Program Review 2004-05

Senator Assessment Form PROGRAM:

I. Criteria for Senate Review

Criteria / Points and Examples / Score / Revisions Needed (Specify module or area)
Does the review have substantive objectives? (3 points) / 3 = The objective is clear, concise, attainable and measurable.
Example: To increase student enrollment in XYZ by 10% within 2 years.
2 = The objective is cryptic and not fully developed.
Example: Maintain services to students at present level.
1 = The objective is unclear. Revision is required.
Example: Improve
Does the interpretation of the data make sense?
(3 points) / 3 =Data and trends are interpreted properly and implications for the program are included.
Example: While day class size is decreasing, evening class size is increasing. The combined class size of the XYZ program is very similar to the college as a whole. It may be that the program could look at reasons why day class size is declining while evening class size is increasing. Perhaps more classes could be offered in the evening or attention could be given to increasing daytime class size. An objective related to class size is needed.
2 =Data and trends are interpreted properly but there are no implications for the program.
Example - Day enrollment is increasing while the Evening enrollment is constant with a slightly decreasing trend.
1=Interpretation does not match the obvious trends. Revisions needed.
Example: The enrollment trend lines are going down and the description is “Enrollments have been increasing.”
Is this a constructive planning document (4 points) / 4 =The program contains excellent information and analysis to be useful in planning. The review contains clear, measurable objectives and resources requests.
3= While there are areas that are unclear, overall the document would be useful for planning.
2 = Half or less of the document seems unclear or convoluted. Document has some use for planning.
1 =Program does not contain enough information to be useful for planning. Revisions required.
Total 10 points / 6 pointsrequired for Senate Acceptance

II. Overall Assessment

The program has less than three objectives No Yes

A score of 1 in any criterion No Yes

A total score of 5 or less No Yes

A yes response to any of the following requires program review revision:

III Recommendations

Recommended for Acceptance to Senate with no revisions

Recommended to Senate with Revisions

Committee Members

Name / Position / Date
Lead,
Reviewer
Reviewer

______

Signature of Committee Lead

Note: Committee lead must submit signed form to the Academic Senate President by January 31, 2005.

Program Review Revision Process:

VPAA meets with Program Review Initiator and Department Chair to revise review based on reader’s recommendation (See Program Review Revision Form). The form is forwarded to the Academic Senate President for final approval. All programs recommended for revisions are due back to the Academic Senate President within one week of recommendation.

Program Review Senator Assessment