Consultant(S) Review of Proposal

Section 22

CONSULTANT(S) REVIEW OF PROPOSAL

Summary of Strengths & Weaknesses

PROFILE—EDUCATIONAL CORPORATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACCREDITATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

INSTITUTIONAL MISSION/PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES/GOALS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACADEMIC CONTROL--INSTITUTION GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACADEMIC CONTROL--INSTITUTION UNDERGRADUATE ORGANIZATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACADEMIC CONTROL--INSTITUTION GRADUATE ORGANIZATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACADEMIC CONTROL--INSTITUTION ACADEMIC UNITS/DIVISIONS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

ACADEMIC CONTROL—INSTITUTION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

INSTITUTION--GRIEVANCE POLICIES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

INSTITUTION ACADEMIC CONTROL--OFF-SITE LOCATIONS AND DISTANCE EDUCATION INITIATIVES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

CURRICULUM INSTITUTION--POLICIES AND PROCESSES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

CURRICULUM INSTITUTION—GENERAL EDUCATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

CURRICULUM INSTITUTION—GRADUATE EDUCATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

CURRICULUM INSTITUTION/PROPOSED PROGRAM--ACADEMIC CREDIT POLICIES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--DEVELOPMENT

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM—MISSION/PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES/GOALS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM—CURRICULUM

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--COURSE DESCRIPTIONS AND SYLLABI

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--CLINICAL/OTHER SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--COURSES AND SEQUENCING THROUGH CURRICULUM

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

LIBRARY RESOURCES AND SERVICES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--GRADING POLICIES/MEASURING STUDENT SUCCESS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--APPLICATION PROCESS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

INSTITUTION—FACULTY APPOINTMENT POLICIES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--FACULTY STANDARDS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--FACULTY APPOINTMENT PROCESS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--FACULTY

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--DOCTORAL FACULTY

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--FACULTY ORIENTATION/MENTORING

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--CLINICAL/OTHER FACULTY

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--CLINICAL/OTHER FACULTY ORIENTATION/MENTORING

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM FACULTY--ADDITIONAL SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM DOCTORAL FACULTY--ADDITIONAL SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM FACULTY ORIENTATION/MENTORING--ADDITIONAL SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM CLINICAL/OTHER FACULTY--ADDITIONAL SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM CLINICAL/OTHER FACULTY ORIENTATION/MENTORING--ADDITIONAL SITES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--FACULTY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT/SCHOLARSHIP

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

SUPPORT SERVICES

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM--BUDGET/FINANCIAL PLAN

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

GENDER, CULTURAL, AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

PROPOSED PROGRAM STARTUP REQUEST

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

APPROPRIATENESS OF MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

SUGGESTIONS

(Suggestions are items that must be addressed in the Institutional Response to this report. However, these items are considered negotiable with the institution. If the institution can demonstrate a clear rationale for not accepting the suggestion, then the Regents may consider the rationale as an acceptable response. If the institution considers a suggestion as merely a misunderstanding by the team, then simply clarify that in the response by providing the necessary information to clear up the misunderstanding.)

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Recommendations are binding items in the Consultants’ Report. The Institutional Response must demonstrate compliance with recommended items. The response may state how the recommendation was accepted and integrated into the proposed program, or, in the case of a recommendation that can only be complied with over time, the institution must present a clear rationale for the implementation of the recommendation and a timeline for such. If the institution considers a recommendation as merely a misunderstanding by the team, then simply clarify that in the response by providing the necessary information to clear up the misunderstanding.)

CONSULTANTS’ RECOMMENDATION TO THE CHANCELLOR:

(The institution will acknowledge and agree to the stipulations listed below and related to the recommendation for authorization in the Institutional Response.)

Upon appropriate response to the Suggestions and Recommendations of the Consultants’ Report, Consultants recommend (Authorization or Provisional Authorization or Not to Authorize) of the (insert degree title name of program as requested) degree program with yearly Progress Reports to be submitted by (insert dates). (For provisional authorizations, a follow-up review is mandated. If this is not applicable to this recommendation, please delete. Otherwise, please complete the following sentence.) A follow-up review must occur prior to (insert date) for continued authorization.

The institution will be responsible for all reasonable expenses related to further review of the proposed program and as stipulated by the Recommendation to the Chancellor and the Board Resolution.