| |
Board of Governor's Five-Year Review
Basis of Program Review Process
W. Va. Code § 18B-1B-4 and 18B-2A-4 delineate responsibilities for the review of academic programs. Each institutional governing board has the responsibility to review, at least every five years all programs offered at the institution(s) of higher education under its jurisdiction. The review should address the viability, adequacy, necessity, and consistency with mission of the programs to the institutional master plan, the institutional compact, and the education and workforce needs of the responsibility district. Additionally, each governing board as part of the review is to require the institution(s) under its jurisdiction to conduct periodic studies of graduates and their employers to determine placement practices and the effectiveness of the education experience. The Higher Education Policy Commission has the responsibility for review of academic degree programs, including the use of institutional missions as a template to assure the appropriateness of existing programs and the authority to implement needed changes.
For the purpose of this document, a "program" is defined as a curriculum or course of study in a discipline specialty that leads to a certificate or degree.
Graduate and Professional Program Review at WVU
Each year, approximately one-fifth of all academic programs at WVU are reviewed. For each program identified for review, the institution will develop a self-study statement addressing the following items.
- Viability - Viability is tested by an analysis of unit cost factors, sustaining a critical mass, and relative productivity. Based upon past trends in enrollment, patterns of graduates, and the best predictive data available, the institution shall assess the program's past ability and future prospects to attract students and sustain a viable, cost-effective program.
- Adequacy - A valuable (but not the sole) criterion for determining the program's adequacy is accreditation by a specialized accrediting or approving agency recognized by the Federal Government or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. The institution shall evaluate the preparation and performance of faculty and students, and the adequacy of facilities.
- Necessity - The dimensions of necessity include whether the program is necessary for the institution's service region, and whether the program is needed by society (as indicated by current employment opportunities, evidence of future need, rate of placement of the programs' graduates). Whether the needs of West Virginia justify the duplication of programs in several geographic service regions shall also be addressed.
- Consistency With Mission - The program shall be a component of, and appropriately contribute to, the fulfillment of the institutional and system missions. The review should indicate the centrality of the program to the institution, explain how the program complements other programs offered, and state how the program draws upon or supports other programs. Both institutional aspects of the program should be addressed. The effects (positive or negative) that discontinuance of the program might have upon the institution's ability to accomplish its mission should be stated.
Programs that are accredited by specialized accrediting or approving agencies recognized by the Federal Government and/or the Council on Higher Education Accreditation shall be considered to have met the minimum requirements of the review process with respect to adequacy. For programs so accredited or approved, institutions shall submit: the comprehensive institutional self-study conducted in compliance with the accreditation or approval process, a copy of the letter containing the conferral of accreditation or approval and a documented statement regarding program consistency with mission, viability and necessity.
The guidelines for the self-study document for programs with or without specialized accreditation will be distributed to the program the spring before the document is to be submitted in the fall.
Possible Outcomes
Institutional Recommendation - The five-year cycle of program review will result in a recommendation by the institution for action relative to each program under review. The institution is clearly obligated to recommend continuation or discontinuation for each program reviewed. If recommending continuation, the institution should state what it intends:
- Continuation of the program at the current level of activity, with or without specific action;
- Continuation of the program at a reduced level of activity (e.g., reducing the range of optional tracks) or other corrective action.
- Identification of the program for further development;
- Development of a cooperative program with another institution, or sharing of courses, facilities, faculty, and the like.
- Discontinuance of the program, (the provisions of Higher Education Policy Commission policy on approval and discontinuance of academic programs will apply).
Recommendation - The Graduate Council will develop a recommendation for action and forward it to the Office of Provost which will present it to the WVU Board of Governors. The BOG recommendations will be reported to the Policy Commission. The Graduate Council may make recommendations that go beyond those also. The Graduate Council may request additional information and may recommend continuance on a provisional basis and request progress reports.
Appeals Committee and the Appeals Process - Any disagreement between a final recommendation of the Graduate Council and the recommendation of the academic unit may be appealed to the WVU Board of Governors.
|
|
