External Review Summary Sheet

Reviewer:

Program:

Date of Review:

Guidance: Please complete this summary sheet at the end of your campus visit and email it to

nd the department chair within one week of the campus visit.This sheet will assist you with identifying key areas (strengths and improvements needed) to address in your final report.

Please rate the following program review criteria using the following:

E = Exemplary;S=Satisfactory;N=Needs Improvement;U=Unclear/need more information

1. PROGRAM LEARNING GOALS (PLGs) AND OUTCOMES(PLOs) / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
1.1 / The PLGs and PLOs reflect the most important skills, knowledge, and values of the discipline/profession.
1.2 / The criteria and standards of achievement for the PLOs adequately match disciplinary/professional standards.
1.3 / Based on your review of student work samples and annual report updates, student achievement of the PLOs is adequate for the degree and discipline/profession.
1.4 / The assessment practices are yielding the needed information to determine how well students are learning the PLOs.
1.5 / Do you recommend any changes to enhance student achievement or program assessment of the PLOs? If so, please explain and advise.
2. CURRICULUM / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
2.1 / The current curriculum content is appropriate to the level and purpose of the program.
2.2 / The design of the curriculum is adequate (required depth and breadth of study, flow of courses, frequency of course offerings, alignment with desired learning outcomes, etc.) to enable students to develop the skills and attain the outcomes needed for graduates of this program.
2.3 / The program clearly outlines program requirements and offers courses regularly to ensure timely completion of the program.
2.4 / The current curriculum quality is adequate for students to develop the skills and attain the outcomes needed for graduates of this program.
2.5 / Students and faculty of the program are satisfied with the overall quality of the current curriculum.
2.6 / Do you recommend any changes to enhance the curriculum (content, design, course availability, etc.)? If so, please explain and advise.
3. CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES (These are voluntary activities that are normally set apart from the regular academic curriculum. They may include language, math or science clubs, debate tournaments, etc.) / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
3.1 / The current co-curriculum content is appropriate to the level and purpose of the program.
3.2 / The design of the co-curriculum is adequate to enable students to develop the skills and attain the outcomes needed for graduates of this program.
3.3 / The current co-curriculum quality is adequate for students to supplement skills and knowledge needed for graduates of this program.
3.4 / Students and faculty of the program are satisfied with the overall quality of the current co-curriculum.
3.5 / Do you recommend any changes to enhance the co-curriculum? If so, please explain and advise.
4. STUDENT EXPERIENCES AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
4.1 / Students are satisfied with the overall quality of their learning experience in the program.
4.2 / Students are adequately supported in the curriculum and advising to ensure theirlearning success.
4.3 / Students feel sufficiently challenged in their program studieswhile not feeling overwhelmed.
4.4 / Faculty members are available and approachable in and out of the classroom.
4.5 / Class sizes are appropriate for productive learning required in particular courses.
4.6 / The program provides adequate opportunities for internships, practice, research, professional development, and/or field experiences, as appropriate.
4.7 / Students are satisfied with the quality of faculty-student relationships.
4.8 / Students are satisfied with the ways the program addresses issues related to faith integration.
4.9 / Do you recommend any changes to improve student experiences and learning environment? If so, please explain and advise.
5. FACULTY QUALITY / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
5.1 / Faculty competencies/credentials are appropriate for the discipline and degree.
5.2 / Faculty specialties correspond to program needs.
5.3 / The system for evaluating teaching practices facilitates continuous improvement of teaching and learning throughout the program (core and adjuncts).
5.4 / Faculty are adequately supported and engaged in ongoing pedagogical development.
5.5 / Faculty are adequately supported and engaged in ongoing professionaldevelopment.
5.6 / Do you recommend any changes (qualifications, expertise, teaching practices or development, professionaldevelopment, etc.) to enhance program quality and student learning? If so, please explain and advise.
6. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
6.1 / The facilities (e.g., classrooms, laboratory sizes and spaces) are adequate to support teaching goals and faculty and student research.
6.2 / The existingequipment that the program has is adequate to support teaching goals and faculty and student research.
6.3 / Do you recommend changesto enhance program quality, student learning, and faculty and student research?If so, please explain and advise.
7. DIVERSITY / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
7.1 / The program's curriculumdemonstrates a commitment to educating students in issues of diversity.
7.2 / The program is adequately diverse in its student and faculty composition.
7.3 / Do you recommend changes to the commitment of diversity? If so, please explain and advise.
8. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION AND SUPPORT / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
8.1 / The department chair receives adequate release time to carry out administrative duties.
8.2 / The library, IT, Disability Services, and Physical Plant and other support resources are current and adequate to meet student and faculty needs.
8.3 / The program has accurately identified and prioritized the program’s most pressing resource needs.
8.4 / The program’s student recruitment and retention processes are adequate.
8.5 / The program has adequate administrative and technical support (e.g., administrative assistant; laboratory coordinator; laboratory manager)
8.6 / Overall program administration is efficient, effective and meets professional standards.
8.7 / Do you recommend any changes to strengthen the program’s current administration, support, and resources?
9. PROPOSED CHANGES / Evaluation:
E, S, N, or U
9.1 / What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the program? Please identify the evidence that supports your answer.
9.2 / What goals would you suggest the program set for the next six years (please list in order of priority, the most important goal first)?Please provide a rationale for these particular goals and this priority.
9.3 / What goals require additional resources? What level of resources would these goals require?How might the program secure these resources?
9.4 / What are the most realistic and important strategies the program can use to achieve the highest priority goals?