum
 Process for reviewing and updating the curriculum
 Describe processes that support continuous quality improvement for the academic degree programs and the
academic unit
 Describe comparative advantages or uniqueness of the program(s)
 Describe how faculty consider various student populations in the design and delivery of the curriculum (first
generation, students of color, non-traditional, etc.)
 Describe how the program integrates divers/multi-cultural perspectives
 Describe the program leadership and the decision making process
 Describe support provided (if any) for other programs/units
 Describe centers or institutes (if any) housed within the department/program

Annual reports (5 years)

Describe how mission of center relates to the work/mission of the program

Describe the faculty role in each center/institute

Evaluate each center/institute effectiveness
C.
Faculty













Describe faculty in the unit and their contributions to the degree program
Describe general expectations of faculty
Document teaching and advising loads for each faculty member
Describe evaluation of teaching effectiveness and advising quality
Provide an abbreviated vita for each faculty member (2-3 pages max)
Describe faculty recruiting process and strategies used for diversity
Describe faculty retention strategies
Describe faculty development/mentoring process
Describe promotion and tenure, post tenure review, and workload allocation processes (include copies of
policies/guidelines)
Describe faculty evaluation of teaching, research, and service quality and quantity
Describe any sponsored projects and how faculty achievements are evaluated
Describe how faculty research supports and enhances the educational program
Describe how the research environment supports continuous quality improvement
Program Review Self-Study Format, 2011
Page 1 of 2
D.
Students (Use IRP Decision Theatre for information: http://irapweb.umkc.edu/; See PEC Guide to UMKC’s Decision
Theatre: )
 Provide a five year history of students in the program

Number of majors/minors

Number of degrees awarded annually

Student credit hour production (total & by FTE)

Student demographics including transfer students, underrepresented minorities and low income students
 Admission requirements (if applicable), SAT or GRE scores, GPA’s, graduate/undergraduate status or other relevant
information
 Student success

Graduates

Retention (undergraduate freshman to sophomore)

Persistence (2nd year to next through 6-year cycle)

Standardized test score data (AP, GPA, MFAT) - if applicable

Licensure/Certification data – if applicable
 Describe unit recruitment activities and strategies to increase diversity
 Describe unit activities and strategies to increase undergraduate retention and graduation
E.
Resources
 Describe the adequacy of resources to support the program and other financial considerations
 Describe administrative support resources (such as administrative assistants, work study students, or graduate
assistants)
 Briefly describe the patterns of resource usage and how they compare with similar programs (e.g., cost of instruction
from UM System Cost Study, Delaware Study)
 Note any deficits or peculiarities encountered with budget or cost data
 Describe the physical location of the unit/program and how it supports the unit
F.
Evaluation, Methods, Data, and Future Planning






Provide evidence that students are achieving the goals and objectives of the program, how this data is used, and how
the information is used for program improvement and planning (WEAVEOnline Reports)
Describe processes faculty use for conducting on-going reviews of the program function, experience, and outcomes as
well as the relation to the strategic planning process
Describe information used for faculty to ascertain high quality program consistency with local, regional and national
trends
Provide explanation if program quality differs significantly from that of similar programs
Describe strengths and areas in need of improvement
Present a five-year strategic plan for addressing areas in need of improvement
Program Review Self-Study Format, 2011
Page 2 of 2