Graduate Program Review - Roles, Responsibilities and Aligning Accreditation
Roles and responsibilities for the various parties involved in Graduate Program Review
**Major/program review charge memo: GFECReviewChargeMemoTemplateExample.pdf
**Three-Year Progress Report for New Programs: ThreeYearNewProgramCheckInForm.docx
Program Review resources from Academic Planning and Institutional Research (Office of the Provost):
Context for Program Review provides types of program reviews, program review policies of schools and colleges.
*Special Case: Aligning ACCREDITATION and graduate program review
If a graduate program is anticipating an accrediting review, the preferred approach is to request that a Graduate Faculty Executive Committee (GFEC) member be allowed to participate in the relevant parts of the program’s accreditation review team and site visit. Graduate programs undergoing accreditation review are encouraged to include a meeting with the appropriate Associate Dean in the Graduate School as part of the accreditation team's site visit due to the support the Graduate School provides.
In cases where the GFEC member believes that their participation in the accreditation review team and site visit was insufficient or the accrediting body does not permit an internal review component, the process below will be put in motion. The rational for the process is that, while an accrediting review can provide high-quality feedback regarding a program’s compliance with accrediting guidelines, those guidelines may not address all the issues of interest to the Graduate School or to the campus. An internal review, thus, needs to be designed to accomplish that latter task.
The internal review process to supplement an accreditation review:
- When the external review team’s report is in hand, along with any departmental reactions to that report, the appropriate School/College Dean and a Graduate School Associate Dean will appoint a three-person committee. Two individuals will be appointed by the School/College Dean while one will be appointed by a Graduate School Associate Dean. To the extent possible and as is customary, the Graduate School appointee will be someone familiar with the field/nature of the program.
- The committee will be given access to the program’s self-study, the external review team report, and any departmental responses to the report. If the committee (the chair to be appointed by the Graduate School) needs further information, it will have the authority to ask the program for supplementary documents or for additional interviews with faculty, staff or students.
- The committee will write a brief (3-5 pages) report, with recommendations as it sees fit. That report will go to the program, and the unit can respond in writing if it feels that a response is warranted.
- The School/College’s Academic Planning Council will vet both the internal and external reports.
- The Graduate Faculty Executive Committee will vet the reports.
See the Supplementary Graduate Program Review Guidelines here: Supplementary Graduate Program Review Guidelines