The
University of Alaska Anchorage
Curriculum Handbook
Revised 2005
Table of Contents
Section 1 – Introduction Page
Section 2 - Curriculum Screening Criteria
Section 3 - Curriculum Approval Process
Overview
Approval for changes to undergraduate credit courses numbered 050 - 299
Approval for substantive changes to courses numbered 050 – 299, for all changes to courses numbered 300 – 499, and for additions or deletions of all academic credit courses
600- Level Courses
500- Level Courses
Degree Programs/New Courses Required for Degree Programs
Scheduling and offering of courses numbered 001 through 699
Approval process for specially numbered courses
Permanent Course Approval Process Chart
Program Approval Process Chart
Non-Permanent Approval Process Chart: (-93, -94) Credit Course, 500-Level Course, and Non-Credit/CEU
Section 4 - Guidance for Preparing a Curriculum Proposal
Curriculum Proposal Preparation
Deadlines
Course Scheduling/Registration
Disapproved CAR
Purge List
Section 5 - Proposal Requirements
New Programs, Major Revisions to Existing Programs
Major or Minor Program Change
New or Revised Course
Deleted Course
Policy additions and changes
The Curriculum Action Request (CAR)
The Course Content Guide (CCG)
Section 6 - General Education Requirement (GER)
UAB Charge to the General Education Subcommittee October 15, 1993
Deletion of a GER Course
GER Preamble
Themes for General Education Distribution Areas
Section 7 - Regents’ Policy & Regulation Part X Chapter IV
Links to important policies
Appendix A – Forms
Curriculum Action Request Form
Resource Implication Form
Curriculum Coordination Form
Library Resource Form
Fee Request Form
Four Year Course Offering Plan
Faculty matrix
Budget worksheet
Outcomes Assessment Plan
Approval to Admit
Appendix B – Links to Examples
Curriculum Action Request
Course Content Guide
New Program Prospectus
Appendix C – Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor Verbs
Appendix D - Undergraduate & Graduate Academic Boards
Membership
Responsibilities
Meeting Schedule
Agenda and Summary
Administrative Support
Appendix E – Northwest Commission on Colleges
Operational Policy A-9
Standard 2.H.3
Standard 2.G.7
Appendix F – Guidance for Student Outcomes for Courses and Programs
Index
Section 1 – Introduction
Academic Boards of the Faculty Senate Principles of Operation
· Excellence in teaching, learning, and research is the indispensable core value of the University of Alaska Anchorage mission, goals and activities. The Graduate Academic Board (GAB) and the Undergraduate Academic Board (UAB) of the Faculty Senate, are the principal academic peer review committees charged to guide the University’s curricular processes.
· The University’s curriculum processes are designed to be efficient and to work within the principles of equity and collegial respect.
· The University evaluates its achievements against appropriate regional and national as well as international benchmarks. The Academic Boards devise evidence-based methods for the approval of the faculty through its representatives in the Senate. The Curriculum Handbook is periodically revised to provide the most complete guide as to standards, protocols, and timelines for curricular initiatives, revisions, and improvements.
· The Academic Boards are charged to identify areas for improvement, foster collaboration, and encourage an ethos of critical self-evaluation for all curriculum.
· The work of the Academic Boards is part of the normal and continuous cycle of curricular planning, monitoring and improvement. It is emphasized that although the curricular products of the faculty reviewed and approved by the Board are useful for purposes of external review, they are primarily intended to promote and maintain excellence in teaching, learning, and research.
These Guidelines in the Curriculum Handbook (2004) describe the University of Alaska Anchorage’s process for approving all academic coursework developments. These Guidelines should be read in conjunction with departmental requirements as appropriate. The procedures and the accompanying templateshave been designed to ensure that:
a. Faculty and staff are properly informed about the processes to be followed for the planning and approval of new courses or programs; amending existing courses or programs; or deleting existing reviewed and approved courses or programs
b. Course proposal documentation is adequate in terms of content and format and that proposals meet the relevant criteria for assessment by the faculty, Academic Boards, and Faculty Senate.
c. Decisions to approve academic developments are timely and well-informed.
These Guidelines also include details of specific deadlines to assist those faculty involved in academic planning.
a. Proposals for academic developments at the University of Alaska Anchorage are approved according to the procedures and timelines set out in these Guidelines. These proposals are considered by the Academic Boards as appropriate and the Faculty Senate.
b. All templates are available on the Governance website at: www.uaa.alaska.edu/governance.
c. Proposers of any course action should ensure that templates are completed correctly and refer initial questions to their discipline specific curriculum committees. Further assistance may be sought from College curriculum committees, and in the last resort the Governance Office, to ensure the proposal is considered in a timely fashion.
d. Proposers of any academic action should ensure that templates are submitted in an appropriate format, using Microsoft Word.
e. College Curriculum Committee chairs should forward the proposal to the responsible curriculum managers in the responsible Dean’s offices once the proposal has been reviewed and approved.
f. Curriculum managers must ensure that a hard copy of the proposal signed by the Dean is forwarded to the Governance Office along with an electronic version of the full proposal.
Basis for Academic Board Review
Academic Board approval is required for:
a. New permanent courses that will appear on the student’s transcript with academic credit.
b. New departmental certificates of completion, undergraduate, graduate or post-baccalaureate certificates, or degree programs.
c. New policies or revisions to existing policies that affect the method of approval, content, or delivery of university courses or programs.
d. Substantial revision to the academic content of a course including:
i. additions, modifications or deletions of major subject areas;
ii. adoption of a new/revised mode of delivery in an entire course;
iii. any course that has not been offered at least once during the past 5 years (i.e. course on a purge list which the discipline informs the Board it intends to deliver).
e. Changes having an impact on the study options available to prospective students, including changes to:
i. selection/admission procedures and standards; or
ii. prerequisites, co-requisites and registration restrictions.
f. Changes having a significant impact on the professions, employers or the wider community, including:
i. enhancement or diminution of employment opportunities;
ii. entry into a new segment of the education system or higher education sector; or
iii. External standards
Section 2 - Curriculum Screening Criteria
Issues in Curriculum Review
1. A request for a curriculum change should be reviewed in terms of format, content, and the impact it has on the entire curriculum and general direction of the school or college in relation to the university. Curriculum Review Bodies are asked to review any change carefully with respect to the program initiating the change and to other academic programs.
At any time a curriculum change is brought before a review body, the program or course will be reviewed in total as outlined in this handbook.
Pertinent academic considerations:
Justification for the change
Effect on resources within the program
Frequency of offerings
Impact on other UAA programs and courses and which ones will be affected
2. The faculty member initiating the curriculum action should be prepared to address the following and any other appropriate issues that members of the Curriculum Review Bodies may ask to be addressed when curriculum action is presented to the appropriate boards at each level of review.
Academic considerations about a new course proposal:
Course Content Guide (CCG) complete and clear (See Section 5 for further information)
Appropriate numbering for level and content (See Section 5 for further information)
Course outcomes match the level of the course (See Section 5 for further information)
Prerequisites are appropriate for content and level
Availability of prerequisites for this course
Frequency of scheduling of course
Justification for stacking or cross listing
Duplication with any other existing courses is explained
Coordination has occurred with the appropriate departments and is documented
Accreditation or nationally accepted practice standards that course meets are identified
Elimination of some other requirement as compensation for addition of this course
Rationale for requiring this course in a program
Course Review
The school/college offering this course is the appropriate academic unit
All boxes on Curriculum Action Request (CAR) are filled in (N/A may be appropriate)
All attachments (Library Resource Form, Coordination Form, Fee Request Form and Resource Implication Form) are complete and correct
Course Content Guide reflects and substantiates the information included on the CAR
Credit hour calculation is correct
Lab/lecture ratio is correct
Course level justified
Number of credits is appropriate
Application of a course to a degree program
Coordination has occurred (both electronically and hard copy) with the appropriate departments, schools and colleges, as well as with community campuses
All information that occurs on both the CAR and CCG are identical (course name and number, credit hours, course description, etc)
If this is a prerequisite for any other course, or if it affects another degree as a requirement, include the necessary CARs and/or coordination signatures with the package
Courses that will become program electives:
Other electives (in content areas) that may be bypassed in favor of this new course
Enhancement or complementation of a program by this course
Option represents a significant area of specialization within the major
Addition of other new courses to cover this area of study
Effect on scheduling of other program electives by the addition of this course
Courses that will become General Education Requirements:
GER objectives from the GER Preamble are addressed by this course
Category definition from Board of Regents’ is applicable to this course
GER outcomes for the category are addressed and assessed by this course
Rationale for adding this course to the GER menu
Similarities and differences to other GER courses
Resource implications for new course proposal:
Effect on offering GER courses within a program or school.
Effect on offering other required courses
Effect on selectives and electives
If the course was offered as a trial course, the number of times it was offered and the enrollments
Review of Program Proposals
Paperwork is complete
Catalog copy is complete and organized, options and special requirements are clearly defined
All the attachments are correct
Needs analysis for the new program is attached
Combined impact on University resources is explained
Coordination has occurred with appropriate departments, schools, and colleges and documentation is present
Possible duplication of an existing program is addressed
Program Objectives and Outcomes
Program outcomes should be clearly stated as the knowledge or abilities that students are expected to demonstrate upon successful completion of the program.
Programs whose external accreditors, require program objectives should state these clearly as the knowledge or abilities that students are expected to demonstrate after completion of the program.
Outcomes should be reasonable in number, relate well to the content and methods of presentation used in the program, and be assessable.
Outcomes should be published for students to use in evaluating and selecting the program.
Outcome assessment should be accomplished with appropriate tools chosen and administered in a way that both direct and indirect measurements of student performance are obtained.
A complete and valid plan should be presented that makes use of the assessments of student learning in the continuous improvement of the course. Plans should conform to the format and content established at UAA and illustrated at the website: www.uaa.alaska.edu/governance.
If this action requires BOR review, the following issues should be addressed
including all the points in Regents’ Policy and Regulation outlined on page 46-48 of the Handbook:
Date to implement response(s) and over what term
The needs that will be met by this program
How the needs are currently being met
The program response(s) to the needs
Location of program delivery
Use of basic and/or applied research in the program.
Program implications for students
Requirements on faculty and/or staff to deliver program
Information technology resources required for the program
Facilities needed by the program
Strategic partnerships that will be fostered by the response
Response measurement and evaluation
Program assessment plans
If this action requires notifying the Commission on Colleges, the following items should also be addressed:
Budget projections (revenue and expenditures) for each of the first three years including:
1. Revenue and expenditures associated with the change itself, and
2. Institutional financial support expected to accommodate the change. Include expected revenue from tuition and fees available to the offering college, and confirmed revenue from all sources including statewide funding (initiatives, presidents appropriations, etc.), college and university reallocations, and external sponsors.
The budgetary and financial implications of the changes for the entire institution also should be addressed.
Student Services Impact
Provision for student services to accommodate the change
Implications for services to the rest of the student body.
Physical Resources Impact
Provision for physical facilities
Equipment
Library and information resources
Impact on the institution’s resources as a whole; and
Faculty and Staff Impact
An analysis of the faculty and staff needed
Educational and professional experience qualifications of the faculty members relative to their individual teaching assignments
Anticipated resources of qualified faculty and staff.
Program Partners
If course or program delivery depends on essential elements supplied by partners external to the university, whether they are accredited or not, the partnership arrangement must be clearly defined with expected contributions and designated responsibilities and authority.
Section 3 - Curriculum Approval Process
Overview
1. The school/college must discuss a proposal for a major revision of an existing program or the development of a new program with the Office of Academic Affairs (OAA) before the curriculum proposal is presented to UAB/GAB for review. Schools/colleges are encouraged to contact OAA early in the approval process. Proposals should include information listed in Section 5 of this handbook.