PROGRAM REVIEW GUIDELINES
Table of Contents
OVERVIEW
PURPOSE
DEFINITIONS AND ROLES
COORDINATION AND SUPPORT
TIMELINES AND SCHEDULES OF REVIEWS
SELF-STUDY
REVIEWERS
SITEVISIT
THE REVIEWERS’ REPORT
POST-SITE VISIT
APPENDICES
1. Tasks & Timelines
2. Data Collection: Program Review Plan
3. Self Study Report
Associated documents for Program Councils:
- External reviewer suggestions – criteria and form
- Self study suggested questions
- CV template (self study appendix)
- Sample site visit agenda
- Program review process flow chart
- Self-study template with explanations and sample text
Other documents:
- OVPA/External reviewer liaison procedures
- Program review policy
- Confidentiality agreement / letter of participation (external reviewers)
- Self-study writer contract
OVERVIEW
Athabasca University’s Program Review process is designed to ensure that we continue to provide programs that meet provincial and national standards for quality and rigor andmeet our quality servicestandards for students. The process involves the Program Council in a self-study of the program, including critical reflection of the issues and challenges facing the program and identification of recommendations and implementation timelines. This process is based on written information from staff, students and alumni (and sometimes employers) and is informed by a report from external reviewers.
Reviews are organized on a five to seven year cycle and are timed where possible to align with program accreditation reviews. Reviews may also be commissioned by the Vice President Academic.
The components of the review are:
- the production of a self-study by the members of the Program Council
- a site visit and subsequent report by a team of external reviewers
- the production of a report by the Program Council with recommendations, implementation activities and timelines
The review process is expected to take approximately 12 to 16months from the initial meeting. The timing of the review is done in consultation with the Vice-President, Academic and is affected by the size and complexity of the program, the availability of external reviewers and the placement of the summer months in the sequence. Hence it is preferable to begin a review in September or January and plan to have the reviewers present in the Winter or Fall months with the review completed by June or September of the following year. The major components and their timelines are:
COMPONENT / MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY / TIMELINESelf-study / Program Council / 4-8 months depending on size of unit
External Reviewer visit or Teleconference / Prep: Coordinator Academic Services, OVPA; On-site: Program Council / 1.5 to 3 days
Occurs in second or third four month unit
Report and Implementation timeline / Program Council / 2 months.
Due in last quarter; either 12 or 15 months
The final Program Review report from the Program Council shall be distributed to:
- Vice President, Academic
- Associate Vice President Academic
- Director of the Unit in which the Program is housed
to assist in long-term planning for the program, and to Chairs of units (as appropriate) to aid in faculty work planning.
The Program Council Representative or Program Director will provide a summary report for ERC, AUAC and AUGC for information. On behalf of the Program Council, the Program Director will provide an annual report to the OVPA concerning progress on implementation of the recommendations.
The Office of the Vice-President Academic holds the official copy of all Program Review materials in accordance with FOIPP regulations and retention policies.
PURPOSE
Program Reviews inform the University’s Academic Plan and help ensure that the University is meeting its goal of quality programming for students. Such processes are also a requirement of Campus Alberta Quality Council.
The reviews evaluate the program structure and processes, and help identify areas for innovation and improvement of the academic and administrative functioning of the program. They are based on written documentation and independent input from present and former students, faculty, staff and external stakeholders. The primary activities are a self-study report, a visit and report from a team of external reviewers and a final report with recommendations and timelines for implementation from the Program Director.
DEFINITIONS AND ROLES
Coordinator, Academic Services: The Coordinator, Academic Services, is responsible for administering the Program Reviews.
Education Review Committee: This committee is a sub committee of AUAC whose mandate includes responsibility for the oversight of the program review process.
Program Council: Each program has a Program Council made up of constituent contributing members as defined by the Program Council Terms of Reference.
Program Council representative: Usually the Program Director, this person is identified by the Program Council to be responsible for liaising with the Coordinator, Academic Services. Usually, this person is responsible for coordinating the development and production of the self-study, organizing meetings of the Council, and assisting with the arrangements for the visiting team and may head a program review working committee, if necessary.
External Program Review Team: The team is composed of 2-4 external reviewers who review the self-study, make a site visit and write a report of their findings.
COORDINATION AND SUPPORT
Program reviews are funded and coordinated through the Office of the Vice President, Academic under the direction of the Coordinator, Academic Services.
The Coordinator, Academic Services will liaise with the Program Council representative andbe responsible for hosting the external reviewers, including arranging the meeting logistics (site and/or teleconference)., The Coordinator, Academic Services is also responsible for the preparation of the summary reportat the end of the review cycle.
As a general principle, the Coordinator, Academic Services will act as the liaison to the review team for the duration of its engagement.
TIMELINES AND SCHEDULES OF REVIEWS
The schedule for program reviews is approved by ERC. Individual adaptations are made to accommodate accreditations or other events.
SELF-STUDY
The self-study provides an opportunity for the Program Council to review its processes, identify successes, and consider possible options and seek resolutions to challenges. It should present the program activities within the framework of the Academic Plan.
Appendix 3 contains details of the requirements of the self-study. The self-study document should be no more than 30pp. excluding appendices.
The Program Council Representative will provide the document to the VPA no later than seven weeks prior to site visit date in order to allow sufficient time for revisions and distribution to the external reviewers. VPA revisions to the document will be coordinated and communicated by the OVPA. One copy of the report, appendices and any addition information will be retained on file in the OVPA both in paper format and electronically.
REVIEWERS
The quality of the reviewers is essential to the quality of commentary provided for the final report. Every effort should be made to identify reviewers who have excellent academic qualifications and credentials in relation to the program area.
The Program Council representative submits the names, university affiliation, email and telephone numbers of 5-7 potential reviewers, including three from Western Canada, when possible, to the OVPA. For each person, a brief rationale and where possible a CV if one is freely available on the Internet should be provided. On no account should Council members approach potential reviewers. To maintain the integrity of the report reviewers must be at arms length from the unit. This means that the person has not been a co-author, supervisor, student, external examiner, etc. in the last five years with anyone on the Program Council. Any known relationships or affiliations with AU should be disclosed.
The Coordinator, Academic Services may suggest additional names if requested by the VPA. The Program Council representative will have an opportunity to review the list and indicate if anyone is inappropriate.
The Program Review Team will consist of 1-3 members from Western universities, and 1-4 members from elsewhere in Canada. Reviewers will normally be from Canadian universities unless a case can be made for inclusion of an international scholar and travel costs, where necessary, are reasonable.
The Vice-President, Academic, and the Program Council members should be available for the duration of the site visit.
The Coordinator, Academic Services, will contact prospective reviewers to confirm participation and then to identify the date and make arrangements for the site visit and report. The Coordinator, Academic Services will work in cooperation with the unit to make all travel/teleconference arrangements for the visiting team and provide the Program Council representative with information on the arrangements.
Contact with members of the visiting team should be through the Coordinator, Academic Services.
The external reviewers should not be asked to provide presentations, or give seminars or performances at AU as part of their participation in the review.
BUDGET IMPLICATIONS
The costs of the site visit (teleconferences, economy class air fare, travel, accommodation, meals, honoraria) and contract costs for the self-study writer (when required)will be paid by the Office of the Vice-President Academic. The OVPA will not compensate for participation in focus groups. Costs incurred by the Office of Institutional Studies for program reviews will be covered by the OIS budget.
SITE VISIT / EXTERNAL REVIEWER TELECONFERENCE
The review will generally begin with a meeting with the Vice-President Academic in order to answer questions about Athabasca University and provide information on the purpose and structure of the program review process and the role of the participants.
On the first day of the review, reviewers will meet with the Program Council representative/ the Program Director and Council members and may have an opportunity to review core coursematerials. Meetings with students and alumni, faculty, professional and administrative support staff, and others will be arranged as appropriate.
The reviewers are expected to arrange their own time when they are not in scheduled meetings.
At the end of the visit the reviewers should have an opportunity to meet with the Vice-President Academic to discuss the process and present an initial report.
Responsibility for the actual arrangement for the meetings at the AU site will be shared by the Program Council representative and OVPA. This will include arrangements for a meeting room, teleconferencing with students and alumni, catering or meal reservations, and water and refreshments available during the day, computer access, etc. A protocol of what is included in the arrangements is in Appendix 4.
THE REVIEWERS’ REPORT
The reviewers are asked to address a generic set of questions provided with their terms of reference as well as those questions raised by the Program Council in the self-study.
Some generic questions are provided in Appendix 3.
The report is not expected to be more that 10 pages.
The report is normally due to the VPA within 45 days of the site visit.
POST-SITE VISIT
The OVPA will provide the Reviewers’ Report to the Program Council Representative or, if this is not the Program Director, then the Program Director. The extent of circulation is determined by the Program Director.
Once the Program Council has discussed the document and revisited the self-study, the group will meet with the VPA discuss its comments and recommendations. This will ideally occur within 6-8 weeks of receiving the Reviewers’ Report.
Following that meeting, the unit will prepare a short document indicating its overall response to the externals' comments and specific responses to each of the recommendations with timelines.
The OVPA will prepare a brief overview document which outlines the program review process, the major points from the self study and the review and includes the Program Council’s recommendations and timelines. This document is presentedat ERC and then at AUAC for information by the Program Council Representative/Program Director.
Each year the Program Chair will then be asked to indicate progress towards achieving these goals.
v.3 update March 2011
December 2011Page 1 of 6