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.
1